“CONOCER PARA PREVENIR”

¿Cuáles son las causas políticas del descontrol de la situación sanitaria en la Argentina?

Por Pepe Beru

Todo lo que ha causado la aparición del COVID-19 no debe perderse detrás de las consecuencias causadas por la discutida política de aislamiento forzado de toda la población. Aunque parece una obviedad es necesario remarcarlo ya que los medios están tratando de que se olviden las preguntas más elementales de este caso ¿De dónde provino este virus? O quizá con mejor precisión la pregunta debería ser ¿Quiénes fueron los que realmente elaboraron este virus y por qué parece ser más agresivo contra ciertas etnias?, ¿Ha sido diseñado como una Bioarma para agredir a ciertos pueblos determinados?

Queda claro que en la Argentina, no hay ánimo ni el interés político por escarvar en este asunto.

Todos estos cuestionamientos están fuera del campo visual de los políticos argentinos, no solo por la incapacidad y el desinterés que los destaca sino también porque con ello temen molestar a sus mecenas y rectores políticos que les monitorean desde las embajadas en Buenos Aires.

En lo que respecta a los insignes medios y periodistas a sueldo des Establishment nada diferente se puede decir ya que, se ha visto como han ido moldeando la percepción de la realidad a la conveniencia y el interés de sus empresas.

Como lo han señalado varias fuentes, para llegar a rastrear el origen de esta creación diabólica y artificial, hay que seguir la ruta del dinero que pueda financiar los estudios en los centros académicos más exclusivos y destacados, a los reclutadores de cerebros provenientes de todas partes del globo para esas universidades, los mejores y avanzados laboratorios de guerra biológica y por supuesto, como esconderlos de la vista del conocimiento público. Por fortuna esto último ya es imposible de hacer tal como quedo claro con las revelaciones de investigadores estadounidenses que (además de revelar la participación de la CIA en el desarrollo del COVID-19) acusan una colusión encubridora entre algunas universidades privadas y el “estado profundo” que dejan entrever una pavorosa y siniestra estrategia.

Para saber como luchar contra algo, es necesario conocer la amenaza, estar prevenido y entrenarse para ello. Se trata de una lógica obvia a la cual los gobiernos deben atenerse para no ser sorprendidos por sin la preparación necesaria. Esto es lo que debería haber hecho el gobierno argentino pero ya sabemos que desde hace más treintas años hasta el presente, cada uno de los gobiernos que han pasado por la Casa Rosada se han ocupado de meras contingencias y mezquinas peleas partidarias que ha llevado al estado a una situación patética e irremisible. Tal vez sea por eso que sus políticas sanitarias para afrontar la actual crisis global, han sido tan improvisadas como inacatables que  han hecho que su población, a estas alturas ya no les presente atención.

Y es que las consecuencias de ese aislamiento pandémico sobre la vida económica y productiva han sido por demás desastrosas ya que se agregaron a una continuidad económica calamitosa que venía de años antes, registrándose en abril de este año una caída del 26,4% con respecto al mismo mes de 2019, sin descontar tampoco, lo conveniente que ha sido esto para controlar y tratar de cooptar sectores de la administración como la justicia.

Como siempre, los gobernantes argentinos han ido a lo más fácil: Seguir el tren de los eventos. En este plan lo único que ha hecho Fernández y su “gabinete de expertos”  ha sido seguir cada una –incluso las más descabelladas- de las sugerencias de la OMS y de expertos extranjeros quienes además de no haber acertado en sus catastróficas visiones, algunos de ellos vienen de agendas políticas bastante oscuras.

Pero un gobierno de un país sin políticas de estado y mucho menos, objetivos estratégicos, se hace muy raro que pueda articular una planificación, llevar estadísticas serias y mucho menos invierta en la investigación e inteligencia para prevenir situaciones como las que han causado la difuminación del COVID-19. Incluso, en los hechos, sus gobernantes al no ser más que muñecos de alquiler (que representan intereses propios), no levantarían un dedo en tratar de poner en evidencia asuntos tan siniestros y sucios que involucran a sus pagadores (No muerdas la mano que te da de comer). En ése sentido, hubiera sido una ficción que el gobierno argentino hubiera llegado a una conclusión propia sobre el origen de esta pandemia.

