Covid Lies: Fraud Assessed and Fraud Rehearsed

“I have invested two years pro bono in identifying the key elements of the fraud, in the sincere hope I can connect with upright individuals who can help bring this to wider attention and, ultimately, to a halt and to justice. As a result of these efforts, I can describe a global fraud operating for two years at tremendous cost in lives, the economy, and the very structure of human societies, which could only have been undertaken by powerful people, organised for a purpose that is not to the benefit of ordinary people.” – Dr. Mike Yeadon

Although not all central, there are a large number of ancillary points that reinforce Dr. Yeadon’s conclusions. He assembled some of these points, “additional observations,” and included them towards the end of his paper titled ‘The Covid Lies’.

Dr. Yeadon’s additional observations include fraud assessed; fraud rehearsed; autopsies; PCR test; cause of death; hospital protocols; experimental vaccines; revised definitions; bizarre statements; boosters and antibodies; Neil Ferguson’s track record; and, prescient testimonies.  “This list is not exhaustive,” he wrote.

This article relates to Dr. Yeadon’s additional observations: fraud assessed and fraud rehearsed.

The Exposé reports the facts the mainstream refuse to. Let’s not lose touch, subscribe today to receive the latest news from The Exposé in your inbox…

EMAIL ADDRESS

SUBSCRIBE

Follow The Exposé on Telegram
Join The Exposé’s Telegram Discussion Group

Fraud Assessed

“In a series of five short videos [by Pandemic Alternative],  you will find remarkable similarities in a Canadian team’s interpretation of the same fraud. Note, in particular, the second film on non-pharmaceutical interventions.” – Dr. Mike Yeadon, The Covid Lies

Pandemic Alternative has so far produced 7 videos in a series relating to governments’ response to the Covid pandemic, view HERE.  Below are the five videos recommended in Dr. Yeadon’s paper. For each of the below, click on the image to watch the video on Rumble.

Pandemic Alternative: Introduction, 16 February 2022 (2 mins)

Pandemic Alternative: Non-pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs), 16 February 2022 (4 mins)

Pandemic Alternative: Vaccines, 18 February 2022 (3 mins)

Pandemic Alternative: What is the emergency management process? 21 February 2022 (3 mins)

Pandemic Alternative: What should have happened during the 2020 covid pandemic? (3 mins)

Fraud Rehearsed

“German investigative journalist Paul Schreyer shows that this fraud was rehearsed for many years, increasingly, with all the stakeholders now running the alleged Covid-19 fraud.” – Dr. Mike Yeadon, The Covid Lies

The lecture given by Paul Schreyer, below, was recorded in Berlin in November 2020. He demonstrates how political decisions during the Corona crisis did not come out of the blue.

The “war on viruses“ began back in the 1990s as the “war on bioterror.“ Research shows that for more than twenty years since then, pandemic scenarios have been repeatedly rehearsed in simulation exercises, first in the US, and later coordinated internationally. Restrictions on liberty, as well as mass vaccinations, were regular features of the planning games.

After the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) declared a coronavirus pandemic in 2020, many of the measures that had been rehearsed and discussed for years were implemented globally.

Schreyer’s lecture chronologically traces how these exercises came about, who organised them, and what parallels the scripts have to the current situation.

Read more: “The evidence that things are amiss is so stark that you literally have to avert your eyes not to realise that things are really bad, everywhere” – Dr. Mike Yeadon

Paul Schreyer: Pandemic simulation games – Preparation for a new era? (63 mins)

If the video above is removed from YouTube you can watch it on Brand New Tube HERE.

Source

Dr. Mike Yeadon wrote a paper titled ‘The Covid Lies’ which was published on the Doctors for Covid Ethics website.  This paper is a working draft dated 10 April 2022.

At 31 pages long the paper is longer than most would read in one sitting.  As it details vital information for all of us, we are republishing his paper in more easily digestible portions in a series of articles, one each day.  This is the eighth in our series, ‘Covid Lies’, and covers topics included in the section of Dr. Yeadon’s paper titled ‘Additional Observations’.

WHO Pandemic Treaty: What It Is, Why It Matters and How to Stop It By Joseph Mercola

In June, we have an opportunity to give public comment on one of the World Health Organization’s most harrowing proposals to date. The World Health Assembly will also vote on amendments to the International Health Regulations, May 22-28, 2022. The WHO will accept two more days of public comment on the treaty, June 16 and 17, 2022, so prepare your statements now.

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• The World Health Organization has started drafting a global pandemic treaty on pandemic preparedness that would grant it absolute power over global biosecurity, such as the power to implement digital identities/vaccine passports, mandatory vaccinations, travel restrictions, standardized medical care and more

• The WHO is not qualified to make global health decisions. As just one example, the WHO didn’t publicly admit SARS-CoV-2 was airborne until the end of December 2021, yet scientists knew the virus was airborne within weeks of the pandemic being declared. The WHO also ignored early advice about airborne transmission

• More importantly, a one-size-fits-all approach to pandemic response simply does not work, because pandemic threats are not identical in all parts of the world. Even people in the same region do not have identical risk and may not need or benefit from identical treatment

• The WHO will accept two more days of public comment on the treaty, June 16 and 17, 2022, so prepare your statements now. The World Health Assembly will also vote on amendments to the International Health Regulations, May 22-28, 2022, which may also strip away more individual rights and liberties

The globalists that brought us the wildly exaggerated COVID pandemic in an effort to cement a biosecurity grid into place is now hard at work on the next phase of this New World Order.

The World Health Organization has started drafting a global pandemic treaty on pandemic preparedness that would grant it absolute power over global biosecurity, such as the power to implement digital identities/vaccine passports, mandatory vaccinations, travel restrictions, standardized medical care and more.

In “The Corbett Report”[1][2] above, independent journalist James Corbett reviews what this treaty is, how it will change the global landscape and strip you of some of your most basic rights and freedoms. Make no mistake, the WHO pandemic treaty is a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy.

A Backdoor to Global Governance

As noted by anti-extremism activist Maajid Nawaz in an April 28, 2022, Twitter post,[3] the “WHO pandemic treaty serves as a backdoor to global empire.”

COVID-19, while potentially deadly to certain vulnerable groups, simply isn’t a valid justification for handing over more power to the WHO, especially in light of its many inexplicable “mistakes” in this and previous pandemics.

As just one example, the WHO didn’t publicly admit SARS-CoV-2 was airborne until the end of December 2021,[4] yet scientists knew the virus was airborne within weeks of the pandemic being declared.[5] The WHO also ignored early advice about airborne transmission.[6]

So, it seems clear that the effort to now hand over more power to the WHO is about something other than them being the most qualified to make health decisions that benefit and protect everyone.

It seems far more likely that the WHO is being installed as a de facto governing body for the global Deep State.[7] Through the WHO, under the guise of biosecurity, the globalist cabal who seek to own everything and control everyone, will then be able to implement their wishes across the whole world in one fell swoop.

With this treaty in place, all member nations will be subject to the WHO’s dictates. If the WHO says every person on the planet needs to have a vaccine passport and digital identity to ensure vaccination compliance, then that’s what every country will be forced to implement, even if the people have rejected such plans using local democratic processes.

As noted by Corbett, these negotiations are already well underway,[8] and the treaty is expected to be fully implemented in 2024 — that is, unless the people of the world wake up to what’s happening and beat back this monstrosity.

