7 Oct 2020

With COVID-19 rates rising, Massachusetts officials push to reopen schools and businesses

Andrew Timon


Last Thursday marked the opening of public schools in Boston, Massachusetts, for in-person learning for high-need students, despite rising numbers of COVID-19 cases in the city and state. Despite the reservations of teachers over school building safety, the Boston Teachers Union (BTU) joined with Mayor Marty Walsh, a Democrat, to open the schools.

This is a reckless policy that coincides with Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker’s order, which began Monday, for the state to move forward with Step 2, Phase 3 of its reopening plan in communities that have not been in the “red zone” (over 8 cases per 100,000) in three weeks. This permits restaurants to serve parties of up to 10 indoors and seat patrons at bars, as well as loosening restrictions on indoor gyms, libraries and performance venues, allowing for 50 percent capacity up to a maximum of 250 people.

Two epidemiologists have urged Baker, a Republican, to reconsider his reopening policies as cases and hospitalizations continue to increase across the state. While the virus has no respect for “community boundaries,” it is clear that even under the previous guidelines of Step 2, Phase 2, viral transmission had been quickly spiraling out of control.

Daily COVID-19 cases in Massachusetts surpassed 700 for two consecutive days last week, and the three-day average of hospitalized COVID patients increased from 308 on September 14 to 442 on October 4. Positivity rates, which have climbed to 5.4 percent of first-tested individuals and 1.7 percent of total tests, have been steadily increasing since late August, as colleges and now public schools have reopened.

In the weeks leading up to this resurgence of cases, tactics of misrepresenting data were used by Governor Baker, Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) Commissioner Jeff Riley, and the Boston Globe, among others, to push for schools to open despite knowing full well that another wave in cases was on the horizon.

An increase of new testing by private colleges—which out-tested the state, more than doubling the total number of tests given, and testing students every few days—artificially lowered the overall positivity rate, even as cases began to increase. This allowed the troubling trend of an increasing positivity rate and the slow uptick in cases to fly under the radar, and was used as a bludgeon by Walsh, Baker, Riley and other officials to push for school and other business re-openings, regardless of the increasing cases.

The artificially low positivity rate of 0.8–1.1 percent, a “key metric” used by the state, and touted by the Globe as the “lowest observed figure for that metric,” was used as a counterweight to high absolute numbers of new cases.

Public schools will undoubtedly become a significant vector for transmission in the coming months. According to the Globe, between September 23 and 30, 63 students and 34 staff members who have been inside school buildings have already tested positive for COVID-19. These figures are an understatement of the real numbers, as they represent only cases reported to the state by school districts themselves, while state education officials are not tracking cases.

It was known in the very early stages of the pandemic, as well as from previous viral outbreaks, that only a comprehensive application of testing, contact tracing and social distancing measures in combination could effectively stop the virus. This can be seen, on the one hand, in the ineffectiveness in controlling the virus in locales that have locked down in some capacity, but invested next to nothing in testing, contact tracing and proper health care; and, on the other hand, in the situation at the most prestigious Boston-area colleges and universities, where despite investing in new facilities, robust testing and contact tracing, social distancing is not possible due to classroom and dorm conditions.

For example, the total number of cases at Boston College (BC) stood recently at 174 out of roughly 10,000 students reportedly on campus, meaning that 1.75 percent of the population has been infected since August 16, when testing began. If this percentage were applied to Massachusetts as a whole, with a population of 6.8 million, it would translate into nearly 120,000 cases in a 45-day period. In the microcosms of schools, even those with robust testing such as BC, transmission is occurring at a rate far above the state average as a whole.

Despite these facts, schools and businesses across the state are reopening, with cases poised to explode into the thousands within weeks. Wealthy universities such as Harvard and MIT, despite possessing billions of dollars in investments, are insisting on having some type of on-campus presence in order to keep the cash flowing.

DESE Commissioner Riley, who recently sent a threatening letter to 16 Massachusetts school districts demanding that they reopen for in-person learning, said in an interview last Friday, “We’re always going to be monitoring the trajectory of the virus and the data, and while we’re still low now, even with a recent uptick, we’ll be monitoring the data throughout the year to see where we are and what [the] next steps [are].”

Riley is expecting cases to surge at schools, but pushing them to open regardless. In the interview, he reiterated the guideline that DESE recommends remote learning only for municipalities receiving a “red designation three weeks in a row on the color-coded metric unless other extenuating circumstances prevent in-person instruction” (emphasis added).

He said the previously mentioned weekly summary of coronavirus cases at schools should not be used to decide whether to close or reopen schools. “I don’t think this data is used for decision-making purposes,” he said. “This is really used for just transparency purposes, so families know where cases are occurring,” which means that the 63 students and 34 staff members already infected in one week of schools reopening should have no bearing on schools remaining open or shifting to remote learning.

With 92 total cases in the state in early March, Baker called a state of emergency, the state was shut down, schools were closed, and gatherings of 10 or more people were prohibited. With no serious investments made by state and federal authorities to do what was necessary to stop the virus, the ruling elite focused instead on bailing out the banks and bolstering the stock market. A policy of “herd immunity” has been implemented, with the aim of “normalizing” the virus so that days of 700-plus cases in Massachusetts warrant no cause for alarm while schools and businesses reopen. Workers, teachers and students do not support these policies, but are being systematically lied to by the Democrats and Republicans and their supporters in the media.

Teachers, workers and students, who are being forced into unsafe environments under conditions of growing cases, must organize independently of the two big business parties and the unions that have agreed to these conditions. The Educators Rank-and-File Safety Committee is fighting to build a nationwide network of independent rank-and-file safety committees to stop these deadly policies from being implemented in every state and across the globe.

6 Oct 2020

WHO IARC Postdoctoral Fellowships 2021/2023

Application Deadline: 30th November 2020.

About the Award: Over more than 50 years, the IARC Fellowship Programme has trained more than 600 rigorously selected early career scientists from more than 80 countries. Since 2005, IARC Postdoctoral Fellowships have been tenable only at the Agency. For this call, only early career scientists from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are eligible to apply.

Eligible Field(s): Candidates are required to prepare their research proposal in line with IARC’s three emerging priorities, as stated below:

  1. Evolving cancer risk factors and populations in transition: IARC host Section/Group: Cancer Surveillance (CSU), Genetic Epidemiology (GEP), Genetic Cancer Susceptibility (GCS), Biomarkers (BMA), Nutritional Epidemiology (NEP), Nutritional Methodology and Biostatistics (NMB), Epigenetics (EGE), Molecular Mechanisms and Biomarker (MMB), Environment and Radiation (ENV), Infections and Cancer Epidemiology (ICE)
  2. Implementation research: IARC host Section/Group: Environment and Radiation (ENV), Infections and Cancer Epidemiology (ICE)Nutritional Epidemiology (NEP), Prevention and Implementation (PRI), Screening (SCR), Infections and Cancer Biology (ICB)
  3. Economic and societal impacts of cancer: IARC host Section/Group: Cancer Surveillance (CSU), Genetic Epidemiology (GEP), Nutritional Epidemiology (NEP), Nutritional Methodology and Biostatistics (NMB), Environment and Radiation (ENV), Screening (SCR)

Proposals focusing on cancer and COVID-19 will also be considered (IARC host Section: Cancer Surveillance (CSU)).

Interdisciplinary projects are encouraged. Candidates should contact the IARC Host Group of their choice before applying in order to interact closely to establish a research proposal of mutual interest, within the framework of the above-mentioned research areas. For each Section/Group precise contact information is available in “General information” under the “Staff” tab: http://www.iarc.fr/en/research-groups/index.php).

