By David Bill

In a world where ‘equity’ is the catch-cry of corporatists accumulating unprecedented wealth, the return of colonialism should not surprise. Colonialism, after all, brings great benefits to those whom it disempowers and pillages. Success requires a highly centralized approach to achieve mass control, restricting freedom ‘for the greater good’ whilst silencing those who disagree.

With the World Health Organization (WHO) now rebooted to promote just such approaches, and its calamitous Covid response having recently pushed former colonies further into penury, the stage is set for a return of the old order. An army of international health bureaucrats, equipping themselves with an array of rhetoric around ‘infodemics,’ ‘vaccine equity,’ and a new-found love of corporate sponsorship, are forming the vanguard. The winners, the losers, and the enablers – all the stuff we naively thought we had put aside but was just festering in the shadows.

While European colonialism proved an excellent way to extract the wealth of others, it also had its downsides. One was the inadvertent extraction of pestilence such as cholera and typhus. While smallpox had been a devastating European export, clearing coveted lands for colonial settlement, transmission of disease in the reverse direction upset the colonizers; local laws and expectations applied and mass death and suffering could not be hidden from the public eye.

To address this problem, 12 European countries met in 1851 for the first international sanitary conference. Most were heavily invested in the colonial enterprise, settling and pillaging other lands to demonstrate a higher form of civilization. Some were still actively enslaving people to make this greater good even cheaper to impose. Thus, the noble field of international public health (nowadays rebranded as ‘Global Health’) was born. Regular rebranding is important as the past becomes awkward.

A series of such conferences culminated in the first Sanitary Convention in 1892, and the establishment of the permanent Office Internationale d’Hygiene Publique in Paris in 1907. The countries of the Americas had got in first with their own International Sanitary Bureau in 1902, but the world’s center of gravity was still in Europe. While the great public-private partnerships that had exploited the colonial populations, such as the East India companies, had mostly dissolved, colonial governments were still able to starve and abuse the locals without too much reference to the norms of behavior expected at home. International public health was about keeping the home populations safe, not about dealing with the disease burdens of the colonized.

Colonies could be run with the efficiency of private industry free from the growing expectations of health and welfare in Europe. They were sufficiently distant and profitable for the benefits of extracted wealth to temper any feelings of guilt that such abuse might arouse. The extremes of some late-comers such as systemic mutilation could also serve as outlets for those who wished to vent virtue; this could allow feelings of philanthropic altruism or ‘White Man’s Burden’ to veil the more routine carnage of the more established powers.

Throughout this, the tropical public health schools of Europe helped keep populations productive and profitable whilst reinforcing this veil of benevolence; dictated healthcare to support the corporate-authoritarian state. They also boosted the egos and sense of adventure of the young health professionals the state recruited. There is not much new under the sun.

Between the two world wars colonialism remained good business. The League of Nations trialed inclusiveness by adding the rising Asian colonial power, Japan. The pre-antibiotic Spanish flu had recently wreaked havoc globally with 25 to 50 million deaths between 1918 and 1920, and typhus had continued a deadly path through the First World War. International collaboration made sense, but it would be on the terms of the wealthy and remain primarily focused on threats to their own health.

This elitist view extended to the eugenics movement of the time. Supported by much of the Western public health establishment, this came to be expressed most clearly through their enthusiastic embrace of Nazism in Germany. We usually view Nazism as gray images of jackboots and concentration camps, but this is a distortion; a figment of monochrome film and propaganda. It was considered progressive at the time; people working together in the sun for the benefit of the many, growing prosperity and opportunity.

It captured the minds and hearts of students and the young, giving them a cause to stand for, sanctioning their right to denigrate deviants, non-conformers, and those considered unhealthy or a threat to social purity. As today, this was all promoted from above by a mix of politicians and corporatists and reflected in the professional societies and colleges. It enables people to view the subjugation of others as virtuous. Fascism and colonialism are faces of the same coin.

The consequent rotting piled corpses of the death trains of the 1940s, and the mutilated skeletal ghosts of the camps they served, gave medical authoritarianism a bad name. The Second World War also gave colonized populations a path and a means to throw off their oppressors. There followed a few decades in which public health did penance. Career paths required acknowledgement of anti-fascist concepts such as equality between countries, community control of health policy, and the ever-unpopular idea of ‘informed consent.’ Declarations from Nuremberg to Helsinki to Alma Ata promoted this theme, with human rights trending in the media.