WHO Likely Seeking to Monopolize Health Care Worldwide

Under the guise of a global pandemic, the WHO, the World Economic Forum (WEF) and all its installed leaders in government and private business, were able to roll out a plan that had already been decades in the making. The pandemic was a perfect cover.

In the name of keeping everyone “safe” from infection, the globalists justified unprecedented attacks on democracy, civil liberties and personal freedoms, including the right to choose your own medical treatment.

Now, the WHO is gearing up to make its pandemic leadership permanent, extend it into the health care systems of every nation, and eventually implement a universal or “socialist-like” health care system as part of The Great Reset.

While this is not currently being discussed, there’s every reason to suspect that this is part of the plan. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has previously stated that his “central priority” as director-general of the WHO is to push the world toward universal health coverage.[9]

And, considering the WHO changed its definition of “pandemic” to “a worldwide epidemic of a disease,”[10] without the original specificity of severe illness that causes high morbidity,[11][12] just about anything could be made to fit the pandemic criterion. The whole premise behind this pandemic treaty is that “shared threat requires shared response.” But a given threat is almost never equally shared across regions.

Take COVID-19 for example. Not only is the risk of COVID not the same for people in New York City and the outback of Australia, it’s not even the same for all the people in those areas, as COVID is highly dependent on age and underlying health conditions.

The WHO insists that the remedy is the same for everyone everywhere, yet the risks vary widely from nation to nation, region to region, person to person. They intend to eliminate individualized medicine and provide blanket rulings for how a given threat is to be addressed. Without doubt, this can only result in needless suffering, not to mention the loss of individual freedom.

How the WHO Has Wielded Previous Pandemic Instruments

To give us an idea of how the WHO might end up misusing this new proposed international “instrument” on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, we can look at the International Health Regulations (IHR),[13] which the U.S. signed on to in 2005.

The IHR is what empowered the WHO to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).[14] This is a special legal category that allows the WHO to initiate certain contracts and procedures, including drug and vaccine contracts.

As noted by Corbett, the IHR allows the unelected director-general of the WHO to simply declare a PHEIC and, suddenly, all member states have to dance to his tune. It basically grants the WHO dictatorial powers over health policy.

PHEICs have included the phony H1N1 swine flu pandemic in 2009, the inconsequential Zika outbreak in 2016, the overhyped Ebola outbreak in 2019, and, of course, the massively exaggerated COVID pandemic in 2020. All of these PHEICs were poorly handled and the WHO was criticized as inept and corrupt[15] in their wake.

So, to summarize, through the IHR, the WHO has already been significantly empowered to dictate global health policy with regard to pandemics, and they used that power to bamboozle the nations of the world into spending billions of dollars on countermeasures, especially drugs and vaccines, that didn’t work very well.

In that sense, the WHO is really just another wealth-transfer instrument. The WHO’s Big Pharma collaborators make billions on the taxpayers’ dime, while the people of the world are left to suffer the consequences of fast-tracked vaccines. Its handling of the COVID pandemic in particular has been unprecedentedly bad, as they were behind the withholding of early treatment with safe medicines worldwide.

As noted by ivermectin advocate Dr. Tess Lawrie,[16] the WHO has also claimed the mRNA shots as safe as conventional vaccines, which is nowhere near the truth. Most all available data prove they are the most dangerous drugs ever created. Why would anyone expect the WHO to become less corrupt if given even more power and control?

IHR Amendments May Also Restrict Rights and Freedoms

Now, the IHR overrode and superseded the U.S. Constitution from the start, but in January 2022, the U.S. also submitted regulatory amendments[17] that will give the WHO even more power to restrict your rights and freedoms.

May 22 through 28, 2022, the World Health Assembly will gather and vote on these amendments to the IHR and, if passed, they will be enacted into international law. These submitted amendments are in addition to the WHO pandemic treaty currently under discussion. As reported by Health Policy Watch, February 23, 2022:[18]

“Washington wants to fast track a series of nitty-gritty, but far-reaching changes in the existing International Health Regulations that govern WHO and member state emergency alert and response — for consideration at this year’s World Health Assembly, 22-28 May.

The U.S. proposal[19] for major IHR rule changes, obtained by Health Policy Watch, has been a topic of discussion in a series of closed-door meetings of WHO member states, which are considering ways to reform the existing IHR, as well as advancing a whole new WHO convention or other international instrument[20] on pandemic prevention and response …

The U.S. is expected to lead a parallel track of tightly-paced ‘informal’ member state negotiations to reach consensus on an IHR reform resolution for approval at this year’s 75th WHA [World Health Assembly] …”

The “new WHO convention or other international instrument” mentioned here refers to the WHO treaty currently under discussion. An intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) was established as a subdivision of the World Health Assembly in December 2021,[21] for the purpose of drafting and negotiating this new pandemic treaty. And, as mentioned, this INB has begun that work.

However, as noted by Corbett, this is only the second time in the WHO’s history that an INB has been established. The first one was the INB of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control,[22] 22 years ago. So, this is not a well-established process, and it’s hard to predict how it will play out.

Bill Gates Builds GERM Team for the WHO

Another clue about what the WHO intends to do with more power comes from its primary funder, Bill Gates. Gates recently announced he’s building a pandemic response team for the WHO, which he would like to be called the “Global Epidemic Response & Mobilization” or GERM Team.

This team will be made up of thousands of disease experts under WHO’s purview, and will monitor nations and “decide when they need to suspend civil liberties, force populations to wear masks and close borders,” The Counter Signal reports.[23]

Of course, Gates is also the largest funder of the WHO (when you combine the donations from both his foundation and GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance). This and other relationships speak volumes about the corruption still ruling the WHO. At the end of the day, Gates is basically paying the WHO to dictate to the world what they must do to make Gates a ton of money. As noted by The Counter Signal:[24]

“Gates’ announcement of the GERM team coincides with the World Health Organization’s drafting of a global pandemic treaty … In the future, the pandemic treaty will not only ensure that member states abide by International Health Regulations but will also put the WHO in the driver’s seat, so to speak. Member states, including the US and Canada, will take their orders directly from the organization. As Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis explains:

‘The treaty includes 190 countries and would be legally binding. The treaty defines and classifies what is considered a pandemic, and this could consist of broad classifications, including an increase in cancers, heart conditions, strokes, etc. If a pandemic is declared, the WHO takes over the global health management of the pandemic.

Of even more concern, if this treaty is enshrined, the WHO would be in full control over what gets called a pandemic. They could dictate how our doctors can respond, which drugs can and can’t be used, or which vaccines are approved. We would end up with a one-size-fits-all approach for the entire world … A one-size-fits-all response to a health crisis doesn’t even work across Canada, let alone the entire globe’ …

It isn’t unreasonable to assume that the GERM team, as a new branch of the WHO, would oversee making sure member states comply with the pandemic treaty after the draft is finalized and member states sign-on.

The next question, then, is how the WHO and Bill Gates would be able to monitor every individual in every country to determine whether enough people are sick to justify locking a region down.

To this end, the WHO has contracted German-based Deutsche Telekom subsidiary T-Systems to develop a global vaccine passport system,[25] with plans to link every person on the planet to a QR code digital ID … Thus, there will be one pandemic treaty, one GERM team, one global vaccine passport, and one World Health Organization to monitor every person on the planet.”