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: Only candidates from LMIC are eligible (according to the World Bank Classification list). All candidates are required to have finished their doctoral degree within five years of the closing date for application, or must be in the final year of their doctoral degree (their degree must have been awarded by the time of starting their Fellowship). Candidates with a MD are also eligible to apply on condition that their research experience can be considered equivalent to that of a candidate with a doctoral degree. The working languages at IARC are English and French. Candidates must be proficient in English at a level sufficient for scientific communication. Candidates currently at IARC as fully-funded postdoctoral scientists, or candidates who have been at the Agency as a postdoctoral scientist or a doctoral student for a period greater than six months, cannot be considered.

Eligible Countries: Low & Middle-income Countries (LMICs)

To be Taken at (Country): Fellowships are tenable at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France. 

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award:

  • Fellowships should be taken up before the end of 2021 (flexibility will be granted according to the global health situation).
  • The current IARC postdoctoral stipend is € 2,820 per month.
  • The cost of travel for the successful candidate, and in certain circumstances for dependants, will be met, a dependant’s allowance and a training allowance paid, and health insurance covered, within IARC’s maximum liability.
  • Depending on certain conditions, Fellows from LMIC countries will be able to apply for an IARC return grant of max. € 10,000 during the second year of their Fellowship in order to start up an independent research programme linked to IARC’s activities upon return to their LMI country of origin.

Duration of Award: The fellowship is for a period of two years (a brief interim report during the 1st year of the Fellowship as well as a final report at the end will be required).

How to Apply: Applications are to be submitted online by 30 November 2020.

  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

The Kennedy-Lugar Youth Exchange and Study (YES) Scholarship Program 2021/2022

Application Deadline: Varies by Country

About the Award: The U.S. Department of State established the Kennedy-Lugar Youth Exchange and Study (YES) program in October 2002 in recognition of the importance of youth exchange as a key component to build bridges between citizens of the U.S. and countries around the world. The program is funded by the U.S. Department of State and provides scholarships for high school students from countries with significant Muslim populations to attend high school in the U.S., live with an American host family, and serve as “youth ambassadors” for their home countries.

YES students spend one academic semester in the U.S. from August to December 2021.

Type: Short course

Eligibility:

  • Applicants must be citizens and not dual citizens or permanent residents of the U.S., or eligible countries;
  • Candidates must be between 15 and 17 years of age on August 01, 2020; have a date of birth between August 1, 2003, and August 1, 2005
  • Candidates must be currently enrolled in grades 8-11 in any high school and/or college in their country.
  • Applicants must be proficient in written and spoken English at a level sufficient to engage in high school-level courses;
  • Students must have a B grade point average or better, without any failing grades in the present year, and past two years;
  • Applicants must be able to meet U.S. J1 visa eligibility requirements;
  • Neither parent works at the U.S. Mission (U.S. Embassy, USAID).
  • Be able to accurately present their culture in American schools and communities.
  • Be committed to returning to their home countries upon completion of the program and completing a two-year home residency requirement.
  • Demonstrate leadership skills.
  • Have little or no prior study or travel experience in the United States or elsewhere outside of their home country.
  • Be willing and able to fully participate in an intensive academic program, community service, and educational travel for one academic year.
  • Be prepared to adapt to American high school life and to live with an American host family.
  • Be mature, responsible, independent, confident, open-minded, tolerant, thoughtful and inquisitive.
  • Be willing and able to fully participate in an intensive academic program, community service, and educational travel program; and, be comfortable with campus life, prepared to share living accommodations, and able to make adjustments to cultural and social practices different from those of their home country.

Eligible Countries:

  • Albania
  • Bahrain
  • Bangladesh
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Bulgaria
  • Cameroon
  • Egypt
  • Gaza
  • Ghana
  • India
  • Indonesia
  • Israel (Arab Communities)
  • Jordan
  • Kenya
  • Kosovo
  • Kuwait
  • Lebanon
  • Liberia
  • Libya
  • Malaysia
  • Mali
  • Morocco
  • Mozambique
  • Nigeria
  • North Macedonia
  • Pakistan
    • Philippines
    • Saudi Arabia
    • Senegal
    • Sierra Leone
    • South Africa
    • Suriname
    • Tanzania
    • Thailand
    • Tunisia
    • Turkey
    • West Bank
    • Yemen

To be Taken at (Country): USA

Number of Awards: Numerous

Value & Duration of Award:

  • Round-trip airfare from your home country to the United States.
  • The cost of a Pre-Departure Orientation.
  • Placement with a U.S. host family for 10 to 11 months.
  • A modest monthly stipend.
  • Health insurance.
  • The cost of program activities and materials

How to Apply: Select your country here & apply

  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

German Development Bank (KFW) Masters Scholarships 2021/2022

Application Deadline: 22nd October 2020, 17:00 hours, East Africa Time

Eligible Countries: Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda.

To be Taken at (Country): EAC Partner State other than their country of citizenship

Field(s) of Study: 1) Mathematics, 2) Engineering, 3) Informatics, 4) Science, 5) Technology and 6) Business Science.

About the Award: Applications are invited for the above named scholarship programme supported by the German Development Bank (KFW) in collaboration with the East African Community (EAC) and implemented by the Inter-University Council for East Africa (IUCEA). The goal of this initiative is to contribute towards training leaders that will foster EAC regional integration.

Applicants are expected to study in countries other than their own in selected universities and programmes. Successful applicants will  be offered a comprehensive package including scholarships for the masters programmes, internships, mentoring, networking events and further leadership training activities. The scholarship will support masters students in Mathematics, Engineering, Informatics, Science, Technology and Business Science programmes. IUCEA hereby invites applications from students who are citizens of the East African Community (EAC) Partner States to apply for the KFW funded Masters Scholarships.

Type: Masters

Selection Criteria: The minimum requirements for qualification for the programme are:

  1. Be a citizen of a partner state of the East African Community;
  2. Possess the required academic qualifications for admission to the programme (at least at the level of Upper Second Class Honours or “Distinction” as applicable;
  3. Submit a motivation letter in English (with not more than 500 words) as follows:
  • well written (grammatically and professionally)
  • Demonstrates a convincing motivation for wanting to pursue the Master’s Programme chosen          
  • Adequately demonstrates the applicant’s foreseen professional engagement in the EAC Integration agenda after completing the Master’s Programme
  • Demonstrates how they expect to apply the acquired skills and knowledge from the Master’s Programme to contribute to the EAC Integration Agenda
  • Demonstrates where they anticipate to see themselves professionally and academically in 5 and 10 years.

Note: This has to be one letter

i. Be below 35 years of age; and
ii. Have obtained an admission from a university in another country in the EAC Region other than their own.

Number of Awards: 60

Value of Award: The project offers financial support to academically skilled and disadvantaged Master’s students with the main focus on priority areas. Women and persons with disabilities are encouraged to join the programme.

The scholarship covers:

  1. University tuition fees: payable directly to the university according to an official invoice;
  2. Stipend: EUR380 per month to support living expenses including housing, food, utilities, local transportation and settlement expenses;
  3. Allowances for study materials and research: EUR 1,500 one-off allowance;
  4. Medical insurance; and
  5. Extracurricular events: at least one event per year.

