The Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals expresses deep concern over the growing threat to the Republika Srpska (RS) and the Serbian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) by open attacks on the institutions and competences of the RS guaranteed by the Dayton-Paris Agreement (1995).

The Belgrade Forum condemns all attempts of the western power centers aimed at the abolishment of the Republika Srpska and the revision of the 1995 peace agreement and stands for the full respect of the Dayton Paris Agreement, especially for respect of the constitutional principle of equality of the two entities and the three constituent peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The Belgrade Forum points out the inadmissibility of the systematic usurpation of the competences of the institutions of BiH and the RS by the illegally imposed so-called High Representative Christijan Schmidt, which leads to the blocking of the constitutional functioning of BiH and the entities and raising political tensions. The Belgrade Forum considers that the High Representative is a remnant of the past neo-colonialist concepts and a serious obstacle to the rule of law and democracy, and that it is high time for its abolition.

Nobody is authorized to disempowered the RS of its constitutional rights or to stop its legitimate demands for the restitution of all the usurped powers provided for by the Dayton Paris Agreement and the Constitution, including the right to develop special parallel relations with neighboring Republic of Serbia.

Current processes and attacks on the President of the RS, Milorad Dodik, are unfounded and politically motivated. They confirm the plans of the Western power centers aimed at abolishing of the RS, disregarding of the Dayton-Paris Agreement and the creation of a unitary BiH under the domination of the Bosniak elite in Sarajevo. On the other hand, the same power centers continue to violate the UN Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) in order to legitimize unilateral separation of the so-called Kosovo thus imposing yet another Albanian state on the territory of the Republic of Serbia. Both – endeavors to create unitary BiH and greater Albania – have common denominator anti-Serbian geopolitical projects aimed at establishing full control over the Balkan Peninsula expanding NATO and the West, in general, to the East.

The creation of a unitary BiH and its inclusion in NATO is contrary to the determination of the Serbian people to freely decide on their development and future, respecting the same rights of other Balkan nations. Ongoing pressures and threats against the institutions and acquired rights of the Republika Srpska represent a danger for the freedom and equality of the Serbian people in the Balkans and require unanimous support to the full respect and implementation of the international law, particularly the Dayton Paris Peace Agreement and UN SC resolution 1244.

The Belgrade Forum emphasizes the importance of the Declaration of the All-Serbian Congress held on June 8, 2024 and calls on all patriotic forces for unity, national solidarity and decisive support to the Republika Srpska and its legitimate leadership, in defense of all rights guaranteed by the Dayton Agreement and the Constitution.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image: President Slobodan Milosevic of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, President Alija Izetbegovic of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and President Franjo Tudjman of the Republic of Croatia initial the draft of the Dayton Peace Accords. (From the Public Domain)

Video: Japan Rising. The Tokyo International Crisis Summit. The New “Replicon” Self-amplifying mRNA Vaccines

By The Corbett Report, October 17, 2024

The International Crisis Summit descended on Tokyo last week to warn about the new “replicon” self-amplifying mRNA vaccines that are about to be unleashed like a third atomic bomb upon the population of Japan.

Bayer’s ‘Backward’ Claim: A Bid to Reap Control of Indian Agriculture

By Colin Todhunter, October 17, 2024

For some critics, if one firm tops a league table for anti-people, anti-nature business practices, it is Bayer (although there are many other worthy candidates). Nevertheless, the Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR) signed a memorandum of understanding with Bayer in September 2023.  

“Surviving the Unipolar Era: North Korea’s 35-year Standoff with the United States”: A Review of A.B. Abrams’s New Book

By Richard C. Cook, October 17, 2024

The origins of the Korean conflict lie in the standoff between the Communist and Western blocs that formed at the end of World War II. The Korean peninsula had been under Japanese rule since 1905, but an indigenous revolt had begun to take power during the latter stages of the war. The U.S. moved to prevent that revolt from taking over all of Korea.

The US Fears an Uncontrollable Escalation Sequence with Russia Much More Than with Iran

By Andrew Korybko, October 17, 2024

The US has no qualms about shooting down Iranian missiles launched against Israel but won’t consider shooting down Russian ones launched against Ukraine, which has upset Zelensky and some of his compatriots who thus feel like second-class allies.

Race, Class and the Death Penalty in the United States

By Abayomi Azikiwe, October 17, 2024

Even though the United States government praises itself for representing what is claimed to be the “leading democracy” in the world, the character of the legal and criminal justice system is largely based upon an unequal class structure and racial stratification.

October 7, 2001: America’s “Just War” against Afghanistan: Women’s Rights “Before” and “After” America’s Destructive Wars

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 15, 2024

The NeoCons’ agenda is not to “win the war” but to engineer the breakup of sovereign nation states, destroy their culture and national identity, derogate fundamental values and human rights.

German Lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich’s Persecution in Prison

By Reiner Fuellmich and Peter Koenig, October 14, 2024

13 October 2024 will be the first anniversary of Reiner Fuellmich’s pre-trial prison custody. His conditions, especially for someone who has not committed and is not suspected of a criminal act of violence are, to say it benignly, horrendous, bordering on torture.

For some critics, if one firm tops a league table for anti-people, anti-nature business practices, it is Bayer (although there are many other worthy candidates). Nevertheless, the Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR) signed a memorandum of understanding with Bayer in September 2023.  

Bayer’s approach to agricultural development involves promoting a model of industrial agriculture dependent on corporate products, including its toxic chemicals and genetically modified crops, and advocating for precision, data-driven agriculture that relies heavily on its proprietary technologies and software.

Simon Wiebusch, Country Divisional Head of Crop Science for Bayer South Asia, recently stated that India cannot become a ‘developed nation’ with ‘backward’ agriculture. He believes India’s agriculture sector must modernise for the country to achieve developed nation status by 2047.  

Bayer’s vision for agriculture in India includes prioritising and fast-tracking approvals for its new products, introducing genetically modified (GM) food crops, addressing labour shortages (for weeding) by increasingly focusing on herbicides and developing herbicides for specific crops like paddy, wheat, sugarcane and maize.  

Government institutions like the ICAR seem likely to allow Bayer to leverage the agency’s infrastructure and networks to pursue its commercial plans.  

Wiebusch’s comments have received much media coverage. There is a tendency for journalists and media outlets to accept statements made by people in top corporate jobs as pearls of wisdom never to be critically questioned, especially in India when there is talk of the country achieving ‘developed status’. But people like Wiebusch are hardly objective. They are not soothsayers who have an unbiased view of the world and its future.    

Bayer has a view of what agriculture should look like and is gaining increasing control of farmers in various countries in terms of having a direct influence on how they farm and what inputs they use. Its digital platforms are intended to be one-stop shops for carbon credits, seeds, pesticides and fertilisers and agronomic advice, all supplied by the company, which gets the added benefit of control over the agronomic and financial data harvested from farms.   

As for carbon credits, the non-profit GRAIN argues that, like digital platforms per se, carbon trading is about consolidating control within the food system and is certainly not about sequestering carbon.   

So, what does Wiebusch mean when he talks about modernisation of a backward agriculture in India? All of what is set out above and more.  

Like Wiebusch, corporate lobbyists often refer to ‘modern agriculture’. Instead, we should say: a system that produces healthy food for all while sustaining farming communities and livelihoods. Because the term ‘modern agriculture’ is deliberately deceptive: it means a system dependent on proprietary inputs and integrated with corporate supply chains. Anything other is defined as ‘backward’.  

According to Bayer, Wiebusch is a star player who can drive market share and create business value for the company. On the Bayer India website it says: Simon’s key strengths include unlocking business growth, redefining distribution strategies, driving change management and building diverse teams that drive market share and create business value.  

Stripped of the corporate jargon and any talk of ‘helping’ India, the goal is to secure control of the sector and ensure corporate dependency.  

India has achieved self-sufficiency in food grains and has ensured there is enough food (in terms of calories) available to feed its entire population. It is the world’s largest producer of milk, pulses and millets and the second-largest producer of rice, wheat, sugarcane, groundnuts, vegetables, fruit and cotton.  

So, we might ask: who needs Bayer?  

Bhaskar Save certainly did not on his impressively bountiful organic farm in Gujarat. In 2006, he described in an eight-page open letter (along with six annexures) to M S Swaminathan (widely regarded as the father of the Green Revolution in India) how the type of chemical-intensive agriculture that Bayer promotes and the urban-centric model of development favoured by the government has had devastating environmental economic and social consequences for India.  

Save offered agroecological alternatives to address the problems, including solutions to boost farmer incomes and rural communities, cultivate a wider range of nutrient-dense crops, build soil fertility, improve water management, enhance on-farm ecology and increase biodiversity.  

Vandana Shiva recently posted on X:  

“India’s agriculture was sustained over 10,000 years because it was based on nature’s laws of diversity, recycling, regeneration & circularity. Albert Howard spread organic farming worldwide learning from Indian peasants. Working with nature is sophistication, not backwardness.  

“Bayer calling India’s agriculture backward is a new toxic colonisation. Bayer/Monsanto, the poison cartel whose roots are in war, has driven biodiversity to extinction with monocultures, spread cancers with glyphosate & herbicides, destroyed democracy.”  

Bayer promotes a corporate expansionist ‘development’ agenda that is self-sustaining and can be described as anything but development (see the online article Resisting Genetically Mutilated Food and the Eco-Modern Nightmare).  

Companies like Bayer present their technologies and products as fixes for the problems created by the model of ‘growth’ and ‘development’ they promote. ‘Scientific innovation’ is touted as the answer. The proposed solutions often create new problems or worsen existing ones. This leads to a cycle of dependency on corporate products and technologies. Monsanto’s failed Bt cotton in India being a case in point.  

Problems created by corporate-led development become opportunities for further corporate inputs and the commodification of knowledge and further ‘expert’ interventions. The primary motivation is financial gain rather than genuine societal improvement.  

Corporate-driven ‘development’ is a misnomer, especially in agriculture, as it often leads to regression in terms of health, environmental sustainability and rural community resilience, while perpetuating a cycle of problems and ‘solutions’ that primarily benefit large corporations.  

But the type of agroecological solutions presented by the likes of Bhaskar Save run counter to Bayer’s aims of more pesticides, more GMOs, more control and corporate consolidation. For example, the industry seeks to derail the EU’s farm to fork strategy (which involves a dramatic reduction in agrochemical use), and Bayer spends record amounts to shape policies to its advantage, courtesy of its entrenched lobbying networks.  

Of course, Bayer presents its neocolonial aspirations in terms of helping backward Indian farmers. A good old dose of Western saviourism.  

To promote its model, Bayer must appear to offer practical solutions. It uses the narrative of climate emergency to promote a Ponzi carbon trading scheme that is resulting in land displacement across the world. And Bayer says that labour shortages for manual weeding in Indian agriculture are a significant challenge, so the rollout of toxic herbicides like glyphosate are a necessity.  

But there are several approaches to address this issue beyond relying on herbicides like glyphosate (it will kill all plants that do not have the herbicide tolerant trait), which is wholly unsuitable for a nation comprising so many small farms cultivating a diverse range of crops.  

Mechanical weeding using animal-drawn or tractor-powered implements for larger farms is one solution, and there are several agronomic techniques that can help suppress weeds and reduce labour needs: crop rotation disrupts weed lifecycles, higher planting densities shade out weeds, proper fertilisation gives crops a competitive advantage and use of cover crops and mulches can suppress weed growth.  

Even here, however, there are cynical attempts to get farmers to change their cultivation methods (with no tangible financial benefits) and move away from traditional systems.  

In the article The Ox Fall Down: Path Breaking and Treadmills in Indian Cotton Agriculture, for instance, we see farmers being nudged away from traditional planting methods and pushed towards a method inconducive to oxen ploughing but very conducive for herbicide-dependent weed management. That article notes the huge growth potential for herbicides in India, something companies like Bayer are keen to capitalise on.    

Wiebusch talks of India reaching ‘developed status’. But what does the type of ‘development’ he proposes entail?  

We need only look around us for the answer: decision-making centralised in the hands of government and corporate entities, traditional local governance structures weakened and standardised, top-down policies and corporate consolidation through mergers and acquisitions with local independent enterprises struggling to compete.  

Consolidated corporations have greater lobbying power to shape regulations in their favour, further entrenching their market position. In other words, political centralisation and corporate consolidation are often intertwined. Centralised political structures tend to align with the interests of large, consolidated corporations, and both centralised governments and large corporations exert greater control over resources.  

This dual process has led to reduced economic diversity and resilience, weakened local communities and traditions, increased vulnerability to systemic shocks and diminished democratic participation.  

‘Developed status’ also means accelerated urbanisation, land amalgamations for industrial-scale farming and depopulation of the countryside.  

It has been estimated that between 2016 and 2030, globally, urban areas will have tripled in size, expanding into cropland and undermining the productivity of agricultural systems. Around 60% of the world’s cropland lies on the outskirts of cities. This land is, on average, twice as productive as land elsewhere on the globe.    

As cities expand, millions of small-scale farmers are displaced. These farmers produce the majority of food in the Global South and are key to global food security.  

A combination of urbanisation and policies deliberately designed to displace the food-producing peasantry will serve to boost the corporate takeover of India’s agrifood sector.  

But none of this is inevitable. Many of us know what the response should be: prioritising sustainable, locally appropriate solutions and restoring food sovereignty and the economic vibrancy of rural communities; focusing on holistic human well-being rather than narrow economic metrics of ‘growth’; preserving traditional knowledge that underpins highly productive  farming practices for the benefit of farmers, consumer health and the environment; and empowering communities through localism and decentralisation rather than creating state-corporate dependency.  

Such solutions are markedly different from those characterised by rural population displacement, the subjugation of peoples and nature, nutrient-poor diets, degraded on-farm and off-farm ecosystems and corporate consolidation.  

There are alternative visions for the future, alternative visions of human development. But these do not boost corporate margins or control and do not fit the hegemonic narrative of what passes for ‘development’.  

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Renowned author Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).  

Featured image is from Sebastian Rittau via Wikimedia Commons

Why Are African States Joining BRICS?

October 17th, 2024 by Kester Kenn Klomegah

Geopolitical changes and the reconfiguration of economic architecture towards the Global South, under the rapidly-growing influence of BRICS+ (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) on the global stage are driving majority of African States to move away the United States draconic hegemony, its hidden ambiguity and obscurity, as well as rules-based political order combined with authoritarianism. Without much doubts, African States are increasingly showing skyline interest in BRICS+, primarily due to its distinctive-focused objectives including global peace, the strategic development paradigms, food and energy security directions in the 21st century and beyond.

Ultimately, African States are shrugging off relations with the Western and European world, alternatively settling for better beneficial economic cooperation and targeting to tap existing opportunities with countries in the Global South. Researchers and policy experts have argued that the main aim within the association is to create conditions for the sustainable development for BRICS+ member countries and their people. There are other several factors or reasons, but for Africa the central question remains what concretely these countries wanted to gain from BRICS+ association. This article explores some of the driving reasons:

Exemplary Leadership

At least, Africa is in search for an exemplary leadership for the next decade. What is really needed is statesmanship, leaders who understand and recognise clearly the basic principles of shaping the future of global collaboration, particularly in the economic architecture. Generally Africa views China, Russia, India and other members of BRICS upholding and advocating for the principles of equality in political participation, respect for sovereignty and integrity as well as complete fairness both in bilateral and multilateral cooperation. That however, the exceptionally poor choice of new BRICS members (Ethiopia and Egypt) in Johannesburg has increasingly wretched the BRICS pursuit of global peace and security. The destructive ill-discipline of two new members was observed when BRICS foreign ministers abruptly closed a meeting in New York in late September 2024, due to Egypt and Ethiopia crashing over UN Security Council reforms, as they apparently considered South Africa and Nigeria would be unsuitable choices as non-veto-voting permanent members. (See further reports on Ethiopia and Egypt’s blatant conflict over Somaliland, in the Horn of Africa).

Beneficial Economic Cooperation

Acknowledging the current low levels of development, African leaders have consistently been forging a broader relations with external powers, on one hand. On the other hand, African States expressed absolute frustration over economic exploitations, foreign multinational financial institutions’ stringent conditions and Western hegemony. As an alternative step, majority are now consolidating their positions based on a balance of interests, and simultaneously prioritizing economic cooperation and  partnerships with BRICS, particularly China and Russia. According to information sources monitored, many African countries in the continent have expressed the desire ascend and ready to strictly adhere to the principles outlined by BRICS+ association. Applications filed by African countries conform to the agreed guiding principles, standards, criteria and procedure for BRICS membership expansion. With optimism, it is however expected approx. 15 African States’ applications for membership would be approved during the late October summit – under the motto “Strengthening Multilateralism for Equitable Global Development and Security” – in Kazan, capital city of Republic of Tatarstan. In practical terms, BRICS’ unique enlargement will, in the near future, embrace potential new members from the Global South and Global East.

Image: Bb3015 / Wikipedia

Despite the challenges, African States have high hopes and will explore the possibility of taking concessionary loans, and/or securing adequate funding through BRICS’ New Development Bank (NDB) which was established in 2015. For the NDB is in steady evolutionary process, but hopes to forge economic partnerships within BRICS+, and facilitate access to diverse markets, enhance trade and investment opportunities across emerging economies. At its annual board meeting, from August 29 to 31, 2024, in South Africa, the NDB restated its insights to offer a more inclusive and flexible approach to financing, support the reshaping long-term development goals, better suited to the unique needs of BRICS members and other developing countries.

In addition, BRICS+ has set significant task to ensure a fairer interconnectedness between states, and enlist their active participation in the reconstruction of global economic architecture away from existing unipolarity. In order to realize this, BRICS plans to introduce new financial payment systems. The concept of ‘de-dollarization’ and the term ‘multipolarity’ are now admired by majority of developing countries in the Global South. An appreciated driver for this process is BRICS platform created to resonate broader common objectives, to engage in steadfast reforms and no doubt, to roadmap better alternative socio-economic and political directions.

While African States continue to forge alternative economic and governance structures that challenge the the Britton Woods institutions, multinational financial system, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund with their existing dynamical network still operate in nearly all countries across Africa. Egypt and Ethiopia (both BRICS members) are engrossed with funding from IMF and the World Bank. For example, Egypt, struggling with economic challenges, recently secured an $8 billion bailout from the western-dominated International Monetary Fund, while Ethiopia, facing financial strain and internal crises of its own, also turned to the IMF for a $3.4 billion loan. This suggests that a significant departure from dollar reliance and existing financial institutions remains a distant prospect. According to June report from the World Bank, Africa’s real GDP growth, which dropped to 3.1 percent in 2023 from 4.1 percent in 2022. Looking forward, however, the economic outlook is more positive, with growth expected to increase to 3.7 percent in 2024 and 4.3 percent in 2025, highlighting the strong resilience of African economies, as it targets access to new markets, investment and technology.

Meanwhile among current members of BRICS, China with a cutting-edge maintains the most admirable robust economic relations with Africa, especially under its policy flagship the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) which it started in 2013 to establish beneficial economic relations and equal opportunities and foster cooperation in the different parts of the world. China’s private sector is now likely to lead trade and investment in Africa, while new initiatives like the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) will promote the growth of region. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), this amounted to a record $282 billion in total trade volume in 2023. Trading largely in military arms and weaponry, Russia has a meagre $25 billion trade statistics with Africa.

Africa’s Security Expectations

An analysis and monitoring show that Africa in dare need of peace and of security, an ingredient for development. Further analysis also highlights African countries’ divergent interests in politics, economy and social spheres. The same applies to their foreign policies with external partners, while majority still pursues a multi-alignment strategy, engaging with both the U.S. and the other major powers.

The current Commander of the U.S. Africa Command, Michael E. Langley, stated that the purpose of the command is to work alongside African military personnel to support their military operations. The White House official documents categorically stated that Africa Command “will strengthen our security cooperation with Africa and create new opportunities to bolster the capabilities of our partners in Africa. Africa Command will enhance our efforts to bring peace and security to the people of Africa and promote our common goals of development, health, education, democracy, and economic growth in Africa.”

Over the past decades, Africa’s security objectives have remained fragmented, and in many countries the United States African Command (AFRICOM), responsible for U.S. military operations, including fighting regional conflicts, has terribly failed to attain their purpose of creating military bases on the continent. It has huge yearly budget for sustaining military relations with 53 African States.

With the changing geopolitical tides, African Union (AU) and individual African States now envision to re-align with BRICS+ to address peace and security questions throughout the continent. BRICS+ has become Africa’s salvation. Russia has contributed immensely towards the expulsion of Europeans, particularly France out of French-speaking States in West Africa. These included Burkina Faso, Malian Republic and Niger. The Horn of Africa is still in delicate fragile situation. In a few other places such Mozambique, Guinea and Chad partially get financial support for military operations from Europe and the United States.

The Declaration adopted at the XV BRICS Summit held in South Africa, reiterated absolute commitment to inclusive multilateralism towards supporting peace and security in Africa. It underscored “commitment to the peaceful resolution of differences and disputes through dialogue and inclusive consultations in a coordinated and cooperative manner and support all efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of crises.”

It finally stressed commitment to multilateralism and to the central role of the United Nations which are prerequisites to maintain peace and security. And for this, it is imperative to refrain from any coercive measures not based on international law and the UN Charter.

Critical Weak Points

In reaction at the first stage in deciding whether to expand, BRICS has to guide against its internal instability and possible negative influence. The association should seriously consider the importance of reviewing and working on its basic instruments, instead of making any hasty decisions. BRICS is looking to the Global South – developing countries with sharp disparities but together account for 40 per cent of the world’s GDP and 80 per cent of its population.

Many analysts have made powerful narratives that BRICS policies may not bring any real change because of diverging interests in politics, economy and culture. Many have different perceptions about the essence of what often referred to as a multipolar world. While expressing readiness to leverage unto BRICS platform which is largely considered symbolic in the current geopolitical situation, there are many practical things that are difficult to promote. Notwithstanding that, new BRICS members have multiple domestic issues to settle and still have to traditionally rely on western institutions. Shifting their alliance away from these institutions implies driving a sharp-edged dagger into the dynamics of their economic development. Russia has made an economic impact especially in Africa and Asian countries, in addition to China and India, despite the fact that its agenda is dominated by the Ukraine war.

BRICS Under Russia’s Presidency

Today, new players representing the Global South and Global East have stepped onto the international political stage. The geopolitical ambitions of the new global players are buttressed by their economic potential. Their numbers are growing, according Foreign Affairs Minister Sergey Lavrov, and to support his argument, he made reference to President Vladimir Putin who said at the G20 extraordinary summit on November 2023, that a “significant portion of global investment, trade and consumer activity is shifting to the Asian, African and Latin American regions, which are home to the majority of the world’s population.”

At the Primakov Readings held in Moscow, Sergey Lavrov further remarked “the trends shaping the multipolar order are new realities. The unbalanced and unfair model of globalization is becoming a thing of the past. The emergence of new global development centres, the increasing self-awareness of many developing countries and their refusal to blindly follow former colonial powers.

As often understandably described, BRICS countries represent about 46% of the world’s population and over 36% of global GDP, according to recent estimates by global financial institutions. As an informal association, its aim is to amplify the voice of major emerging economies to counterbalance the Western-centered global order and related structured institutions. In a nutshell, BRICS, as a symbol of multipolarity, overlooks its role in highlighting the huge deficiencies and enormous challenges of the existing international framework. It was founded in 2006 by Russia, Brazil, India and China, with South Africa joining in 2010. In January 2024, it expanded to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran,  Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who worked previously with Inter Press Service (IPS), Weekly Blitz and InDepthNews, is now a regular contributor to Global Research. He researches Eurasia, Russia, Africa and BRICS. His focused interest areas include geopolitical changes, foreign relations and economic development questions relating to Africa. As a versatile researcher, he believes that everyone deserves equal access to quality and trustworthy media reports.

Featured image: © Sputnik/Photo host agency brics-russia2020.ru

Today’s Humanity Is Victim of Powerful Political Cults

The trajectory of daily aerial bombardments, targeted killings of fellow human beings, planned destruction of human habitats and cries for help by innocent children, men and women go unanswered for more than a year. It is madness, inhumanity, complete breakdown and impotence of global organizations such as the UNO and its Security Council and complete indifference of global leaders to challenge the animosities perpetuated by Israel and bombed by using American supplied weapons on the masses who should be protected by the so-called civilized world of the 21st century if there is any left intact.

The global thinking hubs wondered how to avert the tyranny and oppression to safeguard the innocent people of Gaza. President Biden and Secretary Blinken claimed to be deescalating the war in the Middle East and focusing on humanitarian aid desperately needed by the entrapped civilians across Gaza, but they appear preoccupied in sending THAAT and weapons of mass destruction to level Gaza and make it available to Israeli settlers. Their words and actions are self-contradictory, treacherous and misleading as Israel extends bombardment on Lebanon to crush the will of the civilian population for security and survival. Essentials of human survival are being weaponized. The global humanity must be concerned, why Israel is stopping foods, medicine and water supplies to the entrapped civilians in Northern strip and why it is repeatedly bombing the Al-Aqsa hospital and places of worhsip across Gaza? PM Netanyahu and his Far-Right extremists coalition live in a political fantancy not representative of the people of Israel. The contradictions covered up adroit formulation but continue to haunt the Israeli masses for peace and belonging to the land of Palestine: 

People of Israel Feel Denied Freedom and Curse of Political Lies

Ari Shavit (“Israel Takes its Last Breath”, Haaretz, Israel: 10/8/24), clarfies the essence of current affairs: It appears we have passed the point of no return, and it may be that “Israel” can no longer end the occupation, stop colonization, or achieve peace. It seems impossible to reform Zionism, save democracy, and divide the people of this land.

He added: If the situation is as it is, then:

  • There is no reason to live in this country.
  • There is no reason to write in “Haaretz.”
  • There is no reason to read “Haaretz.”

We must follow what Rogel Alpher suggested two years ago—leave the country… If “Israelism” and Jewishness are no longer a vital part of one’s identity, and if every Israeli citizen holds a foreign passport, not only technically but psychologically, then it’s over. We should say goodbye to our friends and move to San Francisco, Berlin, or Paris.

Ari Shavit points out: The curse of lies is what haunts the Israelis, and day after day it strikes them in the face in the form of a knife in the hand of a Jerusalemite, Hebronite, or Nabulsi, or with a stone or from a bus driver from Jaffa, Haifa, or Acre. The Israelis realize they have no future in Palestine; this is not a land without a people as they falsely claimed. Another writer acknowledges not just the existence of the Palestinian people but rather their superiority over the Israelis. This is Gideon Levy, the leftist Zionist, who says this.

Aluf Benn, Editor, Haaretz: “Israel’s Paradox of Defeat” (Transcend Media: 10/16/24), spells out the fear of common citizens: But even with the IDF occupying about a third of Gaza’s territory, to many Israelis, the current situation feels like defeat. …..This calamitous stasis, coupled with Israel’s growing global isolation and increasingly gloomy economic outlook, contribute to a national sense of hopelessness and despair. In fact, paradoxically, important facets of Israeli politics and society have changed surprisingly little since the immediate aftermath of Hamas’s attack. Citizens of border communities in the north and the south remain unable to return to their homes. Rather than uniting Jewish Israelis against a common external enemy, Israel’s now multifront fight against its external enemies has only widened preexisting social and political fissures between Netanyahu’s opponents and his supporters. Beating the expectations of his foes and his friends alike, Netanyahu continues to act as the center of gravity in Israeli politics. The right-wing coalition that keeps him in power has amped up its quest to crush the Palestinian statehood movement and “replace the Israeli elite,” a euphemism for demolishing Israel’s democratic and liberal institutions. 

The thinking Israelis are fast awakening to question the doctrine of Zionism, acclaimed Jewish superiority over others and systems of fake democracy. The 21st century age of knowledge and human expectations offer a grim picture of the present and future in-waiting. Israeli citizenry protesting against the war and calling for an immediate ceasefire, return of hostages and peace wants PM Netanyahu to resign alleging he is inept, greedy, self-centered who heavily rely on Israeli extremist policies and practices to undermine their future. Once in power, is Netanyahu irrelevant, problematic and paranoid to see the people’s interests? Biden and Netanyahu both appear to have lost sense of reality and awareness and most importantly, consciousness of the self and the political environment around them. They have become psychopaths who baffle with time and tides of political mismanagement, wars on mankind and destroy cultures and civilizations to overrun those who challenge their obsessed ignorance and viciousness.

Living time and encompassing realities demanding a navigational change are ignored in political statements, policies and actions. Aggressive cults are working across America and Israel mysteriously as if Joe Biden, Blinken and Netanyahu would have an infinite lifespan. They breathe oxygen in a self-generated conflict zone without any accountability. The cults used them for their own vested interests. Every egoistic leader is an enemy of the self and mankind. Throughout history men of power and influence commit horrible crimes against the humanity of which they are an essential part. Why? The answer lies with their individualistic absolutism and mindset. Is it part of the human nature that man should be cruel against man? We, the People are at a RISK of Extinction. Global warriors are the elite class born to rule – the men of king, who are most often hated and feared and always dream of glory and triumph to achieve at a cost of ruthlessness, triviality and success leading to degeneration and viciousness across the human societies. They are influential to defy accountability for their crimes.

We, the People, and Earth Sustains Life and Humanity and Our Enemies Destroy It

The Earth was a Divine “trust” to mankind for its existence, survival and progress. We, the people of the Earth, are standing and moving faster than the speed of sound. It could be hard to imagine or believe it. But you were standing on solid ground, and not in the cockpit of a supersonic jet. At any given moment, we are all moving at a speed of about 1,674 kilometers an hour, thanks to the Earth’s rotation and thanks to the Creator of the Earth.We live on Earth created by God for Man and Humanity and all other living beings: In Chapter 23: verse 72, The Quran makes a vivid revelation:

“We did indeed offer the Trust to the Heavens and the Earth. And the Mountains but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof: But man undertook it; He was indeed unjust and foolish.”

Western cultures are neglectful of the memory of God and lack rational understanding of the imperatives of living Earth and how it sustains life and humanity and all that could be imagined. Does reason operate the functionalities of the Earth or is it the Command of God to ensure miraculous operations for billions of years? Is it unreasonable to believe in the Divine Revelations and be the People of REASON? Earth’s average orbital speed is about 30 kilometers per second. In other units, that’s about 19 miles per second, or 67,000 miles per hour, or 110,000 kilometers per hour (110 million meters per hour). The earth rotates once every 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4.09053 seconds, called the sidereal period, and its circumference is roughly 40,075 kilometers. Thus, the surface of the earth at the equator moves at a speed of 460 meters per second–or roughly 1,000 miles per hour. Across the varied spectrums of human thoughts hardly any thinking people reflect upon the existing and continuous balanced environmental gases which sustain the living creatures on earth. Our environment contains 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 0.97% argon and carbon dioxide 0.04% and the air safeguards the atmosphere and life on earth by absorbing ultraviolet solar radiation and reducing the temperature extremes in constant and systematic changing of days and nights. 

The US and Israel Could be Charged by the ICJ for Crimes Against Humanity and Genocide 

Wars kill people and destroy human habitats. Yet, the paranoid and most hated maniacs put up a show of war celebrations – a success achieved by strangulating the humanity – cost of ruthlessness, human degeneration and lack of imagination. To glance ahead it seems that the Western world failed to see a dreadful tragic history in the making of the end of time and loss of ingenuity to understand the consequences of naive egoism of Israeli leadership making war as an instrument of territorial expansion and conquest across Palestine, Lebanon and the larger Arab Middle East. If Lebanon had responsible public institutions and leadership they should have formed a legtimate government to encounter the Israeli onslaught. Not so, they appear their own enemies working against the interest of people just like the Arab-Muslim leaders lacking sense of honesty and capacity, unable to challenge the US-Israel war against the helpless masses of Gaza. The Israeli leaders prophesize “greater Israel” and the US hegemoney over the oil exporting Arab states. The Arab-Muslim leaders could well be described as a scum floating on a torrent. If Israel is not stopped, soon the leading oil exporting Arab states could fly Israeli-American flags for a change. Please see How Arab Leaders Betray Islam and Defy the Logice of Political Change, Peace and Security.”

The UNO and its Security Council and the EU shamefully became dubious and void in the 21st century global norms of civility, human rights, freedom, justice and safety of civilians. The UNSC resolutions for ceasefire and peace turned out to be a joke to mankind’s hopes as Israel refused to honor them. The US and Israeli leaders are not conscious of their own end game and could be charged and prosecuted for crimes against humanity and genocide. PM Netanyahu and his extremist regime would see Gaza and occupied West Bank more like an experimental lab for that end game. Animals live and do not reflect on the imperatives of life whereas, we, the human beings cannot act like animals as we are supposed to be intelligent and responsible species on this Earth. At the edge of reason, the notion of evil leads to realization of evil and tyranny of war must be stopped by all means and those responsible for the genocide and crimes against humanity must be held accountable to restore the manifestation of a sustainable human future.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in international affairs-global security, peace and conflict resolution and has spent several academic years across the Russian-Ukrainian and Central Asian regions knowing the people, diverse cultures of thinking and political governance and a keen interest in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations, and author of several publications including: One Humanity and the Remaking of Global Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution, and a forthcoming book: Global Humanity and the Remaking of Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution beyond the Lens of Human Consciousness.

Featured image is from Fuad Alymani

Israeli warplanes have launched dozens of airstrikes across Lebanon over the past 24 hours despite US ‘guarantees’ that Tel Aviv would scale down its aggression.

.

.

.

.

“The mayor of Nabatieh, among others… was martyred. It’s a massacre,” Nabatieh Governor Howaida Turk told AFP. “For now, 11 strikes have mainly hit Nabatieh but also its surroundings,” Turk added, and described how the intense raids “formed a kind of belt of fire” in the area.

“The Israeli enemy raid … on two buildings, that of the Nabatieh municipality and the union of municipalities, killed six people in a preliminary toll,” Lebanon’s Health Ministry said in a statement, adding that rescuers were searching for survivors under the rubble.

At least 43 others were injured in the attack.

