Jump to content
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

Recommended Posts

  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

Chikni Chameli 

 

நேற்று ராத்திரி துக்கம் போய்டிச்சு யம்மா

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

நேயரின் விருப்பத்திற்கு😀 (இந்த பாடலுக்கு 2005-2007 வரை அபுதாபி மீனா ஹெட்டலில் இரவு ஒரே ஆட்டம்மதான், இன்னும் சில பாட்டிருக்கு😀) ஹோய், அப்புடி போடு போடு போடு அசத்தி போடு கண்ணாலே இப்புடி போடு

இனி ஒரே கூத்தாகத் இருக்கப்போகிறது யாழ்.நன்றி இணைப்புக்கு உடையார் 

Sunny Leone's Deo Deo Full Video Song   😂🤣 அது மட்டும்தான் இப்ப மன அழுத்தத்தை குறைக்கின்றது..

  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

பெண்:
நெருப்பே சிக்கி முக்கி நெருப்பே
மயக்கி சொக்கி சொக்கி மயக்கி

ஆண்:
நெருப்பே சிக்கி முக்கி நெருப்பே
இதமா ஒத்தடம் கொடுப்பேன்
மெதுவா சொக்கி சொக்கி மயக்கி மடியில் படுப்பேன்
தினமும் உன்னை உன்னை நெனச்சே
உடம்பு குச்சியா எளச்சேன்
கனவில் எட்டி எட்டி பார்த்தேன் அதனால் பொளச்சேன்
ஓ ........... மேகம் மேகம் தூரம் போகமட்டும்
போகும் போதே தூறல் போடட்டும் .................... (நெருப்பே)

மழையே மழையே என்மேலே வந்து விழவா விழவா
வெயிலே வெயிலே உன் வேர்வை வலையை விரித்திடவா
பனியே பனியே என் பாயில் கொஞ்சம் படுவா படுவா
இதழோரம் சிரிப்பு பிறக்கிறதே
புதுசாக எதையோ நெனச்சே (நெருப்பே)

சகியே சகியே சல்லாபத் தோளின் மணியே மணியே
ரதியே ரதியே உன்ராவில் நானும் நுழைந்திடவா
கனியே கனியே என் நாவில் உந்தன் ருசியே ருசியே
விரலோடு விரல்கள் இறுகிடவே
நகத்தோடு நடனம் தொடங்கும் (நெருப்பே)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

உன்மேல ஆசை தான்
 ஆனது ஆகட்டும்
சே டு மீ பேபி
போனது போகட்டும்
டூ டு மீ பேபி

 இது கனவு தேசம் தான்
பெண் : நினைத்ததை முடிப்பவன்
ஒன் மோர் டைம் யெஹ்
கிடைத்ததை எடுப்பவன்
டூ டு மீ பேபி

காத்தாடி போல நெஞ்சு
கூத்தாடுதே
கண்ணாடி பொம்மை ரெண்டு
சேர்ந்தாடுதே

உன்மேல ஆசை தான்
ஆனது ஆகட்டும்
சே டு மீ பேபி
போனது போகட்டும்
டூ டு மீ பேபி

 இது கனவு தேசம் தான்
நினைத்ததை முடிப்பவன்
ஒன் மோர் டைம் யெஹ்
கிடைத்ததை எடுப்பவன்
டூ டு மீ பேபி

என் எதிரே ரெண்டு பாப்பா
கை வச்சா என்ன தப்பா
 தினுசான கேள்வி தான்ப்பா
துடிப்பான காளையப்பா
 கடலோரம் கப்பலப்பா

கரை தட்டி நிக்குதப்பா
 பெண் தொட்ட மலையும் சாயும்
நடுசாமம் நிலவும் காயும்

 வேஷம் நாணம்
தேகம் தேய்தொழிந்து
தூசி போலே தொலை வீர்ப் பார்

 தத்தக்கு தா…ஹ்ம்ம்
தக்க திக்க தா
தத்தக்கு தா…ஹ்ம்ம்
தக்க திக்க தா
பெண் : ஹா…ஆஅ…ஆஅ…
ஏய் ஏய்… ஏ…
ஆண் : அதே….அதே….

 மனிதன் ஓட்டை வீடடா
வாசல் இங்கு நூறடா
உடலை விட்டு நீங்கடா
உன்னை உற்று பாருடா
என் ஆச ரோசா

 கட்டிக்கிட்டு முட்டிக்கலாம்
ஒரு வாட்டி வா
 நான் தானே ராசா

 ஒட்டிக்கிட்டு தொட்டுக்கலாம்
தீ மூட்டி ஆ

 ஈசன் ஆளும்
சாம்பல் மேல் உழன்று
ஈசல் போலே ஆளை வீர்ப் பார்
காத்தாடி போல நெஞ்சு

கூத்தாடுதே
கண்ணாடி பொம்மை ரெண்டு
சேர்ந்தாடுதே
: டாக் டு மீ பாய்

ஒன் மோர் டைம் யெஹ்
டாக் டு மீ பாய்
ஒன் மோர் டைம்
டாக் டு மீ பாய்
ஒன் மோர் டைம் யெஹ்

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

ஆத்தி சூடி ஆத்தி சூடி நியூ வே ஆத்திதி சூடி

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

கொக்கு மீனை திங்குமா இல்லையின்ன 
மீனு கொக்கை முழுங்குமா 
ஒரே ஒரே ஒஅரே பர பர ஜொரெய் ஜொரெய் ஜொரெய் 

கொக்கு மீனை திங்குமா 
இல்லையின்ன மீனு கொக்கை முழுங்குமா 
தின்னா பசி அடங்குமா 
இல்லையின்ன தின்ன தின்ன பசிஎடுக்குமா 
பார்க்க பார்க்தான் நாக்கு ஊருது 
பக்கத்துல நீயும் வந்தால் வேர்த்து கொட்டுது 
மூட்டை மூட்டையா ஆசை ஏறுது 
மூடி வச்சு மூடி வச்சு எடையும் கூடுது 
பஞ்சு மூட்டை உன் மேல நான் தீய மூட்டவா ? 
கொத்து கொத்தா முத்தம் போட்டு அனல கூட்டவா ? 

(கொக்கு மீனை ...) 