Las evidencias de que la pandemia fue creada son inconstrastables. Tal como lo habíamos dicho a comienzos de año, éste brote viral no solo no tenía nada de natural sino que incluso ya se había producido unos meses antes dentro de los EEUU (Fort Detrick, Maryland). El mediatizado brote en Wuhan por el mes de febrero de éste año solo fue el coletazo de una jugada sucia que salio mal.

¿Pero que sucedía en esos momentos en Argentina? O más bien ¿Qué sabía el gobierno de Fernández de lo que estaba ocurriendo entre EEUU y China? Obviamente nada. Y es que además de la acostumbrada desconexión con la realidad política global, la clase dirigente argentina está más preocupada para ver como preserva sus privilegios y aumenta las ganancias para sus bolsillos que atender a problemas que podrían llegar a tocar la puerta del país.

A pesar de que el actual gobierno se vanagloria de promover la investigación científica con sus principales exponentes de su  propaganda al INVAP y el CONICET, el desarrollo y alcance de éstas áreas es evidentemente muy limitada. En lo referente a las investigaciones y desarrollos del campo de la defensa, podemos decir que son casi nulas  manteniéndose en la raya que Londres le hubo impuesto de forma tácita en aquellos oprobiosos acuerdos consensuados y firmados a comienzos de la década de los noventas (1989/1990) por el entonces presidente peronista Carlos Menem. Fue por ello que nadie podía sorprenderse de las conclusiones a las que arribaron los asesores del Ministerio de Defensa británico en la cuales quedaba claro que “la Argentina ya no era una potencia militar capaz”.

De ese modo, todos los avances y las investigaciones científicas que pudiesen ser dirigidas a mejorar el bienestar de la población, que incluye la defensa y su inteligencia (lo que incluye a las amenazas NBQ que contemplan las Bioarmas), fueron abandonados y desmontados, cortando sus presupuestos para el área o siendo recurrentemente desviados a los bolsillos de sectores y funcionarios corruptos. Como resultado de ello, los cerebros nativos sin expectativas para desarrollar sus talentos en la tierra que los educo, al ver que  para sobrevivir debían emplearse en trabajos mediocres para sobrevivir, comenzaron a ser tentados y reclutados para aplicar sus invalorables conocimientos adquiridos en el exterior ¿Quién puede culparles por tener que optar por esta solución que en algunos más que otros, causa un doloroso desarraigo?

Fue en este marco que Argentina (por intermedio de sus gobiernos) renuncio a sus proyecciones estratégicas (creyendo que con ello se eliminarían los problemas), cerró las investigaciones nucleares con orientación bélica (dejándole el puesto a Brasil), entrego su desarrollo de misiles más avanzado de toda la región (Cóndor I y II) y su industria militar convencional en general (que ofrecía productos de alta calidad que competían en el mercado mundial) que fue extendiéndose paulatinamente a las áreas de mayor complejidad.

El país cayó en un pozo de mediocridad y controversias sin sentido del cual ningún gobierno ha tratado de sacarlo. Para los gobernantes ello no podía ser mejor. De esa manera, el deterioro político y social ha venido siendo piramidalmente democrático llegando a infectar con esa ideología de una desidia y corrupción tolerada a los más bajos estratos sociales.

Las actuales circunstancias no son nada alentadoras. La grieta política lejos ha estado de cerrarse y por el contrario, hoy los ciudadanos argentinos desconfiados de sus representantes carentes de autoridad moral, de las instituciones vaciadas de propósitos y de las autoridades con miedo a ejercer el monopolio de la fuerza, están pasando de ser meros observadores a protagonistas de la profundización de esta situación critica, revelando que los días de mutismo y apatía de las masas anónimas se han acabado para dar lugar a las movilizaciones apartidarias y encendidas que ponen  muy nerviosos a los personeros y profesionales del negocio político.

En un país en el cual puede ingresar un elefante pintado de rojo por sus aduanas sin que las autoridades “se den cuenta” ¿Cómo pretender esperar que pudieran prevenir y mucho menos detectar el ingreso de un virus de diseño como el COVID-19?

 

“TARGET: BELARUS”

What will be the outcome of what is already seen as another subversive intervention by the West in Eurasia?

 

By Dany Smith

All means that allow NATO to enter Eurasia are allowed no matter what the consequences of it may be. In the last 20 years, the use of the strategy of persuasion through the so-called “color revolution”, known as “soft blows” in which psychological agitation and manipulation of the masses are used –in which certain media participate- to destabilizing governments not aligned with Washington, in recent years have been complemented with the use of clandestine violence and sabotage by special groups, as the most used variant for these purposes.