Duration of Award: 2 years

How to Apply: See in Award Webpage Link (below)

  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Japanese Government (MEXT) Scholarship 2021/2022

Application Deadline: 30th October 2020

Type: Master, PhD

Eligibility: International students with outstanding academic records (*1) who wish to enter Japan in September, 2021 as a new student (*2) to study in the Master’s or Doctoral Program at the Graduate School of Science.

  • (*1) Applicants who have already graduated from their latest degree program should have a final grade point of 2.30 or higher, while current students should have a grade point of 2.30 or higher for their current courses, and both should be expected to maintain the same academic standards during the course of the scholarship program.
    * Grade points shall be calculated according to a formula specified by MEXT.
    Furthermore, students must meet one of the criteria given under “(7) Language Proficiency” given below.
  • (*2) Please refer to (11) Non-eligibility 5. to confirm your eligibility.

Eligible Countries: International (To see the list of priority nationalities, please click here).

To be Taken at (Country): Japan

Number of Awards: The number of applicants to be nominated by the Graduate School of Science to the University of Tokyo, as well as the number to be subsequently nominated by the University of Tokyo to MEXT, shall be finalized after the application period has closed. In the last round (application for 2020 entrance) each Graduate School was allowed to nominate at most one applicant, and the University of Tokyo was allowed to nominate at most three applicants to MEXT.

Value of Award:

  • Allowance
  • Traveling Costs
  • School Fees

Duration of Award: For a recipient who will enroll in a Master’s Program or Doctoral Program, the scholarship will be payable for the standard period of time necessary for the recipient to complete his or her program (standard course term), starting from October 2021.

  • Master’s Program = October, 2021 – September, 2023 (2years)
  • Doctoral Program = October, 2021 – September, 2024 (3years)

(2)Extension of the Scholarship Period

How to Apply: Applicants must send in the required documents for MEXT Scholarship as well as complete their admission application for entering the Master’s/Doctoral Program, following the “Instruction for Graduate School Application for International Students”.

  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Politics, Religion, Abortion, Use of Force and the Will of God

Scott Owen


There is in this world of concepts, ideas, and theories hardly any more absurd and therefore dangerous notion, than the idea of forced patriotism or forced religion. History is absolutely overwhelmed with tales of the horror and ultimate futility of those who attempted to force religion and politics onto others, others that is, who were simply living their lives according to their own ways and manners. As far back as written history can take us we find the pain and anguish dealt out onto those unfortunate “others” by the ones who felt that it was their place in life to impose their beliefs on mankind. Being expansionists these dominators have pushed their politics, their religion and their grand schemes of conquering nature and building monuments for themselves, their government, their religion, customs and fashions on anyone that they could. There are those who were coerced or enslaved into their service, and for those who would not comply, they were subjected to ostracism, torture and death.

As we study, we have seen in both ancient and recent history, the brutality of political ideologues across the world. Some have been attached to recognized religious organizations and some, as in the communist regimes of the USSR and China, were not so aligned, instead making the idolatry of the state the belief system that the oppressors recognized as the supreme entity. From the walls of Babylon to the wall being constructed on the Southern line of the US border, empires have demanded, when they could, obedience to the king or the commander. Throughout history more often than not, religion in one form or the other, assisted government in controlling power and people. Being tightly interwoven with kingdoms and empires, they survive and thrive for a time, in a mutual relationship where the king commands the body of his servants and slaves while the church takes charge to own the immortal soul of those in captivity.

The state made its earthly bargain with the people and religion promised the spiritual. While both employed the carrot and the stick, where the promise of the carrot failed the hard reality of the stick was close behind. As social creatures, the benefit of a life lived in the security and company of others was and is easy to see and understand. Life in any village however requires a certain respect and consideration towards the others and some compromise will surely occur, but living together does not need to be confused with forced patriotism, which is a mental exercise rather than a necessary social construct. Religion too is a mental experience that need not be forced on anyone by society in that freedom to worship is not a social function either, there is no need to compromise or conform in belief unless crossed by someone who’s religion suggests that they should force that belief system on another. But after thousands of years of the unholy alliance between religion and the state, many people today would have a difficult time telling where government ends and religion begins, and an equally difficult time in finding the mental freedom to live independently of those alliances forced in the name of patriotism and religion. The indoctrination of children in many homes begins immediately which completes another form of force, the forcing of ideas and standards through the most subtle device, which is simple education and cultural transference of ideas and customs. It takes an unusual effort to free the mind from such indoctrination and a good bit of wisdom and luck when attempting to live free of governmental or religious persecution.

For our present purpose let’s focus on European governments and the Christian church so we might explore, study and understand the lead-up to our situation here in the US and in some cases, around the world in the year 2020.

Jesus was born in Nazareth which was a small village in Galilee which, in turn was part of ancient Palestine which had been under Babylonian, Egyptian, Israeli, Persian, Greek and Roman control at various times. At the time of Jesus, Galilee was a Roman territory with a Roman king, Herod Antipas.
The Roman Empire was quite extensive and as extensive modern day empires are prone to do, a ruler, governor or king would be established to lord over an area. As long as the locals stayed within the Roman law and accepted their subservience to the Empire things went along in relative peace. This is the Pax Romania which became a model for future empires such as the modern US Empire.

Jesus arrives on the scene, born in Bethleham and decides to take on the Jewish authorities much like the prophets before him and much like Martin Luther would do some 1500 years later when he brought the Reformation to the doors of the Catholic Church. Leaving the mysterious elements of the Christ in Jesus behind for a moment we can examine the life of Jesus from a political perspective. Although Jesus was not a political reformer as such his human existence would end because of a political question that was put forth by the Jewish leaders who were quite political in both their internal and external affairs, using the power and force of Rome to silence Jesus the religious reformer. Jesus’s message to the Jewish authorities of his time was much like the calls for reformation through history up to the present time. Jesus called out the hypocrisy of authoritarian rulers within the Jewish community for placing their faith and trust in man-made laws, social hierarchies, rituals and customs while forgetting the true nature of the God that the Jews claimed to worship, the God of Love. Jesus criticized the Jewish authorities for putting their man-made kingdom above Gods kingdom. Jesus then sealed his fate by declaring a very ancient notion that he and this God of Love were of one mind and one body. This outraged the Jewish authorities who in their own vanity had forgotten that according to their own tradition, they too were the Sons and Daughters of the great Jehovah. For this impudence, or blaspheme as they called it, Jesus was hauled before the Roman court where they asked that Jesus should be put to death. And he was.

At the time of his death, the followers or friends of Jesus evidently were numbered in the hundreds along with those 11 disciples who remained. They tried to carry-on as a small group of now rebellious outsiders or “believers” as they seem to have called themselves, and were hunted down by the authorities for those beliefs. This is where the more mysterious elements of the Jesus story kick in with the believers talk of the resurrected Jesus ascending into heaven. This small group of believers then was and still is “the Church of Jesus Christ”.

From what we know, Jesus left no instructions for his church other than that they should love each other, love their neighbors and love Their God. Some think that Jesus established his church around St. Peter because of his saying in reference to Peter, “Upon this rock I will build my church”, but that is not to say that Peter was to build up an organization that would become “The Church”. It was the rock of Peter’s faith, the faith that Jesus saw in Peter that the church was to be built upon, not on Peters position as an authority figure.

Paul of Taursus then joins the procession making himself a self-declared leader of the church and proceeds, along with Peter to do the ever so human task of attempting to control the church, to build-up an organization that is. Even then there was talk of division and anti-christ elements with the church (And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God; and such is the spirit of Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come, and even now already it is in the world. 1 John 4:3) and between that and the persecution that began to follow these Christian rebels the natural splintering of the group began with some taking positions of authority while other, more independently minded, non-political Christians faded into the background.

