Bulletin N° 1007


“China and the New World Order”

November 10, 2014


with James Corbett





Subject: The Nuremberg Code of 1947: “The right to avoid the imposition of human experimentation.”



Grenoble, November 5, 2021


Dear Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,


A political axiom: “When the only thing collaborators have to offer are attacks by propaganda, psychological warfare, and physical threats; then you know they are on weak ground, and so do they.”

A social corollary: “Social critics are denouncing corporate corruption, not as “a few bad apples,” but rather as a pandemic created by the corporate capitalist establishment which produces wide-spread collusion and class collaboration - a pathology of moral cripples that ends badly.


The final portion of our presentation of Barrington Moore Jr’s classic study of “the social basis of revolt and obedience” will include the last four chapters of his 1978 book, Injustice, where he turns to more abstract considerations of the role played by subjective events - such as moral outrage or indifference - in the determination of historical events. Chapter 11 deals with “the suppression of historical alternatives” as occurred in Germany between 1918 and 1920. He begins this discussion by acknowledging the complexity of the issue. “One cannot provide irrefutable proof,” he concedes, “of the existence of a suppressed historical possibility.”

      On the other hand, it is equally impossible to prove that any given situation had to turn out in exactly the way it did. There is plenty of room in between for serious discussion whose outcome has very serious consequences for real life.

     The historian’s reluctance to engage in debate about why something did not happen is quite understandable. Historians justifiably feel that they have enough work to do in explaining what did happen. But any explanation of what actually took place connotes an explanation for why something else failed to occur. If revolutionaries failed to win power, there must be reasons why they failed and evidence in support of these reasons. Hence, so far as I can see, historians have to use some conception of suppressed historical possibilities whether they choose to or not. . . . To the extent that suppressed historical alternatives exist at all, they evidently have different degrees of existence. . . . To speak to the case we are about to examine, not even the most vigorous opponent of historical inevitability would be likely to claim that German society in 1918 could have returned to the ways of medieval knights and serfdom. But the possibility of a breakthrough to some variant of socialism or liberal capitalism, more stable and humane than the sequence of the Weimar Republic and the Nazi regime, is not so easy to exclude. Existing facts quite obviously limit the range of possible alternatives. Thus suppressed alternatives have to be concrete alternatives and specific to concrete situations. A big part of the task of any empirical investigation would be to determine the extent to which any given situation actually was open; more precisely what facts limited the range of options open to those men and women whose behavior strongly influenced the course of events.

     The word ‘determine’ has unavoidably crept into the discussion. What can it really mean? The answer can hardly be a matter of grammar and ordinary English usage. Instead, it requires explicating, however briefly, a position on the famous and thorny issues of determinism and moral and political responsibly. To put the issue very simply, how can an historical actor – great or small, a single individual or a whole group such as the German workers – be political responsible for its actions if it is also true such a actions have definite causes? The concept of causation must be complete and consistent. The notions of determinism and responsibility cannot be brought in and out of a discussion simply to support a predetermined conclusion. As Max Weber remarked, in discussing Marxist determinism, it is not a taxi one can take and then get out of whenever one pleases. Hence it seems that moral responsibility is incompatible with determinism.

. . .

     In order to keep the notion of moral and political responsibility it does not, however, appear necessary to drop the concept of determinism or, as I prefer, universal causation.  . . .  Universal causation does not exclude the idea that some causes can be more important than others and that the relative significance of causes can change. It is reasonably plain that the results of human intelligence and human effort have been continually entering and transforming the stream of historical causation as far back as the record goes. The history of technology and/or ideas provides sufficient factual testimony for this familiar point of view. Though we understand the process very imperfectly, there are evidently reasons why particular ideas enter the stream when they do, or why they fail to make an entry. But that is what the investigator tries to find out, not what he should assume in advance. Thus the idea of moral or political responsibility merely means that the application of human effort and intelligence can make a difference in human affairs. What difference we have to find out. Such responsibility, to put the point in a slightly different way, can have both causes and consequences. The task in any given case is to find out what they were.

     Though hardly likely to be universally persuasive, this effort to combine the general idea of personal and group responsibility with notions of determinate causation will have to suffice for working purposes. Furthermore if moral responsibility is to have any meaning, it must indicate that human beings are responsible for those consequences of acts and decisions that in the actual circumstances of the time these persons should have been able to foresee. Thus moral responsibility has to be made historically specific and include an assessment of the level of knowledge and judgment available to specific historical actors. Clearly that will be an important aspect of the investigation on which we are about to embark.

    These considerations lead back to the conception of suppressed historical possibilities and the central question that will evidently require an answer: who are the people who do the suppressing and why do they do it?

     In the rest of this chapter I shall explore the thesis that in Germany immediately after the First World War, conditions may have existed that rendered possible some sort of a liberal breakthrough resulting in a regime more stable than the one that in a decade and a half was to succumb to Adolf Hitler. It is a thesis suggested though not systemically developed in recent German historical work critical of the standard SPD apology: that in 1918 the only choice was between an oppressive revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat or an alliance with the old order.

     Though a critical analysis of this thesis provides a useful set of questions around which to organize much of the material, the demolition of this thesis – or indeed of any thesis – is not the object of the inquiry.

     Instead there are two positive objectives. The fist is to search for the kinds of arguments that might sustain the thesis that the liberal alterative was a viable one. This will not be an exercise in abstract logic. There will also be an examination of relevant evidence, though the examination can hardly be an exhaustive one. An authority on German history may easily notice important aspects that I have overlooked or misinterpreted. That would be all to the good since it would mean that concrete evidence was relevant to the discussion. Through the device of exploring these arguments, it may be possible – and this is the second objective – to shed new light on the capacities and limitations of German industrial workers in their efforts to establish a more just and human society at this important historical juncture.

     The choice of a liberal over a socialist alternative rests on the view that the liberal one was both closer to the actual possibilities at that point in time and, as a set of institutional arrangements, held somewhat greater promise for a less repressive social order than that which had just come to grief with the collapse of the Imperial system. There is no reason to make a secret of the fact that my general political inclinations run in the same general direction for the same general reasons. But if one starts with a socialist alternative, the technique of investigation remains the same. The questions to ask are fundamentally the same: they include: 1) In these specific circumstances what concrete steps would such a policy imply? 2) What were the obstacles to carrying it out? 3) On what resources in the existing social order could such a policy draw? What do we know about the working or nonworking of institutional arrangements, and the situation and predispositions of various sectors of the population during this period that would enable us to draw tenable inferences about this policy? 4) If there should be enough evidence to support the view that the policy was indeed feasible, why then did it fail of adoption? Did nobody in power think of it, and if that is the case, what are the reasons of this apparent failure? If those removed from the levers of power did think of such a policy, why was their position so weak?

     There is of course a risk of tailoring the evidence to suit preconceptions, a risk that exists in all forms of inquiry. In this particular case the main risk may be that of making radical and revolutionary movements seem puny and ‘manageable’ at some points in time, and very formidable at others. But fortunately  the political preconceptions and preferences of investigators differ. The conclusions that they reach can be checked against evidence. The factual component in the answers to the questions just mentioned is sufficiently large to impose in due course a wide area of agreement. Historians can and in fact already do agree on a great deal more than just dates and raw events. After all, the situation in Germany between 1918 and 1920 was what it was no matter what a liberal, socialist, or reactionary historian now wishes it had been. (pp.377-381)

A crucial non-decision: the SPD and the army.

     As has often been pointed out, Elbert’s government did next to nothing about reforming or controlling the bureaucracy and the judicial system. In both of these, antirepublican and reactionary sentiments were to have a powerful impact on policy. The SPD tactic of acquiescence, in the name of law and order and the restoration of the economy, prevailed generally across the board. In that sense military policy was no exception. But if there were to be a more vigorous policy, it would have to start with the military and succeed. Otherwise nothing else could work. To antagonize the civil bureaucracy and leave the officer corps intact would be an obviously infallible formula for the success of counterrevolutionary plots. But if the army were well in hand, other elements would have to think twice about undue delay in the execution of government policies, especially if there were strong signs that the new government enjoyed widespread popular support as was the case in early November 1918. If the SPD leaders really could not have done anything more than they actually did – which in effect was nothing – about taking control of the army, there was nothing else thay could have accomplished.

. . .

On the Eastern frontiers and beyond, sporadic fighting was to continue for some time. The technical problems must have looked enormous. The potential consequences of failure to solve them rapidly and satisfactorily must also have looked like a slide into anarchy and disaster for the German population as a whole. The General Staff had powerful and apparently realistic arguments to present. Millions of men had to be brought back across the front. It was necessary to find trains to transport them. Next it was necessary to find supplies to feed them. Then it was necessary to disarm them in an orderly fashion. Otherwise there was the risk of masses of hungry soldiers foraging and plundering on their own, a savage and angry Soldateska such as the one that had ravaged town and country in the Thirty Year’s War. For all these reasons, the General Staff’s arguments continued, it was necessary to maintain centralized control over the military apparatus and authority in the country as a whole. To do their job the military needed the maintenance of discipline in their own ranks, which meant no interference from soldier’s councils, and no nonsense about the election of officers by the soldiers.

     These arguments must have sounded impressive to Ebert and some of his colleagues, who were at heart solid German citizens anxious to do right by their country. That was of course part of the trouble. But how valid were the arguments? Was there a way of getting the soldiers back in a more or less orderly fashion without the degree of reliance that the SPD placed on the General Staff? Austrian experience suggests that there was.

. . .

     To sum up the argument so far, there is enough evidence to present a strong challenge to the thesis that Ebert and those who followed his lead had no choice but to rely on the old officer corps for the sake of orderly demobilization and necessary minimum of domestic tranquility. It is not hard to see how and why these leaders felt the way they apparently did, and even to feel considerable human sympathy for them as well as their opponents. But that is something very different from an acceptance of the propositions that circumstances were such that they could do nothing else. If we reject that proposition on the basis of the evidence just sketched, we have grounds for asking what kind of a policy might have had some chance of succeeding.

. . .

The problem before us is a related but distinct one: whether in fact a ‘third way’ was possible somewhere between a de facto alliance with the old order and revolutionary dictatorship. One way to find out more about the problem is to state what such a policy would have amounted to in practice. Then and only then does it become possible to perceive some of the elements in the situation that could have favored the execution of such a policy as well as the obstacles it could have encountered.

     If the SPD moderates were to have established themselves without heavy reliance on the army and other pillars of the old order, they would have had to adopt economic policies to undercut the radicals on their left and still draw some support from the moderates to their right. That meant getting the economic wheels to turn, and more besides, in a situation of defeat and disorganization with the Allies looming in the background and holding many of the decisive keys to their future, as well as a revolutionary government in Russia which at that point exerted immense power’s of attraction. It is necessary to concede at once that the obstacles to any such policy were enormous and that no government, no matter how able, imaginative, and energetic, might have overcome them successfully.

     In pursuit of this general strategy the government would, I suggest, have had to take the following measures; It would have been necessary to intervene decisively in the affairs of the army and the bureaucracy by putting its own men in key positions to control policy. In the army that would have meant using and influencing the soldier’s councils as well as sending representatives with broad plenary powers to the High Command.

. . .

     In economic and social policy it would have been necessary for the government to take control of some key sectors of the economy – mining is an obvious candidate where the promise that this might happen sufficed to quiet the miners temporarily at a high point of radical turmoil – and give the workers additional influence over conditions in the pit and on the shop floor. It would not, I suggest, have been necessary to give the workers a voice in the basic decisions about investment and marketing along the lines of full-scale worker’s control. The government, presumably responsive to popular pressures, could have kept some levers in this area, and the workers would have gained influence too over these decisions indirectly, through what they could do about working conditions. There are many indications that such policies, sketched here in the barest possible outline, would have greatly undercut the support of a radical solution.

. . .

By their policies Ebert and his colleagues created in the Freikorps and parts of the old army the necessary instrument for counterrevolution of the old prefascist model (i.e., without massive popular support) and handed it to the right on a steel platter. At least some old-fashioned union leaders like Carl Legien realized this at the time of the Kapp Putsch, when it was much too late.

Moore, sums up his view of the SPD leadership at the end of this discussion of possible alternatives at this decisive moment in German history.

     In any case the significance of these liberal and legalistic scruples is open to serious doubt. This is not a matter of judging intentions or probing the recesses of Ebert’s mind, at least not entirely. It is also a matter of noting what actually happened. The decisions to rely on the army and then on the Freikorps, as well as to postpone socialization, did in fact present the National Assembly with faits accomplis. Noske showed no scruples about shooting down rebellious workers in defense of liberal democracy. All deviations from a purist and probably impossible conception of liberalism, one that seeks the resolution of all social conflict through discussion and rational persuasion, were deviations to the right. The reformist leaders showed almost no awareness of the consideration that in order to give democracy and constitutional government a chance to survive (even as a necessary prelude to socialism) it might be necessary to do something about the power of those groups and institutions whose behavior had long proved them to be convinced and effective enemies of these principles. That is odd for even the most nominal Marxist.(pp.382-391)  

   He then goes on to emphasize the decisive importance of subjective factors in the political dynamic which unfolded to produce the moderate-reactionary alliance that gave birth to Nazism.