Under the silly history of the “promotion of democracy” and “freedom”, Washington through various means deploys a series of dirty tactics that are framed in an agenda of global domination that has as one of its objectives postponed in Eurasia, control the same Russian Federation. This race comes from the very fall of the USSR and was not stopped by the supposed good intentions of the new era of “peace and friendship” that had emerged between Washington and Moscow. All the talk and those good intentions embodied in speeches, executive orders and projects such as the National Security Strategy under the Bill Clinton administration in 1996 that raised "prospects for political stability, peaceful resolution of conflicts and greater dignity for the peoples of the world. ”, They went to the pipe as soon as George W. Bush and his mixed band of neoconservatives and Zionists took office, who launched a harmful farce that, among other things, tried to argue that their actions were framed in their interest to bring democracy and freedom … By force of torture and the point of a rifle.

The manipulation of the political-social reality through the operations of Transnational agencies and supposedly independent NGOs, dedicated to promoting “democratic values” and supposed humanitarian aid, has been the most common “Trojan Horse” to create innocent screens to penetrate the countries in order to generate subversive atmospheres and agitation against governments that are an obstacle to the ambitions of Washington and Brussels. A perfidious but very effective tactic to take advantage of the conditions of calamity and despair created by the governments of the countries from which these supposed aid originate.

In Latin America we have already verified this with the NATO landing in Colombia and the deployment of immediate information agitation and intoxication operations promoted by the Corporation of local media -related to the United States-, civil rights groups and other supposedly humanitarian groups (financed by the State Department) that claiming to provide aid for the misery to which Venezuelans are subjected by the trade sanctions that Washington has been applying since 2014, they try to soften the Venezuelan population from two sides (and playing good and bad) to permeate it to the point of leading them to betray their own government.

NATO's ambitions to control all of Eurasia require its strategic access to the region. For this they need excuses and what better way to do this than to exploit the internal problems and divisions (political, ethnic and / or religious) that exist within each country. In the case of Belarus, the excuses to deploy a color revolution have a name and surname, Alexandre Lukashenko. And it is that 26 years of government (in Western eyes) seems a more than extensive period for a presidential term, but what the hell does NATO or Washington have to do with judging this socio-political reality? As can be seen, we are once again before the accusing finger of the Anglo-Saxon sermonizer who tries to impose his own visions by teaching political morality without seeing his own horrors of failures.

Obviously the brains behind these operations do not pay attention to those details. The business is to mark the defects of others and sell solutions that will not solve anything. Putting their declamations of support for democracy first, not taking for granted that they have disastrous internal situations that contradict what they claim to defend, has been the continuous tactic to carry out each one of the external interventions in their corresponding magnitude.

There is no doubt in understanding that´s Belarusians are fed up with a government that does not seem to meet the expectations of its population and that, to top it all, it renewed its tenure in government after the last August 9 elections. The youth is the one who most demands changes in their country and by the way, this is very legitimate, but something very different is that foreign interests take advantage of these anxieties for their own benefit.

It is clear that any situation of stagnation cannot bring prosperity but this should not serve for other nations using dark organizations with clear non-holy intentions and totally remote from the popular interests of the citizens, they co-opt and manipulate the masses so that once Having achieved their objectives, they discard them as has already been seen with horrifying examples in various regions of the globe.

Belarus is a palatable snack for NATO and Lukashenko knows that very well. But the one who is most sure of this is Vladimir Putin. It is a piece of the puzzle that the Atlantic organization has been shaping since it began to absorb Eastern European countries such as Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia and of course, Poland, which in addition to having a common border with Belarus, is currently one of the most enthusiastic hosts of US troops and missiles. And Belarus is the only country that still resists being co-opted by this Western expansionist ambition and the one who most worried that it will continue like this is Russia.

At the same time, the Russian government knows that the demonstrations that are being organized in the capital Minsk are not mobilized by spontaneous organizations of its population or by the calls of a charismatic 37-year-old girl named Svetlana Tijanóvskaya. There is a stale smell behind it that is more reminiscent of the demonstrations in Maidan Square in Ukraine in February 2014.

To this day, no one believes that these types of Western deployments are developed for “love of freedom” and “democracy”. On the contrary, sources in the field have been seeing how they operate through social networks and in the same streets, subjects from third countries, curiously aligned with Washington, are behind the calls and certainly, these types of organizations have funding black.