Under WHO Control, Vaccine Passports Are a Given

Indeed, while countries around the world have scrubbed their COVID measures and backed away from vaccine passports, the WHO is still moving ahead with a global vaccine passport program.[26]

So, if the WHO is given the authority to dictate biosecurity rules for the world, you can bet they’ll insist on vaccine passports with built-in digital identity and readiness for a centralized programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC). As reported by the Western Standard:[27]

“The WHO fully intends to provide support to its 194 member states to facilitate the implementation of the digital verification technology for countries’ national and regional verification of vaccine status.

‘COVID-19 affects everyone. Countries will therefore only emerge from the pandemic together. Vaccination certificates that are tamper-proof and digitally verifiable build trust. WHO is therefore supporting member states in building national and regional trust networks and verification technology.

The WHO’s gateway service also serves as a bridge between regional systems. It can also be used as part of future vaccination campaigns and home-based records,’ said Garrett Mehl, unit head of the WHO’s Department of Digital Health and Innovation, on Deutsche Telekom’s website.”

Can We Stop the International Pandemic Treaty?

The question now is, can we stop this “international pandemic instrument” that the WHO is seeking? With short notice, the WHO announced it would accept public comment on the treaty for a total of five days.[28] The World Council for Health (WCH) was among the few that acted quickly enough to submit a comment in opposition of the treaty. Lawrie delivered the WCH’s submission.[29]

“The proposal to take control of pandemics at a central WHO level is untenable and threatens a global society … It is foolhardy to even suggest that a ‘one size fits all’ response to a pandemic crisis across geographic zones characterized by hugely different parameters, could possibly be covered by a central bureaucratic process — the need for local decision making is of prime importance.” ~ Robert Clancy, Ph.D.

In an April 26, 2022, update on Substack, Lawrie wrote:[30]

“Despite the lack of notice, many grassroots organizations did what they could to spread the word and the World Council for Health’s #stopthetreaty campaign reached an astonishing 415 million people. Many of you made written submissions expressing your concerns. So many of you in fact, that I hear the WHO’s website crashed on the last day.”

One person who missed the deadline was professor Robert Clancy, a leading clinical immunologist in Canada. He sent the comment he would have wanted to submit to Lawrie, who included it in her post:[31]

“The proposal to take control of pandemics at a central WHO level is untenable and threatens a global society. I am in receipt of the World Council for Health response, and the superbly summarized view by Dr. Tess Lawrie. These concerns reflect the ‘across the board’ view of most Australian doctors …

The failure to understand the restrictions of systemic vaccination for mucosal infection and the dangers of accumulated suppression that follows mindless booster programs, and failure to interrogate the massive databases regarding adverse events of genetic vaccines are but two of the serious mistakes perpetuated by the WHO …

It is foolhardy to even suggest that a ‘one size fits all’ response to a pandemic crisis across geographic zones characterized by hugely different parameters, could possibly be covered by a central bureaucratic process — the need for local decision making is of prime importance.

The rule of science and the rule of the doctor-patient relationship must determine any response to a pandemic, and current experience where the rule of the narrative has so distorted disease outcomes — supported by the WHO — must make very clear the foolishness of rewarding incompetence and corruption with even greater powers.

I write this as the most experienced Clinical Immunologist in Australia, and a leading research scientist in Mucosal Immunology with a focus on ‘host-parasite relationship.’ Professor Robert Clancy AM FRS(N) MB BS BSc(Med) PhD DSc FRACP FRCP(A) FRCP(C)”

Make Your Voice Heard in June

While many, like Clancy, didn’t get a chance to participate, the WHO has announced it will allow for two more days of public comment, June 16 and 17, 2022. As noted by Lawrie:[32]

“Please also be aware of the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations, to be voted on this May at the World Health Assembly.

Like the pandemic treaty, this is another move to seize greater powers and override the sovereign laws of individual nations. Some say this is more significant than the pandemic treaty: if voted in, it means the loss of our sovereignty from this November. James Roguski has written extensively about this on his Substack.[33]

There seems to be a concerted effort by the WHO and its controllers to attack our sovereignty from all angles. It is important we make it clear that we do not recognize the WHO as an authority over us and that we will not tolerate this abuse of power.

We are sovereign and will not be bound by the undertakings of corrupt officials who pretend to act on our behalf when signing away the inherent rights of the World’s People. They do not act for us and we will not be bound.”

I encourage you to make plans to have your voice heard June 16 and 17, 2022. Unfortunately, the WHO has not yet released any submission details. Your best bet right now is to sign up for the WCH’s newsletter. The last time, they issued links and instructions on how to submit your comment, and are sure to do the same for the June submission window. You can subscribe at the bottom of this page, or on the WCH’s home page.

To block the IHR amendments at the May 2022 World Health Assembly, we need to flood our respective delegations with opposition. A list of U.S. delegates can be found in Roguski’s Substack article, “Speaking Truth to Power.”

For contact information for other nations’ delegates, I would suggest contacting the regional office and ask for a list (see “Regions” in the blue section at the bottom of the World Health Assembly’s webpage). It’s also possible that the WCH will publish guidance on it, so be sure to sign up for their newsletter.

Originally published May 11 2022 on Mercola.com

OPINION: NATO is Nuclear Apartheid

On the one hand, you have a group of perhaps 2,000 men, dying without healthcare, bombed into the stone age, starved to emaciation, branded by the Russians and some mainstream and even some alternative media as Nazis, who refuse to leave the office, and continue to defend their country and their city 24/7, to their dying breath.

On the other hand, you have the Whitehall civil servants, perhaps 474,020 of them, who deny their country healthcare by failing to provide PPE other than through a select group of large corporations which typically in these situations pay covert bribes to powerful public sector people in order to become their preferred suppliers. Indeed that is generally the reason why they are preferred so much. But these civil servants refuse even to turn up at the office. 

Which one of these two groups would you say is doing the greater service for the British people?

The Exposé reports the facts the mainstream refuse to. Let’s not lose touch, subscribe today to receive the latest news from The Exposé in your inbox…

EMAIL ADDRESS

SUBSCRIBE

Follow The Exposé on Telegram
Join The Exposé’s Telegram Discussion Group

By a concerned reader

If I personally had the power to liberate them I would do it. Notwithstanding the fact that I had at least one of my relatives killed in a Nazi concentration camp by real Nazis. But sadly all I have to support them with are my words. 

But words are the one thing that opponents of the present Russian regime are denied. So It is my great pleasure to use my freedom of speech in this publication on behalf of every silenced Russian Journalist and true Russian Patriot and true Ukrainian patriot just as I have done on behalf of those denied a voice-over gene poisoning vaccines and US election fraud and the perversion of children for the sexual gratification of immoral adults. So many groups in this world are denied a voice. Regrettably, I do not have the billions or the credibility to rescue Twitter from the globalists and may God bless the one who has. But The Expose gives me the richness of self-expression which is what the Asovstallers are fighting for and what we in the West all too often take for granted.