இடுப்புல எனக்கு இடம் கொஞ்சம் இடம் கொஞ்சம் ஒதுக்கு 
சடுகுடு ஆட்டம் ஆடி காட்டுறேன் 
ஏகப்பட்ட திமிரு உனக்குள்ள இருக்கு 
நேரங்காலம் வரட்டும் நான் அடக்கி காட்டுறேன் 
தோள் மேலே நான் தூக்கி ஊர் சுற்றவா 
வாயோடு வாய் வச்சு சோர் ஊட்டவா ? (2) 
வெள்ளாடு போல மேயாத என்னை 
உன்னால தன்னால நண்டூருதே 

(கொக்கு மீனை ...) 

பனை மரம் போல இருக்குற உன்னை 
மரம் கொதியாட்டம் கொத்தி பார்க்கவா ? 
தேன் ஆடை போல இருக்குற உன்னை 
தேனியா மாறி தின்னு பார்க்கவா ? 
பதினாறு பிள்ளைக்கு பேர் தேடவா 
ஒதுங்காம பதுங்காம விளையாடவா (2) 
வெட்கத்தை விட்டு நீ சொல்லிபுட்ட 
இப்போ என் கூத்தை நீ பாரடி , கொக்கு ...... 

(கொக்கு மீனை ...)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

நம்ம காட்டுல மழை பெய்யுது
நம்ம பாட்டுல சுதி ஏறுது(ஓஹோ)
நம்ம கோட்டையில் கொடி ஆடுது
நம்ம கோப்பையில் சுகம் கூடுது(ஓஹோ)

கடல் உப்பால உருவாச்சு
உடல் தப்பால உருவாச்சு
அட பழசையும் மறந்தாச்சு
புது கதவுகள் திறந்தாச்சு

நம்ம காட்டுல மழை பெய்யுது
நம்ம பாட்டுல சுதி ஏறுது(ஓஹோ)
நம்ம கோட்டையில் கொடி ஆடுது
நம்ம கோப்பையில் சுகம் கூடுது(ஓஹோ)
ஹ ஹ ஹ... ஹஹோய்...
ஹ ஹ ஹ... ஹஹோய்...

சதுரங்கத்தில் வெட்டுப்பட்டா
கண்ணீர் விடாதே
பெண்ணங்கத்தில் ஒட்டிக்கிட்டா
கவலைப்படாதே
விளையாடு விளையாடு
விடிய விடிய விளையாடு
கொண்டாடு கொண்டாடு
குதிச்சு குதிச்சு கொண்டாடு
பயமறியா சிங்கம் ரெண்டு
நரம்புக்குள்ளே நட்பு உண்டு
சேர்ந்ததடா கர்வம் கொண்டு
தெரிக்குது பார் நெருப்புத்துண்டு
நம்ம காட்டுல மழை பெய்யுது
நம்ம பாட்டுல சுதி ஏறுது
 

பாசக்கயிறு பெண்ணிடத்தில்
வச்சான் ஏனப்பா
படைச்சவன பார்க்கையிலே
கேட்டுப்பாரப்பா
அடங்காதே அடங்காதே
அடக்க அடக்க அடங்காதே
வளையாதே பணியாதே
எங்கும் எதுக்கும் அசையாதே
இரவு வந்தா ஏது தூக்கம்
இளமை வந்து ஆள தூக்கும்
கழுத்தடியில் ஈரம் பூக்கும்
நாக்கடியில் கொஞ்சம் வேர்க்கும்

நம்ம நம்ம காட்டுல
மழை மழை பெய்யுது
நம்ம நம்ம பாட்டுல சுதி ஏறுது(ஓஹோ)
நம்ம கோட்டையில்
கொடி கொடி ஆடுது
நம்ம கோப்பையில் சுகம் கூடுது(ஓஹோ)

கடல் உப்பால உருவாச்சு
உடல் தப்பால உருவாச்சு
அட பழசையும் மறந்தாச்சு
புது கதவுகள் திறந்தாச்சு
நம்ம காட்டுல (நம்ம காட்டுல)
மழை பெய்யுது (மழை பெய்யுது)
நம்ம பாட்டுல (நம்ம பாட்டுல)
சுதி ஏறுது (சுதி ஏறுது)

ஹ ஹ ஹ...
ஹ ஹ... ஹஹோய்

 

மச்சகனி பில்லேல

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

இவளுக இம்சை தாங்க முடியவில்லை 🤣

 

உன் மேல ஆசைதான் 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

எங்க வீட்டு குத்துவிளக்கே நீ கிடைச்சா என் வாழ்க்க கெத்து நீ கிடைச்சா என் வாழ்க்க கெத்து எத்தன பிறவிகள் எடுத்தாலும் உன்ன 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