The objective is clear. In this movement there is a specific and final objective which is to break control of Ukraine and by land to the Crimean Peninsula.

 

 

 

 

“DEMOBUROCRACIA”

Cuando la burocracia de un estado pasa de ser un medio a ser un fin para una facción política

 

Por Javier B. Dal

Pese a que nos hallamos en un nuevo milenio, hay realidades que parecieran no escapar para algunos estados nación. Cuando pensamos en una burocracia asfixiante y febril podríamos señalar como ejemplos del siglo XX al mega estado soviético y a los de algunos estados tercermundistas de la segunda mitad del siglo. Pero a pesar del tiempo transcurrido y de los experimentos políticos ensayados (en especial por los liberales anglos) para recrear estados más pequeños (librados a la ley del mercado) y supuestamente más eficientes, la experiencia terminó confirmando que una burocracia razonable es necesaria.

Si no atenemos a la definición de burocracia[1] veremos que ella se refiere a “un conjunto de actividades y trámites a seguir para resolver un asunto de carácter administrativo” que será gestionado por una administración determinada. Traspolado a la política pública y más puntualmente a la vida de un estado, la burocarcia es sin más la organización para la administración de los altos asuntos del país. En la Argentina se ha abusado a tal grado de este formulismo y su práctica, que la estructura burocrática ha pasado de ser un medio para la organización del estado para a ser un fin en si misma.

Con cada año que ha ido pasando, esta burocracia pública ha ido tomando un cariz tal, que se ha vuelto asfixiante y para colmo ineficiente. Su grado de complejidad ha llevado también a que los ciudadanos de a pie se vean muchas veces obligados a tener que requerir de la asistencia de un abogado para realizar un mero trámite administrativo lo que de por si, deja a la vista un alto riesgo para la seguridad jurídica. Esto último podría deducirse de la prolífica población de este tipo de profesionales reflejando una realidad que podría traducirse en el dicho “a mayor cantidad de abogados, mayor inseguridad jurídica”.

Por estas horas la revitalización de esa burocracia brutal e ineficiente, parece florecer a la sombra y bajo la excusa de la “pandemia” aunque, como puede verse, pocos son los recursos materiales disponibles para anhelar ese control total. A la eminente desorganización reinante y la ausencia de recursos materiales para administrar, el gobierno de Fernández & Fernández busca moldear políticamente (según las aspiraciones de CFK) la estructura del estado lo que de por sí, representa una aberración a los principios constitucionales que fundan las instituciones del país.

Sin dudas que la ambición de reformar la justicia federal, es parte de este plan, el cual esconde una finalidad eminentemente partidaria (de tener jueces adictos) lo que al mismo tiempo deja en claro una manifiesta arbitrariedad que lejos está de mejorar el valor justicia y que para peor, es atentatoria de los principios en los que se sustenta la Constitución nacional.

Esto no significa para nada que la gestión de Mauricio Macri fue mejor o que se empeño por sanear los vicios de un estado super poblado de empleados. Para nada. Sabía que el costo político de una medida tal era imposible de aguantar demostrando que no había llegado al poder para mejorar la situación del país sino, para concretar objetivos estrictamente partidarios.

En una magnitud diferente y con otros intereses, los partidarios de CAMBIEMOS sacaron ventajas para sí y para la agenda globalista a la que adhieren de ésta estructura burocrática del caos que además de ineficiente, alberga desde hace décadas un micro cosmos de mafias que viven –manipulando las partidas presupuestaria de cada áreas- del estado.

Hay un gran bulo detrás de la versión que dice que el gobierno va “camino a Venezuela” o sandeces similares. Nada de eso. Quienes se hallan en el poder y ello incluye a CFK, lejos están de ideas tan arriesgadas o llevar adelante medidas extremas. El gobierno actual sigue los mismos patrones de la administración Macri y también se halla en camino a concretar los mismos planes globalistas a los que su precedesor y su staff respondían. Los encuentros de Fernández con los principales referentes de está tendencia y los compromisos contraídos con algunos de ellos así lo reflejan. En ese sentido, lo que a Fernández y su gente le interesa es lograr establecer un control administrativo total de la situación que logre apaciguar las protestas y las reclamaciones de una parte de la población que hasta no hace mucho supo ser abulica y cómoda a ser hoy cada vez más rebelde y contestataria.