Lebanese authorities announced on Tuesday that the death toll from Israeli attacks over the last year has reached 2,350, with 10,906 injured.

In response to the violent raid of the southern Lebanese town, caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati said Israeli jets “deliberately struck a municipal council meeting focused on addressing the city’s relief and service needs.”

“This new assault, along with the ongoing crimes committed by Israel against civilians, is a direct challenge to the international community, whose silence only emboldens the occupation to continue its violations and crimes,” Mikati added.

The Lebanese premier also took aim at the “international community” for being “deliberately silent” about the Israeli aggressions. “What solution can be hoped for in light of this reality?” he said in a statement.

Caretaker Interior Minister Bassam Mawlawi confirmed that the Nabatieh municipality was targeted during a meeting held to coordinate relief work and aid distribution for people who have remained in southern Lebanon. He said a civil defense member was killed and others injured in the strike.

The attack came just hours after Israel renewed its bombing campaign of Beirut’s southern suburbs after a six-day pause. On Tuesday, Mikati claimed to have “received a kind of guarantee to reduce the escalation in the southern suburbs and Beirut.”

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image: L’Orient Le Jour/Muntasser Abdallah

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and the Russian Air Force are escalating attacks on Radical Islamic terrorists who occupy Idlib, killing 30 militants on October 13.

The terrorist groups have been preparing to launch attacks on civilians in northern Syria, including the Idlib countryside, Latakia, and Aleppo.

The SAA has been conducting continuous attacks using heavy artillery and Russian warplanes, targeting Idlib and the western Aleppo countryside over the past few weeks.

On October 12, SAA forces shelled villages west of Aleppo and Idlib countryside with heavy artillery and suicide drones, while targeting terrorist groups.

Idlib has extensive tunnels dug by terrorists over the last 12 years, with one strike targeting an underground vehicle depot near the cannery factory in Idlib city.

Syrian-Russian strikes also hit areas controlled by the Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP) in the hills of Kabani, in Latakia’s countryside west of Idlib.The headquarters of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) leaders were targeted as they arrived at a location near the town of Nayrab, between Idlib and Aleppo.

The main terrorist group holding Idlib is HTS and includes the National Liberation Front, part of the Syrian National Army (SNA), alongside Jaish al-Izza.

The leader of HTS is Mohammed al-Julani, a Syrian who grew up in Saudi Arabia. Indoctrinated there in Radical Islam, he traveled to Iraq in 2003 to fight the American Army. While in an American prison in Iraq, he became associated with Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS. Once Julani was released, he went to Syria and founded the first Al Qaeda branch there, Jibhat al-Nusra.

Nusra became the most vicious, and successful armed group in Syria, and the US-sponsored Free Syrian Army (FSA) ceased to exist, having been absorbed within HTS. After years of battles, the SAA regained territory lost, and Idlib became the last remaining terrorist-controlled area.

Baghdadi and his successor were killed by US commandos in Idlib, as the area became a magnet for Radical Islamic terrorists. Perhaps Julani gave the US the location coordinates for the leader of ISIS, even though Julani still has a $10 million bounty on his head from the US government.

Regardless of the terrorist classification of the leader of Idlib, the American media has come to Idlib to interview Julani to re-brand him as a moderate ‘freedom fighter’ and worthy of the support from Washington and the UN. Julani changed the name of his group from Jibhat al-Nusra to HTS because the US and the UN had out-lawed Nusra as a terrorist group.

Experts who research Radical Islamic terrorist groups know that HTS is just a new name, to allow the US and international humanitarian groups to continue to work alongside and support the HTS. As the old saying goes, ‘a leopard can’t change his spots’.

In 2019, a deal was signed between Russia and Turkey, in which Turkey guaranteed the safe passage of cars, trucks, and buses between Latakia and Aleppo on the M4 highway. However, Turkey never fulfilled their promise.Turkey, a US ally, participated in the Obama-designed US-NATO attack on Syria for ‘regime change’.

Turkey became the staging ground and transit hub for the international terrorist groups coming to Syria through the border at Idlib. One of the terrorist groups is the Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP), which is made up of Chinese citizens known as Uyghurs. About 3,500 TIP terrorists live in Idlib and speak Turkic, the root language of Turkey. President Erdogan of Turkey expedited their travel from western China to Idlib. However, Erdogan wants to restore his relationship with the Assad government in Damascus.

With Turkey’s economy in ruins, it is important to get the Syrian business back, which was the biggest export destination of Turkish goods before 2011. In mid-summer 2024, Turkey fought several battles against their former ally, the Idlib terrorists, in the Kilic Valley south of Kessab in the north Latakia countryside. Turkey wants to cut ties with the terrorists there but is taking faltering steps in the process, perhaps in consideration of the civilians who are in the middle.

President Assad of Syria has asked Turkish occupation forces in Syria to leave before discussion of renewed diplomatic relations. Despite Ankara’s rhetoric, the withdrawal has not happened, but the mid-summer battles by Turkey against the terrorists were promising a change in foreign policy.

Idlib is an agricultural province that lies east of the port of Latakia, and the industrial capital of Syria to the east, Aleppo. Idlib is important because it is a rich olive-growing area, and because it sits on the border with Turkey. In 2011, the first murder victim in Idlib, carried out by the US-supported FSA, was a pharmacist who had been an advocate for secular political values.

He was executed and burned along with his pharmacy. The US-supported FSA were followers of Radical Islam, which is a political ideology, and not a religion or sect, but is followed by some Sunni Muslims. In Saudi Arabia they refer to it as ‘Political Islam’, and it is the fundamental belief system of the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, and ISIS.

According to Axios, the US has about 900 troops in Syria, of which 100 are tasked with supporting the FSA. The only territory in Syria currently occupied by ‘rebels’ is Idlib.

The Western media refers to Idlib as the “last rebel stronghold”, but when you research who controls Idlib, you find it is HTS, which is a Radical Islamic terrorist group. There are no ‘opposition rebels’ in Syria; only terrorists.There are about 3 million persons in Idlib, and many are unarmed civilians, such as women, children, and the elderly.

These people are used effectively as human shields by the terrorists. For many years, the UN has been warning of a humanitarian disaster in Idlib should it be attacked by Syria or Russia.

The UN, and other Western humanitarian organizations, keep delivering food, medicines, and other supplies to keep the civilians, the ‘human shields’, alive. All the goods delivered pass through the hands of HTS, and are distributed according to their priorities.

People who have complained about the strict Islamic law adhered to by HTS, or the arbitrary arrests, torture, and executions by HTS, do not get their share of the free goods. The undistributed free goods are placed in Julani’s shopping mall, Al Hamra Mall, and sold. The UN enables HTS, and the dictator Julani, to keep the civilians under lock and key, and without a voice to complain.

Humanitarian organizations complained when their warehouses were stormed by the HTS when they offered classes designed for women to gain skills for employment, and the HTS strictly forbids women from attending.

The Turkish-backed SNA held Syrians for ransom on October 14 north of Aleppo. These were Syrians who had been living in Lebanon for years and were attempting to return home to flee the Israeli attack on Lebanon.The SNA set up roadblocks and demanded $100 in ransom from each person they held. 57 were freed after paying the extortion, and the remaining victims who could not pay were being held as hostages in the SNA prisons of al-Bab and Azaz, north of Aleppo.

While the world is watching events in Gaza and Lebanon, perhaps Idlib can be liberated from the terrorist groups holding 3 million as human shields and preventing families and cargo from traveling between Latakia and Aleppo. The terrorists have prevented the full recovery of Aleppo, which was liberated in December 2016 by holding the M4 highway as impassable.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Photo taken from southern Turkish border town of Ceylanpinar on Oct. 10, 2019 shows smoke rising from the northern Syrian city of Ras al-Ain during an attack launched by Turkish army. (Xinhua/Mustafa Kaya)

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party of Canada have become so despised after nine years in power that only a quarter of the electorate is considering voting for him. Yet, despite the many current problems in Canada, Trudeau continues to prioritise external matters, such as Ukraine and Sikh separatism in India.

“His failings hold lessons for liberals the world over,” said the British newspaper The Economist in an article titled “Justin Trudeau is wrecking Canada’s liberal dream.”

After losing the support of its government ally, the New Democratic Party, and being defeated in two by-elections, the Liberal Party fears that a plan to increase its vote share is not being considered. The outlet claimed that a letter is circulating among Liberal MPs calling on Justin Trudeau to resign from his post as Prime Minister.

Canadians, who supported him in 2015 to come to power and backed his re-election in 2019 and 2021, are turning against his government.

Housing prices are “central” to understanding the prime minister’s downfall. According to the newspaper, the cost of buying a home has increased by 66% since Justin Trudeau took office, and the lack of supply is particularly acute in Canada.

Mike Moffatt, a housing economist quoted by The Economist, said a “wartime effort” is needed to triple the pace of construction to achieve 5.8 million homes built over the next ten years.

The media outlet added that the large number of migrants arriving in the United States during the administration of the liberal prime minister has aggravated the crisis in the demand for housing.

“Demand for housing from the large number of immigrants who arrived during Mr Trudeau’s decade in power has worsened the crunch,” The Economist reported.

However, the health and education systems are also being affected by the growth in the number of foreign workers, which rose from 109,000 in 2018 to around 240,000 in 2023.

In addition, the number of non-permanent residents, including students and asylum seekers, increased to more than 3 million as of last July, according to the British outlet.

“Canada suffers from laggardly productivity growth,” the Economist said, adding that this situation is exacerbated by a mediocre economy in the United States. The slowdown in productivity growth is holding back wages, and although investment has been “strong” in oil and gas fields, it has been “overshadowed” elsewhere.

The outlet noted that rather than “adapting to or confronting challenges thrown up by his policies,” Trudeau “has preferred to attack his critics” and “seemed inert as the erosion of his party’s support has accelerated.” As a result, “too many” Canadians have “forsaken” the prime minister and the causes he “stood for.”

Yet, even with Canada gripped by a housing and cost-of-living crisis, Trudeau has been unrelenting in his support for Ukraine, recently signing the Fourth Additional Agreement for CA$400 million.

“Canada is one of the leaders in supporting Ukraine and a strategic partner that has provided significant assistance since the first days of the full-scale invasion. Direct budgetary support since February 2022 has reached more than US$5 billion. I am grateful to the Government and citizens of Canada for their solidarity with Ukraine and their crucial contribution to the stability of Ukraine’s financial system,” said Ukrainian Finance Minister Serhii Marchenko on October 11.

It is recalled that last month, Trudeau championed Ukraine’s efforts to receive approval to use NATO-provided long-range weaponry to strike deep into Russian territory.

“[Canada fully supports Ukraine using long-range weaponry to] prevent and interdict Russia’s continued ability to degrade Ukrainian civilian infrastructure,” he said on September 13.

At the same time, Canada’s relations with India have soured once again, with both countries expelling diplomats on October 14 as part of the escalating dispute over the June 2023 assassination of a Sikh separatist, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, in Canada. Trudeau claims that the Indian government is behind Nijjar’s assassination but has yet to offer any evidence.

The pro-Khalistan, or Sikh independence, has been the main issue between Canada and India, with Indian authorities repeatedly highlighting that the Trudeau government offers a safe haven for what New Delhi recognises as terrorists. Sikhs comprise nearly 2% of Canada’s population, and community members have taken up prominent positions in the country, including politics, and for this reason, they are an important voter constituency.

India’s Foreign Minister said in a statement on October 14,

“The Government of India strongly rejects these preposterous imputations and ascribes them to the political agenda of the Trudeau Government that is centred around vote bank politics,” adding that Trudeau’s Government depended on “a political party, whose leader openly espouses a separatist ideology vis-à-vis India” and was also responsible for “aggravating matters.”

Trudeau certainly wrecked Canada’s liberal dream, with a big part attributed to prioritising lost causes for foreign countries rather than dealing with domestic issues. As Canada has become unaffordable for the average citizen, he has instead sought to challenge Russia through the Ukrainian proxy and is missing out on valuable trade with India to defend a vote bank recognised as terrorists by New Delhi. These priorities have come at the price of not only ruined external relations but also the impoverishment of Canadian citizens.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Canadian Press/Shutterstcok

Non-nuclear Iran is incapable of existentially threatening the US like nuclear-armed Russia could.

Politico cited a senior Senate aid and two sources in the Biden Administration to report on Wednesday that the US is much more afraid of an uncontrollable escalation sequence with Russia than with Iran due to the first’s nuclear capabilities. As proof of this, the US has no qualms about shooting down Iranian missiles launched against Israel but won’t consider shooting down Russian ones launched against Ukraine, which has upset Zelensky and some of his compatriots who thus feel like second-class allies.

The difference between Russia/Ukraine and Iran/Israel in this regard accounts for the US’ different approach towards each pair. As was explained last month in this analysis about why “Putin Explicitly Confirmed What Was Already Self-Evident About Russia’s Nuclear Doctrine”, the comparatively more pragmatic policymakers who still have the final say in Russia and the US have thus far managed to avoid the uncontrollable escalation sequence that their respective hawkish rivals want. Here’s how they did it:

“[The US hawks’] comparatively more pragmatic rivals who still call the shots always signal their escalatory intentions far in advance so that Russia could prepare itself and thus be less likely to ‘overreact’ in some way that risks World War III. Likewise, Russia continues restraining itself from replicating the US’ ‘shock-and-awe’ campaign in order to reduce the likelihood of the West ‘overreacting’ by directly intervening in the conflict to salvage their geopolitical project and thus risking World War III.

It can only be speculated whether this interplay is due to each’s permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (‘deep state’) behaving responsibly on their own considering the enormity of what’s at stake or if it’s the result of a ‘gentlemen’s agreement’. Whatever the truth may be, the aforesaid model accounts for the unexpected moves or lack thereof from each, which are the US correspondingly telegraphing its escalatory intentions and Russia never seriously escalating in kind.”

There’s no equivalent balance of nuclear power between the US and Iran, with the most that Iran can do is launch saturation strikes against American bases in the region, not existentially threaten it like Russia can. If Iran’s potential retaliation to Israel’s expected strike harms or kills some of the nearly 100-member team operating the US’ THAAD in the self-professed Jewish State, then the US could either take the hit, retaliate against Iranian-aligned Resistance groups in the region, or strike the Islamic Republic.

Regardless of whatever might happen, non-nuclear Iran is incapable of existentially threatening the US like nuclear-armed Russia could if the latter retaliated to the interception of its missiles by hitting targets inside of NATO, which could easily catalyze a possibly apocalyptic escalation sequence. To be sure, there are indeed some US hawks who want to risk that scenario and the abovementioned comparatively less consequential one in West Asia, but their more pragmatic rivals are still able to stop them for now.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on the author’s Substack, Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from danielo / Shutterstock

August 29, 2024:

The “experts” at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry were officially challenged via a freedom of information order (pgs 1/2) to provide or cite any studies in their possession, custody or control authored by anyone, anywhere, ever:

1. that scientifically prove/provide evidence of the existence of any alleged “HPV” aka “Human Papillomavirus” (simply showing that the alleged particles exist and cause the illness/symptoms that they are alleged to cause… the institutions weren’t even challenged to demonstrate that the particles hijack cells and replicate), or

2. that even describe someone finding and purifying particles alleged to be “HPV” directly from the bodily fluid/tissue/excrement of so-called “hosts”, or

3. wherein the purported “genome” of the alleged “HPV” was found intact in the bodily fluid, tissue or excrement of any supposedly infected “host” (as opposed to fabricated in silico, aka a computer model), or

4. that scientifically demonstrate contagion of the illness / symptoms that are allegedly caused by purported “HPV”.

I included a reminder that scientific evidence requires use of the scientific method to test falsifiable hypotheses through valid, rigorous, repeatable controlled experiments.

And as usual I asked that if records matching my request were held by the institutions but were already publicly available, I be given citations.

October 16, 2024:

Roger Andoh acting as FOIA Officer in the Office of the Chief Operating Officer responded (pgs 7, 8, #24-01612-FOIA):

“A search of our records failed to reveal any documents pertaining to your request. Specifically, subject matter experts were unable to locate records that match the records described in your request as written.”

.

.

And now we await the same confession from the FDA in response to FOIA order #2024-7649, of which Sarah Kolter acting as Director acknowledged receipt on August 30, 2024.

Note that Sarah has already officially confessed that the FDA has no such records for the imaginary “monkeypox virus” (FDA FOIA 2024-7353) or the imaginary “avian influenza virus” (FDA FOIA 2024-6486) and she was not able to cite any for the imaginary “SARS-COV-2” either (FDA FOIA 2024-7837)…

…because virology has always been pseudoscience, no virus has ever been shown to exist, contagion is “public health” mythology and literally hundreds of earlier FOI responses from 40 different countries on dozens of alleged “viruses” also yielded no valid scientific evidence (see further below for more links).

.

.

Note: this newsletter has also been sent to the “Reuters Fact Check Team” and ~200 people who work for “the state”, lamestream media, etc. at Canada, Isle of Man, England and the U.S., so they can’t claim later that they didn’t know.

Recommended Reading/Viewing:

Re “HPV” see:

viroLIEgy.com for articles dismantling the myth

Dr. Sam Bailey’s HPV, Pointless Tests and Toxic Shots

Joan Shenton’s documentary Sacrificial Virgins: The Dangers of the HPV VaccineAmandha Vollmer’s article HPV – The Virus that Wasn’t: How is the Gardasil Vaccine Still on the Market?

The Chain of Causation – Mike Stone, virology

The absolutely necessary scientific evidence required.

I was truly honoured to have a recorded chat recently with my friends Drs Sam and Mark Bailey in New Zealand. Mike Stone accurately describes them as “the Dynamic Duo” and they have helped to keep a lot of people grounded and sane during these last few years!

Christine Massey: “Don’t trust Public Health.” – Drs Sam and Mark Bailey

Dr Sam White on the Medical Mafia – Dr Sam Bailey

Debunking the Debunker! – Dawn Lester

I personally haven’t watched this one yet but am looking forward to it: A Look at the Human Genome Project – Dr. Tom Cowan

Official Confessions/Evidence Confirm that Virology is Pseudoscience

Freedom of Information Responses reveal that health/science institutions around the world (225 and counting!) have no record of SARS-COV-2 (the alleged convid virus) isolation/purification, anywhere, ever: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/

Excel file listing 225 institutions: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Institution-list-for-website.xlsx

FOI responses re other imaginary “viruses” (HIV, avian influenza, HPV, Influenza, Measles, etc., etc., etc.):
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-have-no-record-of-any-virus-having-been-isolated-purified-virology-isnt-a-science/

FOIs re secretive and unscientifically “mock infected” cells (aka invalid controls) and fabricated “virus genomes”: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/do-virologists-perform-valid-control-experiments-is-virology-a-science/

3000+ pages of “virus” FOIs in 8 compilation pdfs, and my notarized declarations re the anti-scientific nature of virology: https://tinyurl.com/IsolationFOIs

Failed freedom of Information responses re contagion: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/freedom-of-information-responses-re-contagion/

Do health and science institutions have studies proving that bacteria CAUSE disease? https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/do-health-authorities-have-studies-proving-that-bacteria-cause-disease-lets-find-out-via-freedom-of-information/

Because “they” (HIV, influenza virus, HPV, measles virus, etc., etc., etc.) have never been shown to exist, clearly don’t exist and virology isn’t a science.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on the author’s Substack, Christine Massey’s “germ” FOI Newsletter.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

Emanuel Pastreich’s campaign for US President “Fear No Evil” comes at a crucial moment in history. Humanity faces an inflection point as the forces of global finance push for World War III to solve the deep contradictions created by a bankrupt economic system.

When we look for a candidate in this critical election who has not only spoken out about specific humanitarian horrors but has also identified the ideological and structural causes of this war economy and made concrete proposals for a solution that addresses the imperialist foundations of the American economy, Pastreich stands alone.

The fact that he has been blocked out throughout the election process in the Green Party, and as an independent, using nefarious means, and that he has had to continue the campaign from Japan without getting on the ballot in a single state does not disqualify him in our opinion, but instead gives him legitimacy in an election that is being held amid unprecedented institutional collapse.

In other words, Pastreich’s demands for ethics, accountability, and transparency in government can serve as the foundations for a mass political movement that can achieve what this patently rigged election could not possibly achieve.

The United States stands atop a rotten pile of “Western powers” accustomed to ruling the globe unchallenged, who have relabeled “imperialism” as “aid to developing nations” and who cannot face the prospect of playing second fiddle to the rising Eurasian powers: China, Russia, Iran. They disdain to uphold the principles of international law and diplomacy that they demand of others.

The ruling elites in the USA and Europe, and their quislings in Canada, Australia, Japan and South Korea, have decided that rather than treat the rapidly developing East and Global South (which make up vast majority of humanity and, increasingly, the economy) as a partner, they would rather risk everything in order to hang on to their privileges pushing for total war abroad and a brutal technology-driven totalitarian rule at home.

Emanuel Pastreich opposes not only the nightmare scenario of war with Russia or Iran but also all the wars waged by the West. In his speeches, he highlights how the false concept of growth, the promotion of overproduction, and the glorification of extraction and exploitation push us toward war.

Pastreich makes it clear on his website that he welcomes comprehensive dialogue with all the world’s nations, as indicated by his speeches addressed to the citizens of the earth in 43 languages. Those speeches include tributes to the great civilizations of the world, from Laos to Peria, from Turkey to Nepal, as well as apologies for American war crimes and imperialist exploitation.

Pastreich is making an internationalist, not globalist, appeal for a new age of true cooperation based on citizens’ rights and the diversity of human civilization and that refuses the blood money of banks and corporations.

Pastreich is not in denial about the industrial, manufacturing, scientific, and industrial power of the People’s Republic of China and its synergetic interplay with the economies of the Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran and others via organizations like BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Ethiopia and the United Arab Emirates) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO).

He embraces a new vision for the United States that breaks, in a sense that even Roosevelt and Wallace failed to do, with the ghosts of the British Empire, the multinational banks and trusts pulling our chains whose blood money was wrung from workers over five centuries of exploitation and plunder of the great civilizations of India, Bangladesh, China, Africa and South America.

This global ruling class understands that time is not on their side and that the East and the Global South will surpass them in a rapidly emerging multilateral world.

Pastreich is the only presidential candidate who is fluent in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean, has written extensively in those languages, and delivers speeches in those languages. He feels that respect for all the civilizations of the Earth is essential to peace and that English is no longer a language of absolute status, just as the dollar is no longer the unshakable currency.

Pastreich has spoken out about the exact nature of the COVID operation to destroy civil society through induced mental trauma, to usher in totalitarianism cloaked as healthcare, and to employ supposedly “leftist” parties and organizations as a velvet glove for the steel fist of corporate fascism.

Pastreich stood his ground during the intense repression meted out by the capitalist states during the Covid reign of terror, refusing to embrace the anti-scientific popularism that asserted that evil is the work of Satan, that viruses do not exist, that climate change is myth, and that the crimes we witness are the product of inflexible bureaucrats—rather than global capitalists. His three years of unemployment and life abroad testify to that commitment.

Pastreich asserts that it is not enough to say we will be more careful with vaccinations in the future, but rather we must demand that the assets of the corporations responsible for these state crimes be seized and redistributed to the injured. He declares that corporations do not have any legal status, that Wall Street’s criminal economy must be ended and replaced by a cooperative economy run by the people, and that respect for actual work and for our shared environment must be at the core of the economy.

Pastreich proposes a complete transformation of the working masses’ relationship with large-scale industrial and manufacturing whose ownership is claimed by corporations. He also asserts that private banks cannot control the creation of money that belongs to the people through a transparent and democratically elected Congress.

The rich and powerful have created an impossible choice for the workers. On the one side is a reactionary, pro-business, anti-government, isolationist political culture that degrades the status of workers but that is allowed to recognize the crimes of 9/11, of the Federal Reserve, of false flag shootings, and of Covid 19. On the other side is a progressive political culture that accurately identifies the dangers of capitalism but refuses to acknowledge state crimes and the deep corruption of the entire political and economic system.

Pastreich lays the ground for a movement that will address economic contradictions and state crimes without holding up messiah figures or opposing genuine internationalism. This can only be achieved by eliminating the hidden effective government of the United States and other nations: the multinational banks and multinational corporations.

Pastreich proposes that revolution is the only way forward and that such revolution is legitimated by the Declaration of Independence which established the nation, stating:

“When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”

His efforts to revive the revolutionary elements of the American political tradition, which has currency with citizens, without dismissing the achievements of the Marxist revolutionary tradition, offer real potential for a united front as we enter into an age of revolutionary politics.

We have a choice between a constructive and egalitarian revolution dedicated to the needs of workers or a right-wing “revolution” for the benefit of billionaires such as is being led by Donald Trump and planned by Steve Bannon.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image is from Korea IT Times

Nuclear Fever: War Mongering on Iran

October 17th, 2024 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

The recent string of exaggerated military successes – or at least as they are understood to be – places Israel in a situation it has been previously used to: prowess in war.  Such prowess promises much: redrawing boundaries; overthrowing governments; destroying the capabilities of adversaries and enemies.  Nothing, in this equation, contemplates peace, let alone diplomatic resolution. It’s playground pugilism that rarely gets out of the sandpit.

In Washington, a fever has struck regarding Israel’s advances.  The outbreak has stirred much enthusiasm in a doctrine that has been shown, time and again, to be wretchedly uncertain and grossly dangerous.  With no concrete evidence of imminent harm to US interests, it featured in the highest policy planning circles that oiled an invasion of Iraq in 2003.  While the stated objective was the disarming of Saddam Hussein’s regime for having Weapons of Mass Destruction it turned out not to have, the logic was one of pre-emptive strike: we attack the madman in Baghdad before he goes nuclear and loses it.

The establishment wonk on empire and espionage at The Washington Post, David Ignatius, offers a fairly meaningless assessment in terms of claimed Israeli dominance over Iran and its proxies.  After a year of conflict, Israel had “gained what military strategists call ‘escalation dominance’”.  The implication: a decisive attack on Iran is imminent.

The point here (at this juncture, the mind lost seeks sanctuary in a mental asylum of lunatic reassurances), is that attacking Iran in toto will not result in much by way of retaliatory detriment.  Some bruising, surely, but hardly lingering flesh wounds.  Israel has, it would seem, been working some magic, spreading its own view that Iran has a gruesome plan in its military vault: eliminating Israel by 2040.

In Foreign Policy, Matthew Kroenig, generously self-described as a national security strategist, blusters for war.  “Indeed, now is an ideal opportunity to destroy Iran’s nuclear program,” he asserts with childish longing.  The reason for such an attack lies in a presumption.  Yet again, the doctrine of preemption, one hostile to international law and the UN Charter, plays out its feeble rationale.  Evidence, in such cases, is almost always scanty.  Kroenig, however, is certain.  Iran will secure one bomb’s worth of weapon-grade material within a matter of weeks.  The rest is obvious.  No evidence is offered, nor does it even matter, given Kroenig’s longstanding zeal in wishing to rid Iran of its nuclear facilities.

The Atlantic Council has also suggested a policy that what is good for the goose of Christian-Jewish freedom is not good for the gander of Persian Shia ambition.  It is exactly this full-fledged hypocrisy that the despots of the secular tyranny in North Korea realised in dealing with Washington.  Beware the nostrums against nuclear armament.

In a report authored by both Democrats and Republicans for the Council, a warning of chilling absurdity is offered:

“The United States needs to maintain a declaratory policy, explicitly enunciated by the president, that it will not tolerate Iran getting a nuclear weapon and will use military force to prevent this development if all other measures fail.”

Instead of resisting belligerent chatter, the authors suggest that the US threaten Iran through announcing “yearly joint exercises with Israel, such as Juniper Oak and seek additional funding in the next budget cycle to speed research and development of next-generation military hardware capable of destroying Iran’s nuclear program.”

Kroenig shows his usual stuffing.  Iran can never have nuclear weapons, because the United States and Israel say so.  (The Sunni powers, for their own reasons, agree.)  This form of perennial idiocy could apply to all the powers that have nuclear weapons, including Israel itself.  At one point, no state should have had that relic of sadism’s folly.  Then they came in succession after the United States: the Soviet bomb, the Britannic bomb, the Gallic bomb.  Throw in China, India, Pakistan, Israel.  Plucky, deranged North Korea, was wise to note the trend, showing lunacy to be eternally divisible.

It is precisely that sort of logic that has drawn such comments as this from the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a May interview:

“Iran’s level of deterrence will be different if the existence of Iran is threatened.  We have no decision to produce a nuclear bomb, but we will have to change our nuclear doctrine if such threats occur.” 

This month, almost 40 legislators penned a letter to the Supreme National Security Council calling for a reconsideration of current nuclear doctrine.  The greater the fanatic’s desire to remove a perceived threat, the more likely an opponent will give basis to that threat.

For all the faux restraint being officially aired in Washington regarding Israel’s next round of military assaults, there is enormous sympathy, even affection, for the view that wrongs shall be righted, and the mullahs punished.  Bedding for a more hostile response to Iran also features in the inane airings of the presidential election.  Vice President Kamala Harris, in an interview with 60 minutes, remarked that, “Iran has American blood on its hands, okay?” In making that claim, she suggested that Tehran was somehow Washington’s greatest adversary.

In response to this fatuous remark, Justin Logan of the Cato Institute offers an ice-cold bath of reason: “This is not the Wehrmacht in 1940.”  The path to dominating the Middle East hardly involves such tools as propaganda, proxy operations and psychological warfare “much less becoming the greatest threat to the United States.”

The nuclear option is now available to governments that should never have had them.  But acquiring the dangerously untenable followed.  To assume that brutal, amputation loving theocrats in Tehran should not have them defies the trajectory of a certain moronic consistency.  The Persian bomb is probably imminent, and it is incumbent on the murderous fantasists in Israel and the United States to chew over that fact.  Unfortunately for the rest of us, the fetish against acquisition risks expanding a conventional conflict through testing the will and means of a power that, while wounded, hardly counts as defeated.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures at RMIT University.  He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). Email: [email protected] 

Featured image is from The Libertarian Institute

AI Translation of this Article in Korean, Scroll Down

“단극시대 생존: 북한과 미국의 35년 간의 대립”: A.B. 에이브람스의 새 책 리뷰

이 기사의 한국어 AI 번역, 아래로 스크롤

A Short Quiz:

1.     With what nation has the U.S. been at war for almost 75 years?

2.     What nation has never been colonized by a Western power?

3.     What nation has never bowed to U.S. pressure to surrender any aspect of its sovereignty to the New World Order?

4.     What nation survived the collapse of its patron, the Soviet Union, followed by natural disasters, possibly manmade, that took its population to the brink of starvation in the 1990s?

5.     What nation negotiated a possible peace settlement with the Clinton administration only to have President George W. Bush declare it part of an “axis of evil”?

6.     What nation was #1 on the U.S. regime change hit list in 2002, ahead of Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, and Iran?

7.     What nation was called by the U.S. “a very tough nut to crack,” forcing the U.S. to back down from an attack after it utilized its own resources to develop a nuclear deterrent?

8.     What nation created a massive underground fortification complex that may have inspired Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah?

9.     What nation has a nuclear deterrent possibly capable of dropping H-bombs on the U.S. mainland?

Overview 

Obviously the answer is North Korea, a part of the world about which most Western readers know absolutely nothing. What they think they know is often based on the lies of the mainstream media that routinely fabricates atrocity stories about every U.S. “adversary” that raises its head.

Now Clarity Press has come out with a new book by Korea expert A.B. Abrams that reads like a thriller but tells you much of what you need to know about an epic story by a resilient country that has turned its small, mountainous land into a fortress of survival in today’s mortally dangerous international environment.

The origins of the Korean conflict lie in the standoff between the Communist and Western blocs that formed at the end of World War II. The Korean peninsula had been under Japanese rule since 1905, but an indigenous revolt had begun to take power during the latter stages of the war. The U.S. moved to prevent that revolt from taking over all of Korea.

In August 1945 the U.S. proposed a temporary division of Korea into areas of Soviet and U.S. trusteeship at the 38th parallel. The Koreans in the North who had formed people’s committees operated with considerable autonomy. Those in the South worked under tight U.S. control, declaring the Republic of Korea as rulers of the entire peninsula on August 15, 1948.

By now a civil war had broken out, with the leaders to the North declaring their own Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) in September 1948. In 1950, full-scale war began, and within 72 hours the forces of the South had been defeated. The U.S. military now stepped in and the Korean War was on.

.

undefined

Hundreds of thousands of South Koreans fled south in mid-1950 after the North Korean army invaded. (From the Public Domain)

.

The violence was horrendous, with massive civilian deaths. U.S. bombing killed a million North and South Koreans and left six million homeless. The U.S.-led land army invaded the north but was driven back by Chinese intervention. The final armistice was at the point where hostilities began, the 38th parallel.

U.S. air power carried out massive indiscriminate bombing on a scale that had only been exceeded by the assault on Japan in World War II. The U.S. dropped 32,557 tons of napalm. Bombing of the Yalu River dams destroyed 250,000 tons of rice and caused floods and starvation. Altogether, three to four million North Koreans died in the war, a number declared by many observers to be genocidal.

During the war, U.S. commander Douglas MacArthur recommended nuclear strikes against 26 Korean and Chinese targets. These were deterred by the Soviet Union’s possession of a nuclear strike capability that could be used against American East Asian bases. The Korean War also led China to believe it needed a nuclear deterrent against the U.S.

Despite the existence of the 1953 Armistice, there was never a treaty of peace between the U.S. and North Korea or between North and South, causing a state of war to be in existence to this day. It’s the oldest condition of open hostilities on earth, with the U.S. never recognizing the existence of the North Korean state and never backing off from its official policy that a North Korean government and nation must cease to exist.

So the question arises as to how North Korea has managed to survive after all these years? What is their secret in being able to do what no other nation has done that is not part of the official Western hegemony?

This is the question addressed by A.B Abrams in his most recent book. The answer, of course, is complex but includes North Korea’s own decision to acquire nuclear weapons and missiles to attack the American homeland. It’s also a question that hit the front-page headlines when President Donald Trump visited North Korea and engaged with its leader, Chairman Kim Jong Un, and became the first U.S. chief executive to say anything about North Korea other than insults.