Hence the old order in this largely abortive revolution was able to rely on the ‘responsible’ moderates to do its dirty work, that of suppressing radicalism. Relatively slight changes in timing and tactics in this fluid situation could, I suggest, have brought about quite different consequences. With slightly different changes in leadership and tactics all around, it is not too hard to envisage a situation in which rather less ‘responsible’ moderates than Ebert forced far greater concessions from the old elites by means of threatening that, if the concessions were not granted, revolutionary radicals would take power. Had that happened, not only Germany but the rest of the world might have been spared enormous tragedies. (p.396)


In Chapter 12, Moore turns to « the Nazi example » repressive moral outrage.

     Until now this study has focused almost entirely on the liberating and humane aspects of popular and lower-class conceptions of injustice. This emphasis has been the fruit of a deliberate choice in posing the questions central to this book: under what circumstances have human beings accepted, or at times chosen, lives marked by misery and oppression? And under what circumstances have people arrived at a moral rejection of misery, embracing forms of behavior new to them in their efforts to resist and change the social order?

     But at this point we must consider another set of historical facts that will force us to deepen and darken how we shall ask and try to answer our central questions. The Nazi period in Germany, and more broadly the worldwide twentieth-century phenomenon of fascism, demonstrate beyond any doubt that popular movements can and do have at times a very cruel and repressive component. Indeed, fascism has revived the age-old conservative tradition that sees in demagoguery and the masses generally the central threat to liberty and a humane social order. To disregard this issue would falsify the entire analysis.

     Against this revival of a conservative tradition that reaches back at least as far as Plato, modern writers on the left have mounted a defense of popular movements based on variety of empirical and theoretical considerations. Several studies of popular movements have shown that support for authoritarian trends came mainly from ‘respectable’ and conservative elements in modern industrial societies while working and lower-class movements  have generally taken the form of rational responses to legitimate economic grievances.  Though these investigations have pointed to some mistaken conceptions of modern mass movements, they have not made the issues vanish. There is no way to deny the plain fact that fascist movements have enjoyed or created enough popular support to make them hideously dangerous. As we shall see, the popular basis of fascism included only a tiny proportion of the industrial workers. Nevertheless among all such movements German fascism almost certainly enjoyed the most enthusiastic and widest range of popular support. For that very reason it was the most dangerous manifestation of a worldwide trend.

     A more general and theoretical argument would, if it were acceptable, justify the exclusion of fascist movements from the subject matter of any book that purported to be about moral outrage and the sense of injustice, whether popular or not. From this standpoint, fascist beliefs and sentiments have nothing to do with morality and justice. The social and political objectives of fascism are aggressive and oppressive, the exact opposite of the liberating and humane objectives of revolutionary mass movements. The fact that both resort to violence means nothing, since violence directed against the oppressor by his victim is something very different from the oppressor’s violence directed against the victim.

     The world we live in would be at least morally much more manageable if this argument were completely convincing and the distinctions it draws in theory more obvious in practice. Unfortunately the violence of the oppressed has often become the new violence of the oppressor, and the moment of transition from one to the other has been both fleeting and hard to detect. The stated purposes and objectives of the political movements have no more to do with their actual behavior and consequences than is the case with individuals. The Sermon on the Mount can be a step on the road to the Inquisition, and the dream of a world without oppression become the justification for a terrorist secret police. Though the connection is not necessarily an inevitable one, a denial of the connection will not help human beings to avoid a repetition of such experiences in their continuing search for a world with less cruelty and oppression. Then, too, the sentiments of moral anger at felt injustices have been a powerful component in mass support for fascist movements. Finally and most significantly, even if this line of argument were convincing, it would reveal nothing about the causes of popular movements with a powerful component of cruelty and aggression.

     We have glimpsed some of these frightening possibilities in the discussion of Part One of how and why oppressive forms of authority gain acceptance and why human beings at times inflict suffering on themselves and even seem to enjoy doing it. In this chapter I shall pursue this theme further by using the National Socialist movement in Germany as a paradigm to uncover some of the causes and social roots of this streak of cruelty in popular movements.(pp.398-400)


Who were the Nazis?

     The first question to ask about a movement is what kinds of people joined it. More precisely we want to learn what we can about the circumstances of their daily lives that helped to produce the savage resentment against the world around them so characteristic of the Nazis. Immediate circumstances alone will not adequately explain their feelings and behavior. It will also be necessary to understand as much as possible about the ways people who were or became Nazis saw and interpreted their own circumstances, ways that were in large measure due to the imprint and residue of still earlier experiences. These included the defeat and turmoil of 1918 and subsequent years, the catastrophic inflation of 1923, the deceptive years of prosperity, and then the Great Depression that began in 1929 and was still raging like an epidemic when Adolf Hitler took power in 1933. To these perceptions we will turn later after an attempt to sketch the Nazi movement in its social setting.(p.400)

Moore uses two rarely cited sources to explore this subject of how Nazism appealed to different segments of the German population: The first source was “Parteistatistik, Stand 1: Januar 1935” issued by the Reichsorganisationsleiter of the NSDAP, a three volume study of the “social composition of the Nazi Party which was printed in typescript with a notice that “the information contained therein was not to be given to anyone except the inner staff of the Reichsleiter’s office without written permission and that the volumes were to be kept in a secure place.”(fnt 2, p.401) The second source which revealed new information on the composition of the NSDAP was the general census of June 1933 (about five months following Hitler’s seizure of power), which contained a very detailed statistical profile of occupational groups in German society. Together these two sources provide a window into the occupational variations of susceptibility to Nazi appeal in Germany at the time of the fascist takeover.

[W]e come to the somewhat surprising conclusion that the main organizational expression of lower-middle-class resentments probably drew no more than half of its membership from this stratum. On the other hand, this was the largest group in the Party, with the industrial workers making up slightly more than a quarter. The finding helps to explain the flexibility of Nazi strategy. . . . No amount of ingenuity in the manipulation of census data and figures for Party membership can reveal how people actually felt and behaved; their fears, angers, and explanations of the world. To force German fascism into the sociological straitjacket of mere lower-middle-class resentment would be misleading and in the end reveal nothing. Structural data can provide indispensable information about what kinds of people were likely to have certain feelings, how many such people there may have been at certain points in time, and their place in a complicated and changing web of social relationships. But that is not enough. For what human beings felt as injustice and what they tired to do about their particular conception of injustice it is necessary to turn to quite different kinds of evidence.(pp.410-411)


Forms and sources of Nazi moral outrage.

Moore turns to the autobiographies of rank-and-file Party members in order to study the mentality of fascist attraction in Germany.

     The fact that the NSDAP contained so many industrial or at least urban workers was a distinct political advantage. Even if the Party’s appeal was most effective among the lower middle classes, this fact gave some color of truth to their claim to speak and act for all Germans, or better, all patriotic Germans. After they had gained power, their policies of conquest and plunder did in fact bring benefits to most Germans – as long as it was successful. Rearmament ended the scourge of unemployment and helped to generate profits for business. After the war there were a good many Germans who remarked bitterly that Hitler had made only one mistake: he lost the war. It is necessary to remember too that in any country a nationalist appeal has some basis in fact, that amid the turmoil of the last years of the Republic there was a sense in which all Germans shared a common historical legacy and were in the same boat because  they were the inhabitants of the same state.

     Even if with widely varying degrees of success, therefore, the Nazi could and did appeal to practically all strata of the population. Where they succeeded, they evidently managed to find resonances among individuals with a certain set of shared experiences and a certain cast of mind, or at least a set of prior inclinations. Both the experiences and the way of interpreting them were themselves historical and social products which we must now investigate. For this purpose the autobiographical accounts of rank-and-file Nazis, collected by Theodore Abel in 1934, provide valuable information.

     One striking feature in the autobiographies is the conventional morality and outlook on life that these individuals report as the consequence of their upbringing. There is a recurring stress on hard work, honesty, loyal obedience to duly constituted authority, patriotism, and the virtues of being a good family man as the recipe for a contented and useful life. The autobiographies generally describe parents in an idealized fashion along these lines, even in the case of working-class families where the father was a Social Democrat. In such instances, however, there may be signs of differences between the mother and father over religion. While the atmosphere sounds strict, there is room for the indulgence of boyish pranks and exuberance. This indulgence is consistent with the strict demarcation of sex roles and the emphasis on the virtues of manliness, also very noticeable in the accounts.

     This morality is common to men from quite different occupational backgrounds and does not appear to be specific to any particular social class. It represents the precipitate of several converging historical influences. At points there are strong echoes of the simple moral earnestness that was a conspicuous current among the artisans as far back at 1848, without, however, the strong religious overtones. It is also easy to recognize this whole complex of virtues as the ideals of early competitive capitalism.

     That institutional complex, on the other hand, never took firm hold in Germany: Concurrenz (competition), as we know, was evil. Hence, as will become clearer later, there are contradictions: the individual is expected to make his own way in life though his own exertions but somehow not in competition with others. Then there are several detectable influences that are much more recent and come down to indoctrination by the upper class in patriotism and obedience. The educational system, the army, and daily experiences of contact with those in authority evidently did their work well upon a substantial portion of the underlying population. The whole complex is conventional, representing the imprint of specific historical experiences and an amalgam of these. It is petty bourgeois rather than bourgeois (and hardly patrician: there is not sense of being accustomed to receive deference) with a strong overlay of both bureaucratic and even feudal features. The bureaucratic ones take the form of emphasis on the importance of performing a limited task in a disciplined manner; the feudal ones appear as a sense of personal honor and diffuse loyalty to superiors. The whole combination as such is specifically German. Yet it would be an error to overemphasize the strictly German aspect. Fascism, I have argued elsewhere, was a worldwide historical phenomenon, even if it reached its most virulently destructive form in Germany. Generally similar causes, including a similar morality and outlook on life, existed as dominant or subordinate trends in many parts of the globe.

     Equipped with this way of perceiving and judging the world, a way that was quite widespread but by no means universal in Germany after 1918, these young men underwent a series of disillusioning and threatening experiences. For many a soldier the return to the revolutionary homeland of 1918 was a bitter shock and challenge to which he responded in punitive fashion in the manner reported by this one:

          Troops were once again returning to the Fatherland, yet a disgusting sight met their eyes. Beardless boys, dissolute deserters and whores tore off the shoulder bands of our front-line fighters and spat upon their field gray uniforms. At the same time they muttered something about liberty, equality, and fraternity. Poor, deluded people! Was this liberty, and fraternity? People who never saw a battle field, who had never heard the whine of a bullet, openly insulted men who through four and a half years had defied the world in arms, who had risked their lives in innumerable battles, with the sole desire to guard the country against this horror.

          For the first time I began to feel a burning hatred for this human scum that trod everything pure and clean underfoot.’(pp.412-413)


     One last account worth mentioning briefly describes the disenchantment of a white-collar worker with the Deutschnational Volkspartei, a reactionary monarchist Party that drew its support from Junkers and big industry. Their solution to the problem of unemployment, as this man saw it, was general improvement in economic conditions to absorb the unemployed. This policy, as he saw, implied

‘… years of bayonet rule to deal with the desperation bound to follow. How different form this was the daring proposition that sprang from Hitler’s warm sympathetic heart! His idea was not to use the resources of the state to help industrialists and land owners, but to take advantage of them immediately to relieve the misery of millions of unemployed Germans.’

The remark reveals another side of the emotional currents among the less fortunate classes: a desire to have the benefits of revolution without the costs in conflict and suffering. This hope the Nazis shared with many forms of statist liberalism, from Franklin Roosevelt onward. But there is a significant difference. Even the statist version of liberalism presupposes the continuation of group conflict whereas the Nazis’ view looked forward to the dissolution of conflict within the boundaries of the ‘people’s community’ as part of the intensified struggle on an international scale with liberalism and Marxism.

     By this point it is, I hope, clear enough that the Nazis did draw their popular support from people who felt morally outraged by the social order around them. They felt themselves to be the persecuted victims of the liberal capitalist Republic of Weimar. If anything, this sense of persecution increased for those who took the step of joining the Nazi Party. According to Abel, several hundred National Socialists were stoned, shot, or knifed to death in street brawls with organized leftist groups between 1930 and 1932. Though the courts were generally very lenient with Nazi and other rightists who resorted to violence, local police forces did at times crack down severely on Storm Troopers. The effect of physical persecution was merely to intensify loyalty to Hitler and the cause.

     Rank-and-file party members evidently perceived and explained the shocks they received from the hand hands of a society in upheaval in very simplified moral terms. Since most saw themselves as strictly moral and hard-working, the catastrophes and threats of catastrophe in their own lives had to come from external source that was evil. If effort did not lead to reward in the way traditionally expected, something must be radically wrong and immoral. . . . This something was partly conspiracy and partly a radical defect in the whole social order. Rank-and-file Nazis did generalize. If anything, they generalized too much. There is practically no concrete social and economic analysis in their popular diagnosis of the social order. Instead there was a pervading sense of evil and pollution. Root out the pollution in a manly ‘old-fashion’ way, and the unpolluted could live happily ever afterward in a ‘people’s community.’ Such were the essential elements in this popular diagnosis and remedy for suffering.