Pero hasta el momento, sus intentos de establecer una burocracia inflamada apoyada en la excusa de la pandemia, ha fracasado por el simple motivo de que la población no le obedece y aunque quisiera imponer su voluntad mediante sus fuerzas de seguridad como se ha visto en el "Amba", el señor presidente y sus ministros han comprobado que ellas son inexistentes (Propiciado por el desguace presupuestario de las FFAA).

El gasto público es uno de los problemas cruciales que afecta de forma congénita al estado argentino vinculado a la burocracia, producto de la pésima administración financiera, una distribución de recursos más destinada a crear empleos públicos y financiar el asistencialismo y por supuesto la que se pierde por una enraizada corrupción estructural que ha llegado a dar ejemplos harto obsenos de hasta donde existe la podredumbre en el estado. Es aquí donde comienza a evidenciarse el sobredimensionamiento del estado que ya no sirve a los propósitos del común de sus habitantes sino, a los fines de quienes se sirven de él. Y es allí donde se explica, el “por qué” los políticos de carrera se lanzan con todas sus fuerzas a tratar de conquistar un pedacito de ese pastel.

Para peor, su conformación político-territorial se ve circunscripta por un extenso territorio con 24 realidades políticas (provincias y sus respectivos municipios) propias y cada una de ellas con sus propias administraciones y por ende su propia burocracia estatal (y por ende con su propio microclima de impunidad) que símil a su modelo nación, también sirve como “fondo de empleo” para colocar familiares, amigos y amantes sin interesar detalles como son la eficiencia y la celeridad en la resolución de los asuntos traídos a su conocimiento.  Es de este modo que lo que realmente se vive en la Argentina es una “demoburocracia”  que en realidad no se identifica con ninguna ideología ya que y cabe dejarlo bien en claro, en la Argentina hace mucho tiempo que las ideologías partidarias han muerto para ser reemplazadas por el arribismo y el oportunismo rentado.

 

 

---

[1] Definición y diversas acepciones de la Real Academia Española: 1. f. Organización regulada por normas que establecen un orden racional para distribuir y gestionar los asuntos que le son propios. 2. f. Conjunto de los servidores públicos.3. f. Influencia excesiva de los funcionarios en los asuntos públicos.  4. f. Administración ineficiente a causa del papeleo, la rigidez y las formalidades superfluas.

 

“THE RETURN OF NON-CHANGE”

How Trump's opposition prepares for the assault on the White House. Can this mean a change?

By Charles H. Slim

Something has changed in the US after four years of the administration of an “outsider” like Donald Trump. For those who voted and continue to sympathize with the media entrepreneur, the country has turned its attention back to its own affairs, abandoning the foreign policy of dire conspiratorial and warlike interventions that sunk the country. This does not mean that Trump has fulfilled all his promises since there are still US troops in the Middle East, the withdrawal from Afghanistan seems to have been frozen indefinitely and tug of war with China in the South Sea and the Hong Kong issue. It remains something that puts your State Department at eas.

The elections next November, is accelerating the desire of the opposition to take advantage of the complicated situation in the Union and definitively unseat Donald Trump, who finds himself with a pendulous popular image.

Seeing how opponents of the Trump administration and in particular some of them have been positioning themselves, many might ask what could change with those who have defrauded their fellow citizens in the past? Deep down, many of these citizens know that nothing would change. The promise of a change within the system with the first black and democratic president ended up being a disappointment crowned with real farces as they were withdrawn of troops from Iraq that were not such, the increase of the dirty operations of the CIA on Afghanistan and Pakistan, the launch of a project to reconfigure the Middle East with dire humanitarian consequences and the Nobel Peace Prize.

For those who have not forgotten this, Obama is not exactly a benchmark for changes for the better. It was for this reason that a supposed new proposal to Joe Biden, an elderly former Democratic president, little charisma and with some dirty laundry to hide was put in charge.

To give him support and try to catapult him to the elections in November, the Democrats have deployed a long-awaited media strategy. The reappearance of Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton as political godfathers of an emerging figure in politics such as California Senator Kamala Harris as vice candidate makes that clear. They are the same Democratic puppets of the past trying to climb the White House at the cost of a new face that for the better, Trump fervently detests.