Under the Biden administration, North Korea returned to the crosshairs, though with its support of Russia in Ukraine and the creation of a new multipolar world led by Russia and China, a page may have been turned, with matters still being far from settled. Thus the future of North Korea remains an open question, and North Korea is not backing down.

The following paragraphs consist of a brief synopsis of A.B. Abrams’ text, along with pertinent quotations. For the full impact, read the entire book. Your worldview may never be the same by the time you turn the final pages. You will also discern the implications of the latest news of North Korea’s assistance being provided to Russia in Ukraine.

“Introduction” 

At the end of a lengthy Introduction, A.B. Abrams summarizes:

“Where they were not properly deterred, America and the wider Western world would not hesitate to bring ruin and immeasurable suffering to populations that remained outside their control, which was a lesson learned at cost to the peoples of both North and South Korea during the Korean War, and subsequently strongly reinforced by Western militaries’ conduct over the following several decades.”

Chapter 1: “The Post-Cold War Years: A New Era of Conflict” 

During the Cold War, North Korea became the most urbanized and industrialized country in Asia. Dams being built were “engineering masterpieces.”

With the growth of the Western bloc, North Korea became increasingly isolated. After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989-1991, North Korea found itself “in a very small minority of states outside of Western influence.”

Image: USAF aircraft of the 4th Fighter Wing (F-16, F-15C and F-15E) fly over Kuwaiti oil fires, set by the retreating Iraqi army during Operation Desert Storm in 1991. Almost the same as Image:USAF F-16A F-15C F-15E Desert Storm pic.jpg save for the size and tint (From the Public Domain)

Iraq/Desert Storm and the dismemberment of Yugoslavia showed North Korea the danger of a sudden Western assault. Demonization of North Korea began with an April 10, 1991, article by the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations entitled “North Korea: The Next Nuclear Nightmare,” with parallels being drawn between Iraq and North Korea. Regime change was in the air, including pre-emptive attacks.

North Korea had decided to develop nuclear weapons, starting by 1990. They saw Iraq facing the U.S. without nuclear weapons as its fatal mistake. North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and fired a large ballistic missile capable of hitting U.S. bases in Japan on May 29, 1993.

The U.S. moved to impose sanctions against North Korea along with planning a major attack with 100,000 troops. North Korea moved for full normalization of relations with the U.S., which the Clinton administration refused. Ex-president Jimmy Carter was then called in to negotiate, resulting in the October 21, 1994, “Agreed Framework.” North Korea agreed to give up nuclear weapons development in exchange for technical aid in power generation and movement toward normal state-to-state relations. 

Meanwhile, North Korea had lost the support of the former Soviet Union as a bulwark, while the U.S. foreign policy establishment was convinced that North Korea would soon collapse. In 1995-1998 the North Korean economy did come close to collapsing due to catastrophic flooding followed by drought. The U.S. claimed North Korea was deliberately starving its people. But North Korea recovered, with Chinese support replacing Russia’s. During this time, “North Korea has proven amazingly resilient,” with U.S. Neocons calling on the U.S. government to “tear down this tyranny.”

The U.S. failed to live up to the Agreed Framework by normalizing relations, and by the end of the Clinton administration the opportunity had been lost.

Chapter 2: “The George W. Bush Years: Deterring an Invasion and Becoming a Nuclear Weapons State” 

Within three years the Bush administration “would collapse the Agreed Framework and again bring the two countries to the brink of war.” Bush labeled North Korea a member of the “axis of evil,” along with Iran and Iraq. On September 17, 2002, the U.S. issued a new National Security Strategy “announcing the option of using nuclear weapons against rogue states thought to be developing weapons of mass destruction.”

Feeling the threat, North Korea resolved to become a nuclear weapons state.

The U.S. plan was to go to war against North Korea, followed by Iraq, Syria, Iran, and others. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said, “We want to end all challenges, no matter how indistinct they might be to American power.”  But it was the Pentagon that took North Korea off the list as #1 because of North Korea’s military strength and the estimate that the U.S. and South Korea would take 500,000 casualties in the first 90 days of war. So the U.S. decided to go after the “low-hanging fruit” in the Middle East instead.

Meanwhile, North Korea had heavily fortified itself against potential U.S. nuclear attack. “Almost all of North Korea’s critical industries are now located underground.” A ground U.S. assault was deemed impossible, while “winning the war from the air would not be viable.”

In 2003, North Korea announced its withdrawal from the Agreed Framework and reactivated its plutonium facility. By June 2003, North Korea had enough plutonium for 3-4 new warheads. After the fall of Baghdad, the U.S. began to prepare an attack on North Korea, but as Iraq became a quagmire of insurgencies, the U.S. bogged own. By the end of 2003, the Bush administration concluded that there was no good military solution, with a consensus that North Korea was winning the confrontation.

The U.S. now escalated existing financial and trade sanctions against North Korea, while in 2006 North Korea put into service its first intermediate range ballistic missile and on October 9, 2006, detonated its first nuclear warhead in an underground test.

Now the U.S. moved toward a more conciliatory posture via sanctions relief, while North Korea froze plutonium development. Meanwhile, its trade with China was booming as the Iraq war paralyzed U.S. action against such adversaries as Russia, China, Iran, Syria, and Libya.

Chapter 3: “The Barack Obama Years: A New Phase of the Conflict” 

Abrams writes that the Barack Obama administration which commenced in January 2009 “brought a new global cold war.” Stable ties with China were disrupted by Obama’s “Pivot to Asia.” This was the start of comprehensive war planning by the Western powers against a part of the world increasingly dominated by China. Bush-era improvements in relations with Syria and Libya were reversed and relations with Russia shattered by the 2014 Maidan coup in Ukraine. Relations were also destabilized with Pakistan, Yemen, and Turkey.

Obama said of East Asia: “America should write the rules. America should call the shots. Other countries should play by the rules America and our partners set and not the other way around.” Regarding North Korea, the Obama administration decided that “full and unilateral disarmament was a precondition for any talks.”

Behind Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the U.S. moved to implement a new range of financial and trade sanctions. North Korea now detonated another nuclear bomb and accelerated testing of ballistic missiles. The U.S. predicted North Korean collapse due to the ailing health of Chairman Kim Jong Il.

In mid-2009 the U.S. used the Stuxnet Worm in a major cyberattack on North Korea’s nuclear program. There was also a joint Israel-U.S. cyberattack against North Korea and Iran. The attack against North Korea failed, as they had “near-unique resistance” to Western cyberattacks.

Chairman Kim Jong Il died and was succeeded by his son Kim Jong Un, who had been educated in Switzerland. Despite U.S. propaganda, North Korea remained stable, with major cultural, economic, and technological advances. North Korea escalated its nuclear testing, with the aim of becoming capable of ballistic missile launches.

Major U.S. military exercises in March 2013 caused North Korea to decide on developing an ICBM that could be aimed at the U.S. mainland. On March 13, North Korea announced it was nullifying the original Korean War Armistice Agreement and would now be engaging in “merciless retaliation” to any Western attack. On April 1, North Korea declared itself a “full-fledged nuclear weapons state.” North Korea’s reliance on indigenous resources was seen as making its weapons program virtually immune to sanctions.

In 2014, President Obama personally ordered the stepping up of cyber and electronic attacks on North Korea, but from 2014-2017, its missile program advanced tremendously, marking a major U.S. policy failure.

In 2014, North Korea announced development of a submarine-launched missile, another game-changer. When North Korea asked the Obama administration to abandon its hostilities and negotiate for peace, the U.S. refused. The U.S. Department of Defense now assessed that North Korea was capable of reaching the U.S. mainland with nuclear weapons. January 6, 2016, saw North Korea’s first test of an H-bomb-fission-type device.

President Obama now said the U.S. “could obviously destroy North Korea,” while a U.S. State Department official said that Chairman Kim would “immediately die” if they initiated a nuclear attack. But by the later stages of the Obama administration, the U.S. had concluded that North Korea was not “a backwards state anymore.”

Chapter 4: “The Obama Administration on the Offensive”

Toward the end of Obama’s term, his administration still wanted to launch an attack on North Korea’s nuclear facilities, while Obama himself wanted “to attack and eliminate the North Korea leadership.” The Council on Foreign Relations issued a paper advocating destruction of North Korea and its absorption by South Korea, also promising economic benefits to China if it remained neutral.

CFR’s preferred U.S. strategy for this era of world history was disclosed in a January 2017 article in Foreign Affairs by CFR President Richard N. Haass entitled “World Order 2.0.” Haass advocated moves “to amend the concept of self-determination on the part of an entity seeking a state of its own and replace it with the notion that statehood is something to be granted rather than asserted.” States accused of humanitarian abuses should have their statehood stripped through military intervention, [an extension of a standing U.S. doctrine that such “abuses” justified U.S.-enforced regime change]. The article had a photo of Chairman Kim Jong Un and other North Korean leaders. Haass’s article defined the outlook of the U.S. foreign policy establishment as President Donald Trump entered the White House.

Two factors had prevented Obama from ordering an attack on North Korea in 2016: 1) North Korea was more heavily armed and fortified than any immediate adversary since World War II; and 2) options to degrade its nuclear missile program with air strikes were non-existent due to dozens of its nuclear warheads being placed deep underground. Also, North Korea was “without parallel the toughest intelligence target in the world,” so any attack would be hit-or-miss.

Consequently, Obama’s doctrine was called, somewhat disdainfully, “Strategic Patience,” at a time when asymmetric warfare was on the ascendant. It was also a time when the U.S. was reluctant to send massive armies abroad as it had done in Afghanistan and Iraq, so was now utilizing state and non-state proxies, such as ISIS in the Middle East, along with emergent technologies like the internet as instruments of war.

Information warfare targets multiplied, including Hong Kong, Ukraine, Syria, and Iran. A NATO policy paper stated: “Information can be used to disorganize governance, organize anti-government protests, delude adversaries, influence public opinion, and reduce an opponents’ will to resist.” Google Ideas became one avenue of information warfare.

Information attacks against North Korea were part of the Department of Defense’s budget, with broadcasts of American soap operas an example of attempts to induce favorability to Western interests. An NGO with the goal of overthrowing the North Korean government was the North Korea Strategy Center, which invested heavily in smuggling flash drives across the border with such content as Wikipedia and programs such as Friends, Superbad, and Sex and the City. The New York-based Human Rights Foundation oversaw the dropping of 10,000 copies of the anti-North Korean film The Interview into North Korea via balloon. There were also suggestions among NGOs of dropping $1 bills infected with the COVID virus.

Meanwhile, ubiquitous atrocity stories appeared on YouTube, all fabricated, that were heavily promoted by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (See A.B. Abrams, Atrocity Fabrication and Its Consequences: How Fake News Shapes World Order, Clarity Press: 2023.) A constant flow of fake newspaper articles “also reached entirely new levels in the Obama years.” These were “all closely coordinated with military and diplomatic efforts to isolate the country.” Under President Donald Trump, slander toward North Korea became even worse behind Stephen Miller, Senior Adviser to the President and White House Director of Speechwriting.

Chapter 5: “Fire and Fury: The Military Standoff that Ended an Era” 

Open warfare between the U.S. and North Korea has never been so close as it was during the last year of the Obama administration and the first two years of the Trump presidency. But by the end of this period, North Korea had won its battle for independence behind a nuclear deterrent the U.S. was unable to prevent.  

This period saw major advances in North Korea’s ballistic missile development, while its miniaturized H-bomb put it on course to flight test an ICBM capable of hitting the U.S. mainland. Economic sanctions had reached their limit, with no further way to pressure North Korea to back off its deterrent program.

The U.S. now turned to pressuring China to take a stand against North Korea. The Council on Foreign Relations raised the threat of a major war on China’s border. But China paid only lip service, while non-Western trading partners continued to deal with North Korea behind the scenes.

Obama told Trump that North Korea would be his “toughest foreign policy challenge.” But within six months, North Korea had gained intercontinental range nuclear delivery capability. Trump now expressed willingness to personally negotiate with Chairman Kim and even invite him to the White House. Trump had also pledged to pull troops out of Afghanistan and Syria. This showed that “as president, Trump quickly came into conflict with the foreign policy establishment.”

On July 4, 2017, North Korea conducted its first confirmed launch of an ICBM. This was the first time in history a medium or small state had gained a long-range nuclear deterrent. A U.S. general stated that this “changed the entire structure of the world.” North Korea would soon be able to launch up to 60 nuclear warheads.

Trump’s strategy on North Korea now became “tough talk.” Using the same words Truman spoke against Japan, he said: “North Korea best not make any more threats to the U.S. They will be met with fire and fury the world has never seen.” Chairman Kim chided back that the U.S. thought its mainland to be “an invulnerable Heavenly Kingdom,” even threatening a pre-emptive attack.

On September 19, 2017, Trump went before the UN General Assembly where he threatened “to totally destroy North Korea.” North Korea responded that its “ultimate goal is to establish the balance of power” with the U.S. Some U.S. advisers said they at least wanted to give North Korea “a bloody nose.”

The U.S. then assembled an unprecedented armada offshore from Korea with three carrier strike groups and disclosed they still had nuclear silos in South Korea. Navy SEALS were deployed capable of launching assassination missions. North Korea had instituted a missile testing moratorium which it now ended, saying Trump was “begging for nuclear war.”

Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov now said the U.S. was “playing with fire” and that Russia would “do its utmost” to prevent the U.S. from starting a war. The Chinese Global Times warned that China would intervene to support North Korea if the U.S. attacked, while China and Russia both staged military exercises in the region.

While President Trump insulted Chairman Kim as “Little Rocket Man,” and “Washington had left no clear path to negotiations,” the Trump administration now began to shift against a military attack. Even so, Senator Lindsey Graham lobbied for war as did top military brass. In January 2018, Foreign Affairs published an article entitled: “It’s Time to Bomb North Korea.” But by now, “U.S. intelligence believed that North Korea had developed the capability to deliver nuclear retaliation against much of the American mainland.”

Abrams makes clear that it was North Korea’s nuclear deterrent and determination to use it that prevented war. “Had North Korea failed to develop an ICBM capability when it did, the possibility of the U.S. initiating a war in Northeast Asia to the severe detriment of all regional states and populations would have been considerably greater.” This would have involved the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives, particularly in South Korea.

Chapter 6: “North Korea Wins: Coming to Terms with a New Status Quo”

The beginning of 2018 saw the end of a two-year standoff between North Korea and the U.S. Russian President Vladimir Putin said, “I believe Mr. Kim Jong Un has certainly won this round.” On January 1, 2018, Chairman Kim said, “The nuclear button is on my office desk all the time.” What was left, according to Abrams, was only “to mass-produce nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles.”

Having reached this point, North Korea now froze testing of all missiles. South Korea also attempted to de-fuse the situation, with the “Olympic Détente” coming next. The Trump administration could not admit its failure to stop North Korea from acquiring a nuclear deterrent. North Korea also released three U.S. citizens serving prison sentences.

On June 12, 2018, President Trump and Chairman Kim met in Singapore, “a major landmark in the softening of the American position.” Trump also thanked China’s Chairman Xi Jinping for his help. Trump wrote on Twitter, “There is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea.”

.

President Donald J. Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un sign a joint statement | June 12, 2018 (Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian)

.

Claiming a win for his administration, Trump met with Kim a second time in Hanoi on February 27, 2019, but without a normalization agreement. North Korea had asked for a lifting of sanctions, while Trump followed the advice of National Security Advisor John Bolton in demanding that North Korea transfer its entire nuclear arsenal and all nuclear fuel to the U.S. and “declare all its chemical and biological inventories.” Talks collapsed, with Kim walking away. Secretary of State Pompeo demanded that North Korea completely denuclearize unilaterally, but Trump refused to approve any new punitive sanctions.

.

Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un shake hands at the Hanoi Summit in Vietnam, February 27, 2019. Photo credit: White House

.

North Korea now resumed its missile development and testing program, focusing on defeating U.S. missile defense systems. Trump said he was not concerned: “I am in no rush….I am very happy with the way it’s going.” On June 30, 2019, Trump met Kim for the 3rd time in the DMZ, the first president in history to enter North Korea. “Trump reportedly invited Chairman Kim to visit Washington, ‘when the time is right,’ and used conciliatory language unprecedented and entirely unheard of from an American president.”

The Atlantic called the meeting: “The day denuclearization died.” Still, North Korea was being seen by some as Trump’s only “major foreign policy or geopolitical success,” while John Bolton referred to Kim as “a dictator of a rat-shit little country.”

Détente ended with failure of October 2019 talks in Stockholm, where North Korea broke off the meeting, with the U.S. resuming offshore military exercises. Kim announced resumption of testing of strategic weapons, as North Korea “unveiled a new heavier class of ballistic missile submarine.”

Then came COVID in early 2020. North Korea closed its borders on January 22, 2020, with the New York Times applauding this as achieving what Trump could not: “choking the North’s economy.” But North Korea survived the lockdowns, shocking observers. “This tremendous demonstration of resilience to any possible future economic warfare efforts seriously undermined Western hopes for the future of the sanctions regime.”

After the election of Joe Biden on November 3, 2020, the U.S. began to press for disarmament talks, which North Korea rejected as another U.S. “delaying-time trick.” But the Biden administration was at an impasse as it faced growing criticism for not having a viable policy on North Korean arms control. On March 25, 2017, Foreign Affairs wrote: “It is time for a realistic bargain with North Korea,” though Biden himself spoke of total denuclearization.

Meanwhile, North Korea continued to advance with rail-based missiles, missiles to elude defensive systems, hypersonic glide missiles, highly maneuverable cruise missiles, and improved air defense systems. On November 18, 2022, North Korea resumed ICBM testing. North Korea was now poised to have one of the most formidable nuclear deterrents in the world. North Korea also made major advances in conventional weaponry and defense. In response, the U.S. now “announced the full resumption of large-scale military exercises.”

Abrams summarizes: “The Biden administration’s tenure in many respects marked a return to the Cold War era.” But by the 2020s, North Korea “was far less of an outlier in the world order,” while the U.S. position was “increasingly unfavorable.”

Chapter 7: “The Second Cold War: A New Era for North Korea”

The North Korean economy was far ahead of South Korea in the 1950s and 60s, but was surpassed by the 80s as the Soviet Union stagnated. In the 1990s and early 2000s, North Korea came under intensive siege from the West. But under Obama, the global order began to fracture, leaving North Korea with more potential partners. Many countries looked at North Korea favorably as it had “remained a fortress unlike any other.”

The tremendous economic growth of China in the 21st century has benefited North Korea greatly. China’s trade policies have significantly undercut Western economic and trade sanctions. Chinese Chairman Xi Jinping visited North Korea in 2019. Tourism and technology transfer from China have increased. North Korea opened its channels to Chinese media and culture to offset U.S. and South Korean fare. North Korea has also moved closer to China militarily.

Russia, on the other hand, collapsed in the 1990s and was a much weaker strategic partner than had been the Soviet Union. But North Korea “proved to be among Russia’s most reliable supporters in its conflict with NATO and Ukraine from 2022” and began to send workers to Donetsk and Lugansk by 2024.

On September 5, 2022, U.S. intelligence revealed that Russia was purchasing “millions of North Korean artillery shells and rockets” for use in Ukraine. Russian defense minister Sergei Shoigu visited North Korea in July 2023. Later in September, Chairman Kim visited Russia’s Far East to review military aircraft production facilities with an eye to acquisition. Another area of interest was space satellite technology.

Russia also intensified its use of North Korean ballistic missiles against Ukrainian targets and began to acquire North Korean combat vehicles to use against U.S.-supplied Javelins.  

On June 18-19, 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin paid his first visit to North Korea in 24 years. The two countries then signed a “comprehensive strategic partnership” treaty providing for “military and other assistance” in time of war. North Korea now recognized Russia as “unprecedently vital to its security interests.” Relations also continued to open between North Korea and other states targeted by the U.S., including Syria and Iran.

North Korea also believed that the transition from a unipolar to a multipolar world would bring significant benefits. Chairman Kim called North Korea “a powerful independent country.” An example of this transition is the growth of national payment systems away from the U.S. dollar as the world’s trading currency.

Chapter 8: “Future Trajectories in the U.S.-DPRK Conflict” 

2016-2024 also saw a vast modernization of North Korea’s conventional warfare capabilities, showing its attention to the military concept of the “escalation ladder.” North Korea realized that if it relied too heavily on its nuclear deterrent, lower-level conventional attacks by the U.S. might come into play. Thus “Pyongyang’s adversaries could continue to contemplate provocations such as a ‘bloody nose’ strike.” Escalation management has been used effectively elsewhere in the world, as with Hezbollah vs. Israel and by Russia in Ukraine.  

Thus North Korea focused on creating a multi-tiered arsenal. It unveiled its first tactical nuclear warhead on March 24, 2023. Another key element was development of drones. The West now judged that North Korea was capable of knocking out U.S. bases on Guam, Hawaii, Okinawa, and the U.S. 7th Fleet in Japan.

By 2020, the U.S. had lost its ability to fight a near-peer adversary as it would have to against North Korea, due to its focus on fighting only insurgencies, guerrillas, and terrorists for a generation. The U.S. was poorly equipped “to engage in conventional war against major militaries,” while both China and North Korea had built their militaries specifically against the U.S. in case of an East Asian war. By 2020, the U.S. was “a much weakened superpower in a world where Western dominance was facing challenges unprecedented in centuries.”

North Korea represented “one of the most direct contradictions to the idea of a new world order centered on the economic and military power of the Western world and the global triumph of Western values.” It was viewed by the West as the “ultimate outlier,” while retaining “the military capacity to devastate cities across the Western world with thermonuclear strikes…seemingly indefinitely.”

North Korea also professed having learned the lessons from Iraq and Libya that giving up its strength “to make the West happy” was a fatal mistake. So North Korea remains “one of the few places in the world where Western states had never imposed their rule.” And the U.S. retains its central policy of advocating for North Korea’s “total destruction.” Thus “the Western world is expected to sustain longer-term efforts to gradually weaken the country with the aim of achieving a…final collapse.” Whether that policy will ever succeed is the question.

Conclusion

The preceding synopsis is only the tip of the iceberg. A.B Abrams’ book is a highly effective case study of a world on the more-or-less constant brink of nuclear war.

During the 71 years between the end of the Korean War and today, there were only two instances of a U.S. presidential administration moving toward a rapprochement with North Korea.

The first was the Clinton administration’s “Agreed Framework” negotiated by former President Jimmy Carter, and the second was when President Donald Trump reached out personally to Korean Chairman Kim Jung Un. Trump can be credited for taking steps for peace in the face of the hostility of the entire foreign policy establishment of the U.S. and its Western allies.

Otherwise, this is the story of a determined and resilient small nation-state brooking the hostility of the U.S. superpower to chart an independent course in a world dominated by Western interests that is now experiencing challenges from a worldwide revolt. A multipolar world is emerging that the U.S. has tried to prevent since the start of World War II and that the Anglo-American-Zionist imperial sphere has tried to smother for over a century.

Despite the demonization of North Korea by the Western media, its motivated and gifted population has stood by the country’s leadership in making its stand. In so doing, the nation has had the benefit of a compact, homogeneous population, ideologically committed, well-educated, and technologically-oriented that is also able to resist the blandishments of Western corruption such as internet propaganda and pornography. To reach this point, of course, has required near-total military mobilization.

These characteristics have also enabled North Korea to function in an increasingly complex military environment where cyberwarfare, electronic warfare, information warfare, and escalation management play a larger role than ever before. On top of everything else are its airtight security systems.

Finally, in light of Abrams’ book, recent developments between North Korea and Russia can also be understood. Russian President Vladimir Putin has asked the State Duma to ratify the new strategic partnership with North Korea signed during Putin’s visit in June that pledged each nation to assist the other in case of foreign aggression. Notably, the treaty makes a stand against Western sanctions, which opens the Russian-Korean border to free movement of all persons and commodities. Along with trade between North Korea and China, the Western sanctions regime has been defeated. Parallel with this, North Korea has taken new measures to seal and fortify its border with South Korea, thus preventing any ground attack from that direction should rising tensions in East Asia lead to open warfare.  

One could indeed argue that 21st century North Korea has been one source of stability around which the multipolar world in the making has crystallized. A.B. Abrams’ book, Surviving the Unipolar Era: North Korea’s 35-Year Standoff with the United States, shows how this has come to pass and thus should be high on the must-read list for all students of geopolitics and the history of our era.

Disclosure and Disclaimer: Clarity Press is the publisher of my own book, Our Country, Then and Now. The book here under review, Surviving the Unipolar Era: North Korea’s 35-Year Standoff with the United States by A.B. Abrams, is the third book published by Clarity Press that I have reviewed. I have received no consideration for these reviews nor any editorial suggestions nor requirements. Nor have I utilized any other than public open sources.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on the author’s Substack.

Richard C. Cook is co-founder and lead investigator for the American Geopolitical Institute.  Mr. Cook is a retired U.S. federal analyst with extensive experience across various government agencies, including the U.S. Civil Service Commission, FDA, the Carter White House, NASA, and the U.S. Treasury. He is a graduate of the College of William and Mary. As a whistleblower at the time of the Challenger disaster, he exposed the flawed O-ring joints that destroyed the Space Shuttle, documenting his story in the book “Challenger Revealed.” After serving at Treasury, he became a vocal critic of the private finance-controlled monetary system, detailing his concerns in “We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform.” He served as an adviser to the American Monetary Institute and worked with Congressman Dennis Kucinich to advocate for replacing the Federal Reserve with a genuine national currency. See his new book, Our Country, Then and Now, Clarity Press, 2023. Also see his Three Sages Substack at https://montanarcc.substack.com/publish/posts and his American Geopolitical Institute articles at https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/category/agi/.

“Every human enterprise must serve life, must seek to enrich existence on earth, lest man become enslaved where he seeks to establish his dominion!” Bô Yin Râ (Joseph Anton Schneiderfranken, 1876-1943), translation by Posthumus Projects Amsterdam, 2014. Also download the Kober Press edition of The Book on the Living God here.


“단극시대 생존: 북한과 미국의 35년 해적”: AB 에이브람스의 새 책 리뷰

by Richard C. Cook

짧은 퀴즈:

1. 미국은 어떤 나라와 거의 75년간 전쟁을 벌였나요?

2. 서양 강대국에 식민지화된 적이 없는 나라는 어디인가요?

3. 어느 나라가 미국의 압력에 굴복하여 자국의 주권의 어떤 측면이라도 신세계질서에 양보한 적이 없습니까?

4. 1990년대에 후원국이었던 소련의 붕괴와 그에 따른 자연재해(아마도 인재)로 인해 인구가 기근 직전까지 몰린 상황에서 살아남은 나라는 어디입니까?

5. 클린턴 행정부와 평화 협상을 했지만 조지 W. 부시 대통령이 “악의 축”으로 선언한 나라는 어디입니까?

6. 2002년 미국 정권 교체 대상국 명단에서 이라크, 리비아, 소말리아, 예멘, 시리아, 이란을 제치고 1위를 차지한 나라는 어디였습니까?

7. 미국은 어떤 나라를 “까기 힘든 난제”라고 불렀고, 미국이 핵 억지력을 개발하기 위해 자체 자원을 사용한 후 공격에서 물러나도록 강요했습니까?

8. 이란, 하마스, 헤즈볼라에게 영감을 주었을 수 있는 대규모 지하 요새 단지를 만든 나라는 어디입니까?

9. 미국 본토에 수소폭탄을 투하할 수 있는 핵 억지력을 보유한 나라는 어디입니까?

개요

분명히 답은 북한입니다. 대부분의 서양 독자가 전혀 모르는 세계의 일부입니다. 그들이 알고 있다고 생각하는 것은 종종 머리를 드는 모든 미국의 “적”에 대한 잔혹한 이야기를 일상적으로 조작하는 주류 미디어의 거짓말에 근거합니다.

클라리티 프레스에서 한국 전문가 AB 에이브럼스가 쓴 새로운 책을 출간했습니다. 이 책은 스릴러처럼 읽히지만, 오늘날의 치명적으로 위험한 국제 환경에서 작고 산악 지대를 생존의 요새로 바꾼 회복력 있는 한 나라의 서사시에 대해 알아야 할 많은 내용을 담고 있습니다.

한국 갈등의 기원은 2차 세계 대전이 끝난 후 형성된 공산주의와 서방 진영 간의 대치에 있습니다. 한반도는 1905년부터 일본의 지배를 받았지만, 전쟁 후반에 원주민 반란이 권력을 잡기 시작했습니다. 미국은 반란이 한국 전체를 점령하는 것을 막기 위해 움직였습니다.

1945년 8월 미국은 38도선을 따라 소련과 미국의 신탁통치 지역으로 한국을 일시적으로 분할하자고 제안했습니다 . 인민위원회를 구성한 북측의 한국인들은 상당한 자율권을 가지고 운영되었습니다. 남측의 한국인들은 엄격한 미국의 통제 하에 일하면서 1948년 8월 15일에 대한민국을 전체 반도의 통치자로 선언했습니다.

이제 내전이 발발했고, 1948년 9월 북측 지도자들은 조선민주주의인민공화국(DPRK)을 선언했습니다. 1950년, 본격적인 전쟁이 시작되었고, 72시간 만에 남군은 패배했습니다. 이제 미군이 개입했고 한국전쟁이 시작되었습니다.

.

한정되지 않은

1950년 중반 북한군이 침공한 후 수십만 명의 남한 사람들이 남쪽으로 피난을 떠났습니다. (퍼블릭 도메인에서)

.

폭력은 끔찍했고, 민간인이 대량으로 사망했습니다. 미국의 폭격으로 남북한 주민 100만 명이 사망했고 600만 명이 집을 잃었습니다. 미국이 이끄는 육군은 북쪽을 침공했지만 중국의 개입으로 밀려났습니다. 최종 휴전은 적대 행위가 시작된 지점인 38선에서 이루어 졌습니다 .

미국 공군은 제2차 세계대전 당시 일본에 대한 공격에 비하면 규모가 훨씬 큰 무차별 폭격을 감행했습니다. 미국은 32,557톤의 네이팜탄을 투하했습니다. 압록강 댐 폭격으로 25만 톤의 쌀이 파괴되었고 홍수와 기근이 발생했습니다. 전체적으로 300만에서 400만 명의 북한 주민이 전쟁에서 사망했는데, 많은 관찰자들은 이 숫자를 집단 학살이라고 선언했습니다.

전쟁 중에 미국 사령관 더글러스 맥아더는 26개의 한국과 중국 목표물에 대한 핵 공격을 권고했습니다. 이는 소련이 미국 동아시아 기지에 사용할 수 있는 핵 공격 능력을 보유하고 있었기 때문에 억제되었습니다. 한국 전쟁은 또한 중국이 미국에 대한 핵 억제력이 필요하다고 믿게 만들었습니다.

1953년 휴전 협정이 존재했음에도 불구하고 미국과 북한 사이 또는 남북한 사이에 평화 조약이 없었고, 이로 인해 전쟁 상태가 오늘날까지 존재하게 되었습니다. 이는 지구상에서 가장 오래된 공개적 적대 행위 조건으로, 미국은 북한 국가의 존재를 인정하지 않았고 북한 정부와 국가가 존재하지 않아야 한다는 공식 정책에서 결코 물러서지 않았습니다.

그래서 북한이 이렇게 오랜 세월을 견뎌낸 이유가 무엇인지 의문이 생깁니다. 공식적인 서방 패권에 속하지 않는, 다른 어떤 나라도 하지 못한 일을 할 수 있는 비결은 무엇일까요?

이것은 AB Abrams가 그의 가장 최근의 책에서 다룬 질문입니다. 물론 답은 복잡하지만 북한이 미국 본토를 공격하기 위해 핵무기와 미사일을 획득하기로 한 결정이 포함됩니다. 또한 도널드 트럼프 대통령이 북한을 방문하여 지도자인 김정은 위원장과 대화하고 북한에 대해 모욕 외에 아무 말도 하지 않은 최초의 미국 최고 경영자가 되었을 때 1면 헤드라인을 장식한 질문이기도 합니다.

바이든 행정부 하에서 북한은 다시 조준선으로 돌아갔지만, 우크라이나에서 러시아를 지원하고 러시아와 중국이 이끄는 새로운 다극 세계를 만들면서 한 페이지가 바뀌었을 수 있으며, 문제는 여전히 해결되지 않았습니다. 따라서 북한의 미래는 여전히 미지수이며, 북한은 물러서지 않고 있습니다.

다음 문단은 AB Abrams의 텍스트에 대한 간략한 요약과 관련 인용문으로 구성되어 있습니다. 전체적인 영향을 얻으려면 책 전체를 읽으세요. 마지막 페이지를 넘길 때까지 여러분의 세계관은 결코 예전과 같지 않을 수도 있습니다. 또한 우크라이나에서 북한이 러시아에 지원을 제공한다는 최신 뉴스의 의미를 분별하게 될 것입니다.

“소개”

긴 서론의 마지막에서 AB Abrams는 다음과 같이 요약합니다.

“적절하게 억제되지 않으면 미국과 서방 세계는 통제 밖에 있는 인구에게 망신을 주고 헤아릴 수 없는 고통을 주는 것을 주저하지 않을 것입니다. 이는 한국 전쟁 동안 북한과 남한의 사람들이 비용을 들여 얻은 교훈이었고, 이후 수십 년 동안 서방 군대의 행동으로 강력하게 강화되었습니다.”

제1장: “냉전 이후 시대: 갈등의 새로운 시대”

냉전 동안 북한은 아시아에서 가장 도시화되고 산업화된 나라가 되었습니다. 건설 중인 댐은 “엔지니어링 걸작”이었습니다.

서방 진영의 성장으로 북한은 점점 고립되었습니다. 1989-1991년 소련 붕괴 이후 북한은 “서방의 영향력 밖에 있는 아주 소수의 국가”에 속하게 되었습니다.