. . .

Neither the Nazis nor the modern romantic advocates of community show much awareness that in real communities, as they have existed in peasant villages or most nonliterate societies, there are suffocating sanctions against deviance from the community’s norms. In practice these small groupings are dominated by the coq du paroisse, or petty oligarchy. Mrs. Grundy in male or female form is usually the real power behind the throne in what amounts to a petty autocracy where there is hardly any refuge from the disapproving eye of the upholders of tradition.(pp.416-419)


Moore concludes this study with a discussion of “inevitability and the sense of injustice.” Here he discusses the implications of the concept of “totalitarianism.”

The term totalitarian did not emerge as part of American self-serving mythology for the Cold War. To be sure, the distinction is not absolute. But a totalitarian society is one where a small ruling elite controls the means of coercion and persuasion and in the name of some ideal uses police and propaganda to stamp out dissent and reduce social and cultural space to an absolute minimum. In a totalitarian society there is literally no room to experiment with the future, or for that matter with the past. The nature of both past and present is defined through continually shifting decrees that nevertheless maintain a permanent taboo on unofficial experimentation. We have yet to see whether such societies based on permanent mobilization of the underlying population can sustain this mobilization well beyond the lifetime of leaders with actual experience of the revolutionary struggles that formed them.(pp.483-484)


And his final words end on a modest note, speculating on the future prospects of radical emancipatory change in politics.

So far in human history, forms of authority have simply succeeded each other; new ones have substituted quite effectively for those that have become historically obsolete. Whether there will be some qualitative leap into a very different future is an issue that an empirical inquiry like this can at present safely set aside.


  The 22 + items below should make readers think about the historic continuity of contemporary events, as well as how they differ from past events.




Francis McCollum Feeley


Professeur honoraire de l'Université Grenoble-Alpes
Ancien Directeur des Researches
Université de Paris-Nanterre
Director of The Center for the Advanced Study
of American Institutions and Social Movements
The University of California-San Diego





Consent Factory, Inc.



by C.J. Hopkins


Manufacturing consent for private and public sector clients for over 250 years






'What Percent Of CDC Employees Are Vaccinated?':


Cassidy Grills Walensky At Senate Hearing







James Corbett on Research, China and the Media


with James Corbett

(audio, 1:28:30)


Video: Fauci, HHS Officials Discuss Using New Virus from China


to Enforce Universal Vaccines in Footage


by One America News Network



“Mass Media: A History” — Course Notes


by James Corbett





Julian Assange Extradition Case


with Chris Hedges



“Free Julian Assange”:


Snowden, Varoufakis, Corbyn & Tariq Ali Speak Out


Ahead of Extradition Hearing




As jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange faces an extradition hearing Wednesday in London, supporters gathered Friday for the Belmarsh Tribunal, named for the Belmarsh maximum security prison where Assange is being held. The mock trial highlighted major WikiLeaks revelations of U.S. war crimes and demanded Assange’s freedom. Assange faces up to 175 years in prison in the U.S. under the Espionage Act for publishing classified documents exposing U.S. war crimes. Though a British judge blocked his extradition in January, the U.S. appealed the decision. We feature speakers from the tribunal, including writer Tariq Ali, Afghan political activist Selay Ghaffar, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis and former Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn. “Julian, far from being indicted, should actually be a hero,” said Ali. “He should never have been kept in prison for bail. He should not be in prison now awaiting a trial for extradition. He should be released.” We also hear from Srećko Horvat, philosopher and Belmarsh Tribunal chair; Ewen MacAskill, former Guardian journalist; and Stella Morris, partner of Julian Assange.


 “The Most Important Battle for Press Freedom in Our Time”


by Chris Hedges


The CIA, Empty Assurances and Assange’s Defence


by Binoy Kampmark


John Kiriakou on Daniel Hale and America’s Unending Persecution of




by Maj. (ret.) Danny Sjursen


Lawyer Presses Parallels With Love Case


by Joe Lauria


“Update on Assange and the extradition hearing”


with Alex Christoforou and Alexander Mercouris



Beyond Evil !!


with Shawn Baker



Justice for Assange is Justice for All


by John Pilger


Julian Assange is a truth-teller who has committed no crime but revealed government crimes and lies on a vast scale and so performed one of the great public services of my lifetime.





How to Fight Vaccine Mandates and Passports

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/11/02/fighting-vaccine-mandates-passports.aspx?ui=16ffacbab8fe00a7a80fb43e8fc0419cd5e8d4732c8e99e4a93505e1afa83400&sd=20210925&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20211102_HL2&mid=DM1026073&rid=1310300436Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaBottom of Form

Story at-a-glance

Around the world, huge numbers of people are protesting vaccine mandates and passports. In mid-September 2021, Italy became the first European country to announce the implementation of mandatory COVID-19 health passes (so-called “Green Pass”) for all workers, both public and private.

The Italian mandate took effect October 15, 2021. Under the new rules, any Italian who does not have a Green Pass is forced into unpaid leave and risks fines of up to 1,500 euros (approximately $1,750). Massive demonstrations are also taking place in The Netherlands, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Greece, Romania, Slovenia, Australia and France.

Even in Israel, mass protests are now taking place as it was announced Israelis will lose their health pass privileges unless they get a third booster shot six months after their second dose.

Situation in New York

New York City has also seen large protests in the wake of its vaccine requirement for restaurants and other public venues. Among those protesting are firefighters, first responders, correctional officers, police officers and sanitation workers.

The New York City police union, the Police Benevolent Association, recently sued the city over its COVID jab mandate, saying it opposes any mandate that does not allow police officers to undergo weekly testing in lieu of getting the shot.

As of mid-October 2021, an estimated 30% of the New York police department remained unvaccinated.1 Unless they’re fully “vaccinated” by November 1, 2021, they all face being placed on unpaid leave. In all, about 46,0002 New York city workers stand before this difficult choice: get the risky jab or lose their job.

Among city sanitation workers, 38% remain unvaccinated.3 We’ve already seen how mass walkouts can change things. For example, in mid-October 2021, Southwest Airlines did a sudden U-turn, reversing its strict get jabbed or get lost policy.4

Southwest is now urging unvaccinated employees to apply for an exemption, which the airline will do its best to approve. In cases where an exemption is not approved, Southwest has promised to provide other accommodation, such as weekly testing, which is not an option under Biden’s mandate.

Now, imagine what halving the sanitation department in New York City would do. I predict a few weeks of letting trash pile up might soften the mayor’s stance on the mandate.

It would be even more catastrophic — and more likely to end the mandate — were the remaining vaccinated sanitation workers to walk off the job in solidarity. After all, whether you decided to get the initial jab or not, the vaccine mandate is a direct attack on your personal freedom and liberty.

Unless you’re willing to give up all personal autonomy to the government, you have to say no to this clear authoritarian overreach, because it’s only going to get worse from here. There really is no telling what you’ll have to submit yourself to next in order to keep your “privileges,” which now include having a job.

The Global Threat of Vaccine Mandates and Passports

In the video above, investigative reporter James Corbett of The Corbett Report Solution Watch explores how we can thwart the threat of vaccine mandates and passports. As noted by Corbett, this threat is worldwide.

There’s not a nation in the world that can expect to not face vaccine mandates and passports, for the simple reason that the passports are a foundational part of the new economic control system that is being rolled out.

So, while it appears people have successfully pushed back in some areas — including the U.K., which recently announced it would scrap the passport requirement for restaurants and other public venues, and in Florida, where Gov. Ron DeSantis is calling on businesses to pay for adverse reactions if they mandate the shot (see his speech below) — we must remain vigilant, not let up, and not give an inch.

We’ve repeatedly seen how government officials have said there are no plans for vaccine mandates or passports, only to turn on a dime days or weeks later. It seems they’re all using the same playbook: First, put people’s minds at ease, and then pull the rug out — over and over again.

How to Thwart the Threat of Vaccine Mandates and Passports

While there’s no one-size-fits-all solution, some general suggestions can be made. Corbett divides the available solutions into four main categories:

1. Legal challenges to the vaccine mandates — A variety of legal resources can be found on The Corbett Report’s September Open Thread.5 A thread by HomeRemedySupply, in particular, contains a long list of legal resources for Americans looking to combat vaccine mandates, including vaccine exemption documents and much more.

The Corbett Report show notes6 also list a variety of resources. Another resource is The Solari Report, where you can download a variety of forms, including:

a. A family financial disclosure form, to ensure that a vaccine injury or death does not translate into financial destruction of the whole family

b. An employer disclosure form that informs your employer of the many laws and ethical principles they are breaking and demands they take financial responsibility for any injury you might incur as a result of their mandate

c. A school disclosure form that informs the school of the many laws and ethical principles they are breaking and demands they take financial responsibility for any injury you might incur as a result of their mandate

d. A notice of parental authority form, which parents can use to notify relevant parties that they do not consent to their child being vaccinated without their written informed consent

Another type of legal challenge you can pursue is that of religious and medical exemptions. Just keep in mind that while this might temporarily save the livelihoods of some, it does virtually nothing to protect you or anyone else from tyranny in the long term.

And, as noted by Corbett, even the Amish have had religious exemptions denied by bureaucrats who say they don’t think the Amish have a strongly held religious conviction against vaccination. If you know anything about Amish who choose not to vaccinate, you know what a ridiculous statement that is, but at the end of the day, these are the kinds of people making the decisions.

2. Workarounds that don’t necessitate facing the problem head-on — This includes setting up a network of likeminded people to create parallel economies and resources,7 and getting involved in local politics, your children’s school board and so on, where you can apply pressure and affect change from the inside. You can also sign petitions, such as the British togetherdeclaration.org.8

3. Peaceful protests and demonstrations — As mentioned earlier, there are mass protests taking place all over the world. Keep in mind that this strategy requires patience and above all persistence. Doing it once or twice will accomplish little.

The French have been taken to the streets by the hundreds of thousands every weekend for months. Our leaders are clearly not easily or rapidly swayed by these displays of solidarity but, over time, peaceful protests can be effective.

4. The ultimate solution: noncompliance — At the end of the day, the most effective long-term solution is mass noncompliance, “ignoring the rulers out of existence,” to quote Arizona Dara, featured in Corbett’s report. It’s important to realize that it’s not our politicians who are running the show. They’re foot soldiers for unnamed, unelected globalists, which is why fighting in the political arena is unlikely to eliminate this threat over the long term.

As noted by Corbett, the technocrat globalists that are the real string pullers are only able to do what they do because people tend to just go along with it. It’s that simple. If enough people don’t comply, their plans fall apart.

If millions of people refuse to comply with the mandates and the passports and then sue their employers when they’re fired, if millions force the establishment to go through that hassle, the establishment will eventually cave. As noted by Corbett, it would become mathematically impossible for them to enforce the tyranny. Ultimately, that’s how we win.

Vaccine Passports Are Part of Surveillance Capitalism

To learn more about the scheme behind vaccine passports, read Jeremy Loffredo’s and Max Blumenthal’s article, “Public Health or Private Wealth? How Digital Vaccine Passports Pave Way for Unprecedented Surveillance Capitalism.”9 As noted in that article:

“The titans of global capitalism are exploiting the Covid-19 crisis to institute social credit-style digital ID systems across the West.

The death by starvation of Etwariya Devi, a 67-year-old widow from the rural Indian state of Jharkhand, might have passed without notice had it not been part of a more widespread trend.

Like 1.3 billion of her fellow Indians, Devi had been pushed to enroll in a biometric digital ID system called Aadhaar in order to access public services, including her monthly allotment of 25kg of rice.

When her fingerprint failed to register with the shoddy system, Devi was denied her food ration. Throughout the course of the following three months in 2017, she was repeatedly refused food until she succumbed to hunger, alone in her home.

Premani Kumar, a 64-year-old woman also from Jharkhand, met the same demise as Devi, dying of hunger and exhaustion the same year after the Aadhaar system transferred her pension payments to another person without her permission, while cutting off her monthly food rations.

A similarly cruel fate was reserved for Santoshi Kumari, an 11-year-old girl, also from Jharkhand, who reportedly died begging for rice after her family’s ration card was canceled because it had not been linked to their Aadhaar digital ID.

These three heart-rending casualties were among a spate of deaths in rural India in 2017 which came as a direct result of the Aadhaar digital ID system.

With over one billion Indians in its database, Aadhaar is the largest biometric digital ID program ever constructed. Besides serving as a portal to government services, it tracks users’ movements between cities, their employment status, and purchasing records. It is a de facto social credit system that serves as the key entry point for accessing services in India ...

For those yearning for an end to pandemic-related restrictions, credential programs certifying their vaccination against Covid-19 have been marketed as the key to reopening the economy and restoring their personal freedom. But the implementation of immunity passports is also accelerating the establishment of a global digital identity infrastructure.”