For corporate authoritarianism and the colonialist ideal to be made friendly again, the former themes would have to be sanitized. ‘Greater good’ is a good place to start; “Protect your community, get your jab” makes forced compliance sound caring. “No one is safe, until everyone is safe” justifies the demonization of non-compliers. A few generations of forgetting, a bit of rebranding, and it all becomes mainstream again.

Let us dig further into our enlightened present. We pull down the statues of the tyrants, ban the books of racists, then close the markets and schools across low-income countries and expand their debt, ensuring they remain subservient. In wealthy countries, corporatists fund the colleges that train the cadres who then save the ignorant and needy in ‘backward’ States. They arrange for the children to be injected with the medicines the corporatists make, proven effective by the modelers they sponsor and approved by the regulatory agencies they support. The big new public-private partnerships ensure private profit can be driven by public money.

An ever-growing bureaucracy, in an ever-growing list of international agencies, now implements the centrist agenda, removing remaining vestiges of local ownership and control. Thousands of well-salaried ‘humanitarian’ workers are the new East India Company bureaucrats, projecting the same façade of Western largesse to the distant, ignorant, and undeveloped. Untouchable international agencies such as the WHO, external to national judicial control, do the leg work for those with money and power. Two decades ago, emphasis was on empowering communities. I have sat in meetings in recent years where these same people shamelessly discuss defunding countries that don’t comply with emerging Western cultural norms. Cultural imperialism has become acceptable again.

With the world turning full circle, post-World War Two concepts of human rights, equality, and local agency are exiting the international stage. The veiled colonialism currently dressed up as vaccine equity looks like a bunch of colonial bureaucrats forcing their sponsors’ wares on those with less power, whilst building policies to ensure this imbalance remains. Malnutrition, infectious disease, child marriage, and generational poverty are side issues to the East India Pharma and Software Company’s bottom lines. This will stop when those being colonized once again unite and refuse to comply. In the meantime, the enablers could open their eyes and understand who they are working for.

[…]

Via https://brownstone.org/articles/the-history-of-public-health-colonialism/

Dr Guy Hatchard

The government, the media, and the health service have buried their heads in the sand and promised our health problems will go away.

Friday 08 March 2024: the government announced new health targets promising greatly shortened wait times and faster treatments, but incredibly failed to address why so many people are falling sick. Health Minister Shane Reti admitted the deficiencies in the announced policies, which are neither new nor realistic, saying:

“I do want to acknowledge that achieving shorter wait times for first specialist assessments and for elective treatments were tough for the previous government, and will be tough for us too.”

You don’t have to look very far to realise why. An article in the UK Daily Mail entitled “Why ARE so many young people having heart attacks? They had seemingly healthy lifestyles… but all these people suffered heart problems“, spills the beans. Apparently, close to 20% of people being admitted to hospital with heart attacks are now under 40.

According to Dr Joe Mills, a consultant cardiologist at Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital:

“We have really noticed the trend for younger people from mid-20s upwards having heart attacks in the past five years in particular. Now as a cardiologist, you wouldn’t even raise your eyebrows when seeing someone in their late 30s — it’s becoming fairly typical, which is frightening.”

The article then proceeds to trot out the usual suspects: obesity, stress, sedentary lifestyle, smoking, alcohol, and diabetes but fails to observe that none of these factors have changed appreciably or abruptly during the last five years. Something else has, and we all know what that it is, but the Daily Mail and the numerous doctors they interviewed all seem to be suffering from amnesia.

Rhoda Wilson

The EU’s globalist agenda prioritises dependency rather than local self-sufficiency, even though relying on food and oil imports poses risks.  Importing food from distant locations significantly increases fuel consumption and labour compared to producing it locally.

The World Economic Forum’s reset agenda promotes the adoption of smart devices and 5G technology, despite the potential harm of electromagnetic frequency technologies to human health.  In the farming sector, this translates to the electrification and wireless connection of everything under the guise of combating climate change and achieving net zero carbon emissions.