கும்பலாக சுத்துவோம் நாங்க ஜயோ அம்மா என்று கத்துவோம்

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

நீ அட்டை பொறுக்கி நான் குப்பை பொறுக்கி

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

என்ன நினைச்சிட்டே என்னை நீ ஏன்ட வெறுத்திட்டாய்

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • கருத்துக்கள உறவுகள்

அச்சு சாரி சாரி.. என்னை மன்னிச்சிக்கோ டி

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Tell a friend

    Love கருத்துக்களம்? Tell a friend!
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Coronavirus and gender: More chores for women set back gains in equality 9 hours ago By Sandrine Lungumbu and Amelia Butterly BBC 100 Women The coronavirus pandemic could wipe out 25 years of increasing gender equality, new global data from UN Women suggests. Women are doing significantly more domestic chores and family care, because of the impact of the pandemic. "Everything we worked for, that has taken 25 years, could be lost in a year," says UN Women Deputy Executive Director Anita Bhatia. Employment and education opportunities could be lost, and women may suffer from poorer mental and physical health. The care burden poses a "real risk of reverting to 1950s gender stereotypes", Ms Bhatia says. Even before the pandemic, it was estimated women were doing about three quarters of the 16 billion hours of unpaid work that are done each day around the world. In other words, before coronavirus, for every one hour of unpaid work done by men, three hours was done by women. Now that figure is higher. "If it was more than three times as much as men before the pandemic, I assure you that number has at least doubled," says Ms Bhatia. Though the 38 surveys carried out by UN Women primarily focused on lower and middle-income countries, data from more industrialised countries show a similar picture. "More alarming is the fact that many women are actually not going back to work," says Ms Bhatia. "In the month of September alone, in the US, something like 865,000 women dropped out of the labour force compared to 200,000 men, and most of that can be explained by the fact that there was a care burden and there's nobody else around." UN Women warns that the ripple effect from having fewer working women will be dire on not only women's wellbeing but their economic progress and independence. BBC 100 Women has spoken to three women, looking at how the pandemic has impacted the amount of work they do. They were asked to keep a time diary, noting down how they used the hours in a typical day, covering a 24-hour-period.   'I reached my limit everyday'   TENI WADA 'I reached my limit almost every day, my daughter would be crying and then I'd be crying.' Even before the pandemic, women in Japan spent on average almost five times longer than men on unpaid care work and chores. Teni Wada is a brand consultant based in Tokyo and was working a part-time nursery teacher before lockdown began. "It's 5am and I'm desperately trying to complete this article on sake. The deadline isn't for a few days, but I like to stay ahead of the game. 'Mum life' is unpredictable, and I don't want this unpredictability to cost me a pay cheque," she writes in her diary. Teni says time is a luxury she doesn't have in between home-schooling, planning meals, working and doing the laundry. During lockdown, Teni and her husband have both been working from home, but their days look very different. "He works from 9.30am to around 5-6.30pm, and I do feel like he has the luxury of going into a room and can concentrate on his work, but I don't have that luxury, she says, "I do feel it's a bit unfair." At home, Teni says she does around 80% of the unpaid work which includes home-schooling her three-year-old daughter. "The first two-three months were awful, mentally I reached my limit almost every day, my daughter would be crying and then I'd be crying," she recalls. "We are seeing worrying impacts, including high levels of stress and mental health challenges, particularly for women, partly as a result of the increased workloads," says Papa Seck, Chief Statistician at UN Women.   'I had to do everything alone'   ESPERANZA BOLIVIA 'The days are very exhausting in the field, at least for me, because I have other tasks in the house.' Delina Velasquez is a farmer from the Cercado province in the southern city of Tarija in Bolivia. Her days usually start around 5am, and she splits most of her time between working in the greenhouse and housework. But every two months she travels to the city's farmers' market to sell the vegetables she's been growing. "The days are very exhausting in the field, at least for me, because I have other tasks in the house, but for now my daughter helps me, she is my right hand. She helps me in the house, in the field, in the greenhouse," she says. Traditional gender norms reinforce the idea that men are the breadwinners while women are the homemakers, and girls are often expected to take on housework. "When it comes to children's assistance [in unpaid work], parents are more likely to cite help from daughters than sons," says Mr Seck. But Delina is happy that she gets to spend more time with her family during the pandemic. "Before, I had to do everything alone in the nursery, buying seeds, storing, propagating, watering, cooking, cleaning," she says. "But now that the school year has closed, my daughter helps me with cleaning, cooking, washing clothes; my little boy helps me in the nursery, my husband spends more time with us and helps us in everything he can. It's more relaxing for me."   'Women can have it all'   IJEOMA KOLA 'My mind is always thinking about things he doesn't think about' Dr Ijeoma Kola is a Nigerian-American woman living in Nairobi, Kenya. She says part of the reason she has been able to juggle becoming a new mum and her job is because her husband is supportive and they can afford to hire someone to help them at home. "Not all women have that, or are an economic position where they can afford help. But I still wake up every day at 6 or 7 to nurse our son," she says. Ijeoma says society is not economically set up in favour of women and instils gender norms that make it impossible for the average women to be able to have it all. "Women can have it all, but not all at the same time and not without major sacrifices," she explains. "I think that they're probably very few of us and I count myself very lucky to be able to have most things, if not everything." Being able to hire someone to help out, made lockdown a bit easier for Ijeoma and her family. "There was about a month where it was just us and I was miserable," she says. "I felt like I just had so much work to do and couldn't get any professional work done because I was doing so much household work." Although her husband is a good partner when it comes to parenting and takes the lead on things like cleaning, dishes, and laundry, she says she often feels that the responsibility of managing the home falls on her. "My mind is always thinking about things he doesn't think about like the grocery list, our son's first birthday, whether we should take family photos for the holidays, or scheduling a Zoom hangout with friends," she says. The mental load - having to juggle things like healthcare appointments, meal plans and house repairs - can take a toll on women's physical and mental health as well.   Unpaid and undervalued   Women's unpaid work often covers the cost of care that sustains families, supports economies and fills in for the lack of social services, but it's rarely officially recognised as work. "The key point here is that this has always been undervalued and it has always been treated as something that you didn't have to worry about because there wasn't compensation involved," says Ms Bhatia. "The pandemic has shone a spotlight on the fact that unpaid work has really been the social safety net for the world and has made it possible for others to go out and earn a productive income, while actually hampering the growth opportunities and the employment opportunities of those women who are carrying the care burden." Women who do the bulk of unpaid work will either have less time to engage in paid labour, or work longer hours, and often face financial insecurity either way. "You cannot underscore enough how big a problem this is and how big an impact it's going to have if governments and businesses don't do something," says Ms Bhatia. The UN is calling on governments and businesses to acknowledge that unpaid work exists and implement measures such as extra family leave, or extra paid leave, and keeping childcare centres open. "This is not just a question of rights, it's also a question of what makes economic sense," says Ms Bhatia. "And it makes economic sense that women participate fully in the economy," Additional reporting by Will Dahlgreen and illustrations by Sana Jasemi. BBC 100 Women names 100 influential and inspirational women each year and shares their stories. Find us on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, and use #BBC100Women.   https://www.bbc.com/news/world-55016842