As social and religious rebels are often used, Christians of all sorts were then scapegoated for any number of reasons and having no earthly protections and no friends among the ruling class they became the prey of the empire and suffered greatly for their belief. This persecution that they were enduring brought them together spiritually but also forced them underground just as you might see in any group that is being persecuted by the ruling class.

In 324 AD after a civil war within the Roman Empire, Constantine became the Emperor of Rome. Although he lived most of his life as a Pagan he converted to Christianity on his deathbed. Before his own conversion Constantine had already come to the aid of the persecuted Christians. He helped in promoting the Edict of Milan in 313, he produced what is known as the Nicene Creed which was a record of Christian belief, he committed himself to the building of The Church of the Holy Scelpechur and gave power over the Western Empire to the pope. With this “Donation of Constatine” as it was called we had the beginnings of the alliance between the Roman Empire and the Church of Jesus, referred to still to this day, as The Holy Roman Empire. With this unholy alliance between the Roman Empire and what was then going about as The Christian Church we had our first Christian government and the corruption of the church, the anti-christ that is, came into power.

The history of the Holy Roman Empire and what came to be known as the Catholic Church is long and hard, from corruption to corruption from terror to terror. It is an organization that could hardly if ever be associated with Jesus of Galilee, the man who died on the cross for challenging the authorities of his day, even unto his death. The Catholic Church corrupted both the teachings of Jesus and the spirit of Jesus taking those spiritual things and turning them into false idols of silver, gold, brick and mortar, and corrupted teachers of men, power brokers and lovers of empire rather than lovers of God.

This new alliance of church and state ran roughshod over most all of Europe right up until the Reformation of Martin Luther whose goal was to free Christians from papal authority and what was seen as corruption throughout the church. This reformation was in part an answer to the inquisitions that were taking place as the Catholic Church saw people pulling away from the corruption of their Church, searching for a less cumbersome, less authoritarian church that would go back to the simpler teachings of Jesus, a church outside of the Holy Roman Empire and theoretically, closer to the original teachings of Jesus.

But by now the corruption had run deep, very deep and the liberty and free relationship between man and God taught by Jesus was now buried under loads of dogma and the tendency to rely on the works and teachings of men rather than the pure connection of heart and mind that was exhibited by Jesus Christ. There is no record of any but the major historical personalities throughout all this time but I find it so very easy to imagine a church of Jesus Christ that was running under the attention and notice of the Emperors, popes and protestant reformers of those times. As you will find today if you venture out to those un-safe places, under bridges and on the streets where you will meet them, there is a church that is as strong and faithful as any you will ever find. There is throughout the world, a body of believers in Jesus Christ. They have no temples, no popes or pastors, no clergy, no schools or fundraisers, no hierarchy, no earthly power and no corruption. If you ever hand some money to some beggar on some street corner and they look you in the eye and say to you, God bless you, you will have met one of these ones.

The Doctrine of Discovery and the Conquest of the World:
The joining of Church and State had many consequences for day to day life and those “commoners” who fell under its power as governments, now with religious authority backing their military authority, which was backed by both real violence and threats of violence from those same powers and principalities. All this must have been taken in stride, as much and as often as was possible, as it still is today by non-power seeking regular type people, but as Europeans began to stretch out to explore and conquer the world, they took with them the support of their governments and the blessing of the Church in the form of The Doctrine Of Discovery.

The Doctrine of Discovery was a series of papal bulls or decrees that according to historical records first stared taking shape sometime around 1100. In 1455 pope Nicholas issued the Romanus Pontifix giving Portugal a monopoly over all of African trade which “legally” started the trading of human slaves. In 1493 pope Alexander gave the world the Inter Caetera which gave the kings of Europe legal authority over Africa, Asia, Australia, New Zealand and the Americas. These decrees from the various popes involved, essentially gave European monarchs under the authority of the Roman Church, the blessing and “legal” protection of The Church as they sent their explorers out into the world to conquer and dominate in the name of The Church. This doctrine gave the European monarchs the license to subjugate and murder millions of indigenous people across the globe and has never been recanted by the monarchs or the Church.

As protestants migrated crossed the seas, some seeking freedom from religious and government oppression as we were taught in our public schools they in large part, left behind the authority of popes and kings but they held onto the ideology and the by then, broadly accepted doctrines of the church and state which allowed them in their hearts and minds the conquest of these millions and millions of indigenous peoples who were, like the recently murdered Breonna Taylor, in their own homes minding their own business. The Church by now has moved so far away from the teachings of Jesus that it has become the habitat and tool of every kind of devil ever imagined by those who watch for devils.

As the framers of the US constitution began their work they took care to leave in place, without coming right out and saying it, the idea that if someone was not a convert to Christianity in some form or the other, a heathen or savage as they suddenly became called, it was perfectly fine to steal their land, rob their children, rape their wives and murder anyone who stood in their way. It was commonly understood that these newly transplanted Europeans had the heavenly ordained right and privilege to conquer, in whatever manner necessary, the entire world, their only obstacle to complete domination would be the competing powers and principalities within their own sphere of European influence.

In 1823 as new countries were forming with the conquest of Central and South America, freeing themselves from mostly Spanish, Portuguese and French authority, James Monroe the 5th president of the US decided to put an end to threats of further European intrusion in the Western hemisphere but it was also made clear that the US would not interfere in European conquest in other parts of the world. The US by this time has fully cemented its right to own and dominate the entire Western hemisphere under a new flag and a new religion which was the combination of old European Catholic and Protestant religions joined together with the newly developed Enlightenment movement promoted by modern Europeans and Americas founding fathers. The idea of manifest destiny has now taken full root in the Western mind giving Europeans a guilt free path to conquer and dominate.

Unfortunately the actions of these newly enlightened ones did not match the rhetoric of their proclamations which rightly called for liberty and justice for all and for religious freedom on the conquered land they now possessed through various means. These declarations, as we know, though beautifully written did not recognize the freedom of more than half of the world’s population, leaving out the natives, all men but the white European men themselves, and leaving in subjugation all women from every background and culture. The hypocrisy of the United States was effectively canonized by both the Declaration of Independence and further established by the Monroe Doctrine. The Protestant and Catholic churches in the Western hemisphere, now fully established and powerful in their own right went along, hand in hand, with this ideology and have continued to support it except in a few cases such as the abolitionist movements and in some fringe elements of today’s modern church. The Church therefore, as it is commonly understood and accepted, is completely outside of Christian teaching when in support of these governments and anti-Christ doctrines.

It’s no secret that we are today facing a turmoil and disagreement that is tearing the United States apart and not in some clearly defined line like the old Mason/Dixon line that separated the Northern states from the Southern states. The line in today’s division is not so much geographical or political in that old sense of the word, as it is an ideological separation and because of those who make it so, it is also a religious battle. By that I mean those who by their own admission state that their overall point of view and point of action, is based on their religious beliefs.

In the US that would predominantly mean what is called the Evangelical Christian Church which is composed of Christians from most every denomination, both Catholic and protestant. In particular, where religion meets today’s politics, that group is represented in the person of Donald Trump with Mike Pence standing back and standing by in solidarity like some ghoulish specter cautiously waiting while observing the Mad Man going about his task of destroying the country in the name of God. These men are the current champions of the religious right, a place formerly held by George Bush who had his picture on the cover of popular magazines praying to the God of these “Christians”. Trump and Pence were brought into power in large part by and through the works of what is called Dominion politics. Dominion politics is on full display on the sorely overlooked Christian radio programs being broadcast on the public airwaves across the US. The belief that drives this movement is that we are living in what is commonly described as “the end times” and that it is the duty of these Dominionists to make the world right for Jesus before he returns, to set the stage and usher in the time as described in The Revelation of Saint John. The political ramification is then that their idea of what constitutes preparing the way for Jesus overrides any constitution because as they will tell you, Jesus is The Lord and they are his servants.