This new framework, although marketed as reducing CO₂ emissions, remains highly polluting.  As the focus shifts to marketing and selling new “green” products, the environmental impact remains largely unchanged.

Without Farmers and Without Affordable Oil, Supermarket Shelves Will Quickly Become Empty

The globalist European Union (“EU”) does not seem concerned with the fact that without European farmers the 750 million people of the EU and wider Europe would be without food production on the entire European continent. All food would have to be imported using up yet more fossil fuels in transport – an obvious contradiction to the fossil-fuel/CO₂ reduction agenda. Clearly, the real agenda involves creating dependency; and suppressing local or regional self-sufficiency. Furthermore, if peak oil manifests the so-called ‘cheap’ food imports to the EU will stop due to a shortage of oil and vastly inflated oil prices.

[Note: In another section of the article not included here, Keenan explores whether “Peak Oil” is a hoax and a propaganda tool to justify higher prices and to promote so-called “green” energy.]

A country overly dependent on food imports and oil imports is like a hospital patient on life support waiting for the power plug to be pulled out of the socket. Wherever you live in the world, access to imported food depends on the availability of affordable oil.

Note also that in this era of globalisation, prices can be rigged, and often do not reflect the reality that shipping food thousands of miles requires vastly more fuel and labour than producing food in your own country or region. If these externalities i.e., the true costs of transport, labour, and the polluting impacts on nature, were factored in, then the price of imports would be higher. It does not make sense to ship food thousands of miles when it can be produced within your own locality, country or region.

Given that Ukraine is a huge country with vast tracts of rich fertile land, we can see that the country has long-term strategic importance.  It appears the globalists’ war against humanity, includes this war against farming. and against local food security. Author, Rosa Koire has described that UN Agenda 2030 aims to push people off of the land, become more dependent, and come into the cities:

“UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is a global plan that is implemented locally. Over 600 cities in the US are members… The costs are paid by taxpayers…  Although counties say that they support agricultural uses, eating locally produced food, farmer’s markets, etc, in fact, there are so many regulations restricting water and land use (there are scenic corridors, inland rural corridors, baylands corridors, area plans, specific plans, redevelopment plans, huge fees, fines) that farmers are losing their lands altogether… The push is for people to get off of the land, become more dependent, come into the cities…”  – Rosa Koire

The EU/UN/WEF Technocratic War on Farmers: Climate Alarmism, Corporate Control, the IoT, and Electrification of Everything

The World Economic Forum (“WEF”) reset agenda involves the worldwide adoption of smart devices that utilise electromagnetic frequency technologies, specifically, the Internet of Things (“IoT”). The IoT is supported by 5th generation cellular technology, 5G. Note, however, that thousands of scientific studies assert that EMF-based technologies can be harmful to human health. According to the WEF:

The Internet of Things (IoT) now connects 22 billion devices in real-time, ranging from cars to hospital beds, electric grids and water station pumps, to kitchen ovens and agricultural irrigation systems… this number is expected to reach 50 billion or more by 2030.

In the farming sector, this involves the electrification and wireless connection of everything under the misleading banner of combatting climate change. Smart technology ostensibly marketed for achieving nonsensical “net zero carbon” is already being implemented in the agricultural sector. Consider this quote from a report to the UK’s Food & Drink Sector Council, by its Agricultural Productivity Working Group:

“If the net zero carbon ambition is to be achieved by our industry, electrification of heavy farm machinery must be facilitated. Nationwide reinforcement of rural electricity infrastructure, including buffer battery storage systems, will be essential to deliver the required electrical flow for ‘smart charging’ of multiple high-capacity batteries… in the farming calendar. … Facilitating the management of land by those who will adopt new tools, technologies and practices could have a subsequent positive impact on productivity. The following actions are required: 1. Invest in 5G infrastructure to enable required future data flow 2. Upgrade the rural electricity network to enable electrification of farm equipment… ” – UK Food and Drink Sector Council

Clearly, there is another agenda behind the WEF reset, and UN Agenda 2030, that has nothing to do with real environmentalism (see also the article ‘Driving an electric car is fake environmentalism’). I note that the author Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture and that he describes this agenda in a recent article as follows:

The plan also involves removing farmers from the land (AI-driven farmerless farms) and filling much of the countryside with wind farms and solar panels… this misguided agenda is a recipe for food insecurity… neoliberal trade policies that lead to the import of produce that undermines domestic production and undercuts prices… or the implementation of net zero emissions policies that set unrealistic targets…. farming is deliberately being made impossible or financially non-viable. The aim is to drive most farmers off the land and ram through an agenda that by its very nature seems likely to produce shortages and undermine food security… Big agribusiness and ‘philanthropic’ foundations position themselves as the saviours of humanity … Integral to this ‘food transition’ is the ‘climate emergency’ narrative, a commentary that has been carefully constructed and promoted… This predatory commercialisation of the countryside uses flawed premises and climate alarmism to legitimise the roll-out of technologies to supposedly deliver us all from climate breakdown and Malthusian catastrophe.

The ‘Food Transition’ Is a War on Food, Farmers and Everybody Worldwide, Global Research, 4 March 2024

Note also that the wind-solar-electric economy being promoted by the UN/WEF is fake environmentalism as the production of millions of large batteries for electric vehicles involves extensive use of fossil fuels during the mining, production and processing of rare earth metals. Furthermore, electric vehicles are still driven by electricity produced from fossil fuels and will most likely continue to be. Despite decades of government subsidies wind power provides less than 5% of the world’s energy, and solar just 1%. The use of electricity to charge vehicles and devices is also an extremely inefficient use of energy, according to a study by the European Association for Battery Electric Vehicles commissioned by the European Commission (EC):

The ‘Well-to-Tank’ energy efficiency (from the primary energy source to the electrical plug), taking into account the energy consumed by the production and distribution of the electricity, is estimated at around 37%.

Furthermore, the move from a mine-and-burn hydrocarbon economy towards a wind-solar-electric economy in itself requires a vast expenditure of fossil-fuel energy to re-purpose the entire worldwide industrial system, as well as build vast new energy grids for wind and solar energy. The idea that this new economy reduces CO₂ emissions is simply not true – it has just been marketed as such. A new electric industrial framework in itself will still be very polluting to land, air, and water in virtually the same ways as the old framework as it creates more and more “product” to be marketed and sold, such as electric cars, which we are now incorrectly told is okay because its “green product.”

[…]

Via https://expose-news.com/2024/03/10/globalists-war-against-farming-and-food-security/

Chris Morrison

Bankrupt, blackout Britain where the ever-expanding ranks of the poor get clobbered, open borders place intolerable burdens on public spending and services, the rich spivs get richer backing heavily-subsidised energy white elephants – and those of a certain age look back to the good old days of the 1970s. That isn’t quite how Professor Gordon Hughes spells it out in his excellent new report that crunches the energy transition numbers of the collectivist Net Zero project, but it might be considered a fair summation of reading between the lines.

The insanity of Net Zero becomes clearer by the day. The idea that hydrocarbons – a natural resource whose use from medicines to reliable energy is ubiquitous in modern industrial society – can be removed within less than 30 years is ridiculous. In his report published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation, Professor Hughes concerns himself with the transition from hydrocarbons to ‘green’ technologies such as wind and solar. Forget all the politically-inspired low-ball figures of transition, he is suggesting. Looking at you, Climate Change Committee. It is likely that the amount of new investment needed for the transition will be a minimum of 5% of gross domestic product for the next 20 years, and might exceed 7.5%. Gordon Hughes is a former World Bank economist, and is Professor of Economics at the University of Edinburgh.

There is no chance of borrowing such an “astronomical” amount, notes Hughes, and the only viable way to raise the cash for new capital expenditure would be a two decades-long reduction in private consumption of up to 10%. “Such a shock has never occurred in the last century outside war, and even then never for more than a decade,” he notes.

Recent polling in the U.S. has shown that the desire of a majority of citizens to pay for Net Zero barely stretches to more than the ‘chump’ change in their back pockets. “Commitment to the energy transition is a classic ‘luxury belief’ held most strongly by those who are sufficiently well-off not to worry about the costs… Indeed at least some of those who promote the transition most strongly are among those who expect to gain from the business opportunities.” On this latter point, Hughes was possibly recalling the recent activities of rising media star Dale Vince (£110 million in wind subsidies to date, and counting).