이미지: 4번째 전투 비행단(F-16, F-15C 및 F-15E)의 USAF 항공기가 1991년 사막의 폭풍 작전 중 후퇴하는 이라크 군대가 일으킨 쿠웨이트의 석유 화재 위를 날고 있습니다. 크기와 색조를 제외하고는 Image:USAF F-16A F-15C F-15E Desert Storm pic.jpg와 거의 동일합니다(퍼블릭 도메인에서 가져옴)

이라크/사막의 폭풍과 유고슬라비아의 해체는 북한에 서방의 갑작스러운 공격의 위험을 보여주었습니다. 북한에 대한 악마화는 1991년 4월 10일 미국 외교 관계 위원회가 “북한: 다음 핵 악몽”이라는 제목으로 기사를 쓰면서 시작되었으며, 이라크와 북한 사이에 유사점이 그려졌습니다. 선제 공격을 포함한 정권 교체가 공중에 떠돌았습니다.

북한은 1990년부터 핵무기를 개발하기로 결정했습니다. 그들은 이라크가 핵무기 없이 미국에 맞서는 것을 치명적인 실수로 보았습니다. 북한은 핵확산금지조약을 탈퇴하고 1993년 5월 29일 일본에 있는 미군 기지를 타격할 수 있는 대형 탄도 미사일을 발사했습니다.

미국은 10만 명의 병력을 투입해 대규모 공격을 계획하는 것과 함께 북한에 제재를 가하기로 했습니다. 북한은 미국과의 관계 정상화를 요구했지만 클린턴 행정부는 거부했습니다. 그러자 지미 카터 전 대통령이 협상에 참여했고, 1994년 10월 21일 “합의된 틀”이 성립했습니다. 북한은 핵무기 개발을 포기하는 대가로 발전 기술 지원과 국가 간 정상 관계로의 전환을 약속했습니다.

한편, 북한은 방벽 역할을 하는 구소련의 지원을 잃었고, 미국의 외교 정책 기관은 북한이 곧 붕괴될 것이라고 확신했습니다. 1995-1998년 북한 경제는 엄청난 홍수와 가뭄으로 인해 붕괴 직전까지 갔습니다. 미국은 북한이 고의로 국민을 굶기고 있다고 주장했습니다. 하지만 북한은 회복되었고, 중국의 지원이 러시아의 지원을 대체했습니다. 이 기간 동안 “북한은 놀라울 정도로 회복력이 강하다는 것이 증명되었고”, 미국의 네오콘들은 미국 정부에 “이 폭정을 무너뜨릴 것”을 촉구했습니다.

미국은 관계 정상화를 통해 합의된 틀을 이행하는 데 실패했고, 클린턴 행정부 말기에는 그 기회가 사라졌습니다.

2장: “조지 W. 부시 시대: 침략 억제와 핵무기 국가 되기”

3년 안에 부시 행정부는 “합의된 틀을 무너뜨리고 두 나라를 다시 전쟁 직전까지 몰고 갈 것”이라고 했습니다. 부시는 북한을 이란과 이라크와 함께 “악의 축”의 일원으로 규정했습니다. 2002년 9월 17일, 미국은 “대량 살상 무기를 개발하고 있는 것으로 생각되는 불량 국가에 핵무기를 사용할 수 있는 옵션을 발표하는” 새로운 국가 안보 전략을 발표했습니다.

북한은 위협을 느껴 핵무기 보유국이 되기로 결심했습니다.

미국의 계획은 북한과 전쟁을 치르고, 그 다음에는 이라크, 시리아, 이란, 그리고 다른 나라들과 전쟁을 치르는 것이었습니다. 폴 울포위츠 국방부 부장관은 “미국의 힘에 아무리 모호하더라도 모든 도전을 끝내고 싶습니다.”라고 말했습니다. 하지만 북한의 군사력과 미국과 한국이 전쟁의 첫 90일 동안 50만 명의 사상자를 낼 것이라는 추정 때문에 북한을 1위 목록에서 제외한 것은 펜타곤이었습니다. 그래서 미국은 대신 중동에서 “손쉽게 따먹을 수 있는 과일”을 노리기로 결정했습니다.

한편, 북한은 잠재적인 미국의 핵 공격에 대비해 강력하게 요새화했다. “북한의 거의 모든 중요 산업은 이제 지하에 위치해 있습니다.” 미국의 지상 공격은 불가능하다고 여겨졌고, “공중에서 전쟁을 이기는 것은 실행 불가능할 것입니다.”

2003년 북한은 합의된 틀에서 탈퇴하고 플루토늄 시설을 재가동한다고 발표했습니다. 2003년 6월까지 북한은 3~4개의 새로운 탄두를 위한 플루토늄을 충분히 확보했습니다. 바그다드 함락 후 미국은 북한에 대한 공격을 준비하기 시작했지만 이라크가 반란의 늪이 되자 미국은 스스로를 곤경에 빠뜨렸습니다. 2003년 말까지 부시 행정부는 좋은 군사적 해결책이 없다는 결론을 내렸고 북한이 대결에서 승리하고 있다는 데 의견이 일치했습니다.

미국은 이제 북한에 대한 기존의 금융 및 무역 제재를 강화했고, 북한은 2006년에 최초의 중거리 탄도 미사일을 실전 배치했고, 2006년 10월 9일에는 지하 실험에서 최초의 핵탄두를 폭발시켰습니다.

이제 미국은 제재 완화를 통해 보다 화해적인 자세로 움직였고, 북한은 플루토늄 개발을 동결했습니다. 한편, 이라크 전쟁으로 인해 러시아, 중국, 이란, 시리아, 리비아와 같은 적대국에 대한 미국의 행동이 마비되면서 중국과의 무역이 급증했습니다.

3장: “버락 오바마 시대: 갈등의 새로운 국면”

에이브럼스는 2009년 1월에 출범한 버락 오바마 행정부가 “새로운 세계 냉전을 가져왔다”고 썼다. 중국과의 안정적인 관계는 오바마의 “아시아로의 전환”으로 인해 깨졌다. 이는 서방 강대국이 점점 중국이 지배하는 세계의 일부에 대한 포괄적인 전쟁 계획을 시작한 것이었다. 부시 시대 시리아와 리비아와의 관계 개선은 역전되었고, 러시아와의 관계는 2014년 우크라이나의 마이단 쿠데타로 인해 산산이 조각났다. 파키스탄, 예멘, 터키와의 관계도 불안정해졌다.

오바마는 동아시아에 대해 “미국이 규칙을 작성해야 합니다. 미국이 주도해야 합니다. 다른 나라들은 미국과 우리의 파트너들이 정한 규칙에 따라야지 그 반대가 되어서는 안 됩니다.”라고 말했습니다. 북한과 관련하여 오바마 행정부는 “완전하고 일방적인 군축이 모든 회담의 전제 조건”이라고 결정했습니다.

힐러리 클린턴 국무장관의 뒤를 이어 미국은 새로운 범위의 금융 및 무역 제재를 시행하기 시작했습니다. 북한은 이제 또 다른 핵폭탄을 터뜨리고 탄도 미사일 시험을 가속화했습니다. 미국은 김정일 위원장의 건강 악화로 인해 북한이 붕괴될 것이라고 예측했습니다.

2009년 중반 미국은 Stuxnet Worm을 사용하여 북한의 핵 프로그램에 대한 대규모 사이버 공격을 감행했습니다. 또한 이스라엘과 미국이 북한과 이란을 상대로 공동으로 사이버 공격을 감행했습니다. 북한에 대한 공격은 실패했는데, 그 이유는 북한이 서방의 사이버 공격에 “거의 독특한 저항”을 했기 때문입니다.

김정일 위원장이 사망하고, 스위스에서 교육을 받은 그의 아들 김정은이 왕위를 계승했습니다. 미국의 선전에도 불구하고 북한은 안정을 유지했고, 주요 문화, 경제, 기술의 발전이 있었습니다. 북한은 탄도 미사일 발사 능력을 갖추기 위해 핵 실험을 확대했습니다.

2013년 3월의 주요 미국 군사 훈련으로 인해 북한은 미국 본토를 겨냥할 수 있는 ICBM을 개발하기로 결정했습니다. 3월 13일 북한은 원래 한국전쟁 휴전 협정을 무효화하고 이제 서방의 공격에 대해 “무자비한 보복”을 할 것이라고 발표했습니다. 4월 1일 북한은 자신을 “본격적인 핵무기 국가”라고 선언했습니다. 북한이 토착 자원에 의존하는 것은 무기 프로그램이 제재에 사실상 면역이 되는 것으로 여겨졌습니다.

2014년 오바마 대통령은 북한에 대한 사이버 및 전자 공격을 강화하라고 직접 명령했지만 2014년부터 2017년까지 북한의 미사일 프로그램이 엄청나게 진전되어 미국의 주요 정책 실패로 나타났습니다.

2014년 북한은 잠수함 발사 미사일 개발을 발표했는데, 이는 또 다른 게임 체인저였습니다. 북한이 오바마 행정부에 적대 행위를 포기하고 평화 협상을 요청했을 때 미국은 거부했습니다. 미국 국방부는 이제 북한이 핵무기로 미국 본토에 도달할 수 있다고 평가했습니다. 2016년 1월 6일 북한은 수소폭탄 핵분열형 장치를 처음으로 시험했습니다.

오바마 대통령은 이제 미국이 “분명히 북한을 파괴할 수 있다”고 말했고, 미국 국무부 관리는 김 위원장이 핵 공격을 시작하면 “즉시 죽을 것”이라고 말했다. 하지만 오바마 행정부 후반에 미국은 북한이 “더 이상 후진 국가”가 아니라는 결론을 내렸다.

4장: “공세에 나선 오바마 행정부”

오바마의 임기가 끝나갈 무렵, 그의 행정부는 여전히 북한의 핵 시설에 대한 공격을 시작하고 싶어했고, 오바마 자신은 “북한의 지도부를 공격하고 제거하고 싶어했습니다.” 외교관계위원회는 북한의 파괴와 남한에 의한 흡수를 옹호하는 논문을 발표했으며, 중국이 중립을 유지하면 경제적 이익을 얻을 것이라고 약속했습니다.

CFR이 선호하는 이 세계사 시대에 대한 미국의 전략은 CFR 회장인 Richard N. Haass가 Foreign Affairs 에 기고한 2017년 1월 기사 “세계 질서 2.0″에서 공개되었습니다. Haass는 “자체 국가를 추구하는 주체의 자결 개념을 수정하고 국가 지위는 주장하기보다는 부여해야 할 것이라는 개념으로 대체”하는 움직임을 옹호했습니다. 인도적 학대 혐의를 받은 국가는 군사 개입을 통해 국가 지위를 박탈해야 합니다. [이러한 “학대”가 미국이 강제하는 정권 교체를 정당화한다는 기존 미국 교리의 연장]. 이 기사에는 김정은 위원장과 다른 북한 지도자들의 사진이 실렸습니다. Haass의 기사는 도널드 트럼프 대통령이 백악관에 입성하면서 미국 외교 정책 기관의 전망을 정의했습니다.

오바마가 2016년에 북한에 대한 공격을 명령하지 못하게 막은 두 가지 요인이 있었습니다. 1) 북한은 2차 세계 대전 이후 가장 직접적인 적보다 더 무장하고 요새화되어 있었습니다. 2) 수십 개의 핵탄두가 지하 깊숙이 배치되어 있어 공습으로 핵 미사일 프로그램을 약화시킬 수 있는 옵션이 존재하지 않았습니다. 또한 북한은 “비교할 수 없는 세계에서 가장 강력한 정보 타깃”이었기 때문에 어떤 공격도 성공하거나 실패할 수밖에 없었습니다.

결과적으로 오바마의 독트린은 비대칭 전쟁이 우세하던 시기에 다소 경멸조로 “전략적 인내”라고 불렸습니다. 또한 미국이 아프가니스탄과 이라크에서 그랬던 것처럼 해외에 대규모 군대를 파견하는 것을 꺼려했던 시기였고, 이제는 중동의 ISIS와 같은 국가 및 비국가적 대리인과 인터넷과 같은 신흥 기술을 전쟁 도구로 활용하고 있었습니다.

홍콩, 우크라이나, 시리아, 이란을 포함한 정보전 목표가 늘어났습니다. NATO 정책 문서는 “정보는 통치를 무질서하게 만들고, 반정부 시위를 조직하고, 적대자를 속이고, 여론에 영향을 미치고, 적대자의 저항 의지를 약화시키는 데 사용될 수 있습니다.”라고 명시했습니다. Google Ideas는 정보전의 한 경로가 되었습니다.

북한에 대한 정보 공격은 국방부 예산의 일부였으며, 미국의 멜로드라마 방송은 서방의 이익에 호의를 유도하려는 시도의 한 예였다. 북한 정부를 전복하는 것을 목표로 한 NGO는 북한 전략 센터로, 위키피디아 와 프렌즈, 슈퍼배드, 섹스 앤 더 시티 와 같은 프로그램이 담긴 플래시 드라이브를 국경 너머로 밀수하는 데 막대한 투자를 했다. 뉴욕에 있는 인권 재단은 반북한 영화 인터뷰 10,000부를 풍선 을 통해 북한에 투하하는 것을 감독했다. NGO들 사이에서는 코로나 바이러스에 감염된 1달러 지폐를 투하하자는 제안도 있었다.

한편, 유튜브에는 힐러리 클린턴 국무장관이 대대적으로 홍보한, 모두 조작된, 널리 퍼진 잔혹 행위에 대한 이야기가 등장했습니다. (AB 에이브럼스, Atrocity Fabrication and Its Consequences: How Fake News Shapes World Order, Clarity Press: 2023 참조) 끊임없이 쏟아지는 가짜 신문 기사는 “오바마 시대에 완전히 새로운 수준에 도달했습니다.” 이러한 기사는 “모두 국가를 고립시키려는 군사 및 외교적 노력과 긴밀히 조율되었습니다.” 도널드 트럼프 대통령 하에서 북한에 대한 중상모략은 대통령 수석 고문이자 백악관 연설문 작성 책임자인 스티븐 밀러의 뒤를 이어 더욱 심해졌습니다.

5장: “불과 분노: 한 시대를 끝낸 군사적 대치”

미국과 북한 간의 공개적인 전쟁은 오바마 행정부의 마지막 해와 트럼프 대통령의 첫 2년 동안만큼 가까이 있었던 적이 없었습니다. 하지만 이 기간이 끝날 무렵, 북한은 미국이 막을 수 없었던 핵 억제력 뒤에서 독립을 위한 전투에서 승리했습니다.

이 기간 동안 북한의 탄도 미사일 개발은 큰 진전을 이루었고, 소형화된 수소폭탄은 미국 본토를 타격할 수 있는 ICBM의 비행 시험을 진행했습니다. 경제 제재는 한계에 도달했고, 북한이 억제 프로그램을 철회하도록 압력을 가할 더 이상의 방법은 없었습니다.

미국은 이제 중국에 압력을 가해 북한에 맞서게 했습니다. 외교관계위원회는 중국 국경에서 대규모 전쟁이 일어날 수 있다는 위협을 제기했습니다. 하지만 중국은 그저 입으로만 말하는 반면, 비서방 무역국들은 북한과 뒷전에서 거래를 계속했습니다.

오바마는 트럼프에게 북한이 “가장 힘든 외교 정책 도전”이 될 것이라고 말했습니다. 하지만 6개월 만에 북한은 대륙간 핵 운반 능력을 확보했습니다. 트럼프는 이제 김 위원장과 개인적으로 협상하고 백악관에 초대할 의향을 표명했습니다. 트럼프는 또한 아프가니스탄과 시리아에서 군대를 철수하겠다고 약속했습니다. 이는 “대통령으로서 트럼프가 외교 정책 수립자들과 빠르게 갈등을 빚었다”는 것을 보여줍니다.

2017년 7월 4일, 북한은 ICBM의 첫 번째 확인 발사를 실시했습니다. 이는 역사상 중소 국가가 장거리 핵 억제력을 획득한 첫 번째 사례였습니다. 한 미국 장군은 이것이 “세계의 전체 구조를 바꾸었다”고 말했습니다. 북한은 곧 최대 60개의 핵탄두를 발사할 수 있을 것입니다.

트럼프의 북한에 대한 전략은 이제 “강경한 말”이 되었다. 트루먼이 일본에 대해 한 것과 같은 말을 사용하여 그는 “북한은 미국에 더 이상 위협을 가하지 않는 것이 좋다. 그들은 세계가 본 적 없는 불과 분노에 직면할 것이다”라고 말했다. 김 위원장은 미국이 본토를 “무적의 천국”이라고 생각한다고 반박하며 선제 공격을 위협하기도 했다.

2017년 9월 19일, 트럼프는 유엔 총회에 나가 “북한을 완전히 파괴하겠다”고 위협했습니다. 북한은 “궁극적인 목표는 미국과의 힘의 균형을 확립하는 것”이라고 대응했습니다. 일부 미국 고문은 최소한 북한에 “코피를 흘리게” 하고 싶다고 말했습니다.

미국은 한국에서 3개의 항공모함 타격대를 거느린 전례 없는 함대를 해안에서 편성했고, 한국에 여전히 핵 저장고가 있다고 밝혔다. 해군 특수부대가 암살 임무를 수행할 수 있도록 배치되었다. 북한은 미사일 시험 중단을 제정했고, 트럼프가 “핵전쟁을 간청하고 있다”며 중단했다.

러시아 외무장관 라브로프는 이제 미국이 “불장난”을 하고 있으며 러시아가 미국이 전쟁을 시작하는 것을 막기 위해 “최선을 다할 것”이라고 말했습니다. 중국 글로벌 타임스는 미국이 공격하면 중국이 북한을 지원하기 위해 개입할 것이라고 경고했고, 중국과 러시아는 모두 이 지역에서 군사 훈련을 실시했습니다.

트럼프 대통령이 김 위원장을 “작은 로켓맨”이라고 모욕하고 “워싱턴은 협상으로 가는 명확한 길을 남기지 않았다”고 비난하는 동안, 트럼프 행정부는 이제 군사적 공격에 반대하는 입장을 취하기 시작했습니다. 그럼에도 불구하고, 린지 그레이엄 상원의원은 최고 군 간부들과 마찬가지로 전쟁을 위해 로비 활동을 했습니다. 2018년 1월, 포린 어페어스는 “북한을 폭격할 때가 됐다”는 제목의 기사를 게재했습니다. 하지만 지금까지 “미국 정보부는 북한이 미국 본토 대부분에 핵 보복을 가할 수 있는 능력을 개발했다고 믿었습니다.”

에이브럼스는 북한의 핵 억제력과 그것을 사용하려는 의지가 전쟁을 막았다고 분명히 밝혔습니다. “북한이 ICBM 능력을 개발하지 못했을 때, 미국이 동북아시아에서 전쟁을 일으켜 모든 지역 국가와 인구에 심각한 피해를 입힐 가능성이 상당히 커졌을 것입니다.” 이는 수십만 명의 목숨을 앗아갔을 것이며, 특히 한국에서 그랬을 것입니다.

6장: “북한의 승리: 새로운 현상유지 수용 ”

2018년 초, 북한과 미국 간의 2년간의 대치가 끝났습니다. 러시아 대통령 블라디미르 푸틴은 “김정은 씨가 이번 라운드에서 확실히 승리했다고 믿습니다.”라고 말했습니다. 2018년 1월 1일, 김 위원장은 “핵 단추는 항상 제 사무실 책상 위에 있습니다.”라고 말했습니다. 에이브럼스에 따르면, 남은 것은 “핵탄두와 탄도 미사일을 대량 생산하는 것”뿐이었습니다.

이 지경에 이르자 북한은 이제 모든 미사일 시험을 동결했습니다. 한국도 상황을 해소하려고 시도했고, 그 다음은 “올림픽 데탕트”였습니다. 트럼프 행정부는 북한이 핵 억지력을 획득하는 것을 막지 못했다는 것을 인정할 수 없었습니다. 북한은 또한 감옥에 수감되어 있는 미국 시민 3명을 석방했습니다.

2018년 6월 12일, 트럼프 대통령과 김 위원장은 싱가포르에서 회동했는데, 이는 “미국의 입장 완화에 있어 중요한 이정표”였습니다. 트럼프는 또한 중국의 시진핑 주석에게 도움에 감사를 표했습니다. 트럼프는 트위터에 “더 이상 북한의 핵 위협은 없습니다.”라고 적었습니다.

.

도널드 J. 트럼프 대통령과 북한 김정은 국무위원장이 공동 성명에 서명 | 2018년 6월 12일(조이스 N. 보고시안이 촬영한 공식 백악관 사진)

.

트럼프는 자신의 행정부의 승리를 주장하며 2019년 2월 27일 하노이에서 김정은을 두 번째로 만났지만 정상화 합의는 없었다. 북한은 제재 해제를 요청했고, 트럼프는 존 볼턴 국가안보보좌관의 조언을 따라 북한이 모든 핵무기와 모든 핵연료를 미국으로 이전하고 “모든 화학 및 생물학적 재고를 신고”할 것을 요구했다. 회담은 결렬되었고 김정은은 떠났다. 폼페이오 국무장관은 북한이 일방적으로 완전히 비핵화할 것을 요구했지만, 트럼프는 새로운 징벌적 제재를 승인하지 않았다.

.

도널드 트럼프와 김정은이 2019년 2월 27일 베트남 하노이 정상회담에서 악수하고 있다. 사진 출처: 백악관

.

북한은 이제 미사일 개발 및 시험 프로그램을 재개하여 미국의 미사일 방어 시스템을 무너뜨리는 데 집중했습니다. 트럼프는 걱정하지 않는다고 말했습니다. “저는 서두르지 않습니다… 저는 지금의 진행 방식에 매우 만족합니다.” 2019년 6월 30일, 트럼프는 역사상 처음으로 북한에 입국한 대통령으로서 김정은을 DMZ에서 세 번째로 만났습니다 . “트럼프는 김 위원장을 ‘적절한 시기에’ 워싱턴을 방문하도록 초대했으며, 미국 대통령에게서 전례가 없고 전혀 들어보지 못한 화해적인 언어를 사용했다고 합니다.”

애틀랜틱은 이 회의를 “비핵화가 죽은 날”이라고 불렀습니다. 그래도 북한은 일부 사람들에게 트럼프의 유일한 “주요 외교 정책 또는 지정학적 성공”으로 여겨졌고, 존 볼튼은 김정은을 “쥐똥 같은 작은 나라의 독재자”라고 불렀습니다.

데탕트는 2019년 10월 스톡홀름 회담의 실패로 끝났고, 북한은 회담을 중단했고 미국은 해상 군사 훈련을 재개했습니다. 김정은은 북한이 “새로운 중형 탄도 미사일 잠수함을 공개”하면서 전략 무기 시험을 재개한다고 발표했습니다.

그러다 2020년 초에 코로나가 왔습니다. 북한은 2020년 1월 22일에 국경을 봉쇄했고, 뉴욕 타임스는 트럼프가 달성하지 못한 것을 달성했다고 칭찬했습니다. “북한의 경제를 질식시켰다.” 하지만 북한은 봉쇄에서 살아남았고, 관찰자들은 충격을 받았습니다. “이러한 미래의 경제 전쟁에 대한 엄청난 회복력의 입증은 서방이 제재 체제의 미래에 대한 희망을 심각하게 훼손했습니다.”

2020년 11월 3일 조 바이든이 당선된 후 미국은 군축 회담을 촉구하기 시작했지만 북한은 이를 또 다른 미국의 “시간 지연 속임수”로 거부했습니다. 하지만 바이든 행정부는 북한 군비 통제에 대한 실행 가능한 정책이 없다는 비판이 커지면서 교착 상태에 빠졌습니다. 2017년 3월 25일, 포린 어페어스는 “북한과 현실적인 협상을 할 때가 왔다”고 썼지만, 바이든 자신은 완전한 비핵화를 언급했습니다.

한편, 북한은 레일 기반 미사일, 방어 시스템을 회피하는 미사일, 초음속 글라이드 미사일, 고도로 기동성 있는 순항 미사일, 개선된 방공 시스템으로 계속 진격했습니다. 2022년 11월 18일 북한은 ICBM 시험을 재개했습니다. 이제 북한은 세계에서 가장 강력한 핵 억제력 중 하나를 보유할 태세를 갖추었습니다. 북한은 또한 재래식 무기와 방어에서도 큰 진전을 이루었습니다. 이에 대응하여 미국은 이제 “대규모 군사 훈련의 완전한 재개를 발표했습니다.”

에이브럼스는 이렇게 요약합니다. “바이든 행정부의 임기는 여러 면에서 냉전 시대로의 복귀를 의미했습니다.” 하지만 2020년대에는 북한이 “세계 질서에서 훨씬 덜 이상치”가 되었고, 미국의 입장은 “점점 더 불리해졌습니다.”

제7장: “제2차 냉전: 북한의 새로운 시대”

북한 경제는 1950년대와 60년대에는 남한보다 훨씬 앞섰지만, 소련이 침체되면서 80년대에 추월당했습니다. 1990년대와 2000년대 초반에 북한은 서방으로부터 집중적인 포위를 받았습니다. 하지만 오바마 집권 하에서 세계 질서가 깨지기 시작했고, 북한은 더 많은 잠재적 파트너를 갖게 되었습니다. 많은 국가가 북한을 호의적으로 보았는데, 북한은 “다른 어떤 곳과도 다른 요새로 남아 있었기” 때문입니다.

21 세기 중국의 엄청난 경제 성장은 북한에 큰 혜택을 주었습니다. 중국의 무역 정책은 서방의 경제 및 무역 제재를 상당히 약화시켰습니다. 중국 주석 시진핑은 2019년에 북한을 방문했습니다. 중국에서의 관광과 기술 이전이 증가했습니다. 북한은 미국과 한국 음식을 상쇄하기 위해 중국 미디어와 문화에 채널을 열었습니다. 북한은 또한 군사적으로 중국과 더 가까워졌습니다.

반면 러시아는 1990년대에 붕괴되었고 소련보다 훨씬 약한 전략적 파트너가 되었습니다. 하지만 북한은 “2022년부터 NATO와 우크라이나와의 갈등에서 러시아의 가장 신뢰할 수 있는 지원자 중 하나임이 입증”되었고 2024년까지 도네츠크와 루간스크에 노동자를 파견하기 시작했습니다.

2022년 9월 5일, 미국 정보부는 러시아가 우크라이나에서 사용하기 위해 “수백만 개의 북한 포탄과 로켓”을 구매하고 있다고 밝혔습니다. 러시아 국방부 장관 세르게이 쇼이구는 2023년 7월에 북한을 방문했습니다. 9월 말, 김 위원장은 인수를 염두에 두고 군용기 생산 시설을 검토하기 위해 러시아 극동을 방문했습니다. 또 다른 관심 분야는 우주 위성 기술이었습니다.

러시아는 또한 우크라이나 목표물에 대한 북한의 탄도 미사일 사용을 강화했고, 미국에서 공급한 재블린에 대항하기 위해 북한의 전투 차량을 획득하기 시작했습니다.

2024년 6월 18-19일, 러시아 대통령 블라디미르 푸틴이 24년 만에 처음으로 북한을 방문했습니다. 이후 두 나라는 전쟁 시 “군사 및 기타 지원”을 제공하는 “포괄적 전략적 파트너십” 조약에 서명했습니다. 북한은 이제 러시아를 “자국의 안보 이익에 전례 없이 중요한” 나라로 인정했습니다. 또한 북한과 시리아, 이란을 포함한 미국이 표적으로 삼은 다른 국가들 간의 관계도 계속 개방되었습니다.

북한은 또한 단극 세계에서 다극 세계로의 전환이 상당한 이익을 가져올 것이라고 믿었습니다. 김 위원장은 북한을 “강력한 독립 국가”라고 불렀습니다. 이러한 전환의 한 예는 세계 무역 통화인 미국 달러에서 벗어나 국가 지불 시스템이 성장하는 것입니다.

제8장 “미북 갈등의 미래 궤적”

2016-2024년에는 북한의 재래식 전쟁 역량이 크게 현대화되어 군사적 개념인 “에스컬레이션 사다리”에 주의를 기울였다는 것을 보여주었습니다. 북한은 핵 억제력에 지나치게 의존하면 미국의 저수준 재래식 공격이 작용할 수 있다는 것을 깨달았습니다. 따라서 “평양의 적들은 ‘코피’ 공격과 같은 도발을 계속 고려할 수 있습니다.” 에스컬레이션 관리가 헤즈볼라 대 이스라엘과 러시아가 우크라이나에서 한 것처럼 전 세계에서 효과적으로 사용되었습니다.

따라서 북한은 다층 무기고를 만드는 데 집중했습니다. 2023년 3월 24일에 첫 번째 전술 핵탄두를 공개했습니다. 또 다른 핵심 요소는 드론 개발이었습니다. 서방은 이제 북한이 괌, 하와이, 오키나와의 미군 기지와 일본의 미 7함대를 파괴 할 수 있다고 판단했습니다.

2020년까지 미국은 북한에 맞서 싸울 때와 같은 수준의 적과 싸울 능력을 잃었습니다. 한 세대 동안 반란군, 게릴라, 테러리스트와만 싸우는 데 집중했기 때문입니다. 미국은 “주요 군대에 대한 재래식 전쟁에 참여할” 준비가 제대로 되어 있지 않았고, 중국과 북한은 모두 동아시아 전쟁이 발생할 경우를 대비해 미국에 대항하는 군대를 특별히 건설했습니다. 2020년까지 미국은 “서구의 지배력이 수세기 동안 전례 없는 도전에 직면한 세계에서 크게 약화된 초강대국”이 되었습니다.

북한은 “서구 세계의 경제 및 군사력과 서구 가치의 세계적 승리를 중심으로 한 새로운 세계 질서라는 생각에 가장 직접적인 모순 중 하나”를 나타냈습니다. 서구는 북한을 “궁극적인 이질적 존재”로 여겼지만 “열핵 공격으로 서구 세계 전역의 도시를 파괴할 수 있는 군사적 능력은… 겉보기에 무한정”을 유지했습니다.

북한은 또한 이라크와 리비아에서 교훈을 얻었으며, “서방을 기쁘게 하기 위해” 자신의 힘을 포기하는 것은 치명적인 실수라고 공언했습니다. 따라서 북한은 “서방 국가가 결코 통치를 강요하지 않은 세계에서 몇 안 되는 곳 중 하나”로 남아 있습니다. 그리고 미국은 북한의 “완전한 파괴”를 옹호하는 중심 정책을 유지하고 있습니다. 따라서 “서방 세계는 최종 붕괴를 달성하기 위해 국가를 점진적으로 약화시키려는 장기적인 노력을 지속할 것으로 예상됩니다.” 그 정책이 성공할지는 의문입니다.

결론

앞의 요약은 빙산의 일각일 뿐입니다. AB Abrams의 책은 핵전쟁 직전의 세계에 대한 매우 효과적인 사례 연구입니다.

한국전쟁이 끝난 후 오늘까지 71년 동안 미국 대통령 행정부가 북한과 화해를 향해 나아간 사례는 단 두 번뿐이었습니다.

첫 번째는 지미 카터 전 대통령이 협상한 클린턴 행정부의 “합의된 틀”이고, 두 번째는 도널드 트럼프 대통령이 김정은 북한 국무위원장에게 직접 손을 내밀었을 때입니다. 트럼프는 미국과 서방 동맹국의 외교 정책 수립 전체의 적대감에 직면하여 평화를 위한 조치를 취한 공로를 인정받을 수 있습니다.

그렇지 않으면, 이것은 서구의 이익이 지배하는 세계에서 독립적인 길을 그리기 위해 미국 초강대국의 적대감을 용납하는 단호하고 회복력 있는 소규모 국가에 대한 이야기입니다. 이 세계는 현재 전 세계적 반란으로 인해 도전을 받고 있습니다. 미국은 2차 세계 대전이 시작된 이래로 막으려고 노력해 왔고, 영미 시오니스트 제국권은 1세기 이상 억압하려고 노력해 온 다극적 세계가 등장하고 있습니다.

서방 언론이 북한을 악마화했음에도 불구하고, 북한의 동기 부여되고 재능 있는 주민들은 북한의 지도부를 지지하여 입장을 표명했습니다. 그렇게 함으로써 북한은 이념적으로 헌신적이고, 교육 수준이 높으며, 기술 지향적인 작고 동질적인 주민이라는 이점을 얻었으며, 인터넷 선전과 음란물과 같은 서방의 부패에 대한 유혹에도 저항할 수 있었습니다. 물론 이 지점에 도달하려면 거의 완전한 군사 동원이 필요했습니다.

이러한 특성 덕분에 북한은 사이버전, 전자전, 정보전, 에스컬레이션 관리가 그 어느 때보다 더 큰 역할을 하는 점점 더 복잡해지는 군사 환경에서 기능할 수 있었습니다. 무엇보다도 철저한 보안 시스템이 있습니다.

마지막으로, Abrams의 책에 비추어 볼 때, 북한과 러시아 간의 최근 발전 사항도 이해할 수 있습니다. 러시아의 블라디미르 푸틴 대통령은 국가 두마에 푸틴의 6월 방문 당시 서명된 북한과의 새로운 전략적 파트너십을 비준해 달라고 요청했습니다. 이 파트너십은 각 국가가 외국의 침략이 있을 경우 서로를 지원하기로 약속했습니다. 주목할 점은 이 조약이 러시아-한국 국경을 모든 사람과 상품의 자유로운 이동에 개방하는 서방의 제재에 반대한다는 것입니다. 북한과 중국 간의 무역과 함께 서방의 제재 체제는 무너졌습니다. 이와 병행하여 북한은 남한과의 국경을 봉쇄하고 강화하기 위한 새로운 조치를 취하여 동아시아의 긴장이 고조되어 전쟁이 발발할 경우 해당 방향에서 지상 공격을 차단했습니다.

21 세기 북한은 다극 세계가 만들어지는 데 결정적으로 기여한 안정의 원천 중 하나 라고 주장할 수도 있습니다 . AB Abrams의 책, Surviving the Unipolar Era: North Korea’s 35-Year Standoff with the United States는 이것이 어떻게 이루어졌는지 보여주며, 따라서 지정학과 우리 시대의 역사를 공부하는 모든 학생이 꼭 읽어야 할 책 목록 상위에 올라와야 합니다.