So what we are witnessing here in the US is not only an attempt to overthrow the constitution but also the very idea of a democratic republic such as our own in that in their eyes, Jesus is Lord, not found in the individual man or a majority of the nation represented by a constitutionally bound congress, court or executive. This is taking religion over government in a most obvious and abusive manner. You can find and may have seen in this country, church flagpoles with the flag of these dominionists flying above the American flag as a statement of their earthly priorities.

So above and beyond that, as we consider this movement in both the political and the religious sphere, some might be critical of the way in which these fanatics are attempting to continue the overthrow and own the Christian Church. According to Christian theology, Christians are to be in a state of prayerful waiting for salvation with and through their faith in Jesus. As Christians they are not burdened with the task of building on Earthly Kingdoms or with the job of setting the stage for Armageddon. This all too human desire to conquer and dominate again goes completely against Christian teaching as dominating the US government with religious ideology goes completely against constitutional law.

Jesus himself was offered the kingdoms of the world by Satan. (Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to Him, “All these things I will give you if you will fall down and worship me.”

 Then Jesus said to him, “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only will you shall serve.”)

Jesus refused power over the kingdoms of this world as his purpose was not to become a mere earthly king but the salvation of mankind through redemption and grace, through faith and love, a returning to the Godhead by the people. God’s kingdom was not to be based on the avarice and prideful passions of men or on strategically built governments and empires that relied on the use of force to bring the heathen into submission. For if there is anyone who would know the futility of trying to achieve salvation through the building of empires and the laws of government, it would be this One we so inadequately refer to as God. Because even you and I in our great ignorance of knowing all things to be known, know that you cannot force anyone to love something that they do not love. It is impossible to force a love of country or a love of God onto anyone, simply impossible.

Submission cannot be mistaken for love, and patriotism and religion both require true, un-pretended, un-forced love to be patriotism or religion at all. Our all too human “fore-fathers” were onto something when they wrote the separation of church and state into our Constitution, they were onto the idea and the concept that men must come to their religion, to their “enlightenment” that is through the processes of logic and reason in each individual heart and mind. The ideas of Jefferson at least, whose ideas won the day when establishing the separation of church and state, were that men were basically good and that given room to explore, examine, be educated and then to reflect and act on logic and reason, that they would, under their own power of thinking, grow closer to truth, which would bring us better living societies, which would then bring us closer to our Creator. This idea or philosophy is of course not unique to Jefferson though we can certainly thank him for being sure that it was included in the overall philosophy and laws of the new country they were trying to form.

This philosophy was also promoted by such social and religious thinkers as Dr. M. L. King Jr. when he spoke of the Arc of Justice and then by the entire discourse of The Bible itself as it presents to the reader a story that moves through time, from man’s creation to his fall from grace and awakening to the knowledge of good and evil, to his ultimate reunion with God. So God himself has allowed for the growth and experience that brings a person to him and the reunion is not something contrived or forced and certainly not forced by the hands of preachers, kings or tyrants.

Let’s move now to something more specific, let’s look at one of those chronically divisive issues in the Country, abortion. The debate behind this issue is both political and religious as it is presented by some and often understood by many. This issue is the driving force behind those Evangelist Christians and Dominionists that are attempting a political coup in the USA. I believe that this anti-abortion stance, though inciting true feelings of concern in many people, is purely a political move by Dominionist Republicans made to draw power to their Dominionist Republican power play and cause.

As we do with so many of our day to day challenges, we tend to think of abortion as a modern-day problem but it is not anything new. Abortions have been a fact of life going back to those days before the recording of history. In Roman history for instance we find the commonly accepted practice of leaving unwanted children to the unsympathetic power of nature. Destroying children with deformities or handicaps was recommended by such figures as Cicero and Aristotle who wanted this infanticide to be required by law. It is evident that the woman who was capable of bearing children was considered more important or necessary to society than any particular child she might produce.

Abortions were, as they still are, dangerous, even possibly deadly for the woman who might have one so it’s conceivable that bringing a child to full term and birth may have been preferred to abortions. In Jewish law killing a baby still inside the womb by another in an act of violence was punished by demanding a fine but for a woman to abort her own child it was “if a woman travails to give birth [and it is feared she may die], one may sever the fetus from her womb and extract it, member by member, for her life takes precedence over his” (Oho. 7:6). This is the case only as long as the fetus has not emerged into the world, when it is not a life at all and “it may be killed and the mother saved” (Rashi and Meiri, Sanh. 72b). Jewish law as generally understood, did not think of a fetus as being fully human until its head emerged from the womb.

In the US abortions have been legal across the country since January of 1973 when the Supreme Court decided the case of Roe versus Wade where it was decided that a woman’s right to privacy was guaranteed under the 14th amendment to the constitution. Before that time, during those days of very little over-sight in women’s private affairs, during the time of highly independent pioneers and the necessary ability to take matters into one’s own hands, abortions were certainly an element of life but due to the puritanical custom of not discussing “delicate issues” and in the spirit of independence, it seems to have been mostly ignored by society especially by those pioneers who really did have to take matters into their own hands. The customs of those rough and ready pioneers had a major impact on the overall outlook and tendencies of American society right up until the 60s when, due to the influence of mass-media, and as the culture became more homogenous and then more heavily scrutinize due to proximity and social organization things began to change.

In “A Brief History of Abortion Law” we find that, “When US states did begin banning abortion in the 19th century, doctors seeking to drive out traditional healers, or in their words, quacks, often led the way. They had help from nativists who were concerned about women’s growing independence and the country’s growing diversity. Contemplating the colonization of the West and South in 1868, anti-abortion campaigner Dr. Horatio R. Storer asked if these frontiers would be “be filled by our own children or by those of aliens? This is a question our women must answer; upon their loins depends the future destiny of the nation.” Who would control those loins, and indeed whose childbearing is considered desirable, lay at the heart of regulations on abortion and contraception across the centuries.

The laws every state passed by 1880 banned abortions in all cases but for “therapeutic reasons” that were largely left up to the medical practice and the legal system to determine. In practice, that meant wealthier women with better access to doctors had abortions, while other women bled. “One stark indication of the prevalence of illegal abortion was the death toll,” writes Rachel Benson Gold of the Guttmacher Institute. “In 1930, abortion was listed as the official cause of death for almost 2,700 women—nearly one-fifth (18 percent) of maternal deaths recorded in that year.” Fatalities began decreasing with the advent of antibiotics to treat sepsis, but this too depended on one’s status. “In New York City in the early 1960s,” Benson Gold notes, “1 in 4 childbirth-related deaths among white women was due to abortion; in comparison, abortion accounted for 1 in 2 childbirth-related deaths among nonwhite and Puerto Rican women.”