    • Nuremberg At 75: Its Current Relevance     by Dr. Ruwantissa Abeyratne in Montreal “Ye are my witnesses” Isaiah 43:10 The 75th anniversary of the commencement of the Nuremberg Trials fell on 20 November 2020.  The above quote from the holy scriptures is what one sees as one enters the portals of the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC.  At my unforgettable visit there, which left the most profound impact in me – an experience I have not had in all my travels - I was left with a mixed sense of intense sadness and unbridled anger – that the world stood by and allowed the travesty of the Holocaust to happen.  I was profoundly moved to see youngsters holding hands and crying at various exhibits of the Museum. At the same time, I was glad in a way that I had carried  the burden of a legal education which has left me with  at least the hope that whatever happens, justice will eventually prevail. The Nuremberg Trials were not merely to administer justice and punish guilty Nazi war criminals. It was, a fortiori  a seminal pronouncement of morals and ethics that brought to bear profound issues which were calculated to guide future generations. British Judge Norman Birkett, sitting in judgment said that  Nuremberg was “the greatest trial in history”.  American prosecutor Justice Robert Jackson said: “ This trial has a scope that is utterly beyond anything that has ever been attempted that I know of in judicial history”. Judge Jackson explained his statement by observing that in a single litigation, a whole continent was involved with innumerable players and multifarious instances. The defendants were not all born and brought up in Germany.  On the contrary, they were from different countries and that effectively precluded a possible assumption that the Nazis had targeted a particular race. The victims were persecuted, tortured, and killed based on their ethnicity, religion, political beliefs, or sexual orientation.  The Nazis  had been involved in annihilating, in the cruellest possible manner, not only Jews, but also Russians, Belarusians, Poles, Ukrainians and Serbs, Romanis (gypsies), LGBT people (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender), the mentally or physically disabled, mentally ill; Soviet POWs, Roman Catholics, Protestants, Jehovah's Witnesses, people of the Baháʼí Faith, among others. The two major issues the judges had to address were whether the Holocaust was one big conspiracy and whether the institutions involved were guilty of genocide.  After due consideration the judges decided to bring the word “ conspiracy” within the parameters of “waging aggressive war”. Although the judges agreed that the “conspiracy” had begun on 5 November 1937 when Hitler spelled out his plan of aggression, they went on the basis that the Holocaust was the composite result of individual actions carried out on individual instances. The Court, in its verdict stated: “to initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself  the accumulated evil of the whole”.  The Court rejected the defence of the defendants that they had acted upon orders that they were forced to carry out: “ Hitler could not make aggressive war by himself. He had to have the cooperation of statesmen, military leaders, diplomats, and businessmen. When they, with knowledge of his intentions, gave him their cooperation, they made themselves party to the plan he had initiated.”  There was also the statement from a member of the Court: “ I admit that Hitler was the chief villain.  But for the defendants to put all blame on him is neither manly nor true. Other legs must run his errands: other hands must execute his plans.  On whom did Hitler rely on such things more than upon these men in the dock?” This collective conspiracy of individual acts had resulted in several war crimes, too many to enumerate, being  committed within the broad definition of “total war”. The current relevance of the judgement at Nuremberg can be seen in the text of the judgement itself: “ Today, the danger of being terrorized by technocracy threatens every country in the world. Hitler not only took advantage of technical developments to dominate his own people – he almost succeeded, by means of his technical lead, in subjugating the whole of Europe.  In five or ten years, the technique of warfare will make it possible to fire rockets from continent to continent with uncanny precision. A new large-scale war will end with the destruction of human culture and civilization. Nothing can prevent unfettered engineering and science from completing the work of destroying human beings, which it has begun in so dreadful a way in this war. Therefore, this trial must contribute toward preventing  from contributing such degenerate wars in the future and toward establishing rules whereby human beings can live together”.  What is most striking in this statement is that it was made 75 years ago and it is even more relent now.  Yuval Noah Harari, the much-celebrated historian and academic, at an interview in 2018 stated that one of his three fears for the world is nuclear war (climate change and the rise of technology and the speed in which it advances being the other two).  He also said that we have had global peace because the powerful nations respect each other’s capabilities.  However, Harari  said: “ What we need to realise is that in recent decades war declined not thanks to any miracle or the intervention of some god. War declined because of wise human decisions. And if humans start making unwise decisions, war will return. It takes a lot of wise people to make peace, but it is sometimes enough to have one fool to have a war”. The Nuremberg judgment resonated, 75 years ago, that a global war would probably annihilate the human race. The attendant reasoning was based on the covert premise that individual acts of henchman that go to further the persuasions of an ideologue could be the pivot to devastation  and destruction. All this would hinge on individual power and action. This should not be so. Dr. Rudi Teitel, Professor of Comparative Law at New York Law School and Visiting Professor, London School of Economics, Global Governance, in her book Humanity’s Law (Oxford University Press: 2011) says: “ sovereignty is no longer a self-evident foundation for international law. This shift is driving the move from the State-centric normative discourse of global politics – which had prevailed until recently – to a far ranging, transnational discourse in which references to changed subjectivity have consequences. That new discourse is constructed more among humanity law lines”. This statement is consistent with the pronouncement of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia which in its adjudication of Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic said: “a state-sovereignty oriented approach has been gradually supplanted by a human being-oriented approach”.  Thomas Jefferson once wrote that the purpose of government is to enable the people of a nation to live in safety and happiness. Government exists for the interests of the governed, not for the governors. As Benjamin Franklin wrote, "In free governments the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns." The ultimate powers in a society, therefore, rest in the people themselves, and they should exercise those powers, either directly or through representatives, in every way they are competent and that is practicable. There are two broad reasons for this shift: the natural historical progression of world affairs which shifted trends chronologically; and the growing instances of torture, rape and killings in circumstances of internal strife and military warfare. This shift led to the solid grounding of international society in an area of law called humanitarian law, encompassing human rights. From there came international criminal justice. Spawned by the Nuremberg rules which were formulated on the basic observation of Justice Robert Jackson who said: “Of course, it was, under the law of all civilized peoples, a crime for a man with his bare knuckles to assault another. How did it come that multiplying this crime by a million, and adding firearms to bare knuckles, made it a legally innocent act?”, international criminal justice has, through its ancestor – the Nuremberg rules –made crimes against humanity an arm of positive law. The author, a former official at the United Nations, teaches international law at McGill University.   http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2020/11/nuremberg-at-75-its-current-relevance.html?m=1