The civil servants, famously described by Sir Winston as no longer being civil and no longer being servants, are serving themselves first, whether it be in providing healthcare for the sick and the dying in this country or in providing Visa’s for those fleeing death and destruction in Ukraine  Whereas the Asovstallers are serving their families, their country, Poland, Romania, the Baltic states, the EU, the Scandinavians, the Americans and the British & Irish both of whom have been threatened with a swift despatch into Davy Jones’ radioactive locker by a Russian supercavitating nuclear-propelled torpedo with a large nuclear warhead. 

They serve us by delaying, thwarting and stalling the Russian offensive in Ukraine, which buys us time to better prepare our defences against charming Russian threats to annihilate all of us by various machiavellian technologies they have devised in their spare time for that very purpose.

To me, the defining characteristics of Nazis were and are

1. Blitzkrieg land grabs
2. Forced relocations and Concentration camps for those who oppose them politically or militarily or philosophically or religiously, in fact in an way whatsoever
3. Civilian reprisals for those who inflict military damage to their war machine
4. Total control of state information
5. The invention of new types of intercontinental missiles (V1, V2 etc.)
6. The desire to become the new World Super Power.
7. The belief that they are the master race and incessant threats to all races inferior to them – which is all other races.

Translating that into Russian using Rouble Translate we get…

1. Blitzkrieg land grabs in Georgia and Ukraine
2. Forced relocations, filtration and labour camps for those who oppose them politically or militarily or philosophically or religiously, in fact in any way whatsoever
3. Kiev was bombed in civilian reprisal for sinking the Moskva.
4. Total control of state information
5. The invention of new types of intercontinental missiles (Hypersonic nuclear missiles and Supercavitating nuclear torpedos)
6. The Special Military Operation in Ukraine is designed to End US dominance in the words of Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister. So NOT merely to demilitarize Ukraine.
7. Dmitry Rogozin, the head of the Russian space agency, has warned that Russia could destroy NATO in 30 minutes with nuclear weapons in his Telegram channel.

So how does one behave like a Hypersonic Hitler or a Supersonic Stalin and get away with it in the 21st century?

Accusatory Hypocrisy

One uses the tried and tested method of proactive hypocrisy, pre-emptive accusation, and accusatory hypocrisy. One accuses one’s enemy of being or doing what one is about to be or to do oneself. Because as Sir Winston said: A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth gets the chance to put its pants on. So if you want to get away with a Nazi Blitzkrieg without being called a Nazi, then you must first accuse your intended victims of being Nazis  Or better still you frame your entire war effort as an attack on Naziism. Then you can carry out your Nazi imperialism with impunity.

The democrats in the US do this with ‘Our democracy’, which is of course their dictatorship. They attack democracy by rigging elections in every way imaginable, from media control to election law control to vote counting control to ballot harvesting with 2000 mules, to persecuting prosecuting and harassing opposing political campaigners candidates and presidents etc. But they do it under the cover narrative that they are defending democracy – which cover is designed to wrongfoot their opponents.

Likewise, Putin conducts a Nazi Blitzkrieg against Ukraine under the cover narrative that he is liberating Ukraine from a Nazi sympathising regime. It is the same technique from the same demonic playbook.

Bill Gates and Tony Fauci are masters at accusatory hypocrisy. They pose as saviours from a pandemic that they themselves funded. They force us to receive therapies that they funded or created, which are actually more lethal than the pandemic itself. The real disease here is the desire for power of the bad actors behind the pandemic and the vaccines. The pandemic and the vaccines are merely devices to provide them with the power they crave.

No man has a greater love than this, that he lay down his life for his friends, is the motto of my Oxford college and were Jesus’ words at John 15:13.

Well, the Asovstallers went one better than that. They laid down and are still laying down their lives, not merely for their friends, but actually for people who call them Nazis.

Nazis who have a greater love for people in this country than any Whitehall Mandarin can presently demonstrate from his armchair at home.

I would encourage the government to rescue these steel hearted lovers of freedom and give them all jobs in Whitehall.

The Silence of Snowden on Ukraine

Snowden Feb18: This possibility is frankly so terrible to me it is difficult to even contemplate. I still remember red scars on the streets of Sarajevo, the “Sarajevska ruža” remembering those killed by mortar fire.

Kyiv is bigger than Sarajevo. Than Grozny. Than Fallujah. 

Just unthinkable.

Snowden Feb 27: I’m not suspended from the ceiling above a barrel of acid by a rope that burns a little faster every time I tweet, you concern-trolling ghouls. I’ve just lost any confidence I had that sharing my thinking on this particular topic continues to be useful, because I called it wrong.

Since Feb27, Snowden has made no further tweets about Ukraine.

We must not Isolate Putin

For fear of stating the obvious – The longer the war in Ukraine carries on, the greater the chance is of it escalating into WW3. Whilst we must support the right of any country to defend itself against being colonized by a larger federation of nations, especially since Britain used to be such an aggressor itself. And especially since the UK the US and Ironically Russia too are bound by the 1994December5 Budapest Memorandum to defend Ukraine in return for their agreeing to give up their nuclear weapons (they used to be the 3rd largest nuclear power in the world), the first two paragraphs of which agreement state.

1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

We are now in a situation where Russia has broken their 1994 commitments completely. Whereas the US and UK are keeping their commitments under the memo. But we must all remember that the purpose of the 1994 memorandum was to avoid a nuclear war involving Ukrainian nukes. It was not to risk a nuclear war over Ukraine!

So rather than sanctioning Russian oligarchs and Russian sports personalities and in particular Russian sports oligarchs whilst they are trying to broker peace deals, we should be building bridges to Putin through these people. Because the 1994 memo also pledges that all sides would keep in close communication. In the nuclear age, this is critically important. We cannot afford to have bad relations with Putin however far apart we may be.

What is needed here is a Trump-like character to have a man to man with Putin, and treat him with the respect he deserves for doing a really good job on the Russian economy. and for returning Russia to Superpower status. To be frank, he needs recognition. He needs an Oscar from the Academy of Western Nations and what we gave him was a slap in the face.

Putin said that the only reason the US had any interest in relations with Moscow was that Russia was the only country that could destroy America in half an hour or less. Those are the words of a man with absurdly low self-esteem. There are many, many reasons to have good relations with Russia. They are fantastically competent technologically and very very creative and super logical people. They are brilliant strategists. The worst thing we can do is to demonize them.

If we exclude him, he will only become more resentful. And wars, for all the meaningless justifications that are adduced on their behalf (breathing space, buffer zone etc.) are really about pride, ambition, greed, fear and all the other human emotions in the leaders of the warring parties. They are no different and no less destructive than an argument with one’s better half. Such arguments are about emotion, about feeling valued or appreciated or wanted or loved, or important. I know because I have lost many of those arguments by mistakenly believing they were about the subject matter of the argument.

Vladimir Putin is a resourceful human being as can be seen from his gymnastic lover. We need to be equally resourceful and equally gymnastic in our efforts to include him, nay even to woo him. Because there is no alternative. And he knows there is no alternative.

But we have done the exact opposite with him and he has reacted badly to our excluding him and treating him like the poor relative at the big boy’s power game. In that sense, his Nazi behaviour is partly our fault. We cannot ask him to modify his behaviour if we are not prepared to modify our own behaviour. There is a real sense in which the worse he does in Ukraine, the less stable the world becomes.

Putin seeks acceptance. We denied him entry into the club. So he gatecrashed the club. If we now succeed in throwing him out of the part of the club which he gatecrashed, he may react by destroying the entire club. That is actually what the globalists want. So that they can build back better afterwards. But it is not what any human being with a heart or a conscience wants – including Putin.