Politicians sometimes blather about the pioneering role taken by European countries in Net Zero. Hughes points out that leaders in China and India are not fools. “Posturing about targets that are patently not achievable and might be economically ruinous is unlikely to convince anyone, although most will be too polite to point this out,” he observed.

Writing a foreword, Lord Frost identified a make-believe world inhabited by Net Zero proponents where it is claimed costs will magically come down, new technologies will somehow be invented and promised green growth will pay for everything. “But they never give any evidence for believing this – and, where we can check what they say, for example in the real costs of wind power, we can see that these cost reductions are simply not happening,” he said.

On the immigration front, Hughes notes a 1% increase in the British population every year. He notes that 4% of GDP must be invested every year in new (not replacement) capital per head. Of course nothing like this is being spent and capital per head is falling rapidly. “Just maintaining the amounts of capital per head will eat up an amount of investment equivalent to that required for the energy transition,” he states.

Squeezing domestic consumption, in other words making the already squeezed poor even poorer by removing all their remaining luxuries in life (older cars, cheap foreign holidays, meat), is the only realistic way to fund the enormous sums required for the Net Zero energy transition. Possibly a glimmer of reality is creeping into political circles with the opposition Labour party having gone through “agonies” and ditched its £28 billion a year green deal. “Clearly, they concluded that it was impossible to sell an increase in the tax burden of that magnitude to a reluctant electorate,” he said. In fact, the sums involved in the Labour plan were only a fifth of the estimated cost of transition.

Any future Government wishing to travel the path of Net Zero must make the choices of reducing public services and mandating savage cuts in household expenditure. Needless to say, the general population is in almost total ignorance about these realities. Hughes notes that the electorate has given no indication that they are willing to bear the costs involved. “Indeed until now all they have been told is that there are few or no trade-offs required, and technology will somehow magically solve everything.”

[…]

Via https://dailysceptic.org/2024/03/06/population-is-not-being-told-the-true-cost-of-net-zero-warns-former-world-bank-economist/

BIGSTOCK

Michael Cook

Newly leaked files from within the leading global transgender healthcare body have revealed that the clinicians who shape how “gender medicine” is regulated and practiced around the world consistently violate medical ethics and informed consent.

The leaked files from the internal messaging forum of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) were published this week by the US-based think tank Environmental Progress.

WPATH is considered the leading global scientific and medical authority on “gender medicine,” and in recent decades, its “standards of care” have guided the policies and practices of governments, medical associations, public health systems and private clinics across the world.

However, Environmental Progress claims that leaked files reveal that WPATH does not meet the standards of evidence-based medicine, and members frequently discuss improvising treatments as they go along. Members are fully aware that children and adolescents cannot comprehend the lifelong consequences of “gender-affirming care,” and in some cases, due to poor health literacy, neither can their parents.

“The WPATH Files show that what is called ‘gender medicine’ is neither science nor medicine,” said Michael Shellenberger, founder of Environmental Progress. “The experiments are not randomized, double-blind, or controlled. It’s not medicine since the first rule is to do no harm. And that requires informed consent.”

Some of the discussion appears very disturbing. Members appear to ignore long-term patient outcomes despite being aware of the debilitating and potentially fatal side effects of cross-sex hormones and other treatments. Messages in the files show that patients with severe mental health issues, such as schizophrenia and dissociative identity disorder, and other vulnerabilities such as homelessness, are being allowed to consent to hormonal and surgical interventions.

Members dismiss concerns about these patients and characterize efforts to protect them as unnecessary “gatekeeping.”

The leaked files provide clear evidence that doctors and therapists are aware they are offering minors life-changing treatments they cannot fully understand. WPATH members know that puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries will cause infertility and other complications, including cancer and pelvic floor dysfunction. Yet they consider life-altering medical interventions for young patients, including vaginoplasty for a 14-year-old and hormones for a developmentally delayed 13-year-old.

The WPATH Files also show how far medical experiments in gender medicine have gone, with discussions about surgeons performing “nullification” and other extreme body modification procedures to create body types that do not exist in nature.