    • Health care profiteering in COVID times   How the Privatization of Medicine in India Is Accelerating Its COVID-19 Death Toll by Yogesh Jain  Spiraling health care expenses in India have been pushing more than 55 million Indians into a state of abject poverty every year. COVID-19 has only worsened the trend for even more families—like Aghan Singh’s.   To ensure that his sick mother received the best treatment, Singh, a self-employed motor mechanic in the small town of Bilaspur, in Chhattisgarh, India, decided to take her to a popular private hospital nearby. She had been running a fever since July 7 and had also developed breathlessness by July 9. Singh rushed her to the hospital, and when they reached the emergency department around 8 p.m., her oxygen levels were dangerously low. The hospital ordered a battery of tests for COVID-19 and quickly admitted her to an intensive care unit to give her oxygen and medicine. In the first eight hours of his mother being admitted to the hospital, Singh deposited Rs 34,000 ($455) and then paid another Rs 1,96,000 ($2,627) over the next four days. To arrange money for his mother’s treatment, Singh had to sell off two and a half acres of land that he owned in his native village. Despite all his efforts, his mother’s condition worsened progressively, and she died on July 16. While still grieving the loss of his beloved mother, he was further stressed about how his family would survive the next month with most of his resources having been exhausted during his mother’s treatment. Also in the state of Chhattisgarh, when 60-year-old Savani Bai from the village of Dhanokhar developed mild symptoms of COVID-19, she spoke to a doctor on the state helpline and was advised to go to the hospital. Since all the government hospital beds were occupied, she had to be admitted to the same private hospital in Bilaspur as Singh’s mother, where she was admitted to a general COVID ward. During her 10-day hospitalization, she was given acetaminophen and was kept under daily observation to ensure her condition was not worsening. For this basic treatment, she ended up spending Rs 85,000 ($1,137) and had to mortgage her one-acre farm to meet her hospital expenses. “I took my mother to a private hospital near my home because it is cleaner and they admit patients swiftly throughout the day,” Singh said. Due to inadequate funding and monitoring of quality control in public hospitals, a large number of people in India are being forced to go to private hospitals for both outpatient, and to a lesser extent, inpatient care. It is a cruel joke that such a move to seek treatment in private hospitals by people is seen as a ‘choice’ rather than a compulsion. India, which is the “second worst-hit country behind the United States,” has been fighting the COVID-19 pandemic with a fragile health system. The country saw one of the most draconian lockdowns anywhere in March, leading to a sense of panic and causing many private hospitals to simply shut up shop or turn away patients during the lockdown period. “I am 59 years old and [have been taking medication] for diabetes and hypertension for 10 years now—how could I expose myself to the risk of COVID? So I shut my hospital completely when [Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi] announced the lockdown, and reopened [the hospital] three months later,” said Ajay Chandrakar, the doctor who owns the hospital to which Singh took his mother. As a result, the avenues for seeking health care in India during a pandemic-induced lockdown were limited to the inadequate public systems. And the private hospitals that left citizens in the lurch went unquestioned and unpunished by India’s national and state governments. In fact, this was an opportunity for the public systems to recapture their rightful position as the predominant health care providers in the country. But the public systems were unprepared for the task. There was hardly any increased funding by the center and state governments to build up the capacity of the public health care system in the country to provide treatment and care for the increasing numbers of patients during the pandemic. Instead, there was “a worrying disruption in India’s basic health services in March as local administrations focused on containing the spread of COVID-19,” reports Mint, using data provided by the National Health Mission. Dr. Gajanan Phutke at the district hospital in Bilaspur said, “I am worried that more than 50 percent of my tuberculosis patients did not return for their drug refills in August, and I don’t know if they are still alive or not. … Immunization rates have also dropped by 50 percent in our health service,” lamented the doctor. Private providers are able to make massive profits by charging patients exorbitantly—and national and state governments aren’t stopping them. Xavier Minz, who runs the largest private lab in Bilaspur, said, “It is time for me to make good on the losses I suffered when most hospitals were shut [during the lockdown in March]. I got permission to do the COVID Real-Time PCR lab [test] and can charge Rs 3,800 ($51) against my expenses of Rs 1,100 ($14) for a single test.” Hospitalization and, in particular, intensive care are where private health systems make their major profits. These profits translate into patients incurring catastrophic health expenditure. Private hospitals continue to profiteer during the pandemic by the same methods they used before it—by massively inflating bills for daily bed charges and intensive care. India has been actively promoting privatization in various social services including in health care for the last 30 years. Private-public partnership (PPP) has been one of the most common models for allowing private systems to perform a task previously done by the public systems while having the state pay for such operations. In India, physicians working with public hospitals are allowed to practice outside their place of employment and treat patients for a fee. “I took my mother to a private hospital owned by Dr. Chandrakar, who is the best doctor in my town and [has worked] in the dharam hospital [government hospitals are called dharam, which means righteous or moral] for the last 25 years.” The PPP system makes it tempting for doctors working in public hospitals to compromise their commitment to their primary role of providing care in the public system. Now in the time of the pandemic, when an acute shortage of doctors and nurses looms large, states still allow their staff to practice privately, causing this chronic problem to become worse. Back at home after recovering from COVID, Savani Bai cursed herself on her way to work at her farm—which had been mortgaged for her treatment—wondering why she had not demanded that the packed government hospital make space for her too when she required it. Aghan Singh only blamed it on his karma, while trying to come to terms with his bleak future. This article was produced by Globetrotter. Yogesh Jain is a physician and public health activist in central India. Jain is a Globetrotter/Peoples Dispatch fellow.   http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2020/11/health-care-profiteering-in-covid-times.html?m=1