공개 및 면책 조항: Clarity Press는 저의 저서 Our Country, Then and Now의 출판사입니다. 여기서 리뷰하는 책 Surviving the Unipolar Era: North Korea’s 35-Year Standoff with the United States (AB Abrams 지음)는 제가 리뷰한 Clarity Press에서 출판한 세 번째 책입니다. 저는 이러한 리뷰에 대한 고려 사항이나 편집 제안 또는 요구 사항을 받지 않았습니다. 또한 공개 오픈 소스 외에는 다른 것을 활용하지 않았습니다.

*

아래의 공유 버튼을 클릭하여 이 기사를 친구와 동료에게 이메일/전달하세요. Instagram  과  Twitter 에서 팔로우 하고 Telegram 채널 을 구독하세요 . Global Research 기사를 자유롭게 리포스트하고 널리 공유하세요.

새는 폭탄이 아니다: 전쟁이 아닌 평화의 세계를 위해 싸우자 

본 기사는 원래 저자의 Substack에 게재되었습니다.

Richard C. Cook은 American Geopolitical Institute의 공동 창립자이자 수석 조사관입니다. Cook은 은퇴한 미국 연방 분석가로, 미국 공무원 위원회, FDA, 카터 백악관, NASA, 미국 재무부를 포함한 다양한 정부 기관에서 광범위한 경험을 쌓았습니다. 그는 윌리엄 앤 메리 대학을 졸업했습니다. 챌린저호 참사 당시 고발자로서 그는 우주 왕복선을 파괴한 결함이 있는 O-링 조인트를 폭로했고, 그의 이야기를 “Challenger Revealed”라는 책에 기록했습니다. 재무부에서 근무한 후 그는 사적 금융 통제 통화 시스템을 강력히 비판했으며, “We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform”에서 그의 우려를 자세히 설명했습니다. 그는 American Monetary Institute의 고문으로 일했고, 의원 데니스 쿠시니치와 협력하여 연방준비제도를 진정한 국가 통화로 대체할 것을 옹호했습니다. 그의 신간, Our Country, Then and Now (Clarity Press, 2023)를 읽어보세요. 또한 그의 Three Sages Substack( https://montanarcc.substack.com/publish/posts) 과 American Geopolitical Institute 기사( https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/category/agi/) 를 읽어보세요 .

“모든 인간의 기업은 삶에 이바지해야 하고, 지상에서의 삶을 풍요롭게 해야 합니다. 그렇지 않으면 인간은 자신의 영토를 확립하고자 하는 곳에서 노예가 될 것입니다!” Bô Yin Râ(Joseph Anton Schneiderfranken, 1876-1943), Posthumus Projects Amsterdam 번역, 2014. 또한 Kober Press에서 발행한 The Book on the Living God를 여기에서 다운로드하세요 .

Race, Class and the Death Penalty in the United States

October 17th, 2024 by Abayomi Azikiwe

Even though the United States government praises itself for representing what is claimed to be the “leading democracy” in the world, the character of the legal and criminal justice system is largely based upon an unequal class structure and racial stratification.

Since its origins as a nation-state, the U.S. ruling interests were dependent upon the forced removals and enslavement of the oppressed Indigenous, African, Latin American and other peoples of color.

In the present century, more than 2 million people are incarcerated in local, state and federal institutions. The overwhelming majority of those detained are from the most exploited and oppressed sections of the population.

The implementation of capital punishment has its origins in the same circumstances which arose to defend the inherent unequal society within the U.S. Not all states sentence inmates to die through lethal injection or electrocution. Nonetheless, the federal death penalty, although not nearly as frequently used, remains in use.

Over the last few weeks numerous southern states have carried out the executions of men who have already been locked up for decades. In several cases exculpatory evidence examined within an impartial courtroom could have exonerated those who were put to death by prison officials.

The federal government, including the executive, legislative and judicial branches, uphold the view that these executions are occurring on a state level and therefore there is no legal basis for halting them. Nonetheless, the political impact of the rising executions in some of the southern states are being felt on a global scale. In the bourgeois democracies of Canada, Western Europe and the United Kingdom, the use of capital punishment has been banned for decades.

Although Canada and these European countries belong to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) therefore being compelled to participate in imperialist war drives in Eastern Europe, West Asia, East Asia, Africa and Latin America, they remain uncomfortable in regard to the regular usage of the death penalty by the U.S. This reality should not be surprising since as already alluded to, the U.S. has the largest per capita prison population than any other country in the world. Despite astronomically high rates of imprisonment the country is extremely violent resulting in the murders and injuries of hundreds of thousands annually.

State violence against African Americans, Latin Americans, immigrants, among others, reinforce the status quo. Since the beginning of the 21st century, thousands of oppressed, working class and poor people have been abused, injured, framed and murdered by law-enforcement agents.

The experience of this century is a continuation of a pattern which emerged under British colonialism in the 17th century. With the independence of the thirteen colonies after the War of 1776-1783, African enslavement and the policy of racially oriented removals remained the mainstay of the Republic up until the Civil War of 1861-1865. The emancipation of four million people of African descent during 1865 ushered in an attempt to reconstruct the U.S. on a more democratic framework. This project was abandoned after the national elections of 1876 resulting in the reinstitution of near slave-like conditions for African Americans.

Mass lynching as a mechanism for social control had its judicial component within the criminal justice system. The penal institutions were utilized for the exploitation of labor which was perfectly legal under the 13th Amendment stating that involuntary servitude was prohibited by the Constitution only apart from the imprisonment of people. The enforcement of laws in the U.S. were designed to gain maximum profits for the capitalist ruling class.

During the post-civil rights era beginning in the 1980s, the U.S. experienced rapid growth in police agencies, law-enforcement tactics utilized against the oppressed population groups and the incarceration of people of color and the working poor. Over a period of three decades, the number of people imprisoned grew by 400 percent.

Racism, State Executions and the Class Character of the U.S. Today

It is necessary to place the present series of executions within a historical context to fully grasp the class character of U.S. society. At the height of the African American movement for equality and self-determination during the early 1970s, the death penalty was suspended by the U.S. Supreme Court between 1972-1976.

Over the last five decades there have been many executions. Sean Murphy wrote for the Associated Press on September 26:

“Death row inmates in five states have been put to death in the span of one week, an unusually high number of executions that defies a yearslong trend of decline in both the use and support of the death penalty in the U.S. The first execution was carried out on Friday in South Carolina. Two more death row inmates, in Missouri and Texas, were pronounced dead Tuesday evening following executions, and an Oklahoma inmate was executed Thursday. When Alabama used nitrogen gas later Thursday to execute a man, it marked the first time in more than 20 years — since July 2003 — that five were held in seven days, according to the nonprofit Death Penalty Information Center, which takes no position on capital punishment but has criticized the way states carry out executions. The United States has reached 1,600 executions since the death penalty was reinstated by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1976, said Robin Maher, the center’s executive director.” 

Delays in executions in recent years are attributed to controversy surrounding the methods used to put inmates to death. Lethal injections often run into difficulties and failures requiring postponements. The lack of availability of preferred substances inducing sudden death has been one cause for the gaps between executions. See this.

.

Death penalty map in the United States

.

In Alabama recently, nitrogen gas was used to execute Alan Eugene Miller, 59, a white man. Perhaps the most widely known execution in the recent period was that of African American Marcellus Williams, 55, of Missouri, who maintained his innocence for many years. As the execution date neared, Williams changed his plea to no contest, yet it was not enough to stave off his ordered death by lethal injection.

Image: Marcellus Williams executed by the State of Missouri

Many questions were raised about the errors in the murder case against Williams. However, the State Supreme Court ruled against him as Governor Mike Parsons rejected a clemency request from Williams sealing his fate.

Death Penalty in the U.S. Can Never be Considered Justifiable

Due to the racial and class history of the U.S., the implementation of the death penalty can never be justified on political and moral grounds. Irrespective of the crimes these inmates were sentenced for by the courts, the level of injustice embedded in the judicial system is a clear reflection of the power dynamics within society as a whole.

Elements within the ruling class have committed far greater crimes against people inside the U.S. and abroad while never facing prosecution let alone capital punishment. Just within the last sixty years, wars of occupation, forced removals and genocide have and are still occurring. Those who have systematically denied the rights of millions to due process and to live a decent life free of impoverishment, racial profiling and all forms of oppression and exploitation can by no means sit in judgment against anyone from the working class and poor.

Those who are utilizing street crime as a rationale for mass incarceration of the largely Black, Brown and poor masses should be more concerned about the abolition of inequality and national oppression rather than seeking to impose social control. The death penalty is the ultimate and final level of state punishment. Therefore, in a racist capitalist system its implementation must be analyzed within the framework of the actual history of the U.S.

The abolition of capital punishment and the entire prison-industrial complex is an integral part of the struggle to overturn the unjust system. A rethinking of the death penalty over recent decades must create the atmosphere for the organizational and mobilizing of social forces aimed at realizing the fundamental change needed to bring into being a truly democratic society.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.  

All images in this article are from the author

You’re Not Crazy. This Genocidal Dystopia Is Crazy.

October 17th, 2024 by Caitlin Johnstone

You’re not crazy. They are crazy. The ones who are going around acting like everything’s fine. The ones dismissing the Gaza genocide as a “single issue”. The ones who don’t like it when you talk about this stuff because it bums them out. They are the crazy ones.

I say this because living in the west during a western-backed genocide can make you feel like you’re going insane. Like maybe there’s something wrong with you for not being able to go along as though your government isn’t helping Israel burn people alive, shoot kids in the head, deliberately destroy Gaza’s healthcare system, and target civilian populations with deadly siege warfare in order to annex Palestinian territory. Like maybe you’re defective if you can’t be as chill about all this as everyone else is being.

But there’s nothing wrong with you, and you are not defective. There is something very wrong with a civilization that could go along with all this. It is our genocidal dystopia that is defective.

History is rife with examples of horrific mass atrocities to which the majority of the population did not respond with the appropriate revulsion and urgency at the time. Slavery. The Holocaust. The systematic extermination of other indigenous populations in other settler-colonialist projects. Most of the people who now look back and judge those evils correctly in hindsight are sleepwalking right through their present-day reiteration in Palestine.

Those who stood against the mass atrocities of history tended to be in the minority, because if opposing them was conventional wisdom they wouldn’t have happened in the first place. This shows us that there is no correlation between conventional wisdom and real moral clarity. We cannot look to others to evaluate whether our position on an issue is the correct one, because history tells us that the majority is very often wrong on the most important issues in the present moment when it matters.

And the majority is wrong now. The ones flagrantly supporting Israel’s abuses are wrong.

The ones who try not to think too much about what’s being done in Gaza and Lebanon are wrong. The ones who say it’s all so tragic and heartbreaking but it’s oh so very complicated and Israel has a right to defend itself are wrong. The ones who don’t oppose Israel’s atrocities but only oppose their own country sending boots on the ground or spending their tax dollars on it are wrong. The ones who know a genocide is happening but avoid making too much noise about it because they want to make sure the Democrats win the election are wrong. The ones who know it’s a genocide but don’t respond to this reality with the appropriate level of urgency, forcefulness and focus are wrong.

All around us we are bombarded with messages trying to gaslight into believing that we are the ones who aren’t perceiving reality correctly. These messages can be overt, like the propaganda of the mass media and the talking points of the Israel apologists we run into online. They can also be subtle, like the unspoken messages we get when nobody around us is talking about Gaza and how people grow uncomfortable when we do.

But those messages are lying to us. We absolutely are the ones who are seeing things correctly. We absolutely are the ones who are responding to this nightmare appropriately. They are the ones acting like a bunch of lunatics casually strolling around in the middle of a house fire. 

Don’t look to others to evaluate your own level of clarity. In a civilization that has gone insane, you have to sort out what sanity looks like for yourself. When our leaders are throwing their support behind an active genocide in a society that is awash with propaganda-induced delusions, we’ve all got to be brave enough to stand on our own two feet.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image is from the author

Israel’s War on the World

October 17th, 2024 by Medea Benjamin

Each new week brings new calamities for people in the countries neighboring Israel, as its leaders try to bomb their way to the promised land of an ever-expanding Greater Israel.

In Gaza, Israel appears to be launching its “Generals’ Plan” to drive the most devastated and traumatized 2.2 million people in the world into the southern half of their open-air prison. Under this plan, Israel would hand the northern half over to greedy developers and settlers who, after decades of U.S. encouragement, have become a dominant force in Israeli politics and society. The redoubled slaughter of those who cannot move or refuse to move south has already begun.

In Lebanon, millions are fleeing for their lives and thousands are being blown to pieces in a repeat of the first phase of the genocide in Gaza. For Israel’s leaders, every person killed or forced to flee and every demolished building in a neighboring country opens the way for future Israeli settlements. The people of Iran, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia ask themselves which of them will be next.

Israel is not only attacking its neighbors. It is at war with the entire world. Israel is especially threatened when the governments of the world come together at the United Nations and in international courts to try to enforce the rule of international law, under which Israel is legally bound by the same rules that all countries have signed up to in the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions.

In July, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel’s occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem since 1967 is illegal, and that it must withdraw its military forces and settlers from all those territories. In September, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution giving Israel one year to complete that withdrawal. If, as expected, Israel fails to comply, the UN Security Council or the General Assembly may take stronger measures, such as an international arms embargo, economic sanctions or even the use of force.

Now, amid the escalating violence of Israel’s latest bombing and invasion of Lebanon, Israel is attacking the UNIFIL UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon, whose thankless job is to monitor and mitigate the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.

On October 10 and 11, Israeli forces fired on three UNIFIL positions in Lebanon. At least five peacekeepers were injured. UNIFIL also accused Israeli soldiers of deliberately firing at and disabling the monitoring cameras at its headquarters, before two Israeli tanks later drove through and destroyed its gates. On October 15th, an Israeli tank fired at a UNIFIL watchtower in what it described as “direct and apparently deliberate fire on a UNIFIL position.” Deliberately targeting UN missions is a war crime.

This is far from the first time the soldiers of UNIFIL have come under attack by Israel. Since UNIFIL took up its positions in southern Lebanon in 1978, Israel has killed blue-helmeted UN peacekeepers from Ireland, Norway, Nepal, France, Finland, Austria and China.

The South Lebanon Army, Israel’s Christian militia proxy in Lebanon from 1984 to 2000, killed many more, and other Palestinian and Lebanese groups have also killed peacekeepers. Three hundred and thirty-seven UN peacekeepers from all over the world have given their lives trying to keep the peace in southern Lebanon, which is sovereign Lebanese territory and should not be subject to repeated invasions by Israel in the first place. UNIFIL has the worst death toll of any of the 52 peacekeeping missions conducted by the UN around the world since 1948.

Fifty countries currently contribute to the 10,000-strong UNIFIL peacekeeping mission, anchored by battalions from France, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Italy, Nepal and Spain. All those governments have strongly and unanimously condemned Israel’s latest attacks, and insisted that “such actions must stop immediately and should be adequately investigated.”

Israel’s assault on UN agencies is not confined to attacking its peacekeepers in Lebanon. The even more vulnerable, unarmed, civilian agency, UNRWA (UN Relief and Works Agency), is under even more vicious assault by Israel in Gaza. In the past year alone, Israel has killed a horrifying number of UNRWA workers, about 230, as it has bombed and fired at UNRWA schools, warehouses, aid convoys and UN personnel.

UNRWA was created in 1949 by the UN General Assembly to provide relief to some 700,000 Palestinian refugees after the 1948 “Nakba,” or catastrophe. The Zionist militias that later became the Israeli army violently expelled over 700,000 Palestinians from their homes and homeland, ignoring the UN partition plan and seizing by force much of the land the UN plan had allocated to form a Palestinian state.

When the UN recognized all that Zionist-occupied territory as the new state of Israel in 1949, Israel’s most aggressive and racist leaders concluded that they could get away with making and remaking their own borders by force, and that the world would not lift a finger to stop them. Emboldened by its growing military and diplomatic alliance with the United States, Israel has only expanded its territorial ambitions.

Netanyahu now brazenly stands before the whole world and displays maps of a Greater Israel that includes all the land it illegally occupies, while Israelis openly talk of annexing parts of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

Dismantling UNRWA has been a long-standing Israeli goal. In 2017, Netanyahu accused the agency of inciting anti-Israeli sentiment. He blamed UNRWA for “perpetuating the Palestinian refugee problem” instead of solving it and called for it to be eliminated.

.

Families have been forced to moved repeatedly in Gaza. UN United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

.

After October 7, 2023, Israel accused 12 of UNRWA’s 13,000 staff of being involved in Hamas’s attack on Israel. UNRWA immediately suspended those workers, and many countries suspended their funding of UNRWA. Since a UN report found that Israeli authorities had not provided “any supporting evidence” to back up their allegations, every country that funds UNRWA has restored its funding, with the sole exception of the United States.

Israel’s assault on the refugee agency has only continued. There are now three anti-UNRWA bills in the Israeli Knesset: one to ban the organization from operating in Israel; another to strip UNRWA’s staff of legal protections afforded to UN workers under Israeli law; and a third that would brand the agency as a terrorist organization. In addition, Israeli members of parliament are proposing legislation to confiscate UNRWA’s headquarters in Jerusalem and use the land for new settlements.

UN Secretary General Guterres warned that, if these bills become law and UNRWA is unable to deliver aid to the people of Gaza, “it would be a catastrophe in what is already an unmitigated disaster.”

Israel’s relationship with the UN and the rest of the world is at a breaking point. When Netanyahu addressed the General Assembly in New York in September, he called the UN a “swamp of antisemitic bile.” But the UN is not an alien body from another planet. It is simply the nations of the world coming together to try to solve our most serious common problems, including the endless crisis that Israel is causing for its neighbors and, increasingly, for the whole world.

Now Israel wants to ban the secretary general of the UN from even entering the country. On October 1st, Israel invaded Lebanon, and Iran launched 180 missiles at Israel, in response to a whole series of Israeli attacks and assassinations. Secretary General Antonio Guterres put out a statement deploring the “broadening conflict in the Middle East,” but did not specifically mention Iran. Israel responded by declaring the UN Secretary General persona non grata in Israel, a new low in relations between Israel and UN officials.

Over the years, the U.S. has partnered with Israel in its attacks on the UN, using its veto in the Security Council 40 times to obstruct the world’s efforts to force Israel to comply with international law.

American obstruction offers no solution to this crisis. It can only fuel it, as the violence and chaos grows and spreads and the United States’ unconditional support for Israel gradually draws it into a more direct role in the conflict.

The rest of the world is looking on in horror, and many world leaders are making sincere efforts to activate the collective mechanisms of the UN system. These mechanisms were built, with American leadership, after the Second World War ended in 1945, so that the world would “never again” be consumed by world war and genocide.

A US arms embargo against Israel and an end to U.S. obstruction in the UN Security Council could tip the political balance of power in favor of the world’s collective efforts to resolve the crisis.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Medea Benjamin is the cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and the author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher for CODEPINK and the author of Blood on Our Hands: The American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.

Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies are the authors of War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, with a new, updated edition due out in February 2025. They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Featured image is by Muhammad Mahdi Karim, Wikimedia Commons

The International Crisis Summit descended on Tokyo last week to warn about the new “replicon” self-amplifying mRNA vaccines that are about to be unleashed like a third atomic bomb upon the population of Japan.

James Corbett was there to cover the proceedings, to document the speeches, to participate in a massive rally in the heart of Tokyo against this dangerous new medical intervention, and to lecture sitting members of the Japanese Diet about his bodily sovereignty.

.

.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image source

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

 

***

Destabilizing the social, political and economic structure of 190 sovereign countries cannot constitute  a “solution” to combating the virus. But that was the imposed “solution” which was implemented in several stages from the very outset of the corona crisis in January 2020.  It’s the destruction of people’s  lives. It is the destabilization of civil society.

Fake science was supportive of this devastating agenda. The lies were sustained by a massive media disinformation campaign. 24/7, Incessant and Repetitive “Covid alerts” in the course of the last two years.

The  historic March 11, 2020 lockdown triggered economic and social chaos Worldwide. It was an act of “economic warfare”: a war against humanity. 

This diabolical agenda has undermined the sovereignty of nation states. It has contributed  to a wave of bankruptcies. It has impoverished people Worldwide.  It has led to a spiralling dollar denominated global debt. 

The March 11, 2020 Lockdown applied simultaneously in 190 countries has resulted in: “The confinement of the labor force” coupled with “The paralysis of the workplace”. The predictable impact: The most serious economic crisis in world history. 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, December 9, 2023

 

Video. Interview with Michelle Leduc Catlin, National Citizens Inquiry (NCI)

 

 

 


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

 

O Ocidente Coletivo continua a intensificar as suas constantes provocações contra a Federação Russa, especialmente na esfera nuclear. No meio de tensões e receios de uma guerra mundial total, a OTAN lançou exercícios nucleares em grande escala, piorando significativamente a situação de segurança na Europa e mesmo em todo o mundo.

A aliança atlantista iniciou recentemente os exercícios militares “Steadfast Noon” na Europa Ocidental, supostamente preparando-se para o possível cenário de um conflito aberto com Moscou em solo europeu. Os exercícios envolvem um grande esforço militar, com pelo menos treze Estados participando na operação sob a liderança dos EUA.

Os exercícios centram-se na avaliação e melhoria da capacidade da OTAN para implantar e utilizar armas nucleares americanas em solo europeu. Pelo menos 2.000 soldados de países da OTAN estão destacados na Europa para ajudar na operação. Uma ampla gama de equipamentos é usada nos exercícios, incluindo bombardeiros, aeronaves de escolta, caças e sistemas avançados de guerra eletrônica. A maioria dos exercícios tem lugar na Bélgica e nos Países Baixos, mas exercícios específicos também estão a ser realizados noutros países, como o Reino Unido e a Dinamarca.

“Num mundo incerto, é vital que testemos a nossa capacidade de defesa para que os nossos adversários saibam que a OTAN está pronta e é capaz de responder a qualquer ameaça”, disse o Secretário-Geral da OTAN, Mark Rutte, ao comentar sobre o exercícios.

Como é sabido, a Federação Russa envolveu-se recentemente em exercícios militares conjuntos com o seu principal aliado, a República de Belarus, lançando manobras para se preparar para uma guerra nuclear. Moscou e Minsk têm um acordo que estabelece uma cooperação irrestrita devido ao Pacto de União dos Estados, razão pela qual qualquer ataque ao território bielorrusso é automaticamente visto como um ataque à Rússia, legitimando uma resposta nuclear. Esta cooperação russo-bielorrussa tem sido frequentemente criticada pelo Ocidente, que não aceita qualquer outra forma de cooperação internacional que não seja a mantida entre os Estados ocidentais.

Também recentemente, Moscou e Belarus realizaram exercícios nucleares conjuntos, que foram relatados pelo Ocidente como uma “violação” das normas internacionais. A iniciativa conjunta russo-bielorrussa é legitimada pelo direito internacional, uma vez que ambos os países têm um acordo de defesa coletiva no âmbito do Estado da União. Os exercícios serviram precisamente para provar a disponibilidade da Rússia para responder a qualquer ameaça contra si mesma e contra a República de Belarus – que é reconhecida pelo governo russo como o seu principal parceiro estatal.

Neste sentido, o Ocidente legitima os atuais exercícios usando a retórica de que é “necessário” responder aos testes das suas capacidades nucleares pela Rússia – ignorando obviamente o fato de a própria Rússia ter acabado de lançar um programa nuclear internacional em resposta às constantes provocações americanas. A melhor coisa que o Ocidente pode fazer no atual momento de tensões é reduzir as suas intenções hegemônistas e começar a cooperar para a paz e a redução das tensões, alcançando assim um equilíbrio nuclear na Europa.

Ao lançar exercícios nucleares em grande escala na Europa neste momento, mesmo sem utilizar projéteis nucleares reais, Washington está simplesmente a agravar as tensões e a contribuir para o aumento da escalada. Não é possível que tais exercícios possam ajudar a trazer um equilíbrio estratégico, sendo simplesmente uma forma de piorar os já tensos laços entre o Ocidente e a Rússia. Neste sentido, é urgente que sejam tomadas medidas de desescalada antes que o ponto sem retorno seja ultrapassado.

As atitudes crescentes do Ocidente não têm outro propósito senão continuar as hostilidades constantes. Se a OTAN continuar a realizar exercícios nucleares na Europa, mesmo com sinais de descontentamento russos, o resultado final será um grave desequilíbrio no equilíbrio nuclear global. Este cenário só pode ser revertido através de um esforço real pela paz – algo que Washington infelizmente não parece disposto a fazer neste momento.

Por seu lado, Moscou mantém uma posição muito clara. Nenhuma agressão nuclear será tolerada, nem mesmo através de proxies. Recentemente, a doutrina nuclear russa foi alterada para responder a possíveis ataques a alvos civis por parte de potências não nucleares como legitimação de uma resposta nuclear – desde que tais ataques sejam realizados com o apoio de uma potência nuclear. Isto significa que a tolerância de Moscou às provocações externas está a diminuir, o que é uma consequência direta da postura irresponsável do Ocidente.

No final, mais uma vez a segurança europeia – e a de todo o mundo – é ameaçada pelas ações irresponsáveis ​​dos EUA, que se recusam a reconhecer a inevitabilidade da criação de um mundo multipolar.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

Artigo em inglês : NATO-led nuclear exercises escalate tensions and threaten European security, InfoBrics, 16 de Outubro de 2024.

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, membro da Associação de Jornalistas do BRICS, pesquisador do Centro de Estudos Geoestratégicos, especialista militar.

Você pode seguir Lucas Leiroz em: https://t.me/lucasleiroz e https://x.com/leiroz_lucas

Beef Spikes Insulin More Than Pasta

October 16th, 2024 by Dr. Ashley Armstrong

Beef causes a greater insulin release than white pasta, challenging common beliefs about carbohydrates and insulin

High carbohydrate and sugar intakes are not associated with insulin resistance and diabetes; increasing carbohydrate consumption can actually increase insulin sensitivity

Avoiding carbohydrates can induce physiological insulin resistance by downregulating enzymes and metabolic machinery important for proper carb metabolism

Free fatty acids play a key role in developing insulin resistance, with elevated levels preventing cells from effectively using carbohydrates

Type 2 diabetes is associated with increased total plasma free fatty acid concentrations

*

In the world of health and nutrition, few topics have sparked as much debate and confusion as insulin. This hormone, essential for regulating blood sugar levels, has become the subject of countless diet trends, health theories, and heated discussions. But why is there so much confusion surrounding insulin, and what’s the truth behind the hype?

I completely understand why so many are interested in the topic — as many people are not metabolically healthy. Estimates suggest that about 1 in 3 adults in the U.S. may be insulin resistant. And 2024 CDC data indicates that the obesity rate in the U.S. is around 42% to 43% among adults.

.

obese adults

.

Insulin resistance is a condition where the body’s cells become less responsive to insulin, a hormone produced by the pancreas that helps regulate blood sugar levels. When insulin resistance occurs, more insulin is needed to help glucose enter the cells. Over time, this can lead to higher insulin levels in the blood and may contribute to various health issues.

Having insulin resistance is certainly not desirable and is a real problem in modern society. However, is insulin something we should fear?

The Insulin Dilemma: Why Are We So Confused?

It’s easy to see why many people feel overwhelmed when it comes to understanding insulin’s role in our bodies. On one side, we have health gurus promoting the “carbohydrate insulin model,” suggesting that insulin is the primary culprit behind weight gain and metabolic issues. On the other side, we have scientific research that paints a more nuanced picture. So, how did we get here?

The carbohydrate insulin model, promoted by figures like Dr. Jason Fung, presents a seemingly straightforward explanation for weight gain and metabolic problems. According to this model, the consumption of carbohydrates can lead to insulin spikes that promote fat storage and contribute to obesity.

  1. Insulin tells your body to store calories.
  2. Carbohydrates cause insulin spikes.
  3. Therefore, high carbohydrate diets lead to weight gain and metabolic issues.

This explanation is appealing in its simplicity. It offers a clear villain (carbohydrates) and a simple solution (reduce carbs to reduce insulin). For many people struggling with weight or health issues, this model provides a sense of control and a clear path forward.

The carbohydrate insulin model then suggests that a higher protein and higher fat intake is best because it doesn’t increase insulin. It also causes many people to fear carbohydrates and can lead to eating-disorder like behaviors for others. While a diet higher in fat may keep insulin levels lower, it doesn’t fix the underlying metabolic problem (which is the inability to use carbohydrates). And when it comes to protein, did you know that protein actually spikes insulin as well?

In a study where researchers gave subjects 240-calorie servings of 38 different types of foods and measured insulin levels, they found that while higher carbohydrate foods generally caused greater insulin secretion, the results weren’t as clear-cut as many would expect.1 Surprisingly, beef caused a greater insulin release than white pasta! This finding challenges the common belief that only carbohydrates significantly impact insulin levels.

.

insulin index of foods

.

Other studies have shown that whey protein powder also stimulates the release of insulin following intake.2 So, if protein-rich foods like beef and whey can stimulate insulin release, does that make them “bad” according to the insulin fear-mongering logic? Of course not! This realization helps put the insulin debate into perspective.

Reality: It’s More Complicated Than That

The carbohydrate insulin model is an oversimplification of a much more complex system. Recent research has shown that the relationship between insulin, carbohydrates, and body fat is far more nuanced.

Like every other hormone in your body, insulin has a specific purpose and isn’t inherently good or bad. In fact, insulin plays crucial roles in our body beyond just regulating blood sugar. Insulin facilitates glucose and amino acid uptake into muscle cells, promoting muscle growth and preventing muscle protein breakdown.

So, if insulin isn’t the primary villain, what is? Again, having elevated insulin and insulin resistance is not a good thing. But what is the reason for the elevated insulin? The inability to utilize carbohydrates.

Consider this: Some bodybuilders inject significant amounts of insulin, yet remain extremely lean. On the flip side, if someone consumed large quantities of pure fat, they would gain substantial body fat despite having very little insulin increase.

Research demonstrates that obesity and inactivity are the biggest contributors to insulin resistance, not carbohydrates themselves. In fact, high-fat diets have even been shown to negatively impact insulin sensitivity. These examples illustrate that the relationship between insulin and fat gain isn’t as straightforward as some would have us believe.

Carbohydrates Are Not the Enemy You Think They Are

Contrary to popular belief, high carbohydrate and sugar intakes are not associated with insulin resistance and diabetes.3,4,5,6,7 In fact, increasing carbohydrate consumption can actually increase insulin sensitivity.8,9,10,11,12

This doesn’t mean that all carbohydrates are created equal or that unlimited consumption is advisable. However, it does suggest that demonizing all carbohydrates based on their effect on insulin is misguided.

Interestingly, avoiding carbohydrates can actually induce physiological insulin resistance. How? When we drastically reduce carb intake, our bodies downregulate the enzymes and metabolic machinery important for proper carb metabolism. Additionally, elevated levels of fatty acids can interfere with insulin signaling pathways. Again, removing the trigger instead of fixing the underlying problem.

A study comparing high-fat and low-fat diets found that participants on the high-fat diet experienced a decrease in glucose disposal rates during insulin infusion, indicating reduced insulin sensitivity.13 There’s also evidence suggesting that low-carbohydrate intake in healthy individuals of normal weight might lead to dysfunctional glucose homeostasis over time.14

One of the key players in the development of insulin resistance is often overlooked: free fatty acids. When we avoid carbs, our bodies can rely more on stress hormones like adrenaline to regulate blood sugar. This adrenaline release triggers the release of free fatty acids from our stored fat into the bloodstream.

Higher circulating free fatty acids prevent our cells from effectively using carbohydrates. As one study notes:

“Dysregulation of free fatty acid metabolism is a key event responsible for insulin resistance and Type 2 diabetes. According to the glucose-fatty acid cycle of Randle, preferential oxidation of free fatty acids over glucose plays a major role in insulin sensitivity and the metabolic disturbances of diabetes mellitus …”15

Another study adds:

“Elevated plasma FFA levels have been shown to account for up to 50% of insulin resistance in obese patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Lowering of FFAs in these patients or interfering with steps in the pathway through which FFAs cause insulin resistance could be a new and promising approach to treat Type 2 diabetes mellitus.”16

In fact, did you know that Type 2 diabetes is associated with increased total plasma free fatty acid concentrations?17 The root cause is often an alteration in oxidative phosphorylation (the process of using oxygen to produce energy from glucose — burning carbs the ‘right’ way) and an increased reliance on glycolysis (breaking down glucose without oxygen, the least efficient way).18

Oxidative phosphorylation leads to more ATP production and more CO2. While glycolysis leads to less ATP, less CO2, and more antimetabolic breakdown products like lactic acid.

When carbs aren’t being used efficiently to produce energy, it builds up in the cells. This excess sugar blocks more sugar from entering the cells, which prevents insulin from doing its job.19 At the heart of insulin resistance lies an inability to effectively use carbohydrates to produce energy. This impairment inhibits the function of insulin. Simply avoiding carbohydrates may reduce insulin levels, but it doesn’t fix this underlying problem — it merely removes the trigger.

The Long-Term Effects of Carb Avoidance

If you’re thriving on a low-carb diet, there’s no need to change your approach. Stick with what works for you and makes you feel your best. However, some people experience frustrations with this dietary style despite being told it is the answer to all of their problems. They may struggle to lose weight, notice thinning hair, have difficulty digesting certain foods, or face issues with sleep and digestion. (The result of poor energy production.)

For others, they may feel great at the beginning or for a few years, until their health starts to take a turn, or they re-gain their weight. It feels good, until it doesn’t. Removing carbohydrates from your diet can force your body to produce more adrenaline and cortisol to compensate, which can actually worsen carb metabolism over time.

This is why some individuals with hypothyroidism who follow a low-carb diet long-term may see their blood sugar “stabilize” initially, only to have it increase again later, regardless of how few carbohydrates they consume. (Why you see some on a low carb diet have elevated fasting glucose levels, despite eating little to no carbs.)