So I would recommend the following deal: Release the Asovstallers and permit grain shipments from Odessa for the 3rd world, and in return, we lift sanctions on all Russian sportspeople and oligarchs. We sanction the administration but not any old high profile Russian person. We build a bridge with our humanity. We make an offer of friendship. We start to include him. We offer him the opportunity to do something heroic for the 3rd world. We treat him with the dignity that his power and might deserve. This is a difficult and testing situation. But the solution is more emotional than it is strategic or tactical I believe.

Nuclear Apartheid

Even now, offering Russia to join NATO if they leave Ukraine would be a good idea in my humble opinion. Because NATO cannot afford to be enemies with Russia and neither can Russia afford to be enemies with NATO. Finland and Sweden are thinking of joining NATO and this has been billed as a great victory against Putin. I think it is a great disaster for world security. The club bouncer having rejected Putin is now admitting two women (seen that a few times before). How does that help calm things down?

How about this scenario: Let’s invite every single country in the whole world to join NATO except Russia shall we? Because that now appears to be NATO’s purpose. It has morphed into a club designed to exclude antagonise and alienate a nuclear superpower. How does that make the world a safer place?

So here is my final suggestion. NATO cannot save Ukraine. But destroying NATO just might save it and the West along with it. I am not surprised that Putin wants Ukraine to be excluded from NATO like he is. Somebody has to keep the guy company as he hangs around outside the club!

I do not like gangs and to misquote Groucho Marx: I do not want to be a member of a club which would not have Russia as a member,.

Here in the West politicians bend over backwards to be inclusive to every group of people who might feel excluded. Every group, that is, except Russians, who are today excluded not only from NATO but from everything else the West has to offer. Yes, our response to their launching a war because they are excluded from NATO, has been to exclude them from everything else we have to offer as well.

The reason the West legislates inclusivity is to prevent the alienation of parts of society from the mainstream. Because such alienation can be damaging to society. Why then can we not apply the same principle to our nuclear neighbour Russia? NATO has become an excluding anachronism which should have been knocked down with the Berlin wall. This exclusion has in my opinion lead us to the war in Ukraine. If we are not careful it will lead us further into WW3 which will be between NATO and Russia,

So here is my suggestion for avoiding a war between NATO and Russia. Abolish NATO, Then there will be no WW3.. NATO is nuclear apartheid. Which is obviously far more dangerous and reckless than racial apartheid

Blacks today have the same rights to economic and social prosperity as whites. Should Russians not have the same rights to nuclear security as Westerners?

It is that insecurity which has led to the Kinzhal Hypersonic nuclear missile and the Poseidon nuclear torpedo. These are not the creations of a nation which feels secure!

Really we have two choices here: Invite Russia to join NATO or abolish that Apartheid Anachronism if no invite is possible.

We should trust each individual NATO member to do the right thing for global and national security as they see it, without tying their hands in a centralised agreement. Because events are beginning to prove that…

The greatest threat to transatlantic security is NATO
The greatest threat to European prosperity is the EU
The greatest threat to world health is the WHO

And the greatest threat to mankind is the centralisation of power and the globalists who are trying to engineer that centralisation.

Dr Vernon Coleman: ‘Monkeypox should be called Money Pox’

A lot of nonsense is being talked about monkeypox which is the hypochondriac’s disease of the moment – even more popular than ‘long covid’.

Given the amount of money that the drug companies seem likely to make from it, the disease should be renamed moneypox.

The Exposé reports the facts the mainstream refuse to. Let’s not lose touch, subscribe today to receive the latest news from The Exposé in your inbox…

EMAIL ADDRESS

SUBSCRIBE

Follow The Exposé on Telegram
Join The Exposé’s Telegram Discussion Group

By Dr Vernon Coleman

Humans who catch the disease have, in the past, often had close contact with animals. For example three young sufferers in Boudua had all been observed to play with internal organs removed from recently killed monkeys.

Now I may be wrong but I suspect you won’t see a lot of that sort of behaviour in the Cotswolds, the centre of Paris or on Long Island. Kids are too busy playing with their smart phones to spend much time tinkering with monkey organs they picked up in the playground.

Nevertheless, the mainstream media is having a field day and is, doubtless under instructions from the conspirators, spreading lorry loads of lies and misinformation. According to one paper, you know you have monkeypox if you have a temperature, a headache, muscle aches, backache and feel tired. Oh, and a rash later on that looks like chickenpox or possibly smallpox though no one knows what smallpox looks like because there hasn’t been a case since 1980, when it was officially declared extinct, except for the odd bottle of the virus being held in laboratories so that scientists could play Dr Doom.

(Incidentally, the disappearance of smallpox had nothing to do with the smallpox vaccine, as I explained in my book Anyone who tells you vaccines are safe and effective is lying. Here’s the proof. Despite this, the American Government holds enough smallpox vaccines for most of its population. If you’re naïve, you may well wonder why the US taxpayers have bought 119 million doses of a vaccine for a disease that hasn’t existed since Pink Floyd released ‘Another Brick in the Wall’.)

Another report on monkeypox swapped `feeling tired’ for `listlessness’ on its list of symptoms.

Oh, and added swollen glands to the list – thereby picking up another two million people with sore throats.

There can’t be more than five million people in Britain with those symptoms right now. So they’ll all be lined up in a queue outside the local Accident and Emergency department by tomorrow lunchtime. And since the tell-tale rash doesn’t appear for several days, no one will be able to tell them whether they have the flu or the monkeypox. Cue panic, fear and endless TV programmes about vaccines.

Journalists are also spreading the word that you can get monkeypox by eating meat. And it’s my guess they’ll get a bonus from the conspirators for that one. The supermarkets will doubtless have to remove monkey chops from the shelves.

Incidentally, journalists and scaremongers should be aware that monkeypox is contagious not infectious. To save them looking it up that means it’s transmitted by contact (which is why it is wrongly being linked to sexual transmitted diseases).

There’s much talk of people dying, though monkeypox isn’t particularly deadly (the official figure seems to be about 3% but that’s probably a wild exaggeration because I’d guess that up until now the only cases that have been diagnosed (largely in the tropical rainforests) have been the serious ones. I’d guess that most cases of monkeypox will have been ignored or dismissed as the chickenpox.

So, what’s it all about?

Well, it could be just all part of the fearporn that the conspirators love so much. The enthusiasm of the mainstream media to run with this one rather suggests that’s a real possibility. Scare everyone to death so that they continue to wear masks, sort their recycling properly, ignore what’s happening in the real world and keep away from zoos.

It could be to prepare the morons who took the covid-19 jab to rush and get themselves jabbed against monkeypox as soon as the monkeypox vaccine centres have been set up. The big drug company bosses are doubtless already sorting out their bonus cheques and wondering how many noughts you can squeeze onto a cheque without a few falling off the end.

Or it could all be to distract us from the big story: the World Health Organisation’s plan to take over the world and become the forerunner of the World Government the conspirators have been working towards for two years.

Or it could be all three.

I’ll write more about the rancid WHO’s evil plan to hold us all prisoner but meanwhile if you want to know more about the monkeypox story take a look at Amazing Polly’s excellent and thoughtful video. You can find it here.