A growing number of medical and psychiatric professionals say the promotion of pseudoscientific surgical and hormonal experiments is a global medical scandal that compares to major incidents of medical malpractice in history, such as lobotomies and ovariotomies.

A section in the report on medical ethics is particularly damning about the notion of autonomy. “In the past, the emphasis on autonomy in medical ethics was meant to act as a shield: there were things a doctor could not do to you without your consent,” says the report. “Nowadays, and especially in gender medicine, autonomy acts as a sword: in its name, there is nothing a doctor may deny you.”

The ”Trans Leaks” have not been reported yet by any major newspapers apart from The Telegraph (London) and Canada’s National Post. Dr Marci Bowers, the president of WPATH, issued a statement in which she contended that trans medicine is scientific and that sceptics aren’t:

“WPATH is and has always been a science- and evidence-based organization whose recommendations are widely endorsed by major medical organizations around the world. We are the professionals who best know the medical needs of trans and gender diverse individuals-and stand opposed to individuals who misrepresent and de-legitimize the diverse identities and complex needs of this population through scare tactics.”

The raw files have been published in a report called The WPATH Files: Pseudoscientific surgical and hormonal experiments on children, adolescents, and vulnerable adults. Journalist Mia Hughes puts the WPATH Files in the context of the best available science on gender distress.

[…]

Via https://bioedge.org/gender/transgender/leaked-files-from-transgender-experts-show-callous-disregard-for-medical-ethics/

Episode 38 Bonaparte in Egypt

Living the French Revolution and Age of Napoleon

Dr Suzanne M Desan

Film Review

Following his brilliant campaign in Italy, the Directory appointed General Napoleon Bonaparte to investigate a possible invasion of England. He decided it was more strategic to invade Egypt. According to Desan, the French first considered invading Egypt in 1763, following their defeat by the British in the Seven Years hope. Now they hoped it could replace St Domingue (which was on the verge of independence)* as source of sugar and coffee. They were already looking at building a canal at Suez between the Mediterranean and Red Sea and limiting Egypt’s role in the British trade route to India.

In May 1798, Napoleon set out with 30,000 troops, 30 ships and a 167-member scientific and artistic commission. As part of the vast Ottoman empire, Egypt was ruled by former Turkish slave soldiers from the Caucasus known as Mamluks.** Pursued by British admiral Horatio Nelson, Napoleon landed at at Aboukir Bay and led his men on a difficult 15-mile desert march to engage the somewhat smaller Mamluk army. Deploying his troops in large squares, a classic defense against a cavalry charge, Napoleon easily defeated them.

In the subsequent Battle of the Nile, Admiral Nelson used his naval fleet to surround Napoleon’s vessels in Aboukir Bay. Napoleon had no choice but to surrender after the British sank 21 French ships and killed 3,200 French sailors.

Despite his naval defeat, Napoleon continued to occupy Egypt, embarked on a total overhaul of the Egyptian government. Assisting its intellectual elites and Muslim and Coptic Christian leaders in setting up new republican councils (called divans), he tore down buildings to widen roads, set up hospitals, printing presses and communal ovens and reformed taxation and the Egyptian judicial system. He also used his 167 European scholars to set up the Institute of Egypt, to indoctrinate Egyptians in European liberalism. During his occupation one of his soldiers discovered an ancient basalt slab inscribed in Greek and Egyptian hieroglyphics which came to be known as the Rosetta Stone.

In October 1798, the people of Alexandria revolted against Napoleon’s new taxes and he suppressed the insurrection by firing on the civilian population with hi canons.

In 1799, he marched his troop east towards Syria, hoping to launch a preemptive strike on the Ottoman troops. When the city of Jaffa (in modern day Israel) refused to surrender, he also bombarded them with canon fire and executed 2500 prisoners of war.

Leaving his officers and the bulk of his troops to govern Egypt, he returned to France to be welcomed as a great hero. He used his uncanny skill at self-promotion to conceal what actually happened in Egypt, with his numerous publications about Egyptian culture leading to the first wave of European Egyptomania.

In 1801, a British/Ottoman coalition would drive the last of Napoleon’s troops out of Egypt.

*See The French Revolution Leads to Revolution in Haiti

**See Mongol Invasion of the Islamic World