Don’t Fall Into the Convenience Trap

Make no mistake, vaccine passports are the precursor to digital ID wallets, as noted by the military surveillance firm Thales.10 Of course, it’s sold as something that will provide you with superior convenience, but as the three stories above show, it doesn’t always work, and even when it does, it turns you into a slave in a system that profits from surveilling everything you do.

Sooner or later, everyone will have to make a choice: Freedom or slavery. There’s no middle ground anymore.

The system also gives unelected globalists — the richest of the rich — the power to cut your access to funds, health care, travel, food or anything else whenever they please. Bill Gates, the World Health Organization, the Rockefellers, the World Bank and the World Economic Forum are just some of the people and organizations that are behind this global enslavement agenda.

Don’t fall for altruistic language spouted by these people. It’s nothing but PR to cover their profit motives. In the real world, digital ID systems have proven disastrous for the average person, resulting in marginalization and death.

In India, a random sampling of 18 villages that had implemented compulsory biometric authentication at rationing stations showed a shocking 37% of people were unable to get their food rations for one reason or another.11 So much for convenience. Imagine having to rely on a system like that for everything in your life — your food, your health care, your education, your banking and everyday purchases.

As noted by Canadian immunologist and geneticist Sir John Bell,12 the COVID-19 medical system can easily be repurposed for other ailments and health goals as well. Any number of other vaccinations could be mandated, and without having those logged in your passport, there goes your freedom yet again.

Any number of drugs could be required to maintain a valid passport. They could put every adult over 40 on mandatory statin treatment, for example, as a public health measure.

Just how much freedom are you willing to lose? Don’t think for a minute that it’ll all end once you get fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Sooner or later, everyone will have to make a choice: freedom or slavery. There’s no middle ground anymore.


Sources and References


Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked. The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

If you want to use an article on your site please click here. This content may be copied in full, with copyright, contact, creation and information intact, without specific permission, when used only in a not-for-profit format. If any other use is desired, permission in writing from Dr. Mercola is required.


Colleges Conditioning Students for a Surveillance Bureaucracy




Only Worker Revolts Can Save America."


with Jimmy Dore and Richard Wolff




How VAERS was made to HIDE ‘adverse events’


with Brian Hooker and Dr. Jessica Rose



Vaxxed Just As Likely To Spread Covid As Unvaxxed


New Study - October 31, 2021


with Jimmy Dore



This Vaccine Injury Cover-Up Should Make Everyone Furious

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/11/03/osha-covers-up-vaccine-injuries.aspx?ui=16ffacbab8fe00a7a80fb43e8fc0419cd5e8d4732c8e99e4a93505e1afa83400&sd=20210925&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20211103&mid=DM1026047&rid=1311217246 analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola

Story at-a-glance

As reported by Kim Iversen above, around the world people are gathering for massive protests against COVID shot mandates. In mid-September 2021, Italy became the first European country to announce the implementation of mandatory COVID-19 health passes (so-called “Green Pass”) for all workers, both public and private.

The Italian mandate took effect October 15, 2021. Residents have been protesting in the streets for months on end and there’s no sign of them letting up. Demonstrations are also taking place in The Netherlands, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Greece, Romania, Slovenia, Australia and France.

Even in Israel, mass protests are now taking place as it was announced Israeli’s will lose their health pass privileges unless they get a third booster shot six months after their second dose. New York City has also seen large protests in the wake of its vaccine requirement for restaurants and other public venues.

Leaders Turn a Blind Eye

Yet, despite massive protests, the push for vaccine mandates and vaccine passports that will create a two-tier society continue unabated. With few exceptions, world leaders are simply turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to the fact that their residents want nothing to do with their new world order.

At the same time, government agencies charged with keeping us safe are doing the complete opposite. That includes the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which President Biden has placed in charge of enforcing his unconstitutional edict that private companies with 100 employees or more must make COVID “vaccination” a requirement for employment or face fines of as much as $700,000 per incidence.1

OSHA will issue the mandate for employers as an emergency temporary standard (ETS), but as of this writing, no official mandate has actually been issued.

According to an October 18, 2021, report by PJ Media,2 OSHA has sent a draft to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Since it’s being issued as an ETS, there will be no public comment period.

Once the OMB review is finalized, the vaccination rule will be published. Only then will the mandate actually go into effect. That said, OSHA has already amended an already existing rule in a way that will hide the true extent of the damage that this mandate will have on the American workforce.

OSHA Rule Change Covers Up Vaccine Injuries

According to OSHA rules (29 CFR 19043), employers must record and report work-related illnesses, injuries and fatalities, whether the employer was at fault or not. As reported May 26, 2021, by employment law firm Ogletree Deakins,4 this recording requirement initially also applied to adverse reactions suffered by employees who had to get the COVID shot as a requirement for employment.

The original guidance stated that employers were required to record an employee’s adverse reaction to the COVID jab if the shot was a) work-related, 2) a new case under 29 C.F.R. 1904.6 and 3) met one or more OSHA general recording criteria set out in 29 C.F.R. 1904.7. OSHA specified that an adverse reaction to the jab would be considered “work-related” if the shot was required for employment.

Then, in late May 2021, OSHA suddenly revoked this guidance, saying it will not enforce the recording requirement if the injury or fatality involves the COVID jab, even if required for employment. The nonenforcement will remain in place through May 2022, at which time the agency will reevaluate its position.

Why would they remove the requirement to record and report vaccine injuries incurred as a result of a vaccine mandate? According to OSHA, the agency is “working diligently to encourage COVID-19 vaccinations,” “does not wish to have any appearance of discouraging workers from receiving COVID-19 vaccination, and also does not wish to disincentivize employers’ vaccination efforts.”5,6 As reported by Ogletree Deakins:7

“There is no doubt that OSHA’s guidance created a disincentive for employers to mandate that their employees get vaccinated. With a mandatory vaccination policy, the guidance ensured that employees’ adverse reactions (with arguably little correlation to actual work-related injuries) could end up on a company’s OSHA recordkeeping logs — which could, in turn, negatively affect its insurance rates and, in some industries, its ability to bid for work.”

What Ogletree fails to address is that by not enforcing this recording requirement for COVID jab injuries, OSHA is intentionally covering up the ramifications these vaccine mandates might have on employees’ health. Meanwhile, employers are still required to record and report COVID-19 infections and COVID-19 deaths among their employees.

Federal Employees Get Special Treatment

In related news, federal employees must be fully “vaccinated” by November 22, 2021, or face the unemployment line. While coercion of this nature is abhorrent under any circumstance, federal employees at least get special treatment if they’re injured by the required jab. As reported by Stacey Lennox for PJ Media:8

“… October 1, 2021, the Federal Employee’s Compensation Act (FECA) issued a bulletin regarding coverage for vaccine injuries.9 FECA did not traditionally cover preventative measures and any resulting illness or injury. As of September 9, 2021, when President Biden announced the federal mandate, adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccination are covered.”

As indicated in FECA Bulletin No. 22-01, dated October 1, 2021:10

“… this executive order now makes COVID-19 vaccination a requirement of most Federal employment. As such, employees impacted by this mandate who receive required COVID-19 vaccinations on or after the date of the executive order may be afforded coverage under the FECA for any adverse reactions to the vaccine itself, and for any injuries sustained while obtaining the vaccination.”

“This bulletin is an interesting turn of events given previous OSHA guidance to private employers,” Lennox writes.11 Indeed, while OSHA is selectively choosing to hide the vaccine injuries of private employees, federal employees will have access to financial compensation for their vaccine injuries, over and above the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Act (CICP).12

Who Will Pay for Private Employees Injured by the Jabs?

On the whole, it’s clear that private employees will be at a distinct disadvantage in terms of compensation. If their employer requires them to get the jab to keep their job, and they get injured by it, the only recourse they have is to file a CICP claim, which is near-impossible to get. By not requiring companies to record vaccine injuries, it effectively shuts down the path for an employee to seek worker’s compensation if they’re injured by a mandated COVID jab.

“While OSHA recordability does not govern worker’s compensation, after managing both for several employers, I have never seen a compensable injury that is not OSHA recordable,” Lennox writes.13

As for CICP, in its 15-year history, it has paid out fewer than 1 in 10 claims.14,15,16 It also offers rather limited help, as you first have to exhaust your personal insurance before it kicks in to pay the difference.

Even if they can get it, CICP awards are likely to be a drop in the bucket for most people. The average award is $200,000, and compensation for fatalities are capped at $370,376.17 Meanwhile, you can easily rack up a $1 million hospital bill if you suffer a serious thrombotic event.18

Private sector employees deserve the same protection as federal employees in the face of mandatory vaccines. The mandates will put a severe risk between them and their ability to earn a living for some people ... If employers don’t want the liability, they should fight the mandate. ~ Stacey Lennox, PJ Media

Perhaps most egregious of all, it’s your responsibility to prove your injury was the “direct result of the countermeasure’s administration based on compelling, reliable, valid, medical and scientific evidence beyond mere temporal association.”

In other words, you basically have to prove what the vaccine developer itself has yet to ascertain, seeing how you are part of their still-ongoing study. You must also pay for your own legal help and any professional witnesses you may need to support your claim.

Union Workers Now Have Another Bargaining Chip

The fact that federal workers who are injured by the mandated COVID jabs will be covered by FICA now gives unionized employees a new bargaining chip though. As noted by Lennox:19

“Without the OSHA ETS, unions would have bargained about having a vaccine mandate as a term or condition of employment at all. Now, unions should still have an opportunity for effects bargaining to ensure their members are covered if they sustain a vaccine injury.”

Recordability Guidance Must Be Changed Back

As mentioned earlier, the OSHA requirement to record vaccine injuries was scrapped because it disincentivized employers to mandate the shot. Having large numbers of injury reports can raise a company’s insurance costs. However, if OSHA is now going to require all employers with 100 or more employees to implement vaccine mandates, then most companies will be in the same boat.

Since no employer will be at a particular disadvantage, OSHA really needs to change its recordability guidance back, Lennox says, adding:20

“Private sector employees deserve the same protection as federal employees in the face of mandatory vaccines. The mandates will put a severe risk between them and their ability to earn a living for some people.

If they [employers] cave, they should be liable just as every taxpayer is now liable for a vaccine injury to a federal employee. If employers don’t want the liability, they should fight the mandate.”


Sources and References


Segregation 2.0 : ‘Perspectives On The Pandemic


with Kevin Jenkins



From Mark Crispin Miller:

This is an extraordinary video, both for Jenkins' grasp of history and fiery eloquence, and for the (sometimes shocking) visuals that illustrate his points.


From John Kirby:

65 percent of black New Yorkers have opted out of the experimental, un-approved biologic being marketed as a "safe and effective" vaccine. Which means they are barred from eating indoors in restaurants, attending the theater, going to school with other children, etc. harkening back to the Jim Crow south. Many will be losing their jobs along with thousands of city workers and uncounted numbers of other Americans across the country. But since by official admission the vaccine does not prevent transmission, there is no rational reason for the new health-based apartheid. So what's going on? Censored health activist Kevin Jenkins (he made it on to the "Disinformation Dozen" honor roll) breaks down what it all means and what we need to do about it.




From: News from Underground [mailto:nobody@simplelists.com]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2021
Subject: Daily digest for


1)      "The healers" have betrayed humanity, just as the intellectuals did before and during World Warz I by Mark Crispin Miller (30 Oct 2021 21:24 EDT)
Reply to list

"Where were all these brilliant minds as the wholly captured CDC and FDA, throwing one of the most elemental premises of immunology casually out the window, repeatedly cast doubt upon the reality and potency of natural immunity, and serially suggested that a not fully- tested vaccine that only produces antibodies for a part of the virus provides better protection than the body’s own millenary defenses?"

BROWNSTONE » ARTICLES  The Treason of the Healers



In 1927, the French intellectual Julien Benda published La Trahison des Clercs which has been translated to English as The Betrayal (and sometimes the Treason) of the Intellectuals. The book is a searing indictment of the role played by intellectuals from both sides of the First World War in fanning the flames of that devastating conflict which raised the threshold of man’s capacity for murder and destruction to theretofore unimaginable levels.

For Benda, the great and unpardonable sin of the intellectuals in both Germany and France was to abandon the imperative to generate “disinterested” knowledge, and to instead lend their talents and prestige to tasks of promoting home-borne chauvinism on one hand, and the systematic denigration of the enemy’s culture and citizens on the other.

The rise of the "figure of the intellectual, as we understand it today, is intimately linked to two interlocking historical processes from the last third of the 19th century: the rapid secularization of society and the rise of the daily newspaper.

In effect, as citizens began to leave the church and its leaders behind, they redirected their desire for transcendence toward the daily press and its new secular “clerics.” These new spiritual leaders, in turn, had to decide, as had their predecessors in ancient Israel, Greece and Rome before them, how to exercise their newfound power.

Was it their job to shore up the positive spirit of the collective in the age of the nation-state? Or was it to reveal to their parishioner-readers the stark truths of their time?

Given the enormous stakes in the matter, the second option was, for Benda, the only morally acceptable one.