It’s crucial to understand that when you don’t eat carbohydrates, your body will make it from your own tissues or dietary protein to provide for the cells that require glucose. The only way to truly solve the problem of metabolic dysfunction is to address the underlying dysfunction that causes it.

So, what’s the solution? As with many aspects of health and nutrition, the answer lies in balance and individualization. Here are some strategies that can help improve insulin sensitivity and overall metabolic health:

1. Eat 3 to 4 balanced meals a day, focusing on whole, minimally processed foods — Fasting all day in the name of ‘health’ is not going to improve metabolic function. On the flip side, you don’t need to be snacking all day.

2. Minimize eating out and avoid heavily processed foods.

3. Exercise consistently, incorporating both strength training and cardiovascular exercise —Remember, rest days are important too, but complete inactivity isn’t the answer. Muscle mass is inversely associated with insulin resistance.20 So the more muscle mass you have, the more insulin sensitive you will be. More muscle means a greater capacity to take up glucose from the bloodstream.

4. Aim for 8,000 to 10,000 steps per day to increase nonexercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT).

5. Reduce consumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), which can impair proper glucose oxidation21,22 and potentially damage insulin-producing beta-cells in the pancreas.23

6. Remain mindful of total dietary fat intake — Dietary fat is not ‘bad’, but overconsuming fat is not required to reap the hormonal and micronutrient benefits. Remember, excess fat consumption can negatively impact carb oxidation, especially when in an insulin resistant state.

7. Include animal protein sources, eggs, and dairy for B vitamins and the micronutrients required to properly oxidize carbohydrates — It is best to choose collagen-rich cuts of meat to get a boost in beneficial amino acids like glycine, which further help your body regain metabolic function. (Example cuts would be slow cooked beef shanks, bone in roasts, beef cheeks, tendons, oxtail, pork hocks, lamb shanks, etc.)

Embracing Metabolism for Better Health

The journey to optimal health and metabolic function isn’t about finding a single villain to eliminate from our diets. It’s about understanding the complex interplay of various factors — including diet, exercise, stress, and sleep — and how they affect our individual bodies.

Insulin, far from being the enemy, is a crucial hormone that plays multiple important roles in our bodies. By focusing on overall metabolic health rather than demonizing specific nutrients or hormones, we can develop a more balanced, sustainable approach to nutrition and health.

Remember, if you’re feeling confused or overwhelmed by conflicting health information, you’re not alone. The key is to focus on foundational healthy habits and listen to your body. If a particular approach is working for you — you feel great, have good energy levels, and maintain a healthy weight — then stick with it. But if you’re still struggling, don’t be afraid to reassess and try a different approach.

Ultimately, the path to health is a personal journey. By arming ourselves with accurate information and maintaining an open, curious mindset, we can navigate the complex world of nutrition and find what truly works for our individual bodies.

Transform Your Health — One Step at a Time

Ashley and her sister Sarah have put together a truly groundbreaking step-by-step course called “Rooted in Resilience.” They have compiled what clearly is the best application of Dr. Ray Peat’s work on Bioenergetic Medicine that I have ever seen.

It is so good that I am using the core of their program to teach the many Health Coaches that I am in the process of training for the new Mercola Health Clinics I am opening this fall. It took these women working nearly full-time on this project for a year to create it.

This has to be one of the absolute best values for health education I have ever seen. If you want to understand why you struggle with health problems and then have a clear program on how to reverse those challenges, then this is the course for you.

It is precisely the type of program I wish I would have had access to when I got out of medical school. I fumbled around for decades before I reached the conclusion they discuss in the course and share with you so you can restore your cellular energy production and recover your health.

  • Select and eat the right foods to heal your metabolism and improve glucose utilization
  • Balance your hormones to help reduce anxiety, weight gain and sleep disturbances
  • Use reverse dieting to increase your calories without gaining weight and tanking your metabolism, all while improving your energy levels
  • Heal your gut for proper immune function, mood and weight management
  • Tweak your diet and lifestyle habits to improve your mindset and mental health
  • Crush your fitness goals with ease and get your life back on track
  • Master the most essential habits for health with bonus guides, including over 100 meal plans to take the stress out of meal time planning and shopping, and so much more!

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Ashley Armstrong is the co-founder of Angel Acres Egg Co., which specializes in low-PUFA (polyunsaturated fat) eggs that are shipped to all 50 states (join waitlist here), and Nourish Cooperative, which ships low-PUFA pork, beef, cheese, A2 dairy and traditional sourdough to all 50 states. Waitlists will reopen shortly.

Notes

1 Am J Clin Nutr. 1997 Nov;66(5):1264-76. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/66.5.1264

2 Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Nov;80(5):1246-53. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/80.5.1246

3 Diabetes Care. 2005 Jun;28(6):1397-403. doi: 10.2337/diacare.28.6.1397

4 Am J Clin Nutr. 1992 May;55(5):1018-23. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/55.5.1018

5 Diabetes Care. 2003 Apr;26(4):1008-15. doi: 10.2337/diacare.26.4.1008

6 The Journal of Nutrition, Volume 131, Issue 10, October 2001, Pages 2782S–2786S, doi: 10.1093/jn/131.10.2782S (Archived)

7 Diabetes Metab. 2005 Apr;31(2):178-88. doi: 10.1016/s1262-3636(07)70184-2

8 J Physiol. 1934 Mar 29; 81(1): 29–48. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1934.sp003113

9 The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Volume 52, Issue 3, September 1990, Pages 524–528, doi: 10.1093/ajcn/52.3.524 (Archived)

10 The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, Volume 67, Issue 5, 1 November 1988, Pages 951–957, doi: 10.1210/jcem-67-5-951

11 American Journal of Physiology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Volume 280, Issue 4, April 2001, Pages E576-E583

12 Diabetologia 44, 2038–2043 (2001)

13 Eur J Nutr. 2017 Feb;56(1):431-443. doi: 10.1007/s00394-015-1108-6. Epub 2015 Nov 28

14 Front Public Health. 2023; 11: 1115333. Published online 2023 Mar 16. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1115333

15 Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2007 Mar;10(2):142-8. doi: 10.1097/MCO.0b013e328042ba90

16 Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2002 Sep;5(5):545-9

17 Nutrients. 2019 Sep; 11(9): 2022

18 J Appl Physiol (1985). 1997 Jul;83(1):166-71

19 PLoS Med. 2007 May;4(5):e154. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040154

20 J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011 Sep;96(9):2898-903. doi: 10.1210/jc.2011-0435. Epub 2011 Jul 21

21 Cardiovascular Disease, Stimulatory Action of Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids on Pyruvate Oxidation, pp 483–493

22 Journal of Applied Physiology, Volume 104, Issue 1, January 2008, Pages 1-9

23 Endocrine. 2011 Apr;39(2):128-38. doi: 10.1007/s12020-010-9432-3. Epub 2010 Dec 15

Featured image is from Mercola

Um dos maiores problemas do mundo contemporâneo é a ameaça constante de uma guerra nuclear entre o Ocidente e a Rússia. Os EUA, a OTAN e os seus aliados têm frequentemente provocado Moscou numa tentativa de escalar o conflito ucraniano. O objetivo ocidental parece ser esgotar a paciência da Rússia, incitando assim uma resposta violenta que poderá levar a uma guerra mundial total.

No entanto, apesar desta postura extremamente provocativa, o presidente dos EUA, Joe Biden, continua a dizer que o seu país está disposto a cooperar para a paz. Segundo Biden, Washington está pronto para desempenhar um papel diplomático, incentivando o diálogo nuclear internacional. Numa declaração recente, apelou às potências mundiais para que agissem racionalmente no processo de tomada de decisão em relação a armas nucleares, evitando ações que pudessem afetar a segurança global.

Biden disse que os EUA estão prontos para negociar termos diplomáticos sobre a questão nuclear com todos os países rivais, incluindo Rússia, China e Coreia do Norte. O objetivo de tal diálogo seria alegadamente reduzir os riscos da ameaça nuclear através de um acordo mutuamente benéfico para todas as partes – conseguindo assim uma possível redução das tensões globais.

“Os EUA estão prontos para iniciar conversações com a Rússia, a China e a Coreia do Norte sem condições prévias para reduzir a ameaça nuclear. Não há nenhum benefício para as nossas nações ou para o mundo em impedir o progresso na redução dos arsenais nucleares”, afirmou o presidente dos EUA.

Ironicamente, as palavras de Biden foram proferidas num discurso de felicitações à organização anti-armas nuclear com sede no Japão, Nihon Hidankyo – que ganhou o Prêmio Nobel da Paz pelo seu intenso trabalho a favor da desnuclearização. É curioso que Biden parabenize tal organização, uma vez que Nihon Hidankyo foi criado precisamente por cidadãos japoneses que sobreviveram aos ataques nucleares americanos em Hiroshima e Nagasaki. Aparentemente, Biden “esqueceu” que os EUA são o único país do mundo que utilizou armas nucleares numa situação real de combate – precisamente contra o Japão.

Além da inconsistência histórica, as palavras de Biden soam extremamente hipócritas, considerando que o presidente americano lidera o país num dos momentos mais instáveis ​​da história recente, quando o risco nuclear é consideravelmente elevado devido às ações irresponsáveis ​​de Washington e dos aliados ocidentais.

Por exemplo, Biden mencionou a Rússia, a China e a Coreia do Norte como nações com as quais os EUA estariam dispostos a negociar termos diplomáticos. No entanto, os EUA atualizaram recentemente a sua estratégia nuclear para estabelecer um “plano de ataques múltiplos” contra estes três países no caso de uma escalada de tensões. É impossível estabelecer negociações entre nações quando um lado planeja abertamente usar armas nucleares contra o outro, razão pela qual o discurso de Biden deve ser visto como mera retórica hipócrita e propagandística.

Toda a escalada das tensões nucleares globais está a acontecer por causa dos EUA. A atitude de países como a Rússia, a China e a Coreia do Norte é claramente defensiva, com o único objetivo de se defenderem das constantes ameaças impostas por Washington através da sua política externa agressiva. Diante de tantas provocações e agressões, os países rivais dos EUA não têm outra alternativa senão se prepararem para o pior cenário – o que explica, por exemplo, atitudes como a reforma da doutrina nuclear russa, os investimentos militares chineses e a estratégia coreana de testes de lançamento de mísseis.

Obviamente, nenhum dos lados da política internacional está realmente interessado numa guerra nuclear, uma vez que não haveria vencedores num tal conflito. No entanto, os EUA estão claramente dispostos a arriscar a segurança mundial para proteger os seus interesses egoístas. Desconfortáveis ​​com a transição geopolítica para a multipolaridade, os EUA fazem todo o possível para impedir a criação de uma nova ordem global, razão pela qual guerras e sanções são utilizadas contra países considerados “inimigos”.

Na verdade, nunca haverá qualquer diálogo nuclear liderado pelos EUA simplesmente porque Washington é o principal agente provocador e desestabilizador nesta questão. Para evitar uma escalada nuclear global, os EUA devem deixar de agir com uma mentalidade unipolar e hegemônista, admitindo que as mudanças no cenário político não podem ser evitadas. Só quando os EUA derem o passo definitivo para acabar com as suas obsessões hegemônicas é que haverá uma possibilidade real de diálogo de paz e de diplomacia nuclear. Enquanto Washington continuar a tentar salvar a ordem unipolar em declínio, o mundo continuará em constante risco de catástrofe.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

Artigo em inglês : Joe Biden hypocritically talks about nuclear dialogue while provokes Russia, InfoBrics, 16 de Outubro de 2024.

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, membro da Associação de Jornalistas do BRICS, pesquisador do Centro de Estudos Geoestratégicos, especialista militar.

Você pode seguir Lucas Leiroz em: https://t.me/lucasleiroz e https://x.com/leiroz_lucas

It’s been over two months since the Kiev regime launched its incursion into the Kursk oblast (region). The area was previously limited only to cross-border skirmishes, artillery duels and occasional sabotage operations, which was why the Russian military deployed Rosgvardiya, particularly the “Akhmat” special forces mostly composed of personnel from Chechnya. These units were not equipped to handle army-sized invading forces and it took some time for the regular military to move in and prevent further advances by the Ukrainian troops. Expectedly, as PR “victories” are the most important segment of the latter’s strategy, this was heavily (ab)used to sow discord within Russia, with the Kiev regime trying to present Chechens as “TikTok soldiers”. However, war propaganda was the least of the Neo-Nazi junta’s crimes in the occupied parts of this Russian region.

Namely, the invading force committed gruesome atrocities against Russian civilians, while Nazi-style treatment of the local population is a common practice.

This is yet another proof that “nomen est omen” is not just a simple saying. While militarily unjustified, the Kiev regime still went ahead with the incursion. Generals were against it, thinking it was a waste of the Neo-Nazi junta’s increasingly scarce resources. Other high-ranking officials also strongly opposed the move, seeing it as nothing more than Zelensky’s risky (geo)political gambit. This includes former top commander General Valery Zaluzhny, currently holding the largely ceremonial role of ambassador to the UK. The mainstream propaganda machine’s reaction was mixed, with some reporting it as risky, while others continued the usual “Ukraine is winning” narrative, insisting that the incursion “embarrassed” Russia.

CNN ran stories about Moscow’s supposed “inability” to push back the Neo-Nazi junta forces, quoting the latter’s field commanders who claimed that “Russian advances are mostly happening on the flanks of our foothold” and that “they’re only making incremental gains, but lose to them to counterattacks”.

However, even the mainstream propaganda machine was forced to admit this wasn’t the case, as the Russian military made fast and steady advances in recent weeks, leading to serious breakthroughs. There’s even a strong possibility that the Kiev regime forces in the area could soon be encircled. The Russian advance has been so fast in some areas that not even NATO personnel were able to flee, with Moscow’s forces neutralizing some Americans fighting for the Kiev regime. The Russian military also has foreign fighters (particularly Serbs), although they’re volunteers.

However, as Moscow’s forces keep advancing, they’re finding evidence of war crimes by the Kiev regime. Perhaps the most concerning is the disappearance of around 1000 locals. The Kremlin has issued a formal accusation that Ukrainian forces kidnapped 1,000 residents of the Kursk region. Russian authorities confirmed this after the relatives of the missing locals pleaded with the government to help find them.

“I’ve received messages regarding more than 1,000 such people from relatives trying to find them. We know nothing about their fate. This is a gross violation of their rights and international norms of treatment of civilians,” presidential human rights commissioner Tatyana Moskalkova said on October 14, adding: “I think it would be useful to remind you that the forced removal of civilians from their places of permanent residence is a gross violation of the Geneva Convention. And the world community should probably give this a proper assessment.”

However, the so-called “international community” (a rather pathetic euphemism for a NATO-occupied fraction of the actual world) is busy with prosecuting (or persecuting, to be precise) President Vladimir Putin for evacuating kids from an active warzone. In fact, enemy combatants who waged war on the people of Donbass for years (including as part of Neo-Nazi units) were actually allowed to go to Russia and take their kids (although this too was used for anti-Russian propaganda).

So far, Moscow had to evacuate over 112,000 residents displaced by the Kiev regime forces. However, based on footage posted on social media, some civilians remained, mostly elderly people.

The Neo-Nazi regime keeps insisting that the locals in occupied areas are treated “humanely”. Still, evidence on the ground suggests otherwise. There were instances where civilians were shot in cars by the Neo-Nazi junta forces, while first reports about kidnappings appeared just days after the Kursk oblast incursion was launched.

What’s probably even more disturbing is the direct involvement of the US-led political West, which not only supported the PR attack, but also took part in its planning. Namely, leaked documents show that several high-ranking American officials and at least one Washington DC-based think tank directly contributed to drawing up plans for the Kiev regime’s attack.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

The alternative news has been under attack especially by the Western political establishment and the mainstream media for quite some time now calling us “Conspiracy Theorists” for the many things we have been exposing for years. One of the things we have been talking about is the Greater Israel Project. Most people in the West believe that Israel only wants a small piece of Palestinian land and once that’s accomplished, Israel will have a secure state that will finally live in peace with its Arab neighbors, but that is farther from the truth.

The Middle East Eye (MEE) published an interesting report ‘Bezalel Smotrich calls for Israel’s borders to extend to Damascus’ about a documentary video produced by a European Public Service channel, Arte called ‘Israel: Ministers of Chaos’ based on the ideas of two radical Israelis, Bezalel Smotrich, the Minister of Finance and Itamar Ben Gvir, the Minister of National Security who call for “re-founding biblical Israel”:

Two men embody the radical initiatives of this government. Two leading ministers who occupy regalian functions: Internal Security and Finance. Their names: Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. Two complete unknowns on the international scene, brought to light by the events of recent months. They are the heirs of two ideological currents that were once marginal: Kahanism and religious Zionism. Today, they are throwing all their weight behind their ideological agenda: imposing Jewish supremacist legislation in the case of the former, and re-founding biblical Israel in the case of the latter.

According to the MEE report, the Israeli Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich said “that Israel would expand “little by little” and eventually encompass all Palestinian territories as well as Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia” and that “It is written that the future of Jerusalem is to expand to Damascus,” he said, citing the “greater Israel” ideology, which envisions the expansion of the state across the Middle East.

One of the actions committed by Bezalel Smotrich was when he deliberately blocked US- flour shipments back in February to starve the Palestinians as reported by Al Mayadeen:

Bezalel Smotrich’s office affirmed to Axios that he directed the customs service to withhold the flour shipments. In collaboration with Netanyahu, he also allegedly requested officials to explore an alternative delivery method.

It is worth noting that more than 2.2 million people, constituting the entire population of Gaza, are confronting crisis or even more severe stages of famine, as per a report from a UN-supported organization released late last year. The risk of famine is escalating daily in the region. The report disclosed that approximately half of Gaza’s population is experiencing emergency levels of food insecurity.

Itamar Ben Gvir, if you remember, is another Israeli extremist who entered Al-Aqsa Mosque‘s courtyards in the occupied East Jerusalem to inflame tensions or we can say, to pick another fight with the Palestinians.

Not only is actions are well-documented, his words are also quite revealing, Middle East Monitor reported on November 23, 2023 that “During an interview with the Israeli Channel 12, Ben-Gvir said “To be clear, when they say that Hamas needs to be eliminated, it also means those who sing, those who support and those who distribute candy, all of these are terrorists.” It seems that Ben-Gvir believes that Israel needs to eliminate Palestinian men, women and children.

There are other extremists such as Dennis Avi Limpkin, an Israeli citizen who is an anti-Islam activist, born in Flushing, New York, then moved to Israel as a teenager in 1968, then in 1972, he joined the Israel Defense Forces becoming a major and eventually promoted to becoming a military spokesman for the IDF.  By 1988, he was involved in the Far-Right Likud campaign and then from 1989 to 1990, he was part of the news department for Yitzhak Shamir’s press office.  At one point, Limpkin lectured in Christian-Zionist churches and synagogues throughout the United States.

Dennis Avi Limpkin published five books under two different names.  The first three books were under his alias, Victor Mordecai which was to hide his identity, his first book, Is Fanatic Islam a Global Threat? (1997) which is described as “proof” that Islam is a threat to world peace, Christian Revival for Israel’s Survival (1999) and ‘Islamic Threat Updates Almanac’ (2003).  The other two books are under his real name, Israel’s Bible Bloc (2006) which promoted a Jewish-Christian Party in Israel founded by Limpkin called Gush Hatanachi or the Bible Bloc Party and then Islam Prophesied in Genesis published in 2010.

In 2009, Limpkin was involved in what was considered a racial incident in Switzerland where he was pro-active in the Swiss Minaret Initiative or the Swiss Minaret Dispute to persuade the Swiss population to ban the construction of Minarets, which are either elevated stands or towers that calls for Muslims to pray at the mosque. Limpkin gave an anti-Islam speech where he compared Allah to Satan. In an article by The Aargauer Zeitung, a Swiss daily newspaper ‘Anti-minaret initiative: Israeli condemned for racial discrimination’ described what happened regarding Limpkin’s actions and its aftermath:

The Islamophobic Israeli Avi Lipkin has been sentenced to a conditional fine and a fine by the Bern-Mittelland examining magistrate’s office for racial discrimination and disruption of freedom of belief and worship

Limpkin criticized Islam in his speech in October 2009 for a Pro-Israel organization in Wichtrach, Bern:

In a speech before the anti-minaret vote, he described Islam as “psychosis”, compared Allah to Satan and called for a ban on Islam. “Avi Lipkin had made several statements against Islam that I classify as racially discriminatory,” said the responsible public prosecutor Thomas Perler to “NZZ am Sonntag”.

“It can be said that his speech contained statements that amounted to a demonization of Islam.” Lipkin gave the speech in October 2009 at the invitation of the “Pro Israel” organization in Wichtrach, Bern, around a month and a half before the anti-minaret vote

The following video shows Limpkin describing Israel’s plan for its expansionist agenda in the Middle East:

The Greater Israel is not a Conspiracy Theory, it never was. The words and actions by Israeli politicians and activists throughout the years have more or less spoken about their Greater Israel plan which is alive and well in the hearts and minds of many Israelis.

Will they be successful in accomplishing a Greater Israel? We can say that even if they are willing to go to war with the Muslim world for the foreseeable future, they have no chance even if the collapsing US empire remains on their side, it will never happen.

The Muslim world will not allow such a project to be a success because that will murder and displace not only the Palestinians, but the Jordanians, Lebanese, Egyptians, Syrians, Iraqis even the Saudis. How much more will the Muslim world tolerate?

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his own blog site, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally published. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

One of the main postulates of strategic thinking is to prevent the creation of an all-encompassing alliance against yourself. Wise leadership will always try to ensure that current and potential enemies remain as divided as possible. However, there’s wise leadership and then there’s the warmongering oligarchy in the United States, desperate to maintain Cold War-like conflicts and start proxy wars that could feed the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) for decades.

The history of American interventionism (a rather outdated euphemism for what’s truly an unprovoked US/NATO aggression against the entire world) shows that the war criminals and plutocrats in Washington DC will always find the “perfect excuse” to engage in invasions against any remotely sovereign(tist) country. This hasn’t changed in the slightest to this very day.

However, technological advances in the last half a century or so have ensured that America simply cannot engage in wars against certain countries. Their ability to inflict untold damage on the US mainland was what kept the warmongers in check. And yet, in the last 30+ years, the end of the (First) Cold War created the illusion that the US “won” and that it can do whatever it wants with absolute impunity. This is precisely why we’ve had an unprecedented number of American invasions and wars of aggression against much of the world in the same time period, particularly in Eastern Europe (Serbia/former Yugoslavia and Russia/former Soviet Union) and the Middle East (over half a dozen countries ravaged and/or destroyed). However, after attacking isolated and largely defenseless countries, now is the time for the “big prize”.

In the last decade or so, Washington DC has been preparing for near-peer confrontation, creating tensions with superpowers such as Russia and China, while also eyeing strong regional players, particularly North Korea and Iran. Expectedly, the said countries understand that their opponent(s) is the same and that they need to work together to keep it at bay. However, instead of trying to drive a wedge between these countries, the US kept pushing against each and everyone simultaneously, further cementing their determination to form what can only be described as an alliance. Moscow, Beijing and Pyongyang might not even be too keen to use the word to describe their trilateral relations, but the reality is that it’s becoming exactly that. The level of their coordination in terms of military and foreign policy certainly suggests that’s the case.

In the last two and a half years, Russia effectively rekindled the relatively dormant military cooperation with North Korea. The two countries are now effectively bound by a mutual defense pact, the first Moscow signed with a non-Soviet state since 1991.

Their close ties also extend to conventional capabilities, including on operational and tactical levels. The political West and its Neo-Nazi puppets insist that North Korean troops are already fighting in Ukraine, but they provide(d) no evidence to support such claims, as per usual. What’s certainly possible is that Pyongyang sent personnel to help their Russian colleagues with the integration of North Korean weapons and munitions into the Kremlin’s arsenal. However, not much more than that can be expected, as there would be far more evidence to the contrary.

On the other hand, China and North Korea are also strengthening their ties, with Xi Jinping telling Kim Jong Un that Beijing is ready for closer strategic coordination with Pyongyang. The two neighbors have been allies since the formation of North Korea and this process is not only expected, but simply natural, as the US keeps militarizing the Asia-Pacific region, including by remilitarizing Japan, a country that never really apologized (let alone paid damages) for its aggression in the area prior and during WWII. Tokyo killed millions of civilians across East Asia (particularly China), cementing strong anti-Japanese sentiment in most countries in the region, including South Korea, otherwise an unmistakably compliant US vassal. Still, America plans to turn Japan into a military powerhouse that would go against Russia, China and North Korea.

As a result, closer ties are being built in the cases of Russia-China, Russia-North Korea and China-North Korea. This is very reminiscent of the way the Entente was formed in decades and years before WWI, when Russia, France and the UK agreed to keep the then-nascent German expansionism in check. Members of the Entente often didn’t have much in common other than this, with Russia and the UK effectively being enemies for centuries as both had competing interests in various parts of the world. Still, the dangers of leaving Berlin’s imperialist tendencies unchecked far eclipsed this centuries-old rivalry. Thus, if the pathologically Russophobic London was able to find common ground with Moscow (or, to be precise, St. Petersburg back then), imagine the ease with which Russia, China and North Korea could form an Entente-like alliance.

They have not only much more in common (in terms of strategic thinking), but are also direct neighbors, with clear economic interests and ties that only keep growing, particularly as the US-led political West is still trying to isolate all three and minimize their economic (and societal) prospects. This simultaneous aggression against all three further strengthens their resolve to coordinate efforts and push back. On October 14, Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov arrived in Beijing, where he met his Chinese counterpart Dong Jun. Both sides expressed intent to “deepen strategic collaboration” and “continuously advance military relations”. Once again, these bilateral ties will inevitably lead to a trilateral alliance that could be the progenitor of an invincible (Eur)Asian monolith that others would surely join.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

The question yet stands: what potential countries with high aspirations are gearing to join BRICS+, an informal association of developing economies, during the forthcoming summit this October 22-24?

In the context of preparations for the BRICS+ summit, a number of significant issues, including the expansion of the association, were reviewed and considered at the sidelines of the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated “the creation of a category of partner states” for current association of BRICS+. Lavrov had already indicated the “suspension” of membership into BRICS+ and further emphasized that “the ministers reviewed the efforts to coordinate the modalities of the new category, BRICS partner countries” as far back in June 2024 during the BRICS Foreign Ministers Council in Russia’s Nizhny Novgorod.

In late September in New York, Lavrov told a news conference following his participation in the high-level week of the 79th session of the UN General Assembly that BRICS+ considered further expansion inappropriate for now, the current BRICS member-countries now considered it not feasible to admit new members, but countries expressing readiness would only become supporting partners and would maintain permanent contacts. These partner members could use BRICS+ to pursue the common goals of fighting United States dominance and Western hegemony. BRICS is also steadily working towards creating a multipolar world.

“As for the prospects for BRICS expansion, at this stage all affiliated countries consider it reasonable not to make new decisions for the time being and to adapt the organization, an association of like-minded members. There were five of us, now there are ten. Of course, this requires some kind of habituation and smooth entry of new members into the work in line with the traditions that the quintet has developed over years,” Lavrov said.

On the other hand, the transition towards a new economic architecture, characterized by de-dollarization and diversification of global financial frameworks, presents immense opportunities and challenges for the Global South. Russia’s engagements with mostly common geopolitical like-minded countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America regions underscore strategic importance for future development of BRICS+.

Meanwhile, BRICS+ rising against United States hegemony and dominance, ultimately helps create the situation or conditions for China to emerge as the global economic power. The ultimate result – BRICS+ is rather driving China, with estimated population of 1.5 billion, to establish global presence, Russia has been cooperating within the external economic parameters especially with China and India.

Under Russia’s BRICS presidency which began January 2024, Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates became the second wave of the newest members to join BRICS.

South Africa ascended in 2011 under China’s initiative. In 2015, BRICS established the New Development Bank (NDB), the only financial instrument to compete with other multilateral institutions such the International Monetary Bank and the World Bank. While these operate worldwide, the NDB has limited scope of operations over the past decade. Nevertheless, NDB has made a significant headway, at least, for consolidating its position and has also taken a few steps in raising the possibility of forging sustainable economic cooperation and collaborating on investment partnerships among member states. According to media reports, NDB primarily intended to pursue a flexible financial framework to create a fairer, more equitable system, in contrast to IMF and the World Bank. By advocating for these essential reforms, NDB portrays itself as the main instrument for reshaping the financial landscape for the Global South.

As often emphasized, BRICS+ functions on the basis of consensus. The consensus principle primarily aims at finding agreements that reflect the mutual accord of all participants. BRICS+ is an informal association of emerging economies based on respectful attitude towards each other and on mutual consideration to promote collaboration based on a balance of interests and strictly adhere to the principle of the sovereign equality of states and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs. Moreover, its transforming structure remains as an emerging force for a new global architecture.

In these previous years, BRICS+ has been emerging as a key player in this world, has the potential to drive significant economic growth and development but BRICS+ and the Global South collaboration face the challenges of diversity in politics, economy and culture. This is evidently noticeable in the dynamism of tackling complex issues such as economic development, trade, climate change, and global governance. The degree of variations significantly in terms of their level of economic development and political influence could complicate efforts to create a cohesive alliance, according to experts’ interpretations.

Leaders will decide on BRICS membership expansion on the basis of full consultation and consensus. The following countries have either expressed interest in joining BRICS or have already applied for membership:

(i) AFRICA

Algeria: In terms of market size, Algeria has the tenth largest proven natural gas reserves globally, is the world’s sixth-largest gas exporter, and has the world’s third-largest untapped shale gas resources.

According to reports, Africa States have submitted applications: Angola, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Congo, DR Congo, Ghana, Kenya, Libya, Mali Republic and Niger Republic.

Nigeria: Nigeria’s Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar has announced that the country intends to become a member of the BRICS group of nations within the next two years. Nigeria has a GDP of $448 billion, a population of 213 million and a GDP per capita of $2,500. It has the world’s 9th largest gas reserves and significant oil reserves.

Senegal: It is a medium capacity gold mining and energy player, with reserves in gold, oil, and gas. The energy industry is at a growth stage as reserves have only recently been found. The energy-hungry BRICS nations will be keen to secure its supplies.

Sudan: Sudan’s top five export markets are 100% BRICS – China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, and the UAE. Sudan also has regional clout. It is Africa’s third-largest country by area, and is a member of the League of Arab States (LAS). Should Sudan join the BRICS it would give the group complete control of the Red Sea supply routes East Africa: South Sudan, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

(ii) AMERICAS 

Bolivia: Asset-rich but relatively poor, Bolivia has the fastest GDP growth rate in Latin America.

There are also Chile, Colombia and Costa Rica.

Cuba: Cuba’s sanctions defiance has long made it a favorite of China and Russia when wanting to annoy the United States. It also has significant agreements with China and Russia, is a member of the BRI and has significant Caribbean and LatAm influence.

Ecuador: Ecuador is negotiating Free Trade Agreements with both China and the Eurasian Economic Union. It would make sense to substitute these with a looser BRICS arrangement

El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

Nicaragua: Nicaragua is a mining play and the leading gold-producing country in Central America. It has a Free Trade Agreement with the ALBA bloc, and is an influential player in the Caribbean.

El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, Panama and Peru.

Uruguay : Uruguay has joined the BRICS New Development Bank – a sure sign that official BRICS membership is pending.

Venezuela: Another outlier, but its energy reserves and political stance fit well with China and Russia’s needs.

(iii) ASIA

Afghanistan: : An outlier, but Afghanistan has significant resources and is a member of the BRI. Diplomatic changes are required, but China, India and Russia are all keen to see redevelopment in the country once political stability can be secured.

Azerbaijan and Bahrain.

Bangladesh: Bangladesh is one of the world’s top five fastest growing economies and is undergoing significant infrastructure and trade development reforms. It shares a 4,100 km border with India.

Indonesia: One of Asia’s leading economies, Indonesia’s potential has again been raised to join BRICS. In July 2023, Jakarta accepted an invitation to participate in the 2023 BRICS summit.

Kazakhstan: Kazakhstan’s economy is highly dependent on oil and related products. In addition to oil, its main export commodities include natural gas, ferrous metals, copper, aluminum, zinc and uranium.

Others include Iraq, Kuwait, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar.

Mongolia: Mongolia is both a problem and solution, while geographically attractive. It requires extensive investment in its energy sector; yet is resource-rich and a transit point between Russia, Kazakhstan and China. It is not a member of any trade bloc, with a looser BRICS arrangement better suited to maintaining its regional impartiality.

Pakistan: Pakistan has filed an application to join the BRICS group of nations in 2024 and is counting on Russia’s assistance during the membership process, the country’s newly appointed Ambassador to Russia Muhammad Khalid Jamali has stated.

Sri Lanka: Sri Lanka isn’t keen on opening up its markets yet has significant economic problems. China is interested in port and Indian Ocean access while Russian tourism investments are increasing. A BRICS agreement would be loose enough to satisfy all concerns, while India will want to keep an eye on it.

Turkiye: Turkiye’s trade figures with the current and most of the upcoming BRICS members show significant growth. Getting access to BRICS NDB funding may also prove attractive for Ankara as talks are expected across a number of issues.

Thailand: Thailand is one of ASEAN’s largest economies, via ASEAN it has additional Free Trade Agreements with Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, China, Hong Kong and India, and agreements with Chile, and Peru. Thailand is also a signatory to the RCEP FTA between ASEAN and Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea.

Uzbekistan: Uzbekistan is one of Central Asia’s fastest growing economies, yet it is hampered by being double-landlocked. Membership of BRICS would give it market access to China, Europe, and the rest of Asia in a more protected manner.

These have also shown potential interest: Syria, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Vietnam and Yemen.

(iv) EUROPE

Azerbaijan and Belarus: In the former Soviet space, Belarus and Azerbaijan have recently expressed their sanonymized interest to leverage unto BRICS platform. Based on the historical fact that Belarus and Russia have already formed a Union State, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko irreversibly promised Belarus’ ascension into BRICS.