A Brief History of Abortion Law by Irin Carmon

It is a fact that the survival rate for women in the US has greatly improved since modern medicine became widespread. It is also a fact that the number of abortions in the U.S. has been steadily decreasing after its peak in 1990. Statistics show that the number of reported abortions in 1973 was 615,831. There was a steady increase in the numbers up until the end of the decade where the numbers climbed to slightly over a million through the 80’s peaking out in 1990 at 1,429,247, then the numbers began to, just as steadily, drop down to 623,471 which 7,640 more abortions than what were counted in 1973. This might lead us to believe that after the initial freedom to abort was again legal and realized, we possibly began to do something right in providing both protections for women while simultaneously reducing the number of abortions, and indeed, we are! The reason the number of abortions is going down is because women are being liberated and empowered, socially, economically, personally and spiritually. As a whole new generation of women and a few men have come to understand and appreciate sexual freedom and sexual responsibility as a natural and normal fact of life and as the number of women who have become socially and financially independent has increased, the numbers of reported abortions have decreased and will likely continue to decrease as women and now men in statistically important numbers have accepted the responsibilities and learned to go the distance in assuring unwanted pregnancies even in sexually liberated times. From this we might discern that people, given the freedom and the tools to do what is best for them, and society, will at times, without coercion, choose to do just that. One of the bases of excuse for the invasion and US interference in other countries business is that by bringing democracy and modern customs to these places the women there will be liberated and empowered. Though no excuse for invading other countries the premise might be true so long as the modern day Christian Dominionists are kept out.

So we find, when looking into our own programs, and having had legal abortions and laws against abortions is that the very best way to end abortions is to end unwanted pregnancies, of this there is no doubt and no argument against the truth of the fact. Likewise, the best way to lower the number of unwanted pregnancies is to empower women. Women who have the benefit of healthy, secure, free and supportive societies are quite capable of making wise decisions regarding pregnancy and birth. For in a woman’s life, there is perhaps no more consequential act than that of bearing a child and raising it into adulthood. Women who face the abuse and trials of rape, incest, poverty, domestic violence, discrimination and the host of other challenges peculiar to women have reason enough to need a way out of an un-wanted or even impossible pregnancy.

There are also of course, times, places, circumstances and situations when a woman gladly welcomes and even pursues a chance to bring a baby into this world. None of this is new either, there have always been those times when a woman might desire a pregnancy and other times when they do not, the challenge then is that women will have children when they want children and that they will not have children when they don’t want children.

This complex situation, as some might have it, is not about freedom in sexuality, permissiveness or a general decay of morals. We know with just a short glance at human sexual patterns and tendencies that there have been very few people in this world at this or any other time that had sex only for the purpose of having a child. This includes both women and men who most unfortunately, horribly even, are not both held to the same level of responsibility where sex and pregnancies are concerned. Further to the point of a woman’s right to choose pregnancy or not, even after men have dropped the cavalier and irresponsible attitude, even when some level of shared responsibility is desired, there is no possible way for men to equally share in the birth or care of children. Ultimately this is a woman’s issue and men must respect and support this fact with that knowledge always in mind.

Societies have tried in various times or throughout history to restrict a woman’s ultimate decision as to when she might have a child or not and at other times societies left women to this decision as a personal choice. Again, this is nothing new. What may be somewhat new is this push to turn the matter of abortions into a political issue decided along Dominionist Republican lines, and a matter that reaches far beyond the rights of women today but extends, due to other political factors inherent in Dominionist philosophy, into the very question of the fate of the U.S. of A.

The Dominionists insist that it is their Christian duty to stop abortions even to the destruction of the country as we know it. We have seen firsthand the degree to which they will throw off the laws of the constitution and basic ethical agreements, lowering themselves as they make every kind of concession to a man who in his own not-so-cleverly disguised words likens himself to some kind of savior in the form of a dictator. There is no pretending that Donald Trump has not positioned himself as such a person. This positioning of Trump, with the support of the Evangelical Christians is both a blatant attack on the democratic principles of this country and also, at the same time, it is anti-Christ in the general sense of the word as outlined in The Bible. Jesus himself refused to take the world by force, yet Donald Trump and his Dominionist backers have the gall to attempt to do so using the name of Jesus and his Church as a stepping-stone to their all-to-obvious lust for power. This is anti-Christ.

I do not believe these Dominionists and Evangelical Christians as they have already shown us that they have forsaken both their country and their church along with the principals of democracy and the teachings of Jesus. They have shown us that the only plan they have for ending abortions is through the use of force against women by denying them those contraceptive tools that they need in this world to make their decisions honestly and without trauma or duress. They have shown us that they have no regard for our constitution or even our ethical and moral social requirements in their blatant disregard of those pillars of our society. They have lied to us and they have cheated and abused the system that they work to dominate and rearrange according to their own images, just as they have done in the churches that they have come to control.

Gone from their religious doctrine are the words of Christ, gone along with the sympathy, compassion, non-judgement, charity, faith and love that Jesus asked to see from his church. Instead we find this corrupted organization pursuing domination through force and brutality which is found nowhere in Christian doctrine. This we see as these non-believers run to rally around a brutal regime that pounds away at those who seek justice in all its many forms, racial, social, economic or even environmental which were the exact things that were expected of anyone trying to follow Christ and as Jesus made clear, where there is no Christian work, there is no Christian belief.

These Evangelical Christians have made abortion their number one issue rather than making poverty, homelessness, police brutality, racial equity and environmental stewardship the focus of their charity and love, and so, under examination we find that they not only support the oppression of women but the oppression of everyone but themselves under a regime that is particularly cruel and authoritarian, a regime that Trump has said is out to dominate and crush dissent or any ideas of freedom and prosperity for the common man, a regime that bestows its favor exclusively towards the already rich and powerful which was also condemned in the teachings of Jesus Christ and runs contrary to the promise of our nation. Politically, it is much more expedient to their cause to attack abortion with its highly charged emotional and ethical considerations than it is to feed the hungry, house the poor, and to deny the privilege of some men over others.

There is still a remnant of Christians in this country. You will not necessarily find them in the brick and mortar churches of this land which is fine, as it should be, for it was written in the Christian Bible that the church is simply this, it is the body of believers in Jesus Christ and nothing more or less. It was also written that there would be false leaders and corrupted churches and that the believers should come away from churches and leaders such as that. So of course, for those that study and believe the Christian teaching, we have this corruption in the church and an anti-Christ in our midst and the blind leading the blind to their own destruction. The Evangelical Christians and Dominionists in their pride have failed to see any of this and predictably, through corruption and impatience have taken the manifestation of Christs revelation into their own hands, exploiting the terrors of Armageddon while turning away from the Apocalypse and the good news of Jesus Christ.

Ultimately for those who believe in the God of Jesus and in the God of love and in uncorrupted Christian teachings of Jesus, it must never be forgotten, our own tendency towards sinfulness which is nothing more or less than a lack of faith. And likewise for those uncorrupted Christians, we must remember where Gods kingdom is to be found, which is inside our own hearts and minds and it must remember always, by those who believe, by who and what Christians are saved and how this too concludes the grace of God towards all men.

Here we find the mystery of the Christian teachings come to life…

“No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” Jeremiah 31:34

Towards a New Gold Standard? Or a Currency War with China?

Peter Koenig


Rumors have it that the remaining months of 2020 may bring drastic and explosive changes in the world’s financial system. But such “doomsday” rumors have been floating around every beginning of fall during the last few years. Why? – The US dollar is getting weaker and weaker. It is not quite on a free fall, but still remains a major trading currency and a key world reserve currency. And for many economists that’s difficult to understand.

However, it is unlikely that that the collapse of the dollar will come from one day to the next. That would not be good for the world economy, as still too many countries depend on the dollar.