Despite the fact that a lot of water has passed under the bridge, it is possible to intuit that the Americans will not be fooled by the old appearances of moderation and “humanism” that today the democrats of the system display. As expected, Harris criticized the handling of the pandemic, unemployment and the social crisis that has brought all this, amplified by the problem of racism that shakes the United States and that has deepened the rift within society. But this did not come with Trump and is a problem that subsisted in the full administration of a black president.

The speech trying to blame the current administration for this problem is as false as it is incredible in the eyes of public opinion. During the Obama administration (2009-2017), police and non-police arbitrariness against people of color, Hispanics and Muslims in general was a constant that was enhanced by the psychosis circumstances of the “Fight against terror” mounted by the previous administration. Incongruity is the word that can sum up his administration in what it did to foreign policy.

Precisely one of the great impostures in that foreign policy of the Obama administration was the impulse of the destabilization of Syria and the plans to reconfigure the Middle East by destroying the Arab nations, implementing the intelligence program called “Islamic State” as a discordant agent.

Internally, the supposedly inclusive policies to provide medical coverage to the majority of the population through the well-known “Obama-Care” continues to be a very controversial issue, given that to put it into operation, some 21 taxes were increased and implemented at the same Time cut budgets in areas that upset Republicans a lot.

With reference to foreign policy there were only nuances. The permanence of the “Guantánamo” Concentration Camp (Cuba), the torture, preventive assassination operations of the CIA and the promotion of a new dirty strategy to destroy the secular Arab governments through the promoted “Arab Spring” blessed and promoted by Zionist intellectuals such as the French Henry Levi, made clear the false differences existing with his Republican colleagues.

In that sense, the performance of the then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in managing efforts to overthrow the legitimate government of Libya (which included the sending of weapons, money and the recruitment of arab mercenaries), the assassination of its president Mohammar Al Gadafy and the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens in a strange attack on the Benghazi embassy in September 2012 (by a CIA-supported Takfir group) casts doubt on the New York senator's democratic credentials and respect for international law.

With reference to the Stevens affair, despite Clinton being dismissed from the Investigative Commission, many were left with many unanswered questions and one of them was Did Chris Stevens die instantly in the assault or was he tortured to death? And if this last hypothesis had been the real cause of his death; why? No one has believed that the attack was motivated by a disgraceful film against Islam that unnerved the “Libyan Muslims” as the media let it run because if it had been, did the same thing happen in other Islamic countries?

This made it clear that the Obama administration lied to its constituents as much as the Republicans did, so let's put aside the presumed transparency. The concealment of unspeakable acts of Obama's foreign policy should not be surprising. But this is not something new. The experience of the Bill Clinton administration in the 1990s showed that in terms of foreign policy, it followed the same and well-concealed line that had marked the conservative wing of the Republicans led by Bush and Cheney. Trump broke with that logic of the Professional Political Corporation, jeopardizing his circular business based on a highly debatable electoral system. After all, Democrats and Republicans work for the same master.

 

“AN INVISIBLE WAR”

Was the circumstantiality caused by COVID-19 motivated by an underground confrontation between the US and China? The answer seems obvious

By Charles H. Slim

After Vladimir Putin's announcement about the discovery of a vaccine to combat the COVID-19 virus, there was a non-coincidental cataract of similar announcements from Great Britain, the United States and even Argentina, making it clear that they also have their own vaccine to around the corner. Clearly the announcement of the Russian president touched the most intimate fibers of Western interests and geopolitics. For now, this gives a feeling of hope to defeat this mythical Coronavirus. In appearances everyone breathes a sigh of relief, but those who know well what this is all about, the battle has just begun.

What is so strange that a new respiratory disease like this has appeared? It is true that for years up to the present, various respiratory conditions have appeared that have been mutating behind the increase in environmental pollution resulting from population assimilation and the merciless industrial advance that contaminates everything in favor of modernity and economic progress. This is partly true, but there are other more harmful and deliberate factors that have triggered the appearance of this type of pests that generally originate in large urban centers.

The appearance in the Arabian Peninsula of the so-called MERS-Cov virus with a limited scope to the territory of Saudi Arabia is a clear example of this. What kind of assassination can there be in the desert? Suspicions that its origin could be from a “Bioweapon”[1] has been hypothesized by some public health officials of the Saudi government. His hypothesis is not at all disposable if we consider how a missile launched on a target in the middle of a city can simulate a terrorist attack. Who would notice in any city or town that a virus has been sprayed?