“Azerbaijan has filed an official application for joining BRICS,” Azerbaijan’s news agency quoted Foreign Ministry’s spokesman, Aykhan Hajizada.

Baku’s intention to jump the bandwagon of BRICS reflected in the joint declaration on strategic partnership between Azerbaijan and China, which was signed on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Astana in early July.

That however, Belarus sees BRICS as a basis for economic development and is ready to join integration processes within the framework of the informal association.

“We are interested in getting involved in integration processes in that space. BRICS is another footing to help us maintain balance and economic stability,” BelTA agency quoted Lukashenko as emphatically asserted.

Notably, Azerbaijan and Belarus are former Soviet republics, with common historical background despite the stark indications of disparity in approach to current politics and economic development, much still remains uniquely common in cultural practice and in the society. Undoubtedly, both the older and current generations have comprehensive understanding of Soviet history and culture. Azarbaijan and Belarus becoming BRICS members will fortify the SCO operations in the region. Therefore, Azerbaijan and Belarus governments and their state institutions such as the cabinet, legislature and judiciary, would endorse aligning to BRICS, and its contribution towards shaping a new post-Soviet space within the framework of emerging new geopolitical reality.

Meanwhile, as Sergey Lavrov noted “the weight, prestige and role of an individual candidate country and, of course, its position in the international arena” would be taken into account in decision-making on accepting new members to expand, a bit later, BRICS. An updated list of candidate countries for BRICS membership, which was “suspension” for the time being, would still be prepared for consideration at October summit under Russia’s chairmanship.

Amid heightening of geopolitical changes, the forthcoming BRICS summit in Kazan on October 22-24 presents an opportunity, most possibly, to determine and review critical pending issues including the association’s structure, and membership. Ensuring qualitative geopolitical influence must be the key priority. Political and economic impact should be paramount instead of anti-western rhetoric and stringent confrontation. As the situation stands, the numerical strength of BRICS is equally important as well as creating the necessary instruments and taking step-by-step comprehensive measures for promoting global peace and future development-oriented aspirations. Despite positive achievements and future expectations, challenges remain. Perhaps, some of the new members with political divergences have already began to manipulate their national interest and therefore discrediting BRICS as demonstrated by Ethiopia and Egypt at the UN Generally Assembly in New York.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who worked previously with Inter Press Service (IPS), Weekly Blitz and InDepthNews, is now a regular contributor to Global Research. He researches Eurasia, Russia, Africa and BRICS. His focused interest areas include geopolitical changes, foreign relations and economic development questions relating to Africa. As a versatile researcher, he believes that everyone deserves equal access to quality and trustworthy media reports.

Europe is at a turning point: it could either become a world power or fall into decline and lose ground to its main international competitors, such as the United States or China, according to an analysis by Bloomberg.

The European Union is currently facing a series of challenges that call into question its viability as a relevant player at the international level and even lead to its certain downfall in several respects.

“After decades of warnings and sub-par growth, the region’s leaders are suddenly confronting a barrage of evidence that decline is becoming unstoppable,” the American outlet specialising in economics and finance warned.

The analysis highlights that a combination of political paralysis, external threats, and economic malaise could end the EU’s ambitions to become a global force. This situation, it suggests, leads its member states to prioritise their own interests above those of the bloc. The outlet added that these factors have made it clear that the EU has shown its inability to act as a homogeneous group in the face of economic, market, security, and defence problems, such as the conflict in Ukraine.

“Those developments all underpin the EU’s failure to act as a cohesive and dynamic economic bloc, eroding its status and degrading its capacity to respond to a wide range of threats from Chinese industrial policy to Russian military aggression, or even a future antagonistic administration in the US,” Bloomberg added.

The article cited analysts saying Europe is responding too slowly to global changes, including global warming, demographic change, and the shift to a post-industrial economy in which China has become a major competitor.

“Something is changing very, very dramatically and very, very deeply in this world,” former Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski said in an interview with Bloomberg. “We can’t react correctly, because we are too slow.”

But the EU’s decline may have started even as early as the bloc’s monetary union, with another analysis by Bloomberg Economics suggesting the bloc’s economy would be about €3 trillion larger if it had kept pace with the US over the past 25 years.

In September, Mario Draghi, the former president of the European Central Bank (ECB), presented a plan to revitalise the European bloc while describing the danger of the region’s decline as an economic force.

“The foundations on which we built are now being shaken,” Draghi said in the introduction to his report. “This is an existential challenge.”

However, the analysis added that the report had not been received well, with some policymakers fearing the region is running out of room for manoeuvre.

“It’s obvious that Europe is falling behind its main trading partners, the US and China,” Greek Finance Minister Kostis Hatzidakis said in a September 24 interview. “If it doesn’t take immediate action, the decline will eventually become non reversible.”

It is recalled that in its semi-annual financial stability review in May this year, the ECB warned that European countries are “vulnerable to adverse shocks” arising from geopolitical tensions and persistently high interest rates due to their inability to continue reducing their public debt.

The ECB stressed that one year after the COVID-19 emergency, many European nations have not fully reversed the support measures introduced to protect consumers and businesses from the impact of the health emergency and, subsequently, the conflict in Ukraine. This, in turn, generated high inflationary levels and increases in energy prices. Added to this is the conflict in the Middle East and its influence on fuel prices.

The financial institution considered that “high debt levels and lenient fiscal policies could raise borrowing costs further and have negative financial stability effects, including via spillovers to private borrowers and to sovereign bond holders.” The ECB also said sovereign debt would likely remain elevated, pointing to “lax fiscal policies” as the main cause for concern.

Despite these slight advances, the European financial institution expects total public debt to remain above pre-pandemic levels, at 90% of GDP in 2024, and to increase slightly next year. Nonetheless, this points to the fact that the collective European economy is no longer comparable to that of the US and China and will be surpassed by India within the coming decades, ensuring that the bloc will not be the great power it envisages.

Not mentioned in the Bloomberg analysis or by the ECB, the major factor in the EU’s economic woes is the anti-Russia sanctions that have boomeranged. Germany, France, and Italy, the three biggest economies in the EU, are the countries that were the worst affected by the anti-Russia sanctions, which have dragged them down into recession. So long as the EU maintains sanctions on Russia, the bloc will never be able to recover, let alone compete with the US and China.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Banksy does Brexit (detail) Image by dullhunk Creative Commons BY

Selected Articles: Does Your Feminism Include Palestine?

October 16th, 2024 by Global Research News

Does Your Feminism Include Palestine?

By Nour Jaghama and Grace Siegelman, October 16, 2024

Women’s Marches are being planned across the country ahead of Election Day to “show the strength of our feminist movement.” However, curiously missing from the talking points around the strength of the feminist movement is the women of Palestine – who have endured the brutality of anti-feminist policies for decades under the illegal occupation by Israel.

Video: There Never Was a COVID Pandemic. Prof. Michel Chossudovsky with Daniel Estulin

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and Daniel Estulin, October 16, 2024

The lies were sustained by a massive media disinformation campaign. 24/7, incessant and repetitive “Covid alerts” in the course of more than three years. In turn, the ongoing fear campaign had devastating impacts on people’s health. The  historic March 11, 2020 lockdown triggered economic and social chaos Worldwide. It was an act of “economic warfare”: a war against humanity. 

Martinique Masses Continue Rebellion Against French Colonial System

By Abayomi Azikiwe, October 16, 2024

In the Caribbean Island of Martinique which remains under French colonial rule, social unrest has flared up again prompted by hyperinflation and the heavy-handed tactics utilized by security forces under the control of Paris.

COVID Roundup: Slew of 55 Toxic Chemicals Discovered in Current Shots, ‘Self-Amplifying’ mRNA Shots in Pipeline

By Ben Bartee, October 16, 2024

Dumping toxic chemicals in experimental drugs and not listing any of them on the insert, then cajoling corporations and government institutions to mandate them through fiat, is obviously immoral and illegal. The question is: what is the American government going to do about it?

More on Israeli Atrocities. Attacking UN Peacekeepers Is a Dangerous Policy

By Philip Giraldi, October 16, 2024

Spain, France, Ireland and Italy, all of which contribute to the peacekeepers force (UNIFIL), and which continued to look the other way when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his band of war criminals committed atrocity after atrocity against Arabs, are now finding themselves mortified when European soldiers are being attacked and wounded by cannon fire from snipers and Israeli tanks.

Conspiracy Theory

Brace Yourselves: A Tsunami Approaches. “There Is Something Being Concocted in the Dens of Power”

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead, October 16, 2024

While we squabble over which side is winning this losing battle to lead the country, there is something being concocted in the dens of power, far beyond the public eye, and it doesn’t bode well for the future of this country.

The Present State of Israel vs. the Israel of the Bible: Understanding the Difference. “The Present State of Israel Is Not the Israel of God”

By Prof. Ruel F. Pepa, October 16, 2024

The modern State of Israel, established in 1948 in the land of Palestine, is often erroneously equated with the Israel of the Bible, to whom God made significant promises. Many Christians, due to a misinterpretation of biblical prophecy and misunderstanding of historical facts, continue to view the current State of Israel as a continuation of biblical Israel, believing it to be the fulfillment of divine promises.

“What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security… And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.”—Historian Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45

Brace yourself: a tsunami approaches.

While we squabble over which side is winning this losing battle to lead the country, there is something being concocted in the dens of power, far beyond the public eye, and it doesn’t bode well for the future of this country.

Anytime you have an entire nation so mesmerized by the antics of the political ruling class that they are oblivious to all else, you’d better beware.

Anytime you have a government that operates in the shadows, speaks in a language of force, and rules by fiat, you’d better beware.

And anytime you have a government so far removed from its people as to ensure that they are never seen, heard or heeded by those elected to represent them, you’d better beware.

We’ve got to get our priorities straight if we are to ever have any hope of maintaining any sense of freedom in America.

As long as we allow ourselves to be distracted, diverted, occasionally outraged, always polarized and content to view each other—rather than the government—as the enemy, we’ll never manage to present a unified front against tyranny (or government corruption and ineptitude) in any form.

Mind you, by “government,” I’m not referring to the highly partisan, two-party bureaucracy of the Republicans and Democrats. Rather, I’m referring to “government” with a capital “G,” the entrenched Deep State that is unaffected by elections, unaltered by populist movements, and has set itself beyond the reach of the law.

This is the hidden face of a government that has no respect for the freedoms of its citizenry.

So, stop with all of the excuses and the hedging and the finger-pointing and the pissing contests to see which side can out-shout, out-blame and out-spew the other.

Enough already with the short- and long-term amnesia that allows political sycophants to conveniently forget the duplicity, complicity and mendacity of their own party while casting blame on everyone else.

This is how evil wins.

This is how freedom falls and tyranny rises.

This is how good, generally decent people—having allowed themselves to be distracted with manufactured crises, polarizing politics, and fighting that divides the populace into warring us vs. them camps—fail to take note of the looming danger that threatens to wipe freedom from the map and place us all in chains.

The world has been down this road before, as historian Milton Mayer recounts in his seminal book on Hitler’s rise to power, They Thought They Were Free.

We are at our most vulnerable right now.

The gravest threat facing us as a nation is not extremism but despotism, exercised by a ruling class whose only allegiance is to power and money.

We’re in a national state of denial, yet no amount of escapism can shield us from the harsh reality that the danger in our midst is posed by an entrenched government bureaucracy that has no regard for the Constitution, Congress, the courts or the citizenry.

No matter how often the team colors change, the playbook remains the same. The leopard does not change its spots.

Scrape off the surface layers and you will find that nothing has changed.

The police state is still winning. We the people are still losing.

In fact, the American police state has continued to advance at the same costly, intrusive, privacy-sapping, Constitution-defying, heartbreaking, soul-scorching, relentless pace under the current Tyrant-in-Chief as it did under those who occupied the White House before him (Trump, Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc.).

Consider for yourselves:

  • Police haven’t stopped disregarding the rights of citizens.
  • SWAT teams haven’t stopped crashing through doors and terrorizing families.
  • The Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security haven’t stopped militarizing and federalizing local police.
  • Schools haven’t stopped treating young people like hard-core prisoners.
  • For-profit private prisons haven’t stopped locking up Americans and immigrants alike at taxpayer expense.
  • Censorship hasn’t stopped.
  • The courts haven’t stopped marching in lockstep with the police state.
  • Government bureaucrats haven’t stopped turning American citizens into criminals.
  • The surveillance state hasn’t stopped spying on Americans’ communications, transactions or movements.
  • The TSA hasn’t stopped groping or ogling travelers.
  • Congress hasn’t stopped enacting draconian laws.
  • The Department of Homeland Security hasn’t stopped being a “wasteful, growing, fear-mongering beast.”
  • The military industrial complex hasn’t stopped profiting from endless wars abroad.
  • The Deep State’s shadow government hasn’t stopped calling the shots behind the scenes.
  • And the American people haven’t stopped acting like gullible sheep.

So you can try to persuade yourself that you are free, that you still live in a country that values freedom, and that it is not too late to make America great again, but to anyone who has been paying attention to America’s decline over the past century, it will be just another lie.

The German people chose to ignore the truth and believe the lie.

They were not oblivious to the horrors taking place around them. The warning signs were definitely there, blinking incessantly like large neon signs.

“Still,” historian Robert Gellately writes, “the vast majority voted in favor of Nazism, and in spite of what they could read in the press and hear by word of mouth about the secret police, the concentration camps, official anti-Semitism, and so on.”

The German people backed Hitler because for the majority of them, life was good.

In a nutshell, life was good because their creature comforts remained undiminished, their bank accounts remained flush, and they weren’t being discriminated against, persecuted, starved, beaten, shot, stripped, jailed and turned into slave labor.

Life is good in America, too.

Life is good in America as long as you’re able to keep sleep-walking through life, cocooning yourself in political fantasies that depict a world in which your party is always right and everyone else is wrong, and distracting yourself with bread-and-circus entertainment that bears no resemblance to reality.

Life is good in America as long as you don’t mind being made to pay through the nose for the government’s endless wars, subsidization of foreign nations, bloated workforce, secret agencies, fusion centers, private prisons, biometric databases, invasive technologies, arsenal of weapons, and every other budgetary line item that is contributing to the fast-growing wealth of the corporate elite at the expense of those who are barely making ends meet—that is, we the 99%. 

Life is good in America for the privileged few, but as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, it’s getting worse by the day for the rest of us.

So, please spare me the media hysterics and the outrage and the hypocritical double standards of those whose moral conscience appears to be largely dictated by their political loyalties.

Anyone who believes that the injustices, cruelties and vicious callousness of the U.S. government are unique to any one particular administration has not been paying attention.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on The Rutherford Institute.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at [email protected].

Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

The modern State of Israel, established in 1948 in the land of Palestine, is often erroneously equated with the Israel of the Bible, to whom God made significant promises. Many Christians, due to a misinterpretation of biblical prophecy and misunderstanding of historical facts, continue to view the current State of Israel as a continuation of biblical Israel, believing it to be the fulfillment of divine promises. However, this perspective is based on a flawed exegesis and a misunderstanding of the political motivations behind the establishment of the modern Israeli state. It is crucial to differentiate between the biblical Israel, a covenant people of God, and the modern state, which was created through political maneuvers and carries a Zionist agenda that is largely secular.

The Creation of Modern Israel: A Political Project

Image: Arthur Balfour (From the Public Domain)

The modern State of Israel was established through the Balfour Declaration of 1917, a document that signaled British support for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This was not an act of divine fulfillment, but a political deal made between the British government and influential figures like Baron Rothschild. The Balfour Declaration was part of a broader strategy during World War I, when Britain sought support from the Zionist movement—a political movement that aimed to establish a national homeland for Jews. Zionism, however, was not a religious movement. It was driven primarily by political and nationalist motives.

Zionism sought to gather Jews from around the world to form a state in Palestine, but it was not a movement grounded in the religious or moral mandates of the Bible. In fact, many leading Zionists were secular or even atheists. They envisioned a Jewish state not as the fulfillment of God’s covenant with the Israelites, but as a solution to the Jewish diaspora’s challenges, particularly after centuries of persecution and, most devastatingly, the Holocaust.

Zionism vs. Judaism: A Fundamental Difference

A critical point often overlooked is the distinction between Zionism and Judaism. Judaism is a religion with ancient roots, based on the Torah and the worship of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Zionism, on the other hand, is a modern political ideology that seeks to establish and maintain a Jewish state, irrespective of religious beliefs.

Many Jews, both inside and outside Israel, oppose Zionism and the state of Israel, particularly due to the injustices committed against the Palestinians. Groups like Neturei Karta, an Orthodox Jewish movement, have long argued that the creation of a Jewish state before the coming of the Messiah is a violation of Jewish law. Additionally, many Jews around the world have expressed solidarity with Palestinians, recognizing the ongoing suffering inflicted upon them since the establishment of the Israeli state in 1948. Therefore, equating Zionism with Judaism is not only inaccurate but also unjust to the many Jews who oppose the state of Israel on both religious and moral grounds.

The Israel of the Bible: A Covenant People, Not a Political State

In the Bible, the term “Israel” refers to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, whom God chose as His covenant people. This choice was not based on their inherent worth but on God’s grace and His desire to use them to reveal His nature and will to the world. The biblical Israel was called to uphold God’s laws, promote justice, and embody holiness as a “light to the nations” (Isaiah 42:6). Central to this covenant was a relationship based on obedience to God’s commandments, justice, and mercy.

The promises made to Israel in the Bible were always conditional on their faithfulness to God. Throughout the Old Testament, Israel faced judgment and exile whenever they strayed from God’s commandments and engaged in injustice, idolatry, and immorality. For example, the prophet Amos condemned Israel’s failure to uphold justice, warning of God’s coming judgment: “Let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream!” (Amos 5:24).

Given this biblical context, it is clear that the modern state of Israel, which operates as a secular nation-state with no overarching commitment to biblical principles, cannot be equated with the Israel of the Bible. The fact that a significant portion of Israeli citizens—around 60%—identify as atheists or secular further undermines the claim that the modern state represents the fulfillment of God’s covenant with His people.

The Misinterpretation of Biblical Prophecy

Many Christians who support the modern state of Israel do so under the belief that the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine is a fulfillment of biblical prophecy. They point to passages like Genesis 12:3, where God tells Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse,” as evidence that Christians must unconditionally support the state of Israel.

However, this interpretation overlooks key aspects of biblical hermeneutics. First, the promises made to Abraham and his descendants were never solely about physical land but about their role in the spiritual redemption of humanity, culminating in the coming of Jesus Christ. Galatians 3:16 clarifies that these promises find their ultimate fulfillment in Christ: “The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say ‘and to seeds,’ meaning many people, but ‘and to your seed,’ meaning one person, who is Christ.”

Secondly, the physical land of Israel was always tied to the covenant relationship with God, which included moral and ethical responsibilities. The Israel of the Bible was to uphold justice, care for the poor, and live in obedience to God’s commandments. The modern state of Israel, by contrast, has been involved in an ongoing conflict with the Palestinians, many of whom have been displaced, oppressed, and subjected to what many call systemic injustice and violence. The ongoing conflict in Gaza, where the Israeli military has been accused of war crimes and the killing of innocent civilians, starkly contrasts with the biblical mandate for justice and mercy.

The Moral Failure of Christian Zionism

Christians who uncritically support the actions of the modern state of Israel, often citing biblical prophecy, have lost their moral compass. By turning a blind eye to the suffering of Palestinians, including Christians living in Gaza and the West Bank, these Christians betray the very message of the Gospel. Jesus Christ taught love, justice, and mercy—values that cannot be reconciled with the violent oppression of any people.

.

Palestinian families walk through destroyed neighbourhoods in Gaza City on 24 November 2023 as the temporary truce between Hamas and the Israeli army takes effect (MEE/Mohammed al-Hajjar)

.

Furthermore, Christians who support the political state of Israel based on their reading of the Bible have, in effect, created a distorted image of God—one that aligns more with nationalism and political power than with the God revealed in Jesus Christ. This is a dangerous misstep, as it replaces the God of justice and compassion with a strange god, one that blesses injustice and oppression.

Conclusion: The Present State of Israel Is Not the Israel of God

It is a profound error to equate the modern state of Israel with the Israel of the Bible. The current Israeli state is a political entity created through secular, Zionist aims, not the fulfillment of God’s covenant promises. It operates without regard for the biblical principles of justice, mercy, and righteousness that God commanded His people to follow.

Christians must recognize that the true Israel of God is not defined by nationality or land but by faithfulness to God’s will, as revealed in Jesus Christ. To continue supporting the state of Israel unconditionally, in the face of its moral failings and the ongoing suffering of the Palestinian people, is to abandon the teachings of Christ and to misinterpret the promises of Scripture. Let us, therefore, pursue peace, justice, and truth, remembering that God’s kingdom transcends earthly politics and boundaries.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Prof. Ruel F. Pepa is a Filipino philosopher based in Madrid, Spain. A retired academic (Associate Professor IV), he taught Philosophy and Social Sciences for more than fifteen years at Trinity University of Asia, an Anglican university in the Philippines. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

The Invention of the Land of Israel: From Holy Land to Homeland by Shlomo Sand (2012).

Zionism: A Brief History by Michael Stanislawski (2017).

The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by Ilan Pappé (2006).

The Bible and the Land: An Encounter by André Trocmé (2010).

Christian Zionism: Road-map to Armageddon? by Stephen Sizer (2004).

Featured image: The Mosaic of Rehob, delineating the boundaries of the Land of Israel and the laws applying within. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

Does Your Feminism Include Palestine?

October 16th, 2024 by Nour Jaghama

Women’s Marches are being planned across the country ahead of Election Day to “show the strength of our feminist movement.” However, curiously missing from the talking points around the strength of the feminist movement is the women of Palestine – who have endured the brutality of anti-feminist policies for decades under the illegal occupation by Israel.

Nour, CODEPINK’s Palestinian-American organizer, shares a story of her grandmother’s sacrifice to take care of her children under occupation:

“In Palestine, Israeli forces routinely impose curfews on Palestinian villages, forcing Palestinians to stay confined in their homes after dusk. The penalty for the slightest movement outside — or even within their homes — can mean immediate arrest or being shot on sight. My mother often recounts a story of my grandmother risking her life during curfew one night. My uncle, who was an infant at the time, was crying for milk, and my grandmother, with no other choice, had to slip out into the night. She moved silently through the shadows, hiding from Israeli soldiers as she crossed the village to find milk for her baby. My mother still remembers the fear she felt, thinking it might be the last time she’d see her mother alive. But my grandmother returned safely because Palestinian women, shaped by decades of occupation and resistance, have learned to navigate the militarized reality that surrounds them, finding ways to perform even the most basic acts of care under unimaginable conditions.”

This story is not new or singular; Palestinian families have faced it on a daily basis for decades. It sparked our reflection on the co-option of feminism in the belly of the beast—where we’re writing from.

Nadia Alia wrote about the 2014 Israeli invasion in Gaza, citing many reporters detailing the “disproportionate” number of women and children victims during this violent attack. She then begged the question, what is a proportionate amount of women and children harmed during war and conflict? When did gender-based violence and violence towards the oppressed become an inevitable part of world relations? And if simply men were killed, would the crime scream quieter? When did we start weighing the scale of a tragedy based on gender — and when did we decide Palestinian men being murdered and imprisoned doesn’t impact their entire community?

Feminism may not be definitive, but at its heart is a commitment to family and community care — a stark contrast to militarism, which injects itself into every aspect of human life and erodes these fundamental values. Palestinian women embody this incompatible relationship between feminism and militarism through their constant resistance to the occupation’s infringement on their health, education, and ability to provide for their families. When the women of Palestine are forced to become breadwinners and protectors because Israel has murdered or imprisoned every man in their family, the necessity for feminism to include the women of Palestine is undeniable. To narrowly define feminism is to be inherently anti-feminist, as we are building new ways to be just, to be equitable, and to show up for our community every day — just as the women of Palestine do. However, co-opting feminism to enact harm and destruction to people and the planet is against all feminist principles and praxis. And to further assume a false sense of superiority over the communities that have been harmed by imperialism is not only inherently anti-feminist, it’s anti-human. Feminism, at its core, is antithetical to all forms of oppression, exploitation, and violence. Feminism devoid of intersectionality becomes a weapon for imperialists by depriving it of its otherwise inherently liberatory nature.

Alia’s writing from 2014 still rings clear today. We just passed a year marker of the October 7 act of resistance from Gazans defending their homeland and 76 years of Palestinians living in an open-air prison inside their own homes. Meanwhile, we head into an election season using feminism as a gateway towards further surveillance, policing, and genocide, both at home and in all corners of the earth. Women’s marches throughout the country won’t even utter the names of the hundreds of thousands of women killed in Palestine to date.

What is feminist about wanting to be the most lethal force in the world?

What is feminist about continuing to arm a genocidal war against Palestine and Lebanon?

What is feminist about using our tax dollars that should go towards natural disaster relief and healthcare to fund murder?

Supplying militarism under the guise of women’s empowerment is again not new. Still, the complacency and ignorance we see from elected officials here in the U.S. and those who appear to care for the well-being of women is always horrific and devastating. It cannot be overstated: there are no feminist bombs, feminist prisons, feminist cops, or feminist wars. There are only paid actors who have convinced people that their eventual demise and the demise of the planet is what will empower their lives today.

Israel’s occupation of Palestine creates a constant state of fear and instability, eroding the rights, safety, and dignity of millions, particularly Palestinian women who bear the weight of war and imperial feminism in devastating ways. CODEPINK started as an immediate reaction to the 2002 Bush Administration creeping closer to invading Iraq based on ‘saving women and children’ only to cause over 15,000 women in Iraq to be killed. The ‘rescue’ narrative we have seen play out in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Palestine, and all across the globe from imperial players like the U.S., Great Britain, and Israel has truly shown the lengths that liberal, western feminism will go to justify the oppression of the women and children it claims to save. It reveals the true intent this movement has for feminism: to keep the status quo and to keep marginalized lives, as Marc Lemont Hill describes it, “directly tied to the needs and interests of the powerful.”

Feminist education, activism, and community care must always come from a place of love and understanding but must also be in steadfast values of abolition and divestment. We cannot let ourselves be co-opted to kill Palestinians. We cannot allow our work to be undermined to kill the people of the Congo, of Sudan, of Yemen, of Ukraine, of Russia. And we must not let our lives and choices be tied to a small group of people reaping the benefits of war.

To support Palestinian liberation means embracing a vision of feminism that stands firmly against militarism, imperialism, and colonialism. It means committing to fight for the rights of Palestinian women and all women who are oppressed in the name of advancing imperialist interests. Feminism calls us to see the connection between the liberties we fight for at home and the rights denied to women and girls across the globe. A genuinely feminist stance fights for a world where no woman, no child, and no community live under the constant threat of violence. Supporting Palestine is about embodying this vision, standing in solidarity, and fighting for a world where imperialism and colonialism are universally resisted.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Nour Jaghama is CODEPINK’s Palestine and Iran Campaigner. Nour graduated from DePaul University with a bachelor’s degree in International Studies in June 2022. She has been advocating for Palestinian liberation for over 5 years, including organizing within her university. She also organizes around related issues, such as abolition.

Grace Siegelman is CODEPINK’s digital engagement manager and feminist foreign policy project coordinator. Her organizing and research focus on prison and police abolition, queer theory, gendered violence and anti-war efforts. She connects her own work to the communities in Chicago and communities across the globe, in Palestine, Yemen and Cuba.

Featured image is from CODEPINK

That Israel is now attacking United Nations peacekeepers in south Lebanon might well be decisive in turning its few remaining “friends” against it.

Spain, France, Ireland and Italy, all of which contribute to the peacekeepers force (UNIFIL), and which continued to look the other way when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his band of war criminals committed atrocity after atrocity against Arabs, are now finding themselves mortified when European soldiers are being attacked and wounded by cannon fire from snipers and Israeli tanks.

In one incident, Israeli armored vehicles smashed their way through the gate of a UNIFIL base, allegedly using chemical weapons that injured 15 UN soldiers. The Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez is urging Europeans to cut off all trade and especially weapons sales with Israel. French President Emmanuel Macron declared an embargo on selling weapons to Israel and called for an immediate ceasefire while several prime ministers have all expressed their “outrage” at the Israeli actions. Even the occupied-by-Israel UK declared itself to be “appalled.” Giorgia Meloni of Italy observed that two bases manned by Italians soldiers had been hit. Her Minister of Defense Guido Crosetto called the attack on the UNIFIL bases “totally unacceptable,” elaborating that

“This was not a mistake and not an accident. It could constitute a war crime and represents a very serious violation of international military law.”

He might have also added that since it was a gross violation of the UN Charter countries including permanent Security Council members China and Russia are demanding a full investigation of what took place.

As usual, Israel portrayed itself as the innocent victim surrounded by evil neighbors. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called on the UN chief to remove the UN peacekeepers who are now deployed in southern Lebanon. He claimed, without providing any evidence, that UNIFIL was serving as a

“human shield to Hezbollah terrorists… This endangers both [those in UNIFIL] and the lives of our soldiers… Mr. Secretary General, get the UNIFIL forces out of harm’s way. It should be done right now, immediately.”

The reality is, of course, that anyone encountering armed Israelis is automatically in “harm’s way,” ask any Palestinian. The Israeli armed forces, having already killed scores of UN workers during their 13-month siege of Gaza, appear set to double down and take on UN peacekeeping forces on their mission to expand the war to Syria and Iran. United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres has thus far refused to remove UNIFIL.

Regarding UNIFIL, the United States characteristically played its usual game of protecting Israel and throwing in a couple of misrepresentations of fact while saying nothing substantive. A National Security Council spokesman said that the White House is “deeply concerned” by reports Israel fired on the UN peacekeeper headquarters and bases in south Lebanon.

“We understand Israel is conducting targeted operations near the Blue Line to destroy Hezbollah infrastructure that could be used to threaten Israeli citizens. While they undertake these operations, it is critical that they not threaten UN peacekeepers’ safety and security.”

It was an all too rare expression of the reality that the United States is being dragged into a war in which it has no real interests by a ruthless client state that has been able to buy or coerce nearly all Congressmen into cheering and singing its song while also controlling much of the relevant bureaucracy and the White House itself. It is also being reported that a beefed up CIA station at the US Embassy in Beirut is collecting information on Hezbollah that is passed on to Israel to assist in its targeting.

It is not the first attack by Israel on United Nations personnel and it will probably not be the last as the Israel Occupation Force (IOF) has been de facto waging war against the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) in Gaza over the past year, targeting and killing its personnel and denying or blocking its largely humanitarian mission. And the United Nations is also a target more generally speaking. At his most recent visit to the UN in New York, the monstrous Netanyahu exhibited a new low even for him, shouting to a nearly empty General Assembly room that the UN has become a “swamp of antisemitic bile,” again playing his favorite tune that Israel is always the victim. And the US has played a role in that campaign, denying any funding to the UNRWA denying any funding to the UNRWA and other international humans rights bodies while also attacking the UN’s broader mission which has been to prevent wars of choice like what is occurring in what was once Palestine.

Inevitably, however, the Zionist fanatics in power in Washington are still motivated to ride the Israeli horse no matter who Netanyahu marks for death, leading to strident calls in Congress, mostly coming from Christian Zionist Republicans, to defund or even leave the United Nations completely. Given Donald Trump’s total fealty to Israel, it is something he just might consider doing if he is reelected. And the threats from individual congressmen to kill UN officials as well as justices and their families who serve on the international courts are all part of what one is hearing.

Image: Former white house advisor Matthew Brodsky [Social media/X]

Former white house advisor Matthew Brodsky [Social media/X]

One particularly charming threat comes from a Jewish former White House advisor Matthew Brodsky, who has lived and studied in Israel. Brodsky recommended in a tweet on X that Israel should attack Irish peacekeepers in South Lebanon, suggesting what kind of advice the White House and Congress are accustomed to receive regarding Israel and Palestine from their overwhelmingly Jewish foreign policy team, which consists of nearly all confirmed Zionists, including President Biden, and also includes a number of dual nationals who hold Israeli citizenship. Brodsky’s background includes briefing members of Congress, the Department of State, Department of Defense and the National Security Council on Iran, Syria and Palestinian-Israeli issues.

Brodsky is currently a Senior Fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy and a former Director of Policy at the Jewish Policy Center. He wrote that:

“Israel should carpet bomb the Irish area and then drop napalm over it.”

The tweet included a map showing the deployment of Ireland’s peacekeeping force in Southern Lebanon, presumably to help guide the Israeli pilots.

There is considerable evidence that Brodsky is far from alone in expressing his complete loyalty to Israel no matter what crimes it commits. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, also Jewish and possibly a dual national, has been acting as Israel’s lawyer, complete with lies about Israeli behavior to cover-up war crimes like the deliberate starving of the Gazan people that equates to genocide. And he is joined in the Middle East by Amos Hochstein, Joe Biden’s personal roving ambassador to the region, who reportedly connived at Israel’s recent invasion of Lebanon. And clearly there is a long tradition of asserting Jewish supremacism within the upper levels of the US government. Last year Stuart Seldowitz, a former US State Department official, was filmed in New York City threatening an ethnic Egyptian halal food street vendor, calling him a terrorist. Seldowitz was recorded saying that the death of 4,000 Palestinian children “wasn’t enough”, highlighting legitimate concerns about anti-Palestinian sentiment among some former US officials. Seldowitz worked for former State Secretary Madeline Albright, who in a shocking interview once justified the killing of 500,000 Iraqi children, stating her view that the killings were “worth it”.

So where do we go from here.

Sometimes recognizing that we have a problem can be the first step in coming up with a solution. To my mind, the rot started with President Harry Truman, who sold out to Jewish money and media power in the 1948 creation of the state of Israel, which real statesmen like Secretary of State George Marshall warned against.