Vernon Coleman’s bestselling book on vaccines is called Anyone who tells you vaccines are safe and effective is lying. Here’s the proof. It is available as a paperback and an eBook and is very modestly priced.

Bill Gates the Bioterrorist’s plan for Global Control

The World Health Organization is attempting to seize control over global pandemic monitoring and response and, ultimately, all health care decision, and Bill Gates intends to play a key part in this takeover.

The Exposé reports the facts the mainstream refuse to. Let’s not lose touch, subscribe today to receive the latest news from The Exposé in your inbox…

EMAIL ADDRESS

SUBSCRIBE

Follow The Exposé on Telegram
Join The Exposé’s Telegram Discussion Group

By Dr J Mercola

In “The Corbett Report” above,1 independent journalist James Corbett reviews the contents of Bill Gates’ book, “How to Prevent the Next Pandemic.”

“It’s every bit as infuriating, nauseating, ridiculous, laughable and risible as you would expect,” he says. “This is a ridiculous book … There’s certainly nothing of medical or scientific value in here … It’s a baffling book even from a propagandistic perspective …

Gates’ goal in writing the book is to disarm the public and prepare us to accept the agenda that Gates and his allies would like to impose on the world. Ultimately, what this is about is drumming up general public support — or at least general public understanding — of the unfolding biosecurity agenda.”

Another reviewer of Gates’ book, economist Jeffrey Tucker, offered similarly negative feedback:2

“Imagine yourself sidled up to a bar. A talkative guy sits down on the stool next to you. He has decided that there is one thing wrong with the world. It can be literally anything. Regardless, he has the solution.

It’s interesting and weird for a few minutes. But you gradually come to realize that he is actually crazy. His main point is wrong and so his solutions are wrong too. But the drinks are good, and he is buying. So you put up with it. In any case, you will forget the whole thing in the morning.

In the morning, however, you realize that he is one of the world’s richest men and he is pulling the strings of many of the world’s most powerful people. Now you are alarmed. In a nutshell, that’s what it’s like to read Bill Gates’s new book ‘How to Prevent the Next Pandemic.’”

Gates’ Book Chapter by Chapter

Corbett goes through Gates’ book chapter by chapter, so if you’re short on time, you can review the ones that interest you the most:

Chapter 1: Learn from COVID (timestamp: 12:58)

Chapter 2: Create a pandemic prevention team (timestamp: 18:23)

Chapter 3: Get better at detecting outbreaks early (timestamp: 26:21)

Chapter 4: Help people protect themselves right away (timestamp: 31:01)

Chapter 5: Find new treatments fast (timestamp: 37:26)

Chapter 6: Get ready to make vaccines (timestamp: 39:46)

Chapter 7: Practice, practice, practice (timestamp: 47:06)

Chapter 8: Close the health gap between rich and poor countries (timestamp: 50:49)

Chapter 9: Make — and fund — a plan for preventing pandemics (timestamp: 57:40)

Afterword: How COVID changed the course of our digital future (timestamp: 1:03:00)

Gates GERM Team

By now, you’ve probably heard that the World Health Organization is attempting to seize control over global pandemic monitoring and response, and ultimately, all health care decisions. But did you know Bill Gates, the largest funder of the WHO (if you combine funding from his foundation and GAVI), also intends to play a key part in this takeover?

As Gates explains in a video at the beginning of Corbett’s report, he’s building a pandemic response team for the WHO, dubbed the “Global Epidemic Response & Mobilization” or GERM Team. This team will be made up of thousands of disease experts under WHO’s purview, and will monitor nations and make decisions about when to suspend civil liberties to prevent spread of an illness.3

Alas, as noted by “Rising” host Kim Iversen in the video compilation above, if COVID-19 has taught us anything, it’s that stopping the spread of a virus is more or less impossible, no matter how draconian the rules. Meanwhile, the side effects of lockdowns and business shutdowns are manifold.

People’s health has suffered from lack of health care. Depression and suicide have skyrocketed. Economies have gone bust. Violent crime has risen. Tucker also points out the false premise behind Gates’ pandemic prevention plan, stating:4

“This theory of virus control — the notion that muscling the population makes a prevalent virus shrink into submission and disappear — is a completely new invention, the mechanization of a primitive instinct.

Smallpox occupies a unique position among infectious diseases as the only one affecting humans that has been eradicated. There are reasons for that: a stable pathogen, a great vaccine, and a hundred years of focused public health work. This happened not due to lockdowns but from the careful and patient application of traditional public-health principles.

[T]he attempt to crush a respiratory virus through universal avoidance could be worse than allowing endemicity to it to develop throughout the population.”

Gates’ Destructive Greed

During COVID, we basically traded false protection against one thing for a multitude of other ills that are far worse in the long run. Now, Gates and the WHO want to make this disastrous strategy the norm.

Once again, we see Gates is basically paying the WHO to dictate what the world must do to make him a ton of money, because he’s always heavily invested in the very “solutions” he presents to the world. While he’s built a reputation as a philanthropist, his actions are self-serving, and more often than not, the recipients of his “generosity” end up worse than they were before.

Case in point: After 15 years, Gates’ Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) project has now been proven an epic fail.5 Gates promised the project would “double yields and incomes for 30 million farming households by 2020.”

That false prognosis was deleted from the AGRA website in June 2020, after a Tuft University assessment revealed hunger had actually increased by 31%. February 28, 2022, the first-ever evaluation report6 confirmed the failure of AGRA.

The Globalists’ Double-Prong Attack on National Sovereignty

But getting back to the globalists’ plan to seize global control through biosecurity governance, they are attempting to do this using two different avenues. If we fail to fight off both attacks, we’ll end up under totalitarian governance.

The first attack comes in the form of amendments7 to the International Health Regulations (IHR). The second attack comes through a new international pandemic treaty with the WHO.

Starting with the first takeover strategy, as you read this, countries around the world are in the process of voting on amendments to the IHR.8 By May 28, 2022, the World Health Assembly will have concluded their vote on these amendments and, if passed, they will be enacted into international law in November 2022.

The IHR, adopted in 2005, is what empowers the WHO to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).9 This is a special legal category that allows the WHO to initiate certain contracts and procedures, including drug and vaccine contracts. While the IHR grants the WHO exceptional power over global health policy already, under the current rules, member states must consent to the WHO’s recommendations.

This is one key feature that is up for revision. Under the new amendments, the WHO would be able to declare a PHEIC in a member state over the objection of that state. The amendments also include ceding control to WHO regional directors authorized to declare a Public Health Emergency of Regional Concern (PHERC).

In summary, the IHR amendments establish “a globalist architecture of worldwide health surveillance, reporting and management,” Robert Malone, Ph.D., warns,10 and we the public have no say in the matter.

We have no official avenue for providing feedback to the World Health Assembly, even though the amendments will give the WHO unprecedented power to restrict our rights and freedoms in the name of biosecurity. There’s not even a publicly available list of who the delegates are or who will vote on the amendments.

Summary of Proposed IHR Amendments

A summary of the proposed changes to the IHR was recently provided by Malone.11 In all, the WHO wants to amend 13 different IHR articles (articles 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 18, 48, 49, 53 and 59), the end result of which is the following:12

1. “Increased surveillance — Under Article 5, the WHO will develop early warning criteria that will allow it to establish a risk assessment for a member state, which means that it can use the type of modeling, simulation, and predictions that exaggerated the risk from COVID-19 over two years ago. Once the WHO creates its assessment, it will communicate it to inter-governmental organizations and other member states.