As the twentieth century advanced, the turn-of-the-century writer was gradually supplanted at the apex of the new social communion by the man of science, and especially, by the "figure of the physician. Given the exigencies of the scientific method, an adherence to a disinterested search for knowledge should have, if anything, become even more important for such people than it had been for the “lettered” objects of Benda’s ire.

However, it did not take long to discover that the newly ascendant men of science were just as prone as Benda’s treasonous writers to abuse the institutional powers conferred on them by society and the state in order to pursue narrowly subscribed, and o$en deeply inhumane, campaigns of bullying and/or human experimentation.

There was, of course the long campaign of intellectual terror waged by Lysenko and his acolytes in the Soviet Union and the large-scale buy-in —much bigger than is still generally acknowledged or admitted—by German physicians of the genocidal program of “Nazi medicine” during the 30s and 40s. And here at home, we have more than enough disgusting cases of medical abuse (forced lobotomies, the Tuskegee Study, MK Ultra, Oxycontin to name just a few) to keep a forensic journalist or historian of medical crime busy for a lifetime.

But when it comes to acknowledging this, things are much the way they are when it comes to acknowledging the serial crimes of the US empire. It is—as Harold Pinter said in addressing this last matter in his Nobel speech—as if, “It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest.”

And because we have largely ignored these outrages against human dignity and the core ethos of healing—explaining them away the very few times when they are mentioned with the ever-useful “a few bad apples” meme—we find ourselves completely flat footed before the dangers of a new expert-led imposition of highly questionable public health policies, as well as a medical cadre that is more arrogant and less capable of personal and collective insight than one could have ever believed to be possible.

Emblematic of this new reality was a “dialogue” about Covid containment I recently had with a doctor friend who insisted in the inimitably declamatory fashion of his caste that: “We know what we have to do to control Covid. Just use masks and social distancing.”

When I expressed skepticism about this and asked him whether he, like me, had read the available science on the e#ectiveness of those approaches to containment, he ignored me. And when I again asked if he had read the science he said: “You can cite all the trivia you want, but we know this is what works”.

Indeed, I am more and more convinced that most practicing physicians have read precious few studies on the clinical treatment of Covid or the e#ectiveness of the public health measures that were invented out of whole cloth in March of 2020 to combat the spread of the disease.

Rather, like the hierarchically-minded “good students” they were and are, they simply assume that someone somewhere up the chain of power has actually read things about these matters, subjected them to critique, and decided they all made perfect sense. Indeed, never has Thomas Kuhn’s portrayal of the drone-like and paradigm-enslaved thinking of most working scientists looked more true.

How else can we explain the fact that so many physicians have sat by silently while blatant anti-science and anti-logic nonsense is proffered to the public day after day by their media colleagues, and worse yet, have, in numerous cases, organized and led campaigns to silence the minority in their ranks who have the courage to challenge these absurd claims and the policies they make possible?

Need examples?

Each of the Emergency Use Authorizations for three Covid injections currently being distributed in the US said quite clearly that there was no evidence that the treatments could, or would, curb transmission, something that has been eloquently borne out in a boatload of studies on so-called breakthrough cases in the last 2-3 months.

Yours truly, that faithful peasant trafficker in “trivia,” read these EUAs immediately when they were issued December and January and wondered how this salient fact was compatible with a vaccine rollout clearly anchored in the idea that individual jab-taking was the best, indeed, the only way to “protect us all” through herd immunity.

Did any of the tens of thousands of doctors out there relentlessly pushing the injections in the name of collective responsibility ever read those summaries of clinical efficacy on transmission?

If they did not, they are professionally negligent and thus undeserving of any further deference or respect.

If they did and continued to state or imply that the injections would halt infection and transmission, then they should be held responsible for the deaths and injuries caused in those taking the injections under this misleading premise.

And if and when the apartheid vaccine passport system ever comes, as it should, under prosecutorial scrutiny, these same doctors should be right there in the dock with the politicians as accessories to the crime for providing a completely bogus intellectual underpinning for the liberticidal project.

Where were all these brilliant minds as the wholly captured CDC and FDA, throwing one of the most elemental premises of immunology casually out the window, repeatedly cast doubt upon the reality and potency of natural immunity, and serially suggested that a not fully- tested vaccine that only produces antibodies for a part of the virus provides better protection than the body’s own millenary defenses?

Did they protest it? Or at least have the temerity to mock the outright idiocy of such statements and suggestions? Did they stop and ask whether that made any sense? Outside of a brave minority–Brownstone Institute hears from such dissidents daily–very few did or, indeed, do so now.

Most of them acted like a physician I know who, after receiving a stack of studies from a patient regarding the potency and durability of natural immunity (none of which he had read or even heard of) along with a request for a statement attesting to the patient’s recovery from Covid, literally ran out of the room for 15 minutes, only to return with a mealy- mouthed and gaslighting statement that in no way confirmed his charge’s recovery nor the now scientifically undeniable fact of his near total protection from both getting and transmitting the virus.

Where are the protests from these people who until a few years ago could be heard pontificating about the “sacred nature” of the doctor- patient relationship and the “doctrine of medical necessity” now that those seminal concepts of medical ethics are being torn to shreds by vaccine mandates that make no distinctions between individual patient susceptibility to the disease?

Have these bathetic citers of Hippocrates begun to think about what this could mean down the road for the practice of medicine? After having cheered government efforts to foist experimental injections on tens, and more probably, hundreds of millions of people for whom these injections can do no statistically significant good, and thus only harm, they are in no position to stop further pharmaceutical demands from the combined forces of big business and government.

On what basis, for example, could a doctor now object on behalf of his patient to an employer who, waving a statistical model produced at some institute, has decided to mandate the universal prescription of, say, statins, or more ominously, antidepressants among the workforce in the name of reducing mortality and sickness and/or bringing down insurance costs?

In such a case, a large percentage of that workforce would be taking drugs they do not need. But after having folded in the face of efforts to do the same with medications of much less proven efficacy and completely unknown side effects, why would corporate backers even consult the doctors in the future?

The sad truth is that they won’t.

Finally, we must reassert what is arguably one of the greatest (if most assiduously ignored in recent years) responsibilities of a healer: the obligation to calm and reassure the patient.

Where were the doctors doing everything to tell their patients that statistically proven chances of dying from Covid were minimal, about the same as dying from the flu? Where were those who repeatedly pointed out the steep age and comorbidity gradient among the disease’s mortal victims?

Again with honorable exceptions, these mostly very well-paid practitioners have been completely AWOL; that is, when they have not been eagerly using their state medical boards to harass and sanction those of their colleagues with the temerity to point out these inconvenient truths.

Worse yet, many of them chose to further lie and insult us with blatantly false bromides about how Covid is a “threat to all” that “doesn’t discriminate among its victims.”

Certain Jesuits of my acquaintance often used to say, “To whom much is given, much is expected.” During the middle years of the 20th century, the social privilege, deference and power previously granted to clerics, and then to writers, was bequeathed to the science-based healers. While they have done much to improve our lives with the money and authority we have given them, they have—even though they seem largely unaware of it—now fallen into a grave state of moral decadence.

If more had, like their early 20th century predecessors, been forced to study and acknowledge the always present threat of hubris in human affairs, they might have been able to head off this historical denouement.

Sadly, however, most today are unreflective technocrats unable to recognize, never mind critique and distance themselves from, the ever more limiting epistemologies within which they carry out their daily tasks. And because of this Oedipal blindness, they will soon, much sooner than most of them think, lose much of the social capital they had assumed was theirs to wield in perpetuity.


2)      Halloween with Dr. Francis Collins by Mark Crispin Miller (31 Oct 2021 12:07 EDT)
Reply to list


On THEIR "green" agenda for the planet; THEIR fake "energy crisis"; Their designs on the world food supply; and much more from SAMIZDAT by Mark Crispin Miller (31 Oct 2021 14:37 EDT)
Reply to list


Interessante artikelen week #44


De Andere Krant podcast #4: Is de wereld te koop? (deanderekrant).

Niels Lunsing interviewde mij voor de Andere Krant podcast over het artikel “Wall Street maakt aarde tot financieel product”.  


Step 1. Redefine the natural world

Step 2. Create a digital replica of the real thing*

Step 3. Monetize the replica/ translate it into a financial product

Global Blueprint Exposed: The Takeover Of All Genetic Material On Earth (technocracy) 

The Central Banks Intend to Lay Claim to Bodies and Minds (silkthreads, from Joseph P. Farrell)

Wall Street’s Takeover of Nature Advances with Launch of New Asset Class

(Repost, W. Webb, unlimitedhangout) 


The Green Agenda or How This Energy Crisis is Different from All Others (williamengdahl)

“The price of energy from all sources conventional is exploding globally. Far from accidental, it is a well-orchestrated plan to collapse the industrial world economy that has already been weakened dramatically by almost two years of ridiculous covid quarantine and related measures. […]. Barring a dramatic rethinking, the EU and other industrial economies are willfully committing economic suicide.”

What William Engdahl describes is a subversion scenario. Here is a lecture by soviet defector Yuri Berezmenov on the topic: Psychological Warfare Subversion

Will ESG Create The Next Lehman Moment…???  (adventuresincapitalism, link from the solari report)

Here is The Hidden $150 Trillion Agenda Behind The "Crusade" Against Climate Change (zerohedge, link from the solari report)

Putin & Xi Give Boris' PR Summit a Miss (sputniknews)

India Rejects Net-Zero Emissions Target, Calls for More 'Carbon Space' From Developed Nations (sputniknews)


Sinister Rockefeller Food System Agenda — They Created it and Now Want to Destroy It (williamengdahl)

“…[the] GMO agenda gives a very good idea how Rockefeller & Co. plan the radical transformation of US agriculture, and it is not good.”


New Study: Pesticides Together With Electromagnetic Fields Can Stress Bees Leading to Colony Collapse Disorder (ehtrust)

Evidence of Wireless Radiation Injuries Ignored by the FCC (ehtrust)

“The Court found the FCC ignored the scientific evidence indicating harmful biological impacts. The record contained hundreds of science-based submissions documenting genetic damage, brain damage, headaches, sleep impacts, reproductive effects and more. These are referenced in our opening brief and all of these documents are downloadable in 27 Appendices. 

Electromagnetic Fields Impact Tree and Plant Growth (ehtrust)

"The measurements of all trees revealed significant differences between the damaged side facing a phone mast and the opposite side [...] . The 30 selected trees in low radiation areas (no visual contact to any phone mast and power flux density under 50μW/m(2)) showed no damage. Statistical analysis demonstrated that electromagnetic radiation from mobile phone masts is harmful for trees. These results are consistent with the fact that damage afflicted on trees by mobile phone towers usually start on one side, extending to the whole tree over time.”


Propaganda - Goebbels' Principles (physics.smu)

Unpacking Propaganda: What Is It? What Can You Do About It? (technocracy)

BIG TECH                  

Google’s Dystopian Research Censorship, Twisting Knowledge (technocracy)


Artsen bezorgd over wet die politie dna laat gebruiken zonder toestemming patiënt (security)


‘An Outrage Against Democracy’: JFK’s Nephews Urge Biden to Reveal Assassination Records (globalresearch)


The Assange Persecution Is Western Savagery At Its Most Transparent (caitlinjohnstone)

“The worst atrocities in history have all been legal. All the worst examples of genocide, slavery, tyranny and bloodshed have been allowed or actively facilitated by the state”.

Where it hurts: Poland must pay 1 million euro PER DAY in rule-of-law row with EU, top European court rules (rt)


The World According to Vladimir Putin (globalresearch)

“Russian president, in Sochi, lays down the law in favor of conservatism – says the woke West is in decline”


New Weapon From China Reportedly Causes Satellites to Explode (futurism, link from Joseph P Farrel)


Dear “Not Fully Vaccinated” Australians, Thou shall not … Fourteen New Rules for Healthy People (theexpose)

Jimmy Patronis urges In-N-Out to come to Florida: ‘I hope your story inspires’ others (floridapolitics)

““We refuse to become the vaccination police,” Arnie Wensinger, In-N-Out’s chief legal officer, told the Washington Post”

Health Care Workers Speak Out on Why They Would Rather Lose Their Jobs Than Take a COVID-19 Vaccine (theepochtimes)

““Health care workers are not taking it because they know that the side effects are real. In urgent care, I have seen myocarditis, cellulitis, [and] unusual neurological symptoms, among a variety of other side effects. I have seen people very ill post-vaccine, and then go on to test positive. The positivity rate for contracting COVID on the vaccinated is very high per the recent studies and what I am seeing in my clinic. A vaccine should work, and it is not working. It should be tested for years on something other than humans before we call it ‘safe and effective.’ There have been over 15,000 deaths from the vaccine that the media is not talking about. I will never take that risk on myself,” Zubiate said.”


(NL) Samizdat: clandestien geschreven informatie die in de Sovjet tijd verspreid werd in netwerken van dissidenten.

"Samizdat: ik schrijf zelf, ik redigeer zelf, ik censureer zelf, ik geef zelf uit, ik verspreid zelf"


(EN) Samizdat was clandestine and censored information information in the Soviet era that was created by dissidents and spread in underground networks. 