    • The Greatest Cover-up in History: Once Upon a Time in Wuhan         Excerpts of the book, Covid-19 - The Greatest Coverup in History, written by authors published by Skyhorse publishing  by Dylan Howard and Dominic Utton “We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.”  — President Donald Trump, CNBC interview, January 22, 2020 It began in China. It began with a single person. In the fall of 2019, Wuhan—the capital city of Hubei Province in the center of the world’s most populous country—was a place few people outside the People’s Republic had even heard of. Within a few months it would become forever synonymous as ground zero for the greatest medical emergency of our age. Nobody could have guessed the coming notoriety that November, however. The sun was shining. The sprawling city’s 11 million people were, as usual, thronging the streets, parks, and markets. “Golden October”—as the Chinese call fall—had passed, and if the people of Wuhan were preparing for winter, they were doing so with little out of the ordinary on their minds. Winters in central China tend to be relatively mild, and at the end of them comes the Chinese New Year holiday, a time of intense celebration during which some 450 million people travel across the country. As a major transportation hub, Wuhan could expect at least 15 million to do so via the city. But a hidden menace was lurking in the very air the people of Wuhan were breathing. A strange new virus was developing and mutating rapidly. It was here in Wuhan, in the streets and factories, the offices and apartment blocks, the train stations, metro carriages, and markets, that the invisible enemy was born—festering at least a month and a half before the world was told. By which time it was already too late. *** The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market is a vast and chaotic space occupying over 50,000 square meters in the Jianghan district of Wuhan, an area conveniently close to shops, homes, and offices and just 800 meters from the Hankou railway station, the main Wuhan terminal for high-speed trains to and from Shanghai, home to some 24 million. Over a thousand tenants set up stalls in this “wet market,” selling seafood and live animals. Some were licensed, some were not—for although Huanan market was officially a space for the mass selling of seafood to shops and restaurants, there was another trade going on here too. Besides the traditional crab, shrimp, striped bass, and salmon for sale, there were all types of exotic and wild animals, from pangolins to bats, rats and frogs to wolf pups. A price list posted by one vendor on the popular Chinese review site Dazhong Dianping listed 112 items available, including a number of wild animals. The South China Morning Post reported the market had a section selling around “120 wildlife animals across 75 species.” In documents reviewed by these authors, the breathtaking range of creatures includes badgers, beavers, camel, crocodiles, dogs, donkeys, foxes, giant salamanders, hedgehogs, koalas, ostrich, otters, peacocks, pheasants, porcupines, rabbit organs, sheep, snakes (including the many-banded krait, Bungarus multicinctus, an extremely venomous species), and turtles. Also available at Huanan were masked palm civets—a mammal native to southeast Asia and India, a little like a cross between a cat and a small bear. In 2003, the SARS virus was isolated in a number of masked palm civets found in another wet market in the Chinese city of Guangdong, ten hours from Wuhan. In 2006, scientists from the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention in Hong Kong and Guangzhou established a direct genetic link between the SARS virus appearing in civets and in humans, with many believing that inadequate or unhygienic preparation of the meat may have been the cause of the disease outbreak. Between 2002 and 2003, SARS would spread to more than two dozen countries in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia and infect 8,098 people worldwide, killing just under one in ten of them before it was contained. But by fall of 2019, SARS was considered old news. There hadn’t been a reported case anywhere in the world since 2004. The stallholders of Huanan—and those who thronged the market browsing for everything from shrimp to camel, masked palm civets, pangolin, and bats included—were completely relaxed about any threat from that disease. It was a beaten virus. Not all the meat sold at wet markets like Huanan was dead. There was also a steady trade in live animals—not as pets, but to be either taken away and slaughtered at home, or else picked out by the customer and butchered there and then. Such livestock would often be kept alongside carcasses in the narrow, crowded, chaotic lanes and stalls that made up the market, with little or no separation between living and dead, one species or another. One report in the Bangkok Post quoted a local resident of the Jianghan district describing a selection of the live animals on offer: “There were turtles, snakes, rats, hedgehogs and pheasants.” The report also carried photographs of the shocking conditions in which they were slaughtered, with unwashed buckets, scales, and knives, splattered with blood and entrails, being reused between several species without washing. Not that the official authorities were especially concerned about the trade in animals—or the conditions in which they were kept and slaughtered. In September 2019, the Wuhan Administration for Industry and Commerce said that government officials had inspected eight stalls at Huanan wet market selling live animals and were happy they all had the correct documentation and licensing. To those in the West, it seems barbaric. To the Chinese people, however, eating rare, unusual, or exotic meat is deeply ingrained in their history and culture. According to Hu Xingdou, professor of economics at Beijing Institute of Technology, “While the West values freedom and other human rights, Chinese people view food as their primary need because starving is a big threat and an unforgettable part of the national memory.” Furthermore, what may once have been born of necessity is now an indication of status. “While feeding themselves is not a problem to many Chinese nowadays,” Hu continued, “eating novel food or meat, organs or parts from rare animals or plants has become a measure of identity to some people.” This collision of cultural identity and the chaotic reality of life inside wet markets such as Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market—as well as a profound refusal to learn the lessons that SARS should have taught—would provide the ideal breeding ground for the return of a disease everyone thought had gone away forever. When COVID-19, a new, deadlier strain of SARS, was discovered, that initial collision was made indescribably worse by the deliberate actions of governments, as you will learn through the pages of this book—first in China and then elsewhere—who, for one reason or another, sought to downplay the threat … with horrific, worldwide consequences. *** On December 31, 2019, when Chinese authorities contacted the World Health Organization and informed them of “cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology detected in Wuhan”—the first official admission that there was anything unusual happening in the city—few would have dared guess just how much carnage this “unknown pneumonia” would go on to cause around the world. In fact, at that time the Chinese government was still denying that the new strain of pneumonia was in any way linked to SARS. And they were prepared to go to extreme lengths to prove they were right. One man, however, was convinced that these patients were potentially the forerunners of a pandemic. His name was Li Wenliang. A little over a month later, he would be dead. Dr. Li was an ophthalmologist who worked as a physician at Wuhan Central Hospital. He was known as a calm, patient, and diligent doctor, a dedicated family man, married with one child and another due in the spring. He had been at Wuhan Central since 2014, and at thirty-three years old was a fit and healthy man, with a keen interest in basketball. On December 30, 2019, Dr. Li’s world was turned upside down. It began with a patient’s report from his colleague Dr. Ai Fen, director of the emergency department at the hospital. In the preceding weeks she had treated two patients who had been admitted with apparent influenza, but strangely for whom conventional treatment methods did not seem to have had any effect. One was a delivery person at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market; the other had no apparent history of contact with the market—and seemingly no connection with the first patient. What seemed a strange coincidence took a more frightening turn after Dr. Ai saw the lab results from one of those patients. The report contained the words “SARS coronavirus, pseudomonas aeruginosa, 46 types of oral / respiratory colonisation bacteria.” Dr. Ai circled the word “SARS” and sent an image of it to another doctor, who forwarded it to his colleagues; by the afternoon it had spread through Wuhan’s medical circles until it reached Dr. Li. As other doctors passed on the information and shared details of their own