The characteristics of the MERS-Cov are so peculiar that its real source has not yet been distinguished. Although the first cases of this virus are usually dated from 2012, the origin and development antecedents come from a long time before.

The environmental conditions that have clearly been altered from the beginning of the eighties with the catastrophic war between Iran and Iraq (1980/1988) to the present are categorical and the causes of this were undoubtedly the poisoning of the soil and the water, from those terrible fires in the oil wells in February 1991, the chemical and radioactive residues of the weapons used by the Allied Coalition and Iraq during the wars of 1991 and 2003, which may very well explain the immunological deficiencies of the Arab populations region of.

Some epidemiologists have pointed out the curious paradoxes presented by this virus[2] that reveal an artificial and unknown origin. And although these specialists have rushed to talk about a possible case of "Bioterrorism" it should be clear that this term cannot be assimilated to the authorship of irregular groups that the media have been presenting in their news programs, supposedly marginal and without government support. No terrorist group for better financing that it could have (as evidenced by the ISIS), can elaborate this type of vectors without having the equipment, preparation, facilities and security that only the powers that have “biological warfare” laboratories have. And those who have this type of infrastructure are the countries that developed this area since the end of the Second War and were perfecting it during the arms race that was triggered in the so-called “cold war”.

Let's not forget back in late 2001 until mid-2002 when, in the midst of the psychosis mounted by the US media about the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the federal government of George W. Bush & Cia, seeking to complicate “Al Qaeda and Iraq” in the matter, I was exposed by mounting the charade of chemical attacks against journalists and members of Congress by sending them envelopes with “ANTRAX”. Have you ever wondered where this dangerous biological agent came from? Do you think it was taken from a tent in the desert hidden under a carpet or from a camel? It was the same element that the shameless con man Collin Powell displayed in a vial in front of the United Nations forum in February 2002 to argue the invasion of Iraq. Where did he get it?

Nor should we forget the efforts of the then “evil Saddam” George W. Bush administration efforts to blame him. As it turned out immediately afterwards, it had been a complete criminal scam that led to all that tragedy for millions of human beings and that at some point it would be interesting to prosecute before the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The current circumstances in which COVID-19 has its appearance and spread still appear highly suspicious, when the efforts of governments and media corporations have been commissioned to try to downplay the hypotheses that complicate the governments of China and of the USA in an underground struggle that has transformed all humanity into its hostages.

It is within this framework that the Russian Federation and its government have far been idle watching events unfold. Undoubtedly, from the first moment and long before this virus manifested itself in the personnel of  “Fort Detrick” in Maryland back in July 2019[3] and that led to its hasty closure, Vladimir Putin had on his desk the reports that detailed what was happening and of course, what were the real purposes of that apparently accidental outbreak. Nor could he ignore the secret connections that exist between the private corporations linked to the Bigpharma and arms industry for which there are no jurisdictions or national allegiances.

It is very suggestive that in those laboratories the US government invests billions of dollars annually to investigate infectious agents such as MERS and Ebola that would later appear mysteriously in South Korea and parts of Africa, an outbreak of this Coronavirus has been registered long before it was unleashed in Wuhan. Nor should we forget the curiosity to see how those diseases tried unsuccessfully to become a pandemic during 2014 to 2015, with which the laboratories lost the opportunity for great profits. The point is that the Maryland laboratories are "Biological Warfare" and that means that their personnel and equipment are not dedicated to finding cures for the selfless benefit of humanity. These are details that make the difference and which the corporate media at the service of the highest bidder or the government of the day, leave aside in their editorials.

Given this, the only thing left to each government is to try to rise to the occasion, strengthen its science and work to be prepared to counteract the effects of this silent war that, from what can be guessed, has started long ago and in the past. which all the world is the battlefield.

---

[1] ARABNEWS. “MERS developed as bio-weapon ‘plausible’”, https://www.arabnews.com/saudi-arabia/news/802221        

[2] https://sphcm.med.unsw.edu.au/news/could-mers-coronavirus-be-bioterrorism-new-study-shows-why-could-be-one-explanations-paradoxes

[3] TheDailyChronicle.com. “Suspicions About Fort Detrick Laboratories Causing The Outbreak of COVID-19”

 By in2town  14th August 2020, https://thedailychronicle.in/news/216965/suspicions-about-fort-detrick-laboratories-causing-the-outbreak-of-covid-19/