Facts are, i) China’s foreign exchange reserves have just increased to US$ 3.112 trillion equivalent, of which about US$ 1.3 trillion denominated in US-dollars – and in general forex-reserves continue to grow; ii) within short, possibly by the end of 2021, the Chinese yuan, or renminbi  (RMB) could become the world’s third largest reserve currency, after the US-dollar and the euro, surpassing the Japanese yen and the British pound, reported by CNBC; iii) according to Morgan Stanley , at least 10 regulators (i.e. Central Banks and similar forex regulating institutions) added the yuan to their reserves in 2019, bringing the total to 70 – and rising; and iv) according to the FED, the US economy could lose in excess to one third of its GDP up to the end of 2020 or mid-2021, while China’s economy is expected to grow by 1.3% (IMF) in 2020, and by China’s own estimate up to 3.5%.

Given the dismal covid-related world economy collapsing, and with China being the only major economy expected to grow this year, the number of yuan reserve holders may increase drastically by the end of 2020 and especially through 2021, suggesting that central banks around the world realize that for their financial stability, they must increase their yuan holdings significantly in the foreseeable future. This means shedding other reserve currencies, like the Japanese Yen, the British Pound, but especially the US-dollar. For example, Russia has dumped the dollar, reducing her dollar debt-holdings by 96%.

The Russian Trade Minister, Denis Manturov, called on his BRICS colleagues to increase their trading in local currencies instead of US dollarsTrade in national currencies is a key aspect of cooperation of the five-nation alliance that includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa and it is an effective way to dedollarize their economies.

China and Russia and many of the Shanghai Cooperation (SCO) countries are trading for many years already in their local currencies, or in yuan, especially cross-border trading, but they are also promoting currency swap arrangements with other countries, eager to escape the iron fist of sanctions of the United States.

In an interview with MarketWatchsenior fellow Stephen Roach at Yale University and former chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, says coronavirus may cause a dramatic decline of the US dollar in the near future – “In a Covid era, everything unfolds at warp speed.” Roach also predicted an up to 35% drop of the dollar against major international currencies. He adds, given today’s economic outlook, this might happen rather quickly.

Indeed, while western economies are struggling keeping afloat, China is preparing to launch a new international currency, the digital, gold-backed, possibly crypto-RMB as an international payment and reserve currency, completely outside the dollar-dominated SWIFT system. The new digital RMB money is currently tested in several Chinese cities with positive results.

The People’s Bank of China – China’s Central Bank – recently revealed plans to have its sovereign digital currency ready in time for the 2022 Winter Olympics. The international rollout could actually happen much earlier, possibly in 2021, or earlier if warranted by international monetary events. In any case, the new trading currency may very likely find an astounding attraction by many countries that are eager to dedollarize and get out from under the boot of threats of sanctions by Washington.

It is clear that any money or legal tender that will grow into a major international trading and reserve currency needs to be backed by a strong economy. Backing of a strong economy is fully commensurate with the yuan. China’s economy today in real – and solid – output and long-term stability can easily be assessed as the world’s strongest. Comparing for example the Chinese GDP with the US GDP is like day and night: The Chinese GDP consists of more than two thirds of tangible and solid production and construction of infrastructure, housing, transport, energy and so on; while the US GDP is almost the reverse, more than half is consumption and service industries. Most hard production is outsourced. This undoubtedly distinguishes the yuan or RMB from fiat currencies, as are the dollar and the euro – which are backed by nothing. Simply put, China’s economy and her currency attract a lot of international trust and confidence.

Unfortunately, these differences are not (yet) reflected by the undistinguished linear accounting of GDP, but they are recognized by international economic observers and analysts, including nations’ treasurers around the world.

These are good reasons for the new digital RMB or yuan to grow fast as a primary trade and reserve asset for many countries. It will most likely far outrank Bitcoin, which is often heralded as possibly the “new gold”, or reserve currency.

Not only would the number of countries holding the Chinese currency in their reserve coffers increase rapidly, but the total amount of yuan reserve holdings might skyrocket faster than analysts expect, signaling clearly the end of the US-dollar hegemony. This might undoubtedly shift the global balance of economic power.

“Looking back years later, the two defining historic events of 2020 would be the coronavirus pandemic, and the other would be [China’s] digital currency,” Xu Yuan, a senior researcher with Beijing’s University’s Digital Finance Research Centre, told recently the South China Morning Post.
——–

These developments are not ignored by Washington. The US will not so easily give up its dollar hegemony which means largely control over the world’s economy and financial flows. Although the times of total dollar-control of the world economy are irreversibly gone, Washington intends to slow down the power shift as long as possible. Though a hot war is not excluded, more likely is a currency war.

In line with the Great Reset announced by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and, in parallel, the IMF prediction of the Great Transformation (see this https://www.globalresearch.ca/imf-wef-great-lockdown-great-transformation/5721090
and this https://www.globalresearch.ca/great-reset-revisited/5723573), a kind of currency revolution might be initiated, possibly introducing a major instrument for launching the Great Reset, alias Transformation.

As a hypothesis, Washington could, via the IMF, return to some kind of a gold standard. It could take the form of a digital SDR-type currency-basket intended to replace the dollar and the emerging digital yuan / RMB as trading and reserve currency. The current composition of the SDR contains the five major international forex currencies, US dollar (41.73%), euro (30.93%), yuan (10.92%), yen (8.33%), and British pound (8.09%).

Although the yuan is vastly undervalued, especially as compared with the US-dollar and the euro, the yuan is finally present in the basket since 2017 and has thereby become an official international exchange and reserve asset. The respective weights in the SDR basket have last been set in 2016 and are valid for 5 years, meaning they are up for renegotiation and readjustment in 2021.

Continuing with the hypothesis of the new gold standard, it might well be that in the hypothetical new SDR-like currency, gold would take a prominent role, one that overshadows the weakness of the US dollar. However, as was the case with the 1944 gold-standard, Washington-Treasury-FED would insist on the value of gold in the basket being linked to the dollar – which would de facto disproportionately increase the respective weight of the dollar in the basket.

If such a hypothetical deal would be accepted by the majority of countries – the US has still the sole veto right in the two Bretton Woods Institutions, IMF and World Bank – the hypothetical gold-based “SDR” would be a serious contender to the emerging internationalized digital yuan / RMB.

To forego such a situation, a possible currency war, China, as a holder of large direct and indirect gold reserves, may consider establishing a “gold commodity” market priced in yuan / RMB – and invite other large gold producers, like Russia, Venezuela, South Africa and others not in the US orbit, to join in an alternative currency, i.e. a yuan-denominated gold market, or a weighted average gold value of, say, the three major participants of the alternative gold commodity market.

This alternative currency denominated gold would be strengthened by the power of the respective economies which would back it.

In the end – as is already demonstrated today – international trust in the respective economies and their currencies – gold backed or not – will determine the outcome of a possible currency confrontation. China, already engaged in cross-border trading in local currencies and expanding yuan-trading arrangements internationally, for example, with currency swap measures in place with Russia, Iran and Venezuela, would be well placed to break the US-currency hegemony.

Finally, the goal is not to have one hegemon to replace another domineering power, but to establish a balanced world with several regional hubs or financial centers which would promote a monetary equilibrium that would gradually accompany progress of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the bridge that spans the world (see also https://www.globalresearch.ca/china-belt-road-initiative-bridge-spans-world/5695727 ), with increasingly equal access to vital resources for building peacefully a World Community with a Shared Future for Mankind.