patients, it turned out those two cases were not as unique as first expected. At 5:43 p.m., Dr. Li posted in a private WeChat group of his medical school classmates. (WeChat is China’s biggest and most comprehensive multipurpose messaging and social media app, akin to WhatsApp, and boasting a billion monthly users. It is also subject to whispers of political censorship and mass surveillance by the Chinese government. Imagine Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Apple Pay all combined … but watched over by Big Brother.) Dr. Li’s message read: “Seven confirmed cases of SARS were reported from Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market.” He also posted shots of the patient’s diagnosis report and CT scan image before adding, “They are being isolated in the emergency department of our hospital.” Fifty-nine minutes later, he received a reply warning him that WeChat was not a secure platform. “Be careful,” said the message, “or else our chat group might be dismissed.” But around him, the toll mounted. More pneumonia cases with unknown causes presenting with fever, fatigue, coughing, and breathing difficulties continued to be diagnosed. Undeterred, Dr. Li kept posting. “The latest news is it has been confirmed that they are coronavirus infections, but the exact virus strain is being subtyped,” he wrote, adding, “Don’t circulate the information outside of this group, tell your family and loved ones to take caution.” Dr. Li’s posts were not kept within the group. Screenshots were taken and shared. To use an unfortunate phrase, under the circumstances, his warnings of a new, potentially deadlier strain of SARS went viral. It did not take long for Big Brother to notice. Within twenty-four hours, the authorities became involved—but not in the way one might have hoped, expected, or even imagined. The Chinese state’s response to Dr. Li’s posts was not to take swift, decisive action against the threat of a new epidemic, but to attempt to swiftly, decisively silence any mention of it. The cover-up had begun. On January 1, 2020, Wuhan police announced that eight internet users were being punished for “spreading rumors.” They claimed that these eight people were guilty of, in the words of the Beijing News, “posting and forwarding false information on the Internet without verification, causing adverse social impact.” Two days later, the Wuhan Public Security Bureau interrogated Dr. Li, issuing him with a warning notice and censuring him for “making false comments on the Internet.” He was made to sign a letter of admonition promising not to do it again. The police warned him that if he failed to learn from the warning and continued to violate the law, he would be prosecuted. They also issued a report stating that Dr. Li’s original message, “Seven confirmed cases of SARS were reported from Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market,” was unequivocally false. Why exactly were the authorities so desperate to bury such potentially important information? What could their motivations for suppressing warnings of a deadly new coronavirus possibly spring from? The censorship did not end with Dr. Li and the other seven so-called “rumor makers.” In early March 2020, a report issued by the Toronto-based research group Citizen Lab found that WeChat had begun censoring key words about the coronavirus outbreak from as early as January 1—in other words, almost from the moment Dr. Ai first became aware of it and Dr. Li messaged his fellow medical students warning them of a potential virus. Citizen Lab’s report found that during the whole of January, WeChat censored no fewer than 132 keyword combinations … and that during the first fifteen days of February—by which time the cat was well and truly out of the bag—a further 384 new keywords were added to the blacklist. These all included references to Chinese leaders, including President Xi Jinping, references to government policies on handling the epidemic, and responses to the outbreak in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Macau. References to Dr. Li were also censored. As well as the crackdown on WeChat, the report noted that popular Chinese live-streaming site YY also blacklisted forty-five keywords from its platform, including the terms “Unknown Wuhan pneumonia” and “SARS outbreak in Wuhan.” Somebody, it seemed obvious, was trying to rewrite history. Did the executives behind WeChat and YY make the decision to censor content and supposedly private messages themselves, perhaps conscious of attracting official reprimands for being seen as vessels for “posting and forwarding false information on the Internet”? If that is the case, it would seem they were not only extremely quick off the block to quash any kind of rumors, but also immediately and astonishingly aware of the Communist Party’s desire to keep this particular information locked down. What seems far more likely is that those whispers of state involvement and surveillance through the likes of WeChat and YY are more than whispers after all. For a regime that has banned Google and Wikipedia altogether, attempting to control the spread of information—and specifically what information is spread—by effectively censoring the internet itself does not seem so far-fetched. “It’s appalling to see the wide range of terms, even including some non-sensitive terms, [being] censored,” Patrick Poon, a researcher at Amnesty International, told the BBC in March. “It shows how obsessed and concerned the Chinese government is [in] trying to curb any discussion … that falls outside the official narrative. It’s totally about social control and deprives citizens of their rights to freedom of information and expression.” That “social control” of its own citizens was to have a devastating effect on the whole planet. *** For the moment, however, it seemed the Chinese authorities’ efforts to quash any talk of a new SARS outbreak was proving successful. WeChat was shutting down attempts to spread awareness, YY was doing the same, Dr. Li Wenliang had been publicly admonished, an official statement had been put out, and life in the People’s Republic was to carry on as normal. Except, of course, it wasn’t. Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was closed on January 1 by the Wuhan health authorities. It was later admitted that this was in response to Dr. Ai’s initial patients, and that the closure was to conduct investigations into the outbreak, as well as to clean and disinfect the market. But at the time, the state-run Xinhua News Agency claimed its closure was simply for “renovations.” It was too little, too late, and with much of the population being kept ignorant of the disease, COVID-19 began to spread like wildfire. On January 2, forty-one patients were hospitalized in Wuhan with the new coronavirus, now named 2019-n-Cov; 66 percent of them had had direct exposure to Huanan wet market. The following day, health authorities reported forty-four cases, eleven of whom were “seriously ill.” That same day, Dr. Li Wenliang resumed his position at Wuhan Central Hospital. What followed was the bitterest twist of fate in this horrific story to date. On January 8, just over a week after his original WeChat posting and just five days after returning to work, Dr. Li treated a female patient with glaucoma. At that time, she showed no obvious signs of infection with coronavirus—her body temperature was normal and she did not appear to have a cough. Prior to its closure, she had been a storekeeper at Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. The next day the woman developed a fever, and a CAT scan revealed she had a lung infection. It emerged that two of her relatives had also developed fevers. Despite the official warnings to keep quiet, Dr. Li was convinced this was another case of the new virus—and reported to the hospital that this was evidence that it could be transmitted human to human. He would be proved horribly correct. On January 10, Dr. Li developed a cough, followed quickly by a fever, and was admitted to the hospital—as a patient—after a scan showed he too had a lung infection. His parents were also admitted with the same infection. Two days later, Dr. Li was placed in intensive care. As his condition worsened—and more and more people became infected—Dr. Li Wenliang once again became a household name in China. This time, his attempts to warn the country about the disease were acknowledged, rather than suppressed. In a national TV broadcast on January 29, Zeng Guang, chief epidemiologist at