2. 48-hour deadline — Under Articles 6, 10, 11, and 13, a member state is given 48 hours to respond to a WHO risk assessment and accept or reject on-site assistance. However, in practice, this timeline can be reduced to hours, forcing it to comply or face international disapproval lead by the WHO and potentially unfriendly member states.

3. Secret sources — Under Article 9, the WHO can rely on undisclosed sources for information leading it to declare a public health emergency. Those sources could include Big Pharma, WHO funders such as the Gates Foundation and the Gates-founded-and-funded GAVI Alliance, as well as others seeking to monopolize power.

4. Weakened sovereignty — Under Article 12, when the WHO receives undisclosed information concerning a purported public health threat in a member state, the Director-General may (not must) consult with the WHO Emergency Committee and the member state. However, s/he can unilaterally declare a potential or actual public health emergency of international concern.

The Director General’s authority replaces national sovereign authority. This can later be used to enforce sanctions on nations.”

Once the amendments are adopted by the World Health Assembly, nations will have only a limited time — six months — to reject them. That would put us into November 2022. Any nation which hasn’t officially rejected the amendments will then be legally bound by them, and any attempt to reject them after the six-month grace period will be null and void.

Attack No. 2: The WHO Pandemic Treaty

The second attempt to gain global control is through an international pandemic treaty with the WHO. An intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) was established as a subdivision of the World Health Assembly in December 2021,13 for the purpose of drafting and negotiating this new pandemic treaty.

In summary, the WHO wants to make its pandemic leadership permanent. It can then extend its power into the health care systems of every nation, and eventually implement a universal or “socialist-like” health care system as part of The Great Reset.

While a WHO-based universal health care system is not currently being discussed, there’s every reason to suspect that this is part of the plan. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has previously stated that his “central priority” as director-general is to push the world toward universal health coverage.14

And, considering the WHO changed its definition of “pandemic” to “a worldwide epidemic of a disease,”15 without the original specificity of severe illness that causes high morbidity,16,17 just about anything could be made to fit the pandemic criterion.

The problem with this treaty is that it simply cannot work. The whole premise behind this pandemic treaty is that “shared threat requires shared response.” But a given threat is almost never equally shared across regions.

Take COVID-19 for example. Not only is the risk of COVID not the same for people in New York City and the outback of Australia, it’s not even the same for all the people in those areas, as COVID is highly dependent on age and underlying health conditions.

The WHO insists that the remedy is the same for everyone everywhere, yet the risks vary widely from nation to nation, region to region, person to person. They intend to eliminate individualized medicine and provide blanket rulings for how a given threat is to be addressed, and this can only result in needless suffering — not to mention the loss of individual freedom.

Are You Ready to Cede All Authority to Gates-Led Group?

In closing, Gates’ GERM team would be the ones with the authority to declare pandemics and coordinate global response.18 Are you ready to cede all authority over your life, health and livelihood to the likes of Gates? I hope not.

In the video above, Del Bigtree with “The Highwire” provides poignant examples where Gates is now admitting what “The Highwire,” I and many others have been saying since the earliest days of the COVID pandemic, and getting censored and deplatformed for it.

Gates is two years behind everyone else, yet despite his apparent inability to interpret the readily available data, he now wants power to dictate health rules to the whole world. We can’t let that happen.

Join the Global #StopTheWHO Campaign

It’s going to require a global response to prevent these two power grabs, starting with the IHR amendments under vote by the World Health Assembly. To that end, the World Council for Health has launched a global #StopTheWHO campaign. Here’s how you can get involved:19

Is America the Real Victim of Anti-Russia Sanctions?

Remember the claims that Russia’s economy was more or less irrelevant, merely the equivalent of a small, not very impressive European country? “Putin, who has an economy the size of Italy,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in 2014 after the invasion of Crimea, “[is] playing a poker game with a pair of twos and winning.” Of increasing Russian diplomatic and geopolitical influence in Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia, The Economist asked in 2019, “How did a country with an economy the size of Spain … achieve all this?”

Seldom has the West so grossly misjudged an economy’s global significance. French economist Jacques Sapir, a renowned specialist of the Russian economy who teaches at the Moscow and Paris schools of economics, explained recently that the war in Ukraine has “made us realize that the Russian economy is considerably more important than what we thought.” For Sapir, one big reason for this miscalculation is exchange rates. If you compare Russia’s gross domestic product (GDP) by simply converting it from rubles into U.S. dollars, you indeed get an economy the size of Spain’s. But such a comparison makes no sense without adjusting for purchasing power parity (PPP), which accounts for productivity and standards of living, and thus per capita welfare and resource use. Indeed, PPP is the measure favored by most international institutions, from the IMF to the OECD. And when you measure Russia’s GDP based on PPP, it’s clear that Russia’s economy is actually more like the size of Germany’s, about $4.4 trillion for Russia versus $4.6 trillion for Germany. From the size of a small and somewhat ailing European economy to the biggest economy in Europe and one of the largest in the world—not a negligible difference.

Sapir also encourages us to ask, “What is the share of the service sector versus the share of the commodities and industrial sector?” To him, the service sector today is grossly overvalued compared with the industrial sector and commodities like oil, gas, copper, and agricultural products. If we reduce the proportional importance of services in the global economy, Sapir says that “Russia’s economy is vastly larger than that of Germany and represents probably 5% or 6% of the world economy,” more like Japan than Spain.

This makes intuitive sense. When push comes to shove, we know there is more value in providing people with the things they really need to survive like food and energy than there is in intangible things like entertainment or financial services. When a company like Netflix has a price-earnings ratio three times higher than that of Nestlé, the world’s largest food company, it’s more likely than not a reflection of market froth than of physical reality. Netflix is a great service, but as long as an estimated 800 million people in the world remain undernourished, Nestlé is still going to provide more value.

All of which is to say that the current crisis in Ukraine has helpfully clarified how much we’ve taken for granted the “antiquated” side of modern economies like industry and commodities—prices for which have surged this year—and perhaps overvalued services and “tech,” whose value has recently crashed.

The size and importance of Russia’s economy is further distorted by ignoring global trade flows, in which Sapir estimates that Russia “may account for maybe as much as 15%.” While Russia is not the largest producer of oil in the world, for example, it has been the largest exporter of it, ahead even of Saudi Arabia. The same is true for many other essential products such as wheat—the world’s most important food crop, with Russia controlling about 19.5% of global exports—nickel (20.4%), semi-finished iron (18.8%), platinum (16.6%), and frozen fishes (11.2%).

Such commanding importance in the production of so many essential commodities means that Russia, like few other countries on the planet, is in many respects a linchpin of the globalized production chain. Unlike “maximum sanctions” on a country like Iran or Venezuela, attempting to cut the Russian link has meant and will likely continue to mean a dramatic reorganization of the global economy.

Now that President Joe Biden has publicly renounced America’s decades-old policy of “strategic ambiguity” with regard to Taiwan, it’s worth thinking about what China’s economy looks like when we remove the same blinkers with which we’d always viewed Russia. If we consider the Chinese economy based on exchange rates—by simply converting China’s GDP from Chinese yuan to U.S. dollars—it is valued at about $17.7 trillion (as of 2021), compared to $23 trillion for the United States and $17 trillion for the European Union.