"Samizdat: I write, I research, I redact, I spread, I publish"



Vrijwillige bijdragen ter ondersteuning van de de blog, nieuwsbrief en vlogs zijn welkom!

Voluntary contributions to my newsletter and other work are very welcome!

•           IBAN NL55ABNA0460022555 t.n.v. Elze van Hamelen

•           Paypal adres: Elze_C@protonmail.com


Wil je je afmelden voor de nieuwsbrief? Antwoord dan op deze email met ‘afmelden’ in de titel.

If you would like to unsubscribe, please reply to this email with ‘unsubscribe’ in the title.


Met vriendelijke groet,

Elze van Hamelen


w www.vanhamelen.eu


Support News from Underground:

Visit News from Underground:

For archives, please go to:




Winning the War Against Therapeutic Nihilism


with Dr. Peter McCullough


[Presented October 2, 2021 at the AAPS 78th Annual Meeting held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania]


Story at-a-glance


Dr. Peter McCullough, an internist, cardiologist and trained epidemiologist, not only sees patients every week but is the editor of two medical journals and has published hundreds of peer-reviewed papers. Prior to the pandemic, he was involved in the interface between heart disease and kidney disease — but that all changed.

McCullough is now a “hunted doctor” who’s been threatened with disciplinary actions, including suspension or revocation of his medical license, by the American Board of Internal Medicine for the “dissemination of misinformation.”1 He stepped forward during the COVID-19 pandemic because he saw something very wrong was going on early in 2020, and he felt compelled to do something about it.

In the video above, you can view McCullough’s October 2, 2021, presentation at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.2 I urge you to set aside one hour to view it in its entirety, as it’s packed with data that call into question the true motivations behind the mass injection campaign, which he believes should have been shut down in January.

Red Flags Showed Jabs Were Unsafe From the Start

According to McCullough, by January 22, 2021, there had been 186 deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database following COVID-19 injection — more than enough to reach the mortality signal of concern to stop the program.

“I know data, and I know safety. The FDA knows I know safety. In fact, I’ve chaired data safety monitoring boards for the National Institutes of Health and Big Pharma,” he said.3 It’s standard to have an external critical event committee, an external data safety monitoring board and a human ethics committee for large clinical trials — such as the mass COVID-19 injection program, but these were not put into place.

“With a program this size, anything over 150 deaths would be an alarm signal,” he said. The U.S. “hit 186 deaths with only 27 million Americans jabbed.” McCullough believes if the proper safety boards had been in place, the COVID-19 jab program would have been shut down in February 2021 based on safety and risk of death.4

Such was the case in 1976, when a fast-tracked injection program against swine flu was halted after an estimated 25 to 32 deaths.5 “We are far beyond that now,” McCullough said.6

While many have been silenced, McCullough found a way to share his concerns via regular contributions to The Hill and, back in August 2020, he warned that putting off early treatment in favor of waiting for an experimental injection was taking a gamble with people’s lives:7

“Warnings and barriers have prevented hundreds of thousands of patients from being treated at home with appropriate non-labelled use of off-target antivirals (zinc, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, doxycycline), steroids (dexamethasone, prednisone, budesonide, colchicine), and antithrombotics (low-molecular weight heparin, oral anticoagulants).

It has become apparent that America has adopted a late-illness hospitalization model while waiting patiently and painfully for the panacea of a COVID-19 vaccine.”

The Jab’s Spike Protein Is a Deadly Protein

The whole world seems to be in lockstep with one narrative — that an injection is the only way out of the pandemic. What’s been kept quiet is the significant health risks that come with the experimental jabs. “Spike protein is a deadly protein,” McCullough said.8 It should be noted that McCullough is not antivaccine — he’s recently had a flu shot. However, the COVID-19 jabs are different:9

“It’s the first time in human medicine that we are injecting vaccines and we’re asking the human body to make a potentially lethal protein. The hope is we make a small enough amount of it and it would create just enough of an immune test that we form immunity to this deadly protein.

The gamble was, what if we make too much? What if we make it for too long of a period of time? What if these lipid nanoparticles go to the wrong organs and don’t stay in the arm, and we start to produce this lethal protein …?”

In August 2021, a large study from Israel10 revealed that the Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,11 leading to the condition at a rate of one to five events per 100,000 persons.12 Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID-19 jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.13

Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia is another serious complication of COVID-19 injections,14 and fertility concerns have also been raised. Pfizer’s biodistribution study, which was used to determine where the injected substances go in the body, even showed the COVID spike protein from the shots accumulated in “quite high concentrations” in the ovaries.15

In May 2021, McCullough was one of 57 authors to sign a paper demanding answers to urgent questions on the jabs’ safety and calling for the mass injection program to be halted immediately if safety cannot be adequately proven and monitored.16

At the very least, McCullough noted, pregnant women, women of childbearing age and COVID-19 survivors shouldn’t have been vaccinated, as these groups were excluded from the jabs’ clinical trials because “they knew they weren’t going to work or would cause excessive harm” in these populations.17

Even with all of these blatant risks, health officials haven’t given any updates or regular briefings on the jabs, such as which one of the three — Pfizer, Moderna or Johnson & Johnson — works “best” or is preferred. A “vaccine ‘report card’ on safety is long overdue,”18 according to McCullough, who believes, “The disability that we are going to see due to these vaccines will go down in history as an unbelievable atrocity.”19

Injection Deadlier, Statistically, Than COVID-19

People are dying from COVID-19 jabs. In an analysis of COVID-19 vaccine death reports from VAERS, researchers found that 86% of the time, nothing else could have caused the death, and it appears the vaccine was the cause.20 Despite this, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention continues to say that no causal link has been found between COVID-19 and the deaths.21 That’s malfeasance, McCullough says.

Even more shocking is a Toxicology Reports study that found the injections are deadlier, statistically, than COVID-19.22 “Because not everybody gets the respiratory infection, and because the respiratory infection is treatable and manageable, in fact one is more likely to die after the vaccine than just take their choice with forgoing the vaccine and potentially getting COVID-19. Statistically, in every age group, that’s the case,” he stated.23

You can see the data for yourself in the study’s graphical abstract, below. The researchers explained:24

“A novel best-case scenario cost-benefit analysis showed very conservatively that there are five times the number of deaths attributable to each inoculation vs those attributable to COVID-19 in the most vulnerable 65+ demographic. The risk of death from COVID-19 decreases drastically as age decreases, and the longer-term effects of the inoculations on lower age groups will increase their risk-benefit ratio, perhaps substantially.”

Vaccine Failures Can’t Be Denied

Along with the health risks are the undeniable cases of “breakthrough infections,” otherwise known as vaccine failures. As of October 12, 2021, the CDC stated that 31,985 people who were fully injected against COVID-19 were hospitalized or died from COVID-19.25

Yet, media reports keep referring to the pandemic as a crisis of the unvaccinated, which is simply inaccurate since COVID-19 continues to affect and spread among those who have been vaccinated. The CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) posted online July 30, 2021, details an outbreak of COVID-19 that occurred in Barnstable County, Massachusetts — 74% of the cases occurred in fully vaccinated people.26

With breakthrough cases on the rise, on May 1, 2021, the CDC stopped monitoring most COVID-19 infections among vaccinated people.27 “The CDC started to do asymmetric reporting to start to craft a narrative that this was going to be a failure of the unvaccinated, a crisis of the unvaccinated,” McCullough said. “But the CDC data continued to come in showing us just the opposite.”28

Pivot to Early Treatment Is Necessary

The data are clear that a pivot away from mass injections to early treatment for COVID-19 could save lives, and McCullough and colleagues recommend that you demand early treatment if you have COVID-19, whether or not you’ve been vaccinated.29

McCullough’s early treatment regimen initially includes a nutraceutical bundle of zinc, vitamin D, vitamin C and quercetin. While you’re recovering at home, open your windows and get plenty of fresh air and ventilation in your home. If symptoms persist or worsen, he recommends calling your doctor and demanding monoclonal antibody therapy.

The treatment progresses to include anti-infectives like HCQ or ivermectin, antibiotics, steroids and blood thinners. If your doctor refuses to treat COVID-19 in the early stages, find a new one and/or visit a telemedicine clinic that will help, as “the prehospital phase is the time of therapeutic opportunity.” You can also download McCullough’s and colleagues’ Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment.30 He states:31

“I have not let a single one of my high-risk patients get slaughtered by the virus. And any doctor who has — and there’s been a million doctors who have — is immoral, is unethical and, from a clinical and civil perspective, is illegal. And I think there is going to be a price to pay.

It’s going to be years in the future, but there’s going to be a price to pay for all of these patients who have died. And if you look through the records on all of them, I will tell you they were all inadequately treated. Every single one of them.”

Outrage Over Forced Injection Grows

With the injections causing harm and failing to protect as promised, frustrations are mounting worldwide due to increasing injection mandates. McCullough noted:32

“The tension is ratcheting up all over the world as the Delta outbreak continues to flare in many heavily vaccinated regions of the world. When more than 25% of the population takes the ill-advised COVID-19 vaccine, this promotes a super-dominant mutant that can easily evade the vaccines’ weak protection, which has happened with Delta.

… Frustration is coming out in folk songs, and the pop music industry, as shown in Eric Clapton’s ‘Enough is Enough’ and ‘Waking Up’ … Expect more to come as many wake up to the reality that our government agencies have failed us on the science, transparency, and safeguarding Americans from conflict of interest.“

McCullough is among a growing number of experts who believe COVID-19 injections are making the pandemic worse instead of better, while effective solutions are being ignored and intentionally suppressed.

“Early ambulatory therapy with a sequenced, multi-drug regimen is supported by available sources of evidence and has a positive benefit-to-risk profile,” he explains, while “COVID-19 genetic vaccines have an unfavorable safety profile and are not sufficiently effective, thus they cannot be supported in clinical practice at this time.”33

Unfortunately, “censorship and reprisal are working to crush freedom of speech, scientific discourse and medical progress”34 McCullough calls on everyone to stand up against the propaganda, but especially doctors, who he believes can save lives by offering early COVID-19 treatment to their patients.


Sources and References

·         1 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021, 55:05

·         2, 6, 33 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021

·         3 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021, 3:00

·         4 BitChute, Episode 20 of Perspectives on the Pandemic … August 26, 2021

·         5 CNN April 30, 2009

·         7 The Hill August 17, 2020

·         8, 9 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021, 6:00

·         10, 12 The New England Journal of Medicine August 25, 2021

·         11 MedPage Today August 25, 2021

·         13 The New England Journal of Medicine August 25, 2021, Results

·         14 Crit Care Med. 2021 Jul 13. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005211. Online ahead of print

·         15 Children’s Health Defense June 3, 2021

·         16 Science Open, SARS-CoV-2 mass vaccination: Urgent questions … May 18, 2021

·         17 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021, 8:30

·         18 America Out Loud September 6, 2021

·         19 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021, 12:52

·         20 ResearchGate Preprint June 2021

·         21 U.S. CDC, Selected Adverse Events Reported After COVID-19 Vaccination October 13, 2021

·         22, 24 Toxicology Reports 2021, Volume 8, Pages 1665-1684

·         23 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021, 15:47

·         25 CDC, COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Case Investigation and Reporting October 12, 2021

·         26 MMWR Weekly August 6, 2021 / 70(31);1059-1062

·         27 MMWR Weekly May 28, 2021 / 70(21);792–793

·         28 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021, 29:41

·         29 Am J Med. 2021 Jan; 134(1): 16–22

·         30 AAPS, A Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment August 28, 2021

·         31 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021, 44:15

·         32 America Out Loud September 3, 2021

·         34 Rumble, Dr. Peter McCullough, Therapeutic Nihilism … October 5, 2021, 1:04


'I Had To Stand Up And Try To Do Something:' Professor Of


Medicine On Suing School Over Vaccine Mandate


by williambanzai7


Dr. Aaron Kheriaty reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic like many other medical experts. He worked long hours as the United States tried to grapple with the new disease. He had too many conversations with family members whose loved ones were dying from it.








November Open Thread




Interview 1670 – New World Next Week with James Evan Pilato

October 29th, 2021

This week on the New World Next Week: NIH scrubs gain-of-function from its website; J&J gets rid of the baby powder cancer lawsuits; and We Will Not Comply as the people rise up against the tyranny.[...]



Interview 1669 - James Corbett Talks Power, Narrative and Conspiracy

October 27th, 2021

via Counterflow with Buck Johnson: My guest on this episode is James Corbett of CorbettReport.com. James has been putting out excellent content in the forms of documentaries, podcasts, writing, and mo[...]


How to Disarm Propaganda - Mark Crispin Miller on #SolutionsWatch

October 26th, 2021

Today Mark Crispin Miller, NYU Professor and News From Underground publisher, joins us to discuss his specialty: propaganda. In true #SolutionsWatch style, we discuss ways to identify and dissect prop[...]


But What About Deagel? - Questions For Corbett #080

October 22nd, 2021

Today James tackles a question he's received many, many times over the past seven years: Who or what is Deagle.com (or is that Deagel.com)? Where does their amazing population forecast come from? What[...]