the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, said on national television that Dr. Li and the other seven people punished by the police for speaking out the month before should not be considered troublemakers but instead be held in “high regard.” The same day—perhaps in an attempt to retrospectively shift the blame onto the Wuhan police force and away from the state apparatus—China’s Supreme People’s Court issued a statement on its social media account. According to them, they now realized that the police had been too heavy-handed. “It might have been a fortunate thing if the public had believed the ‘rumor’ then and started to wear masks and carry out sanitization measures,” they now said. On January 30, Dr. Li was confirmed as having what we now know as COVID-19. That same day, he gave an interview to a reporter from Caixin Media, one of China’s most influential investigative journalism media groups. He described how he believed it was that single exposure to the glaucoma patient that had given him the infection. “One of our patients who was hospitalized for glaucoma had a weak appetite but normal body temperature,” he said. “We didn’t realize anything was wrong at that time. But she still had a weak appetite after her eyes had healed and had a fever. The same day she got a fever, her family members also had a fever, indicating human-to-human transmission. “At first I didn’t take any protective measures. After the patient was transferred, I started coughing and had a fever the next day. After that I started wearing an N95 mask. On January 12, I had a test for respiratory viruses and a CT scan. The results were highly suspicious for a coronavirus infection. My colleagues showed similar symptoms later and my parents also fell sick three or four days later. My condition deteriorated and now I need antibiotic, antiviral, and globulin injections and extra oxygen every day.” He also explained how he had never wanted to be a whistleblower or a subversive of any kind, but simply acted to warn his friends about what he believed to be a dangerous new strain of SARS. “I sent the message to a group of 150 former classmates and emphasized that the message should not be spread beyond the group. I wanted to remind my schoolmates who work on the front lines to protect themselves. “That night, I received some WeChat messages asking me about the matter with screenshots of my earlier messages. Most of the screenshots were incomplete. After mentioning that there were seven confirmed SARS-like cases, I emphasized that it was some type of coronavirus that still needed confirmation. But that was not included in the screenshots that were widely spread online. I thought I could get in trouble because it was sensitive information and it was during a sensitive time when the city was having its annual meeting of legislators. At first I was angry at the people who spread the messages without hiding my identity. But later I understood that they too were worried about their families and friends when they distributed the message. “I never thought the police would pursue me. On January 3, they called me to sign a letter of admonishment. I had never had trouble with the police before and was worried. So I went and signed without telling my family. I was worried that it might lead to punishment by the hospital and affect my career.” Even as he lay in intensive care, struggling to breathe, his body ravaged by the disease he had been silenced for trying to warn people about, Li Wenliang insisted he bore no ill will to the Chinese state. “I just wanted to warn my former classmates not to panic,” he said. “I don’t want to cause trouble with the police. I’m afraid of trouble. It is more important for people to know the truth. To clear my name is not that important to me. Justice lies in people’s hearts. “I believe there should be more than one voice in a healthy society. I don’t agree with the use of public power to overly interfere.” Finally, the reporter asked Dr. Li if he felt like a hero for trying to raise the alarm so quickly. His answer was nothing short of heroic. “I don’t deserve this designation. I was just aware of the information and warned my classmates. I didn’t think that much at the time. After I recover, I still want to go back to the front line. Now the epidemic is still spreading. I don’t want to be a deserter.” A week later, on the night of Thursday, February 6, social media lit up with reports that Dr. Li’s heart had briefly stopped, that he had been placed on an artificial respirator, and that doctors were battling to keep him alive. Within hours, some 17 million users logged onto a livestream of updates from the hospital, desperate for news of his condition. Thousands of users flooded microblogging platform Weibo, demanding the Wuhan police offer a formal apology to the doctor. “Apologize to people all over the nation,” wrote one user. It was all in vain. At 2:58 a.m. the following morning, February 7, 2020, the hospital announced that Dr. Li Wenliang had died. “It happened so suddenly,” one doctor in Wuhan told reporters. “Humans are like ants sometimes. We are too small.” Another was even bleaker. “Our hope is gone. He was our hero.” ***   When Dr. Li Wenliang sent his fateful WeChat message, nobody had heard of COVID-19—and the Chinese state seemed determined to keep it that way. By the time of his death just 40 days later, 545 residents of Wuhan were dead of the virus, with a further 154 elsewhere in China. A staggering 37,198 cases in total had been recorded throughout the country, with an additional 354 cases recorded in other countries, including Thailand, South Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, India, Russia, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, Canada, and the United States, as well as no fewer than eight European countries, including the United Kingdom.   In the port of Yokohama, Japan, 3,700 passengers and crew had been quarantined onboard the cruise ship Diamond Princess. At least 712 of them would test positive for the virus, and 13 would die of the disease. How could COVID-19 spread so swiftly, so far, even after the warnings of Wuhan? The first portion of blame unquestionably lies with Xi Jinping, the general secretary of the Communist Party of China and president of the People’s Republic. Even as Dr. Li lay in intensive care, President Xi made a decision that would ultimately condemn the world: he allowed five million people to leave the epicenter of the virus without being screened. By the time Wuhan and other cities in Hubei Province were locked down on January 23, it was already too late. Dr. Li was right to be frightened when he saw that first patient report. This new coronavirus was unlike anything in living memory—for speed of transmission, for virulence, and for its utter lack of discrimination as to who it infected. He only wanted to warn the world. Why were such efforts made to keep him from doing so? And just how deep does the cover-up go? The following chapters will expose the extraordinary lengths the Chinese government continued to go to in order to conceal the true horror of COVID-19 even after Dr. Li’s death—but will also tell how they have not been the only world power to do so. We will show how the British and American governments in particular have arguably exceeded even the worst of Beijing’s COVID-19 crimes. In death, Dr. Li will be remembered as one of the most important whistleblowers the world has ever seen. He spoke up. He told the truth. He had public integrity. Yet he died as a result. As great a tragedy as Dr. Li’s death is, attention must now—quite rightfully—turn to those who covered up the depth and destructive nature of the disease. The chain of events that led from that initial diagnosis of a single delivery worker at Huanan wet market to the most terrifying pandemic of the modern age is a story about the failure of those we trust to look after us. Not doctors—the doctors have been heroes—but those in government. It goes far deeper than President Xi Jinping. It traverses the globe to Europe, Brazil, the United Kingdom—and ultimately, to the White House itself. In a tearful video posted to social media the day after his death, Li Wenliang’s mother had a stark and simple message for the men and women in power worldwide. “We will not be OK if they do not give us an explanation.” http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2020/11/the-greatest-cover-up-in-history-once.html?m=1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.