RELATED

BDS: Russia vs. Israel

The two cases have little in common, other than a general lack of seriousness about U.S. foreign policy

BYEUGENE KONTOROVICH

Why America Only Pretends to Compete With China

Ukraine shows that the ‘return of great power rivalry’ isn’t happening under the Biden administration

BYJEREMY STERN

But if we adjust for PPP, we see that the Chinese economy reached almost $27.21 trillion in 2021, compared with $20.5 trillion for the EU and $23 trillion for the United States. In terms of PPP, in fact, China’s economy overtook America’s back as much as six years ago.

And what if we reduce the proportional importance of the service sector relative to industry and commodities? Services account for approximately 53.3% of China’s GDP, even less than in Russia (56.7%). If we roughly apply Sapir’s ratio of doubling the valuation of the nonservice sector to China, we may have to consider that in a very real and relevant way, the Chinese economy accounts for something like 25%-30% of the global economy on a PPP basis, rather than the current estimates of 18%-19%. That would put the combined Chinese and Russian economies at about 30%-35% of the global economy (again, adjusting for PPP and the overvaluation of the service sector)—a behemoth and likely unsustainable challenge for a trans-Atlantic community that looks increasingly focused on using maximalist economic sanctions to punish bad actors and achieve desired policy outcomes. That challenge becomes even more daunting when we consider that the service sector accounts for roughly 77% of the U.S. economy and 70% of the EU’s—suggesting a potentially significant degree of overvaluation in Western economic heft, and far more parity in relative economic power with China and Russia.

How much does any of this hairsplitting matter? For one, the war in Ukraine and tensions in the Pacific look to be accelerating a division of the world into Cold War-like political and economic blocs. But whereas the West accounted for over 50% of global GDP at the beginning of the Cold War—with the United States dominating global manufacturing and running huge annual trade surpluses—the West looks to be in a weaker if more entrenched position of power today, and its major adversaries stronger in certain ways than the communist bloc was in 1948.

Before we enthusiastically embrace a new Iron Curtain, therefore, it’s worth pausing to consider how many countries in the world will voluntarily place themselves on our side. The countries of what we consider “the West” will—for ideological and historical reasons, in addition to economic and military enmeshment—undoubtedly remain relatively united. But the West only accounts for about 13% of the world’s population, with China and Russia together making up about 20%. That leaves about two-thirds of humanity “nonaligned,” a position that most of them would like to maintain. If we force them to choose a side, we may be surprised by many of the results.

A tally of the countries participating in current sanctions on Russia, in fact, makes it hard to say whether a new Iron Curtain is being drawn around our adversaries or around the West itself. Countries and nominal U.S. allies as significant as India and Saudi Arabia have been particularly vocal in their refusal to take sides in the conflict in Ukraine.

One telling barometer for this dynamic is oil. With Western oil sanctions on the world’s largest oil exporter, prices have predictably skyrocketed, rising from around $75 a barrel at the beginning of the year up to over $110 today. But countries that have refused to participate in sanctions are now taking advantage of the opportunity to negotiate for Russian energy deliveries at steep discounts. If Russia is still able to sell oil around the world, countries like India are able to negotiate for below-market prices, and Western consumers are being hammered with inflated prices, who is really being sanctioned? A similar principle applies to the weaponization of the U.S. dollar and the Western financial system in general: If non-Western countries are increasingly told that access to dollars and transaction systems like SWIFT are conditional on policies made in Washington that may not necessarily be in their own self-interest, the result may be a de-dollarization of the global economy, not a strengthening of the Western order.

None of this is to say that the brutal invasion of Ukraine has been anything less than an atrocity, and that extraordinary measures may indeed be called for in order to counter Russian expansionism and its implications for global peace and stability. But it’s possible that the West, in a fit of self-righteousness and a need to satisfy various domestic demands, may be diving headlong into a future in which the global South and many others besides feel increasingly pressured to make a choice they don’t want to have to make, and which may leave the West more isolated than ever before in modern times.

War drums: Chinese Communist Party warns elites to get rid of overseas assets following Western sanctions on Russia Wednesday, May 25, 2022 by: JD Heyes

(Natural News) For years, Chinese leaders have sounded bellicose warnings over Taiwan, pledging to bring the island democracy back within Beijing’s fold voluntarily or by force, if necessary.

And for just as long, Taiwanese leaders have essentially ignored or rejected China’s statements.

But now, China has become infinitely stronger than at any time in modern history, essentially mimicking Japan’s rise in the 1920s and 1930s, and as such, it is becoming clearer that Beijing is set to make good on its decades-old pledge to unify its “renegade province.”

The Wall Street Journal reported this week that Chinese Communist leaders have essentially warned the country’s monied elite to divest themselves of assets in the West after sanctions were placed on oligarchs and other wealthy Russians following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.

Specifically:

China’s Communist Party will block promotions for senior cadres whose spouses or children hold significant assets abroad, people familiar with the matter said, as Beijing seeks to insulate its top officials from the types of sanctions now being directed at Russia.

The paper seemed to suggest, however, that the move was more related to internal politics:

The ban, outlined in an internal notice by the party’s powerful Central Organization Department, could play a role in Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s efforts to increase his influence at a twice-a-decade leadership shuffle scheduled for later this year.

But that makes no sense, given that Chinese assets held throughout the West are also seen as strategic, since everything Bejing does is geared at enhancing the regime’s power, as well as China’s technological prowess.

The directive, which was issued in March, bars spouses and children of ministerial-level officials from holding, either directly or indirectly, any real estate overseas or shares in companies and entities registered overseas, according to the sources who spoke to the WSJ.

“Senior officials and members of their immediate families would also be barred from setting up accounts with overseas financial institutions unless they have legitimate reasons for doing so—such as study or work—the people said,” the paper reported further.

“Leading cadres, especially senior cadres, must pay attention to family discipline and ethics,” Xi told the party’s top disciplinary agency in January. He added that officials must “lead by example in managing their spouses and children properly, being a dutiful person and doing things in a clean way.”

Senior officials are required to sign pledges declaring that they are complying with the new rules, which would ostensibly give Xi more leverage over the country’s ChiCom elite ahead of the party’s 20th Congress, which is scheduled for late this year.

Xi is expected to win a third five-year term as head of the party while also stacking his leadership roster with people he can trust so that he can bolster his status as the most powerful leader in China over decades. The compliance pledges will give Xi leverage over any official who is found to be in violation of the overseas assets rules, making them liable for serious offenses including being disloyal and dishonest to the party.

“Since taking power in 2012, Mr. Xi has waged a high-profile campaign to fight corruption and curb displays of extravagance among officials, saying that the party faced an existential battle against moral decay within its ranks,” the WSJ noted further.

The new rules on overseas assets may be framed as an anti-corruption tool by Xi, but the real meaning behind them is clear: Once war with Taiwan begins — now that Joe Biden has pledged to defend the island — the Chinese leader knows assets will be frozen and sanctions will economically cripple the ChiCom elite, which could also lead to rebellion at home.

War drums are beating in Asia.

Sources include:

WSJ.com

NaturalNews.com