Analysis of the Key Participants In the Nagorno Karabagh War

Harut Sassounian


At the time of writing this analysis, on Oct. 5, 2020, the war between Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh on one side, and Azerbaijan, Turkey and Islamist mercenaries on the other, is continuing with countless deaths of soldiers and civilians, and widespread damage of cities and villages. This week, I will analyze the role of each of the key participants in the conflict:

AZERBAIJAN

Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev, refusing to accept Nagorno Karabagh  Armenians’ right to self-determination and following up on his numerous threats to solve the conflict militarily, launched a massive attack against Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh on Sept. 27, 2020. Before the war, Azerbaijan secured the support of the Turkish armed forces and a large number of terrorists from Syria paid by the Turkish government.

The Presidents of Azerbaijan and Turkey have ignored all appeals for ceasefire, including a joint statement by France, Russia and the United States. Aliyev announced that there will be no ceasefire and no negotiations until Armenian forces leave Nagorno Karabagh. Azerbaijan and Turkey not only want to occupy Nagorno Karabagh, but unleash a second genocide on Armenians. This is an existential threat to the Armenian people. It is a war against all 10 million Armenians worldwide. Fortunately, Armenians have understood the serious danger to their existence and have joined hands to repulse the enemy. After the Azeri/Turkish attack fails, Armenia should refuse all proposals for negotiations and safeguard the land of Nagorno Karabagh which has been liberated with the blood of brave Armenian young men. Azerbaijan and Turkey have attacked not only Armenian military targets, but also civilians in major cities and villages. This is a war crime for which Azerbaijan and Turkey should be held responsible in front of the European Court of Human Rights and the International Court of Justice.

Armenia should also file a complaint with the United Nations since Azerbaijan is a signatory to the UN “International Convention Against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries.” The Convention calls for punishment “by appropriate penalties which take into account the grave nature of those offenses.”

TURKEY

Turkey should have no role in the Nagorno Karabagh conflict. Erdogan keeps talking about one nation, two states, referring to Azerbaijan and Turkey. Why does he then not accept the same concept for Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh? He has no right to speak about Nagorno Karabagh’s status, since Turkey itself occupied Northern Cyprus in 1974.

For far too long, Turkey has armed and trained terrorists in Syria, Iraq and Libya, and now in Azerbaijan. The international community is just as guilty as Turkey for not sanctioning it for its terroristic activities. Erdogan has learned that he will get away with murder and no country will say a word. It is time to muzzle Erdogan and check his expansionist desires.

Besides the physical war, there is also a war of propaganda and falsehoods being waged by Azerbaijan and Turkey. As usual, Turkey is lying about the most obvious facts. If it can deny the genocide of 1.5 million Armenians, it can also deny that it has military forces and advisors in Azerbaijan fighting against Armenia and Nagorno Artsakh. Turkey also denies that it has recruited Islamist terrorists to fight in Nagorno Karabagh.

TERRORIST MERCENARIES

Hundreds, if not thousands, of Islamist terrorists have been recruited by Turkey from Northern Syria to go to Azerbaijan to fight against Armenia and Nagorno Artsakh. Many of their phone calls have been recorded in recent days stating that they were misled by Turkey into believing that they will only perform guard duties, not fight in a war. The terrorists stated that they want to leave, but are prevented from doing so. They have come to Azerbaijan after Turkey offered them a couple of thousand dollars a month. Despite the denials of Azerbaijan and Turkey, Armenia’s National Security Services have recorded the terrorists’ phone calls speaking in Arabic and Turkish and advising their fellow terrorists not to come to Azerbaijan.

RUSSIA

Russia is the only world power that can stop the fighting as it has done many times before. Either Russian President Vladimir Putin is unable to pressure Azerbaijan and Turkey to declare a ceasefire or unwilling to do so, until it can secure concessions from Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey for its own benefit.

The problem is that Armenia is a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) which has a mutual defense agreement with Russia and several other former Soviet states. So far Armenia has not applied to CSTO to come to its defense from Azerbaijan’s attacks on the Republic of Armenia, announcing that it can protect its own territory. Armenia should ask CSTO to secure its protection from attacks by Turkey and Azerbaijan. If Armenia applies and CSTO rejects to fulfill its treaty obligations, then we will know that CSTO is a paper tiger. There may be behind the scenes discussions between Armenia and CSTO to come to Armenia’s rescue at the appropriate time, before Armenia is in danger.

Supporting Armenia is also in Russia’s own interest. First of all, the Caucasus region is considered Russia’s sphere of influence which Turkey should not be allowed to encroach. Secondly, the Islamist terrorists that Turkey has sent to Azerbaijan could end up being a threat to Russia’s security. The sooner Russia pressures Azerbaijan and Turkey to send the terrorists back, the better for its own interests.

Armenia is also displeased that Russia sells sophisticated jets and missiles to Azerbaijan. This is an inappropriate conduct for a strategic ally of Armenia. It is understandable that Russia is making these military sales for its own economic benefit, but Armenians have to constantly remind Russia that it is undermining its own reputation in Armenia by supplying weapons to Armenia’s enemy.

IRAN

The Iranian government has always maintained a neutral position in the Armenia Azerbaijan conflict. In the current war, Iran was alarmed when Azeri missiles fell inside the Iranian territory killing a child. Iran also expressed its serious concern with Azerbaijan importing mercenary terrorists which could pose a danger to Iran’s security.

ISRAEL

It is shameful that the Israeli government continues to provide sophisticated drones and missiles to Azerbaijan in return for Azeri oil. Would Israel, if it existed during World War II, have sold weapons to Hitler in return for financial gains? No wonder Armenia last week recalled its newly-appointed Ambassador from Tel Aviv. American Armenians should impress upon American Jews and American Jewish organizations that Israel’s arming of Azerbaijan is morally repugnant and it will be held responsible for the deaths of Armenian civilians and soldiers. Even during the height of this war, scores of Azeri cargo planes have been seen in Israel loading advanced weapons for Azerbaijan!

FRANCE

France is the only country in the world that has told the truth about the conflict. French President Emmanuel Macron declared that Azerbaijan was the one that initiated the attack on Nagorno Karabagh and also confirmed that Turkey has sent Islamist terrorists to Azerbaijan. It is not clear what France will do beyond mere words, nevertheless, Armenians worldwide appreciate the French position.

UNITED STATES

The United States, if it wanted to, could also pressure Turkey to stay out of the Armenian-Azeri conflict. Unfortunately, despite Pres. Trump’s statement that he will look into the conflict, nothing has been done. Trump’s close friendship with Erdogan does not give Armenians any comfort that the United States will play a moderating role in the conflict, particularly at a time when Trump is infected with the coronavirus.

The only positive action coming from the House of Representatives is its planned adoption of Resolution 1165 which condemns Azerbaijan for its attack on Nagorno Karabagh and denounces Turkey for its participation in the war on the side of Azerbaijan. Going beyond condemnation, the United States should sanction Azerbaijan and Turkey, cut off all military and foreign aid to both countries, and designate them as terrorist states!

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, Armenia cannot rely on anyone but its own people to defend its homeland. It is very encouraging that Armenians worldwide have come to the support of Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh donating funds and humanitarian supplies. All Armenians have to continue to counter Azeri and Turkish military and propaganda attacks. When Azerbaijan sees that its military has failed to yield any results, it will be forced to admit that Nagorno Karabagh will never become a part of Azerbaijan. After these vicious Azeri and Turkish attacks, no Armenian will agree to have the people of Nagorno Karabagh live under the brutal rule of the corrupt dictator Aliyev.