The Bystander Effect - #SolutionsWatch

October 20th, 2021

The bystander effect describes a seeming paradox: the more people who are around to help in a given emergency, the less likely that any one individual

will actually stop to help. Today James dives int[...]


For more Podcasts, Videos, Interviews and Articles, please use the tabs at the top of the page.

Top of Form


Bottom of Form






Receive Email Updates

Top of Form

Get new posts by email:

Bottom of Form

Powered by

Not working? CLICK HERE

Recent Comments

·         suef on November Open Thread (2021)

·         theylive on November Open Thread (2021)

·         LastHumanist on November Open Thread (2021)

·         SacredHeartVortex on November Open Thread (2021)

·         theylive on November Open Thread (2021)

·         mik on Interview 1670 – New World Next Week with James Evan Pilato

·         TimmyTaes on November Open Thread (2021)

Search By Tag

9/11 activism alternative media anarchism canada censorship china cia climate change coronavirus cyberwar economy elections eu eugenics false flag fbi federal reserve food fukushima geopolitics gmo internet iran israel japan media nato nsa nuclear obama philosophy police state propaganda resistance russia solutions spying syria technocracy terror un us vaccines war


IPFS Backup

What's this?

This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Site design by:
Logic79. Hosting generously provided by: EuroVPS.com.




From: Children's Health Defense [mailto:team@childrenshealthdefense.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2021
Subject: Most Read News of the Week


Having trouble viewing this email? View it in your web browser

October 31, 2021

















From: News from Underground [mailto:nobody@simplelists.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2021
Subject: Daily digest for nfu@simplelists.com


1)    Email clusterf*ck by Mark Crispin Miller (30 Oct 2021 12:28 EDT)
Reply to list

All emails in my Protonmail account are now encrypted, since I had to change my password, and so I won't be able to decode them unless/until I rediscover my old password.

So if you've emailed me recently, whether just this morning or a month ago, and either hope for a reply or just want to make sure I've got something, please re-send whatever it is.



2)    Indian lawyers suing to halt rollout of DNA "VACCINE" FOR CHILDREN, and investigate the doctor who okayed it by Mark Crispin Miller (30 Oct 2021 12:41 EDT)
Reply to list

A righteous effort to resist, and end, India's COVID catastrophe, started and maintained by criminal officials in the ample pocket of Bill Gates.  



3)    Archbishop Vigano asks Catholics to take COVID-canceled priests into their own homes by Mark Crispin Miller (30 Oct 2021 12:52 EDT)
Reply to list

From Oct. 3, and especially relevant today, since Pope Francis (who has deemed acceptance of the COVID jab "an act of love") met yesterday with Joe Biden (who, according to his scriptwriter[s], suddenly became "our first Catholic president since JFK").

The Church is now in open schism over the "vaccines," as its leadership is globalist, so the faithful have to break away.


BREAKING: Abp. Viganò asks Catholics to take cancelled priests into their own homes


In a new letter, the former Papal Nuncio to the United States condemned vaccine mandates for priests and called upon the faithful for assistance.

Sun Oct 3, 2021 - 2:30 pm EDT

ROME, Italy (LifeSiteNews) — Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has asked Catholics to support cancelled priests by taking them into their own homes.

In a new letter, released Sunday,  the archbishop suggested the deeply personal measure as a way to ensure that the priests are able to say Mass for the faithful and that the faithful receive their “spiritual assistance.”

“The Catholic faithful [should] open their homes to priests persecuted by the tyranny of the bishops allied to globalism, making them available for the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass,” Viganò wrote.

“Gathered around these domestic altars, the refractory communities will thus be able to continue to render due worship to the Holy Trinity and to benefit from the spiritual assistance of their ministers.” (Full letter reproduced below.)

Click on the link for the rest.


4)    Lockdowns proven NOT to halt/slow COVID, masking children is demonstrably insane, and other MUST-READ threads on otherwise worse-than-useless Twitter by Mark Crispin Miller (30 Oct 2021 12:57 EDT)
Reply to list

A Thread of Super Threads!
Not everyone is on Twitter and nobody can ever find that ONE awesome Twitter thread to share. We give you - a super thread of super threads.

Justin Hart

Oct 29

Subscribe now

Our good friend, The Robber Baron (@Robber_Baron_) - a distant relative of the censored @OBusyBody - has put together a masterful thread of COVID threads. Twitter threads can be a very compelling way to tell a narrative in bite size chunks. These can stand for ages but it’s sometimes difficult to re-discover them.

But, if you’re not on Twitter or you want to share them with your mom that can be difficult. SO… we’ve compiled them into readable PDFs which you can share with anyone

Here’s the master thread for your enjoyment. The PDFs are listed below each header.

The Robber Baron @Robber_Baron_

1/10 Many have worked hard to compile lists of articles on Covid topics. Here is a thread of those lists covering: 🔒 Lockdown Effectiveness 😢 Lockdown Harms 🧒 Masking kids 🦠 Spread from kids 😷 Masking Effectiveness 💪 Natural Immunity 💉 Vaccine Efficacy 🤒 Long-Covid

October 29th 2021

54 Retweets103 Likes

30+ studies compiled by @the_brumby on lockdown effectiveness (or rather - ineffectiveness.


Brumby @the_brumby

1.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.111… “there is no evidence that more restrictive nonpharmaceutical interventions (“lockdowns”) contributed substantially to bending the curve of new cases in England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, or the United States in early 2020”

January 13th 2021

926 Retweets1,965 Likes

Also see our Rational Ground article on a similar list of impacts!

Masking Kids is Bad

A thread here at COVID Reason (link below) but click on this image and send it along!

Rational Ground by Justin Hart

Masking Children is an Ineffective Policy and Not Supported by Research or Data

h/t @Robber_Baron_ (original Twitter thread) cross-posted at RationalGround.com 18 months into the pandemic and it is still clear that masking children is an ineffective policy not supported by research or data. I’ve provided 2 sources for each claim below. I’ve also addressed the Delta variant and the more recent studies which have come to light…

Read more

a month ago · 30 likes · 1 comment · Justin Hart

Children are NOT primary drivers of the disease


The Robber Baron @Robber_Baron_

1/16 I never thought I’d have to reiterate that children are not the primary drivers of covid-19 But I guess the desire to vaccinate kids makes folks like @apoorva_nyc & the @nytimes just give up on honest reporting It’s complete BS So here are 30 articles for your review 🧵

September 22nd 2021

468 Retweets699 Likes

Masking Thread by @HeckofALiberal


Pajamas It Is @HeckofaLiberal

THREAD: I've been hesitant to touch masks because of the hot button nature of them but this is getting out of control. New models showing thousands of lives will be saved by February is we all just mask up. It's absurd on it's face. 1/ Study: Universal mask use could save 130,000 lives by February - STAT“Expanding mask use is one of the easy wins for the United States,” said the lead author of the new study.statnews.com

October 23rd 2020

165 Retweets427 Likes

Masking Thread by @IfIHadAStick


Josh Stevenson @ifihadastick

Here are all of the studies that show masks lack statistical effectiveness that @VoteGloriaJ claimed today have been "debunked." I will post all of these studies, and I look forward to @VoteGloriaJ's response to @JasonZacharyTN linking to the peer reviews that debunk them: 1/

October 19th 2021

122 Retweets300 Likes

Vaccines vs. Natural Immunity by @SethStuck


Seth Stuck @SethStuck

5 Reasons People w/ proven Natural Immunity Should be exempt from Vaccine Mandates 🧵 1) NI provides protection from (re)infection = or > to vax 2) NI is long-lasting 3) NI holds up well to variants 4) Risk of adverse events from vax is > for those w/ NI 5) Lots of precedent

September 30th 2021

243 Retweets577 Likes

Also see this excellent article at the Brownstone Institute

Long COVID just like Long Pneumonia? @HeckofALiberal take it on


Pajamas It Is @HeckofaLiberal

THREAD: For those still claiming the “longterm effects” are unique to #covid19 haven’t been paying attention to other viral illnesses. Let’s take a look: 1/ Influenza virus-induced lung injury: pathogenesis and implications for treatmentWe discuss novel aspects of virus- and immune-mediated lung injury and repair after influenza infection <http://ow.ly/JGhC6> The influenza viruses are some of the most important human pathogens, causing substantial seasonal and pandemic morbidity and mortality. In humans, infection of the lower res…erj.ersjournals.com

July 27th 2020

533 Retweets962 Likes

You’re on the free list for Rational Ground by Justin Hart. For the full experience, become a paying subscriber.


© 2021 COVID Reason Unsubscribe

548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104


5)    "Vaccination" über alles! Vera Sharav explains how the ongoing Holocaust recalls the (smaller) one in Europe c. 80 years ago (MUST-WATCH) by Mark Crispin Miller (30 Oct 2021 13:50 EDT)
Reply to list

From Sept. 13, but no less timely now, nor will it be passé anytime soon.



6)    "NO 'grants' me freedom, for I AM a free person!": Christine Anderson of the European Parliament (MUST-WATCH/SHARE) by Mark Crispin Miller (30 Oct 2021 14:50 EDT)
Reply to list




Support News from Underground: https://bit.ly/NFUSupport

Visit News from Underground: https://markcrispinmiller.com

For archives, please go to: https://archives.simplelists.com/nfu




From: Mikki Willis [mailto:info@plandemicseries.com]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2021
Subject: The Super Cold & Natural Immunity


Mikki Willis here, creator of the Plandemic documentary series…


One of the many perks of the Plandemic series is that I am now working closely with many of the world’s top Scientists and Immunologists to bring you the most valuable facts and life-saving information.


I'll be sharing what I'm learning in an ongoing newsletter, to ensure that you and your loved ones are staying informed, have choices and real actionable steps to remain healthy and free.


(To begin, at the bottom of this newsletter, I've included an over-the-counter protocol that was created by a renowned doctor to bulletproof your immune system.)


If for any reason you are not interested in hearing from me on a regular basis, I’ve made it easy for you to OPT OUT by clicking here.


Still here? Great! Let’s get into it.


I recently spent a couple of days with the inventor of mRNA vaccine technology, Dr. Robert Malone.


He had much to say about the importance of natural immunity and all the ways Big Pharma is doing damage to the one thing that is meant to protect your health and sustain your lives.


In the words of Dr. Malone, “The new data we’ve just learned is that natural immunity is 20 times more protective than the C0vid v@ccine."


I asked him directly, “Isn’t it a bit arrogant of us to think that man can create something more powerful than nature?” Dr. Malone replied with a grin, “Indeed.” 


According to several new studies, the rush to mass inoculate the global population during a pandemic is doing great harm to our immune systems. 


Is it any wonder the UK and many other nations are reporting the emergence of a horrible new “super cold?”


One thing is clear. It is imperative that we all begin to boost our body's natural immune system NOW.


I recently had the honor of interviewing Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, one of the most inspiring people I've ever had the pleasure of meeting.



For his brave and tireless efforts to save lives, Dr. Zelenko has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, as well as the Presidential Medal of Freedom.


My heart sank when he told me that he had been diagnosed with, Pulmonary Artery Sarcoma, one of the rarest and most deadly forms of cancer there is.


Dr. Zelenko shared during our interview, “When someone is at this state in their life, they don’t care about money, power or fame. Your value structure changes, and you start to focus and concentrate on what’s really important in life.”


He continued, “I have 8 children and I want to leave the world a little bit better and safer for them,  for your children and for all of our children.”


Watch This Exclusive 8-Minute Interview Here


“They tried to bury us. They did not know we were seeds.”


Mikki Willis




PS. Below is Dr. Zelenko's immune boosting protocol.




Go out and get these supplements yourself, or save time and money by purchasing the all-in-one formula here.


Whatever you do, start to bulletproof your immune system now!

PO BOX 820, Ojai, California 93024, United States




Facebook ‘Whistleblower’ Frances Haugen


Represented by US Intelligence Insiders


by Alexander Rubinstein



From: Cat McGuire [mailto:cat@catmcguire.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2021
Subject: FW: Quite a week for NY freedom activists -- OUR HUMOR BROKE THROUGH VACCINE CENSORSHIP!



Holy shit!  Our Halloween parade spectacle went viral in mainstream media!  In the face of so much censorship against virtually anything anti-vaxx, anti-mandate, the coverage alone of our Halloween action is phenomenal. Even more, some mainstream media also printed normally unallowed text:


We made the London Guardian's Global Photos of the Day! This is huge!


Bravo to Elliot Crown. Our Halloween spectacle was his artistic vision.  Many of you will recall another collaboration I did in May with Elliot – The Kill Shot – which he will reprise November 3 at the Worldwide Walkout rally at City Hall.

From: Cat McGuire
Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2021 2:29 AM
To: Cat McGuire <
Subject: Quite a week for NY freedom activists


Hello friends -- This past week has been incredible.  Last Monday, October 25, at least 15,000 New York city workers, including police, firefighters, EMS, and sanitation workers marched in an exhilarating protest to not have to be vaccinated to keep their jobs.



On Thursday, the firefighters union held an important press conference to not support the vaccine mandates. (The sign I’m wearing is calling out the crooked mayor’s crooked wife for fleecing the city of $900 million budgeted for her “mental health” agency.)

On Sunday, October 31, I helped produce a performance art spectacle for the Annual Village Halloween Parade.  It was the most fun activism I’ve ever done.


Monday, November 1, Kamala Harris attended an event at Carnegie Hall with Governor Cuomo’s reprehensible replacement, Kathy Hochal. It was a beautiful crisp fall night and we were out in full force protesting their support of the hated, unconstitutional mandates.  




From: Paul Jay [mailto:pauljay@theanalysis.com]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2021
Subject: Stop Subsidizing Wall St., Start Subsidizing Workers for High Energy Costs – Bob Pollin




Stop Subsidizing Wall St., Start Subsidizing Workers for High Energy Costs – Bob Pollin

High oil prices and supply chain disruption are driving inflation, not workers’ modest wage increases or government debt. Bob Pollin joins Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news




Honest Government Ad | COP26 Climate Summit

The Australien Government has made an ad for the COP26 UN Climate Summit, and it’s surprisingly honest and informative. Political Satire by Juice Media.




House Committee Chairwoman Maloney Nails Oil Executives

House of Representatives Oversight Committee held hearings with the CEOs of the largest oil companies where Chairwoman Maloney read quotes from internal Exxon documents, which exposed that Exxon knew for years that fossil fuels were causing global warming and that it would lead to catastrophic consequences. She attempted to get the CEOs to acknowledge having lied, which they refused to do. This is an excerpt from the House of Representatives Oversight Committee held on October 28, 2021.




Daniel Ellsberg on Assange Extradition Hearing

Daniel Ellsberg participated in an Italian press conference demanding freedom for Julian Assange.




Paul Jay on Assange Extradition Hearing

Paul Jay participated in an Italian press conference demanding freedom for Julian Assange.




Biden Heads to COP 26 Throttled by Manchin and Trumpists – with Bob Pollin

It looks like there’s not much left of Biden’s climate legislation as he heads to Glasgow planning to lecture China and the world. What should he be doing about the climate crisis? Bob Pollin joins Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news.




Why the Media Doesn’t Understand Control Fraud

Financialization of the economy and pervasive corruption go hand-in-hand. The stronger the financial sector and more parasitical it becomes, the more profound and systemic the corruption. Paul Jay joins “The New Untouchables” for a discussion about Bill Black’s conception of “control fraud.”




Running to be Detroit’s Mayor – Against Democratic Party Machine

Anthony Adams is running for mayor of Detroit on a progressive platform. He’s being marginalized by local media and opposed by the Democratic Party, including President Biden. Anthony Adams joins Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news.




Why banning financing for fossil fuel projects in Africa isn’t a climate solution

Major international donors, including the US, China and UK, are pledging to stop funding fossil fuel projects overseas, but they aren’t making the equivalent cuts at home.




Michael Hudson: Biden Between BlackRock and a Hard Place

The Biden Administration is intertwined with Wall Street but must deliver some election promises to workers. Michael Hudson joins Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news.







Israel to Attack Iran? Washington Gives the Green Light


to the ‘Military Option’


by Philip Giraldi


Exclusive: Attack On Iran Has Become A Priority, Israeli Official Says


by Maryam Sinaee



The Sword and The Book: How Zionism Does Violence to the Jewish




by Miko Peled



Cruel Britannia: Britain's Real Role in the World, with Mark Curtis


by Alan Macleod



Over 500 Scholars Launch Fightback


Against Israel Lobby’s Antisemitism Smear of UK Academics


by  Jonathan Cook



The HLF Five: How US-Israeli Geopolitics


Cruelly Warped the US Judicial Process


by Miko Peled


Raising Awareness of Israeli War Crimes, with Palestine Action


by Lowkey


Israel’s ‘Terrorist’ Label for Palestinian Rights Groups Is Aimed at


Stopping ICC Probe of War Crimes –Al-Haq Founders Say


by Philip Weiss


Israel puts Gaza's deaf people in extreme danger


by Ruwaida Amer


Weapons trade with Saudis and Israel must be disrupted


by Maureen Clare Murphy


​​Meet Sabrina Miller, the student who waged a campus war for Israel


by Kit Klarenberg


Bereaved and abandoned


by Maureen Clare Murphy


Slaying some myths, swallowing others


by Rod Such


The True Face Of The Israeli Government

And The Nations That Work To Hide It


with  Robert Inlakesh



Israel told EU in advance of plan to label rights groups ‘terrorist’


by Ali Abunimah


EU enables Israeli attack on Palestinian groups


by Ali Abunimah


How Facebook helps Israel hide its crimes


by Tamara Nassar


Israeli Missile Strike Kills Five in Damascus Suburbs


by Jason Ditz


How Dutch Israel lobby attacks free speech


by Adri Nieuwhof


US Coalition Calls on Biden to Denounce Israel's Crackdown

on Palestinian Rights Groups


by Kenny Stancil





The Post Covid World, The WEF's Diabolical Project: “Resetting the Future of Work Agenda” – After "The Great Reset". A Horrifying Future


by Peter Koenig


Super Imperialism: The economic strategy of American empire

with economist Michael Hudson


by Ben Norton and Max Blumenthal


Edelman PR and the Manufacturing of “Trust”


by Johnny Vedmore


UNESCO Study 11 to UNESCO 2050: Project BEST and the Forty-Year Plan to Reimagine Education for the Fourth Industrial Revolution


by John Klyczek


Is Climate Alarmism An Establishment Attempt To Restore Social Control?


by williambanzai7


How the US enabled Ethiopia's bloodletting,


training its military while playing innocent observer


by TJ Coles


The Killing of Gaddafi 10 Years ago has Resulted


in the Death of the Nation of Libya and the Destruction of its People



by Richard Medhurst


U.S. Imperialism in Africa with Abayomi Azikiwe


with Danny Haiphong and Margaret Kimberley



Planting Budgetary Time Bombs in Africa: the Macron Doctrine En Marche


by Daniela Gabor, Ndongo Samba Sylla





NATO Sliding Towards War Against Russia in Ukraine


by Finian Cunningham


“Idiots in the Pentagon Are Pushing the U.S. into a Military Confrontation with China over Nothing,” Says Former Top Policy Adviser


by Jeremy Kuzmarov



“Once Upon a Time in Iraq”

Part I


with Andy Serkis



Once Upon a Time in Iraq is a five-part BBC series chronicling the story of the Iraq War from the perspectives of the people who lived through it. It covers events between 2003, when coalition forces occupied the country, and 2014, when the Islamic State group came into existence. It gives the floor to Iraqi and American participants who, although on opposite sides of the conflict, share their first-hand experiences of the war and the trauma it unleashed.

The series is an eye-opening account of the realities of life during war, not from the flawed lens of politicians and political analysts, but through that of the civilians, soldiers and journalists who lived through the invasion and its aftermath. With no stone left unturned, it offers a first-hand narrative of the conflict in a new light, from the fall of Saddam Hussein, to the subsequent civil war and the rise of the Islamic State group.


“Once Upon A Time In Iraq”


filmed by James Bleumel





Biden Administration Is Undermining the Venezuela Dialogue


by Leonardo Flores


Join the Campaign to Free Alex Saab!


by Alliance for Global Justice


Miami Defenders of Twice US Kidnapped Venezuelan Ambassador,


Alex Saab, Rally for his Release


by Lauren Smith


Why Defending Nicaragua is Important



by Stephen Sefton


'In the Spirit of Mandela': International Tribunal Seeks to Charge


U.S. Government with Crimes Against Humanity



by Bob Lederer and Matt Meyer




U.S. Corporate Media Watch


by Roberto Sirvent, Richard Medhurst


'Cloak and dagger' military-intelligence outfit at center of US digital


vaccine passport push


by Jeremy Loffredo and Max Blumenthal


 Public health or private wealth? How digital vaccine passports pave


way for unprecedented surveillance capitalism


by Jeremy Loffredo and Max Blumenthal


COVID-19: Moderna Gets Its Miracle


by Whitney Webb


COVID-19 erased the regulatory and trial-related hurdles that Moderna could never surmount before. Yet, how did Moderna know that COVID-19 would create those conditions months before anyone else, and why did they later claim that their vaccine being tested in NIH trials was different than their commercial candidate?





High Recorded Mortality in Countries Categorized as "Covid-19


Vaccine Champions". The Vaccinated Suffer from Increased Risk of


Mortality compared to the Non-vaccinated


by Gérard Delépine


A Letter to the Unvaccinated


by Dr. Angela Durante, Prof Denis Rancourt, and et al.


Congress Made Crucial Change to Vaccine Definition


Weeks before COVID-19


by Robert L. Kinney III





Stop the Covid Holocaust! Open Letter


by Rabbi Hillel Handler, Hagar Schafrir, and et al.


Mandate Meltdown: 26 NYC Firestations Shuttered,


LA Sheriff Warns Of 'Mass Exodus', Tucson Water District


Faces 'Staff Shortage'



by williambanzai7


While the vast majority of employees across most industries and sectors have acquiesced to mandatory vaccine mandates, enough Americans are refusing to get the jab that states and municipalities are losing a dangerous game of chicken with employees who refuse.


Pentagon may not immediately fire vaccine resisters



by John M. Donnelly


Air Force is first to face troops’ rejection of vaccine mandate


as thousands avoid shots



by Alex Horton


Australia Confiscating Bank Accounts, Property, Licenses,


& Businesses For Non-Compliance With COVID Fines


by williambanzai7


Of all the extreme measures carried out by various states in Australia, the collections and confiscations by the State Penalty and Enforcement Register (SPER) might just be the icing on the cake.


Alison Morrow Interview - "Delete Your Content Or Lose Your Job"


How COVID-19 Destroyed The Illusion


with Ryan Cristián






Was Radical Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone Murdered


to Secure Republican Control of the United States Senate?


by Jeremy Kuzmarov


Struggles for Voting Rights Will Shape the Fate of Abortion Access


by Anoa Changa


From: Maximillian Alvarez,

Editor in Chief of The Real News Network

Date: November 5, 2021




Striketober has come and gone—now it’s time for #Strikesgiving. As I recently had the honor of discussing on a special panel event for New America with Toni Gilpin, Chris Martin, and Mary Alice McCarthy, working people have a lot to be pissed off about right now, and I don’t think that anger is going to go away anytime soon.  

If there was any doubt that last month’s air of increasing worker militancy would suddenly dissipate in November, the events of this week certainly suggest the opposite. For starters, in a stunning show of resolve, workers at farming equipment giant John Deere, who have been on strike since Oct. 14, voted down the company’s latest contract offer on Tuesday and opted to stay on the picket line for as long as it takes to get the respect they deserve. Then, news broke yesterday that over 30,000 healthcare workers at Kaiser Permanente filed their 10-day notice alerting the company that, unless an agreement is reached at the bargaining table, they will go on strike on Nov. 15. As many as 50,000 Kaiser workers around the US could end up striking if more of the union locals that make up the Alliance of Healthcare Unions decide to hit the picket line as well (stay tuned next week for my Working People interview with two Kaiser workers…). Moreover, we also received word from the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers' International Union (BCTGM) that cereal giant Kellogg’s is refusing to budge on negotiations and that the 1,400 plant workers in Nebraska, Tennessee, Michigan, and Pennsylvania will be continuing their strike. We'll have a new TRNN report from the Kellogg’s picket line next week.

It can be truly soul-crushing to wade through what feels like an endless stream of dismal and disheartening news (since this is, in fact, my job, I can personally attest to that…), but this week brought a rare and inspiring bit of good news. As TRNN viewers know, I recently spoke with members of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance about their drastic move to go on a hunger strike in a last-ditch effort to force City Hall to provide life-saving aid to taxi driver-owners who have been crushed by debt as a result of predatory licensing schemes. After 15 days on hunger strike, I am happy to report that they did it … they won

However, as our unofficial TRNN motto says, we’ve still got a lot more work to do. While other sectors of the workforce experience strikes, the fact remains that farm workers in the US are still fighting for basic human rights. In his newest column for TRNN, Guardian writer Michael Sainato explores the unique struggles farm workers face today, as well as the pernicious history that led to farm workers being deliberately exempted from basic worker rights. “When the National Labor Relations Act was passed in the US in 1935,” Sainato writes, “agricultural workers were exempted from the protections it provides for workers who organize or join a labor union, and agricultural workers were left outside the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board. This racist exclusion was a compromise made with elected officials in the Jim Crow-era US South who explicitly wanted to keep subjugated a workforce that, at the time, primarily consisted of Black workers.” 

Thank you, as always, for your continued support of TRNN, and stay tuned for more important stories. Take care of yourselves, take care of each other.

—Maximillian Alvarez, Editor in Chief





From: Children's Health Defense [mailto:team@childrenshealthdefense.org]
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2021
Subject: Breaking: CDC Endorses Pfizer Shot for Kids 5 - 11 + 'Fauci Fooled America' + More


Having trouble viewing this email? View it in your web browser

November 2, 2021

Top News of the Day















Pathetic: Progressives 100% Cave To Establishment On Spending Bills
with Jimmy Dore