Some would put the betrayal earlier, with the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank in 1913. In any event, it is now counter to actual US interests to be so totally subservient to Israeli priorities. A good first step would be to require the constituent groups that make up the Israel Lobby to register as foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, which would require them to reveal their sources of income and their connections to Israel. It would also prohibit them from interfering in US politics. In addition, it does not make sense to send American Ambassadors and Emissaries to Israel who are far more loyal to Israel than to the United States, as the last several have been. Nor does it make sense to have a Jewish/Zionist Secretary of State backed up by a largely Jewish staff and White House cabinet to carry out diplomacy in the Middle East. Diplomacy is precisely what Blinken has not been doing and if he had any decency, which he does not, he would in any event recuse himself from involvement with anything having to do with Israel.

The unconditional ironclad pledge to defend a nation carrying out a genocide while simultaneously seeking to go to war with all its neighbors is a formula for initiating World War 3, which will kill millions of people. Indeed, Biden, who has been discussing with Netanyahu how to attack Iran, has now deployed to Israel a $1.15 billion Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system to be manned by 100 American soldiers on the ground in Israel. The Washington Post is reporting that Israel has decided to attack military sites in Iran before the US election. This is just what Netanyahu wants as he will initiate a new conflict with Iran, Iran will retaliate, possibly killing US military based inside Israel, and bingo the US will be at war. In truth, the world needs less of a rabid dog Jewish state calling the shots as well as less of a corrupted and befuddled America dedicated to protecting the ravening beast. International lawyer John Whitbeck has described the current reality best:

“By their venality, cowardice, moral bankruptcy and near-treason, the American political class is flushing a once great country down history’s toilet, and the Global West, if it does not liberate itself from domination by the Israeli-American Empire, risks a similar fate.”

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: UNIFIL peacekeepers patrol between Ras Naqoura and Labounieh along the Blue Line in southwestern Lebanon. © UNIFIL/Pasqual Gorriz

COVID Propaganda Roundup: The latest updates on the “new normal” – chronicling the lies, distortions, and abuses by the ruling class.

Mask Mandates Return to Blue America

Via Gateway Pundit (emphasis added):

“This month, Santa Clara County decided that everyone — patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers alike — must don the all-too-familiar face masks in public patient care areas in hospitals, clinics, and long-term care facilities. This directive is not for a week or a month but for the entire “winter respiratory virus period,”Mercury News reported.

This mandate is slated to span from November 1 to the end of March. That’s a whole five months of mask-wearing, in spite of declining COVID cases.

Marin County has jumped on the bandwagon, implementing a comparable order. As if that weren’t enough, Alameda, San Mateo, Contra Costa, and Sonoma counties aren’t far behind, mandating their healthcare workers to be masked up in patient care areas starting this week.”

Study: Over Four Dozen Undisclosed Toxic Chemicals Discovered in COVID Shots 

Via International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research (emphasis added):

We report laboratory results from high precision Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) that confirm and expand previous results by SEM-EDX. To this end, the contents of vials from different lots of the brands AstraZeneca/Oxford, CanSino Biologics, Pfizer/BioNTech, Sinopharm, Moderna and Sputnik V were analyzed. Among the undeclared chemical elements were detected 11 of the 15 cytotoxic lanthanides used in electronic devices and optogenetics. In addition, among the undeclared elements were all 11 of the heavy metals: chromium was found in 100% of the samples; arsenic 82%; nickel 59%; cobalt and copper 47%; tin 35%; cadmium, lead and manganese in 18%; and mercury in 6%. A total of 55 undeclared chemical elements were found and quantified with ICP-MS.”

Dumping toxic chemicals in experimental drugs and not listing any of them on the insert, then cajoling corporations and government institutions to mandate them through fiat, is obviously immoral and illegal.

The question is: what is the American government going to do about it?

If Mamala’s masters retains power, the firm answer is definitely nothing, but even if Trump somehow overcomes the election rigging, the answer is probably nothing — unless he makes good on his pledge and appoints RFK Jr. to a top position to take a blowtorch to the pharmaceutical industry and Public Health™ institutions.

Adverse Side Effects: Mechanisms Explained

Recently published research sheds light on the mechanisms by which two key ingredients — lipid nanoparticles (LPNs), polyethene glycol (PEG) — along with the spike proteins the shots are designed to trigger production of, drive inflammation, anaphylaxis, heart attacks, and the other reactions we have seen in the injected by the thousands, if not millions.

Via Diseases (emphasis added):

Acute adverse reactions to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are a major concern, as autopsy reports indicate that deaths most commonly occur on the same day of or one day following vaccination. These acute reactions may be due to cytokine storms triggered by lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) and anaphylaxis induced by polyethene glycol (PEG), both of which are vital constituents of the mRNA-LNP vaccines. Kounis syndrome, in which anaphylaxis triggers acute coronary syndrome (ACS), may also be responsible for these cardiovascular events. Furthermore, COVID-19 mRNA-LNP vaccines encompass adjuvants, such as LNPs, which trigger inflammatory cytokines, including interleukin (IL)-1β and IL-6. These vaccines also produce spike proteins which facilitate the release of inflammatory cytokines. Apart from this, histamine released from mast cells during allergic reactions plays a critical role in IL-6 secretion, which intensifies inflammatory responses.”

Let us never forget, nor forgive, the Public Health™ and corporate media criminals who assured you these were “safe and effective” products despite having never been tested sufficiently on humans and who ought to be on trial via military tribunal for crimes against humanity.

UK: New Massive Study Drops on Injected Kids and Myocarditis

Via Slay News (emphasis added):

A major study involving 1.7 million children has found that heart damage only appeared in children who had received Covid mRNA vaccines.

Not a single unvaccinated child in the group suffered from heart-related problems.

In addition, the researchers note zero children from the entire group, vaccinated or unvaccinated, died from COVID-19.

Furthermore, the study found that Covid shots offered the children very little protection from the virus, with many becoming infected after just 14 to 15 weeks of receiving an injection.”

Via MedRxiv (emphasis added):

“With the approval of NHS England, we conducted an observational study in the OpenSAFELY-TPP database, including a) adolescents aged 12-15 years, and b) children aged 5-11 years and comparing individuals receiving i) first vaccination with unvaccinated controls and ii) second vaccination to single-vaccinated controls. We matched vaccinated individuals with controls on age, sex, region, and other important characteristics…

Amongst 820,926 previously unvaccinated adolescents, the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for positive SARS-CoV-2 test comparing vaccination with no vaccination was 0.74 (95% CI 0.72-0.75), although the 20-week risks were similar

There were no COVID-19-related deaths in any group. Fewer than seven (exact number redacted) COVID-19-related critical care admissions occurred in the adolescent first dose vs unvaccinated cohort. Among both adolescents and children, myocarditis and pericarditis were documented only in the vaccinated groups, with rates of 27 and 10 cases/million after first and second doses respectively.”

‘Self-amplifying’ mRNA Shots Hit Japanese Market, Destined for America 

Via Children’s Health Defense (emphasis added):

Japan is offering a self-amplifying mRNA vaccine as one of the five routine COVID-19 vaccines available to the public for the 2024-2025 fall and winter seasons.

Japanese regulators approved the ARCT-154 shot in November 2023. According to a press release, ARCT-154 is the world’s first self-amplifying mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare approved the vaccine for adults. It is jointly produced by the biotechnology firm CSL and Arcturus Therapeutics.

“The approval is based on positive clinical data from several ARCT-154 studies … which achieved higher immunogenicity results and a favorable safety profile compared to a standard mRNA COVID-19 vaccine comparator,” CSL said.

Japan’s vaccination program will offer the vaccines to people 65 and over, and 60- to 64-year-olds with severe underlying conditions, at a maximum cost of 7,000 yen (approximately $47). People not in these two categories can also receive the shots, but the fee will not be capped.”

What makes these shots — which were only tested on 800 people and produced a 90% adverse event rate prior to Japan approving them — “self-amplifying” is that they contain, in addition to the traditional mRNA in the current generation of COVID shots, RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) that turbocharges spike protein production.

Continuing:

“Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher told The Defender, “These products are completely new. There is absolutely no long-term safety data on them.”…

Hulscher told The Defender that the risks associated with self-amplifying mRNA vaccines “are likely far greater than the risks of conventional mRNA injections.”

[Professor of microbiology Karina Acevedo] Whitehouse explained how self-amplifying mRNA injections are different than synthetic mRNA injections. Synthetic mRNA vaccines contain foreign mRNA that the body’s cells translate into a protein.

Self-amplifying mRNA injections also contain a foreign protein — but in addition, they contain an enzyme that instructs the body on how to make more mRNA.

Whitehouse said, “The function of this enzyme — RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) — is to copy RNA,” which means that “once the cell produces the RdRp, it will make new copies of the foreign mRNA as well as more copies of its own instructions.” likening this function to that of a photocopier.

She likened the process to how a photocopier works. “It keeps going and going and going, making more copies that, in turn, help make more copies,” Whitehouse said.”

 

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via Substack. Also, keep tabs via Twitter.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

Daniel Estulin interviewed Prof. Michel Chossudovsky on his article “There Never Was a “New Corona Virus,” There Never Was a Pandemic“.

Here is an excerpt from the article:

Destabilizing the social, political and economic structure of 190 sovereign countries cannot constitute  a “solution” to combating a novel coronavirus  which mysteriously emerged in Wuhan, Hubei province (PRC) in late December 2019. That was the imposed “solution” —implemented in several stages from the very outset–, leading to The March 2020 Lockdown and the Rollout of a so-called Covid 19 “Vaccine” in December 2020, which since its inception has resulted in an upward trend in excess mortality. 

It’s the destruction of people’s lives Worldwide. It is the destabilization of civil society.

Fake science was supportive of this devastating agenda. The lies were sustained by a massive media disinformation campaign. 24/7, Incessant and Repetitive “Covid alerts” in the course of more than three years. In turn, the ongoing fear campaign had devastating impacts on people’s health

The  historic March 11, 2020 lockdown triggered economic and social chaos Worldwide. It was an act of “economic warfare”: a war against humanity. 

The New Virus: 2019-nCoV

The official story is that a dangerous NEW VIRUS was detected in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China in December 2019. It was entitled 2019-nCoV which stands for “2019 New (n) Corona (Co) Virus (V)”.

On  January 1, 2020, “the Chinese health authorities closed the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan following Western media reports claiming that wild animals sold there may have been the source of the virus.

As of early January 2020, it was the object of extensive media coverage and an unfolding Worldwide fear campaign.  Media disinformation 24/7 went into high gear.

The Chinese authorities (allegedly) “identified a new type of virus” on January 7, 2020, using the RT-PCR test. No specific details were provided regarding the process of isolation of the virus.

Click here to read the full article.

.

Click the image below or click here to watch the interview.

.

 

Below link to the article: 

*

There Never Was a “New Corona Virus”, There Never Was a Pandemic

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 21, 2024

 

 

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

In the Caribbean Island of Martinique which remains under French colonial rule, social unrest has flared up again prompted by hyperinflation and the heavy-handed tactics utilized by security forces under the control of Paris.

Due to its colonial dependency the rate of rising prices in Martinique far exceeds that of the colonial power in France.

During September thousands of people took to the streets in response to the escalating prices for food and other consumer goods. Riot police from France were deployed to put down the unrest which involved industrial actions among the workers.

Nonetheless, despite the repressive atmosphere, people rose up at an even larger level starting on October 9 shutting down the airport. The center of the unrest in the latest outbreak took place in the two largest urban areas of Fort-de-France and Le Lamentin.

The French prefect Jean-Christophe Bouvier declared an emergency and imposed a curfew in the two cities. Between October 10-13, at least one person was killed while many others were wounded including twelve gendarmes.

There were reports of property damage and the taking of consumer goods. These actions illustrated the desperate conditions under which the population of approximately 350, 000 people are forced to live.

A police station was set on fire along with several automobiles. Roadblocks were set up by the people to bring attention to the broad dissatisfaction which exists within the Island.

Food prices in Martinique are on average 40 percent higher than those in France. This is undoubtedly a result of the subordinate political situation in comparison to what has prevailed in France.

The latest round of demonstrations and civil unrest erupted on the day prior to the holding of a scheduled meeting between representatives of the struggle and the French colonial authorities. People in Martinique want policy changes and not more empty promises coming from the authorities who have nothing to offer except maintaining the status quo through coercion and state violence.

On October 10, rumors circulated that a new contingent of French police would be arriving at the airport in Fort-de-France. People marched to the area in efforts to halt their deployment aimed at suppressing the people protesting the rapidly deteriorating economic conditions.

Controversial French riot police units were deployed in September after the labor actions and mass demonstrations. It had been declared that these security forces would not be utilized in the uprising since they were banned after the suppression of similar unrest in 1959 when people were brutalized and killed.

In a report published by Euro News and the Associated Press on October 10, it emphasized that:

“On Thursday night, protesters overran the tarmac on the airport in the island’s capital, Fort-de-France, and tried to force their way into the main entrance, where hundreds of passengers had taken shelter, according to videos posted on social media. Police securing the entrance were seen fending off assaults from the demonstrators and firing what appears to be tear gas in their direction. The airport later said on Facebook that flights had been suspended. Three planes carrying some 1,000 passengers had to be diverted to the nearby island of Guadeloupe on Thursday, Martinique local prefecture said in its statement. Another 500 passengers who were supposed to board those flights were stuck at the Fort-de-France airport, it said.” 

These demonstrations were launched by the Assembly for the Protection of Afro-Caribbean Peoples and Resources. The organization has charged the French colonial state of racial and social discrimination against the population which is overwhelmingly of African descent.

People in French Colonies Are Demanding Autonomy and Independence

The situation in Martinique is by no means isolated from developments in other territories controlled by Paris. In recent years there have been mass demonstrations, strikes and rebellions against the exploitative and oppressed conditions imposed by successive French governments.

President Emmanuel Macron has consistently opposed greater autonomy and national liberation in the colonies which are located in the Indian Ocean, the Caribbean, South America and the Pacific. New Caledonia, also known as Kanaky, was the scene of mass demonstrations during May when the French government sent in troops to put down a rebellion that resulted in the deaths of 7 people.

The people of New Caledonia were protesting against a new law which would grant the right to vote to non-indigenous people in efforts to thwart the demands for self-determination and independence in the Southwest Pacific territory. In 1988 amid a protracted struggle demanding self-rule, the Noumea Treaty was signed in order to curtail the unrest.

A state of emergency was declared in May by the colonial state which lasted for two weeks. New Caledonia is located thousands of miles away from Europe where the French government is based.

The proposed bill by the French government has still not been withdrawn by Macron despite the widespread opposition to the legislation in the Southwest Pacific territory. Macron visited the area earlier in the year and said that there should be dialogue in New Caledonia over the merits of the bill.

In the territory known as French Guiana located on the north coast of South America, the conditions of the people have worsened in recent years as a result of illegal mining, impoverishment and a skyrocketing crime rate. Although the people have demanded greater autonomy in a referendum held in 2020, no changes have been allowed by the government in Paris.

In the geographical proximity of Martinique, other French controlled areas are facing a similar fate. The Anadolu news agency reporting on the situation noted in June:

“The Caribbean Island of Guadeloupe, with a population of 400,000 people located approximately 7,000 kilometers from France, is experiencing security difficulties due to crime rates that are six times higher than the French national average and armed robbery rates that are 20 times higher. Due to the increasing involvement of young people in crimes, a curfew was imposed in April for Pointe-a-Pitre, the commercial capital of the island, for those younger than 18. There were intense protests on the island due to lockdown measures implemented by the French government during the coronavirus pandemic. France sent security forces to the region to suppress protests spreading in Martinique from other colonies.” 

Other contested areas under French colonial control are Reunion in the Indian Ocean east of Madagascar, Mayotte also in the Indian Ocean’s northern Mozambique Channel and French Polynesia in the South Pacific. All of these territories continue to be denied the right to self-determination for their people.

Although the popular views internationally are that classic colonialism was a phenomenon of the 15th to the 20th centuries, in regard to France and other imperialist states, external political and economic domination is still very much the order of the day. The social conditions in these geo-political regions are worsening as the crisis in the world capitalist system becomes more acute.

A Way Out for the People

The only real solution to the continuing crises of colonialism and neo-colonialism is the unity and genuine independence of the oppressed nations. These areas which remain under European domination must unite in a political struggle to win their independence and social emancipation.

The situation today in Martinique illustrates clearly that the movement against colonial domination remains an important aspect of the world movement for freedom against imperialism. Nonetheless, judging from the lessons of the 20th century, the demand for autonomy, self-determination and independence can only achieve effective results when it is combined with the efforts to break the chains of economic dependency.

Developments in the Sahel region of West Africa in recent years have exposed several contradictions within independent states. Although these countries were members of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), United Nations and the African Union (AU), continuing reliance on France, the United States and its NATO allies represents an extension of the colonial and neo-colonial projects.

The African states and the African Diaspora should by all means advocate and organize for the total emancipation from colonialism and neo-colonialism. As a well-known Martinican, Dr. Frantz Fanon, said more than six decades ago:

“So, comrades, let us not pay tribute to Europe by creating states, institutions and societies which draw their inspiration from her. Humanity is waiting for something other from us than such an imitation, which would be almost an obscene caricature. If we want to turn Africa into a new Europe, and America into a new Europe, then let us leave the destiny of our countries to Europeans. They will know how to do it better than the most gifted among us. But if we want humanity to advance a step farther, if we want to bring it up to a different level than that which Europe has shown it, then we must invent and we must make discoveries. If we wish to live up to our peoples’ expectations, we must seek the response elsewhere than in Europe.” 

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.  

Featured image is from the author

On September 18th the UN General Assembly (UNGA) adopted a resolution by large majority on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the legal consequences of Israel’s Gaza offensive and the ongoing occupation. The UNGA affirmed the ICJ ruling in July which triggered the legal obligation of all states to end complicity in and bring an end to Israel’s illegal occupation and apartheid regime. Significantly, the resolution called for sanctions on Israel for the first time in 42 years, specifically referencing the obligation to abstain from economic relations with Israel as it pertains to the Occupied Territories and to take “steps to prevent trade or investment relations that assist in the maintenance of the illegal situation” in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.1 

To this end, the perfectly suited Occupied Territories Bill (OTB) has been languishing in limbo between second Dáil approval and committee stage since January 2019. 

In an interview with RTÉ in mid-September, Tánaiste Micheál Martin reiterated that enacting the OTB would place Ireland in breach of EU law, emphasising that, like it or not, the EU has overriding authority when it comes to trade. Here he is basing his assertion on the much disputed 2019 Attorney General’s advice, advice wich ignores European Court of Justice case law allowing member states to deviate from EU law on public policy grounds to safeguard fundamental rights. 

Micheál has held fast to this dubious position, stalling concrete action on Israel’s unparalleled crimes in the Occupied Territories for nearly five years, including a year of unimaginable genocidal carnage. The ICJ ruling has forced the government to go back to the Attorney General to ask for a second opinion, but that was now over a month ago. What is the hold up? 

At the time of writing, the government is being forced to respond to revelations by The Ditch detailing a secret phone call between former finance minister Paschal Donohoe and his Israeli counterpart.2 These have Donohoe assuring the Israelis the OTB could be blocked from progressing by using the “money message” procedure (a tool that allows the Government to block legislative proposals that have majority support by saying they will incur a cost to the state to implement). The Government has flatly denied that any such phone call took place3, which leaves one to wonder why high-level Israeli officials would be lying to each other about such matters in internal emails. 

What about the status of Ireland’s application to join South Africa’s case at the ICJ? To great fanfare in March, Martin announced Ireland’s intention to add our weight to the case against Israel. Yet there is still no sign of the formal declaration of intervention. Spain announced their application in early June and made the formal declaration in late June. What is the hold up? 

When Micheál Martin was first questioned on revelations in The Ditch about flights full of weapons for Israel transiting Irish airspace, he said the government was not aware of the flights and there wasn’t much the country could do about it.4 A month later they were still “working to confirm the accuracy of reports”, refusing to disclose to the Dáil if more than nine of these flights had occurred, and telling the press future cargo flights of munitions for genocide “may” be stopped in future.5 These flights are illegal irrespective of the ICJ ruling that obligates us to stop them. What is the hold up? 

This foot-dragging stands in stark contrast to how Ireland behaves in relation to Washington’s perceived rivals. Ireland happily goes along with EU sanctions (which do not have a solid foundation in international law) against Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Nicaragua, Mali, Iran, Yemen, Syria, Russia and all the other baddies.These sanctions are imposed by the Council of the EU, a secretive round-table of almost exclusively right-wing leaders and ministers. There is no due process, evidence is not presented, and accused parties do not have a right to present a defence. Conversely, when the principal judicial organ of the United Nations rules that Israel has placed Gazans at risk of genocide, that all states must end the brutal occupation and apartheid, the Irish government goes looking for second legal opinions. 

Micheál went to Israel to point at broken ceiling plaster to help gin up support for a genocide, never shutting up about Israel’s non-existent right to defend itself. Meanwhile he presents Ireland as some kind of humanitarian leader despite the fact that any remotely positive change in government policy comes from them being caught out, being dragged kicking and screaming by the international courts, and the constant pressure from the Irish people. The Irish government may be subservient to genocidal US-led imperialism, but we the people of Ireland are not. 

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Notes

  1. United Nations General Assembly, “Illegal Israeli actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory”, Tenth emergency special session, Agenda item 5, 13th September 2024, press release accessed at: https://archive.ph/n4lIY
  2. “Donohoe had secret call with Israeli finance minister to say government would ‘block’ Occupied Territories Bill”,The Ditch website, 25th September 2024, accessed at https://archive.ph/B1W7H
  3. “Donohoe had no phone call over Occupied Territories Bill, Dáil told”, RTÉ News website, 26th September 2024, accessed at: https://archive.ph/8WVPQ
  4. O’Toole, M. (2024) ‘Tánaiste unveils two new additions to Ireland’s Naval Service Fleet’, Irish Mirror, 5th September 2024, accessed at: https://archive.ph/MNuVg
  5. Whelan, S (2024) ‘Airlines flying arms in airspace may be refused – Martin’, RTÉ News, 23 September 2024, accessed at: https://archive.ph/WCETu

Featured image is from SV

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War

October 16th, 2024 by The Global Research Team

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved the Doomsday Clock from 100 seconds to 90 seconds in 2023. In January this year, the Clock remained unchanged. 

However, with the ongoing escalation in the Middle East and Ukraine, will the Clock move ever closer to midnight? 

Indeed, we are living at a crossroads where our governments neglect public opinion; so much so that worldwide People Power is necessary in the preservation of world peace and order. 

Help Global Research fulfill our mandate to report on the “unspoken truth” and contribute to a future where kids see birds, not bombs. 

  1. Forward the daily Global Research Newsletter and/or your favorite Global Research articles to your family, friends, and respective communities;
  2. Use the various instruments of online posting and social media to “spread the word.” Click the “like” and “share” buttons on our articles’ pages for starters. Help keep our articles circulating;
  3. Encourage family and friends to sign up for our newsletter (click here for sign-up form); and
  4. Follow us on our social media (X and Instagram) and subscribe to our Telegram channel.

Moreover, you can still download a FREE PDF copy of Prof. Michel Chossudovsky’s book, “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War.” Click here (docsend).

If you have the capacity to help us meet our operational costs, you may click on the links below to become a member or make a donation. We sincerely appreciate your generosity.

Click to view our membership plans

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation


Thank you for supporting independent media. 

-The Global Research Team

Author’s Note 

This video was published on July 1, 2020 in the immediate wake of the March 2020 Lockdown imposed on 190+ member states of the United Nations. 

It was act of economic warfare.

A war against humanity. It’s intent was to trigger global poverty, bankruptcy and despair.

This crisis was  misunderstood by economists.  

The covid lockdown in March 2020 was the inception of the most serious economic and social crisis in modern history.

This was the beginning of  a Worldwide crisis six months before the launching of the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine in December 2020. The Vaccine was upheld as a “solution” to the alleged Covid pandemic. 

The World economy is in the hands of the creditors: 

“Now, the problem of Western governments is that the debt is NOT REPAYABLE. …. In other words, that means that an entire state apparatus is now in the hands of the creditors.

… And the next stage is ultimately the confiscation of the State! THE STATE WILL BE PRIVATIZED” (July 1, 2020, see transcript below)

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 12, 2024

.

 

TRANSCRIPT

The 2020 Economic Crisis. Global Poverty, Unemployment and Despair

By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

June 30, 2020

We are undoubtedly living (in) one of the most serious economic and social and crises in modern history. In some regards, we are living history and we are unable to comprehend the logic of the corona virus pandemic.

What is at stake is the pretext and the justification for closing down national economies worldwide based on a public health concern.

We have to understand the causalities. Closing down an economy, nationally and globally does NOT resolve the pandemic. In fact, it creates a situation of INSTITUTIONAL INSTABILITY.

It also results in massive unemployment, confinement of people in their homes, without employment, without food . . . That is what we’re living.

There is NO justification for closing down national economies based on a public health concern, which can be resolved, and SHOULD be resolved!

There is a very complex decision-making process, which has been PLANNED WELL IN ADVANCE. From ‘central authority’, governments are instructed to close down their economies and then, in turn, the governments instruct people to implement social engineering, not to meet, not to have family reunions . . .

And, essentially, what we do not understand, and which is fundamental, is that economic activity is the basis for the reproduction of real life. By that I mean, institutions, purchasing power of families, a whole series of activities, which have developed in the course of history – economic activity constitutes the foundation of all societies.

And what these measures have resulted in is a massive crisis, in which particularly small and medium sized enterprises are being precipitated into bankruptcy, millions of people have become unemployed, and in many countries this has resulted in mass poverty, famine, among certain groups of the population.

We have ample evidence to this effect and we have to understand that this process of closing down national economies is deliberate. IT’S A PLAN.

And, it’s co-ordinated with the financial crisis which took place in the month of February (2020), which led to massive collapse in banking institutions, stock markets and so on. Economists, conventional economists, have a tendency to say that there’s no relationship between the corona pandemic crisis and the financial crash in February. That is utterly mistaken. The fear campaign, the disinformation campaign, have facilitated the MANIPULATION OF STOCK MARKETS. And we’re (I’m) talking about the use of very sophisticated derivatives, speculative instruments and so on.

What is now happening is that governments have been indebted up to their ears. They’re paying out compensation to companies which have been affected; in some cases it’s generous bailouts, in other cases it’s part of a social safety net coming to the rescue of workers and small-scale enterprises.

And the next stage is the MOST SERIOUS DEBT CRISIS IN WORLD HISTORY. In other words, the levels of employment have crashed and companies are bankrupt. We will have a fiscal crisis of the state. In other words, a dramatic decline in (income) tax revenues due to the collapse in employment, and the  companies (which have not gone bankrupt) are going to deduct corporate losses, of course (on their tax statements). How will the governments around the world continue to govern, finance social programs and so on?

It will ultimately be through a gigantic global debt operation implemented both in the so-called ‘developed’ countries – e.g. Italy, France, United States, Canada – and in the developing countries where it will be more the international financial institutions, the World Bank, the IMF, the regional development banks.

Now, the problem of Western governments is that that debt is NOT REPAYABLE. The Italian government has issued bonds with the support of Goldman Sachs and so on; that was done a couple of months back. And what has happened? Italy’s debt is categorized (by Standard and Poor). . . these Italian bonds, are classified ‘BB’, which essentially means junk bond status. In other words, that means that an entire state apparatus is now in the hands of the creditors. And these creditors are the financial institutions, the banks and so on.

And the next stage is ultimately the confiscation of the State! THE STATE WILL BE PRIVATIZED.

All the programs will be under the helm of the creditors. We can say, “Goodbye” to the welfare state in Western Europe. Why? Because the creditors will immediately, following what they did in Greece a few years back . . . they will immediately impose austerity measures, and the privatization of social programs, the privatization of anything that can be privatized – cities, land, public buildings.

And, in other words, we are living a very important evolution because the State, as we know it, will no longer exist. It will be run by private banking interests, who will . . . and they’re already doing that . . . APPOINT their governments, or their politicians, their corrupt politicians, and essentially they will take over the whole political landscape.

That is happening in a number of countries. And in some countries they have even instructed the governments NOT to debate (in parliament) the enormous debts which have been accumulated in the last few months as a result of the pandemic, which now are the object of financing by these powerful financial institutions. In Canada there was an agreement between Prime Minister Trudeau on the one hand and the leader of the opposition – NO DEBATE in parliament on $150 billion of debt, which then has to be covered through public debt operations and loans from financial institutions.

And essentially the scenario that we are living. . . which is unfolding is that, on the one hand, the real economy in the course of the last few months starting in March, well, in fact, starting in February with the stock market crash is in a state of crisis, production activity has been affected, trade has been affected. Millions and millions of people are going to be unemployed, without earnings, and it’s not only poverty – it’s poverty and despair. It’s the marginalization of large sectors of the world population from the labour market. There are figures on that, published by the ILO (International Labour Organization) that in fact, at this stage, it is premature to even start estimating these impacts.

We can look at it country by country. We can see, for instance, that in developing countries the informal sector, let’s say in India or in certain countries in Latin America, (such as) Peru, a large sector of the labour force is involved in what is called the ‘informal sector’; self-employed, small-scale industries and so on. Well, this has been COMPLETELY WIPED OUT and the people affected are left very often, homeless. The only choice they have is to do it to go back to their home villages and in the process they are the victims of famine and a situation of TOTAL MARGINALIZATION.

That is the scenario. It’s beyond global poverty. It’s mass unemployment. It is something which has been ENGINEERED, it’s not something which is accidental. And it’s certainly not something which has been used to resolve a global health crisis.

The global health crisis pertaining to covid has been MULTIPLIED. People have been confined, they have fallen sick, they have lost their jobs, and at the same time the whole health apparatus has been in crisis, unable to function.

What we have to understand is that this process HAS TO BE CONFRONTED! There has to be an organized opposition. This is a neo-liberal project! It’s neo-liberalism to the extreme.

Now, bear in mind that today, what we have, (is that) in some regards, the stock market crash used speculative instruments, insider trading, but also the fear campaign to implement what is THE MOST SIGNIFICANT TRANSFER OF WEALTH IN WORLD HISTORY! In other words, everybody loses money in the stock market crash and the money goes into the hands of, you know, a limited number of billionaires. And there have been estimates as to the enrichment of this class in the course of the last three months. I won’t get into details. So that, this, in a sense, this crisis of February, the stock market crisis, sets the stage for the lockdown.

And on (the topic of) the lockdown, we can call it by another name. The lockdown is the CLOSURE OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY! It is an act which instructs national governments to close down their economy, and they obey! That’s what we call, ‘global governance’. But it’s an imperial project. They obey and they close down everything.

And then they they try to convince their citizens that this is all for a good cause, we are closing down the economy so that we can save lives due to covid-19. That is a very strong statement and at the same time the statistics on covid-19 are the source of manipulation.

I won’t get into that particular dimension but I can say in all certitude that the impact of this crisis is so dramatic, the economic crisis, that it DOESN’T COMPARE to the impact of covid-19, which, according even to people like Anthony Fauci, who says that it is comparable to seasonal influenza. They’ve written that in their peer-reviewed articles.

What they say online, on CNN is a different matter. But they do not consider covid-19 as an ultimate danger of all dangers. It’s not. There are many other health pandemics affecting the world. That does not mean that we shouldn’t take it seriously but we should understand, it’s common sense, it’s not by closing down the global economy that you’re going to resolve this pandemic.

So somebody’s lying, somewhere. And in fact, the lies are ‘becoming the truth’, they’re becoming part of the ‘consensus’ and THAT IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS.

Because when the lie becomes ‘the truth’, there’s no turning backwards.

And we notice how independent scientists, independent analysts, are being CENSORED,  that we have many doctors and nurses and scientists, virologists as well as economists who are speaking out. And you just have to look at the figures, the millions and millions of people who are unemployed as a result of this.

So, what we really need is a historical understanding of what’s going on, because closing down the economy through orders from ‘somewhere up there’ . . .

First of all, it’s DISTINCT FROM ANY PREVIOUS CRISIS. But secondly, we have to RESIST THAT MODEL. And it’s not by changing the paradigm, no. It’s a mass movement; it’s a mass movement against our governments, it’s a mass movement against the architects of this diabolical project . . .

And we can’t ask the Rockefellers, “Please lend us the money” to pay for our expenses, we have to do that on our own.

And that’s why all these NGOs, which are funded by corporate foundations Cannot  . . . I’m not saying . . . some of the things they do are fine but they cannot wage a campaign against those who are sponsoring them, that’s an impossibility.

So we have to implement a grassroots movement, nationally and internationally, to CONFRONT THIS DIABOLICAL PROJECT and to restore our national economies, our national institutions. And, to DENY THE LEGITIMACY OF THE DEBT PROJECT. And to investigate the elements of corruption which have led to this diabolical adventure, which is affecting humanity in its entirety.

This is a war against humanity, implemented through complex economic instruments.

Goodbye and we will continue our battle and our analysis to the best of our abilities at Global Research.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research,  July 1, 2020

 

*

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image is a screenshot from the video


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: [August] 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

A ajuda europeia ao regime de Kiev está a causar cada vez mais descontentamento e protestos entre as pessoas comuns. Uma nova onda de protestos começou recentemente na Alemanha, com o apoio popular aos programas militares da UE a tornar-se realmente diminutos. Isto está a colocar em risco a legitimidade dos governos europeus, especialmente em países como a Alemanha, uma vez que os seus cidadãos já não veem claramente os seus líderes como verdadeiros representantes dos interesses nacionais.

Nos últimos dias, milhares de pessoas saíram às ruas de Berlim e de outras grandes cidades alemãs para demonstrar a sua oposição ao apoio militar do país ao regime neonazista de Kiev. Os manifestantes, afiliados a vários grupos políticos e movimentos sociais, fizeram discursos públicos condenando o fornecimento de armas às forças ucranianas e afirmando que não estavam preparados para gastar os seus recursos e armas para ajudar Kiev.

Uma das principais razões dos protestos foi a oposição ao fornecimento de mísseis alemães Taurus à Ucrânia. Como é sabido, nos últimos meses tem aumentado a pressão por parte do Presidente ucraniano Vladimir Zelensky e dos seus apoiadores para o fornecimento de armas capazes de atingir alvos “profundos” no território indiscutível da Federação Russa. O governo de Olaf Scholz manteve uma posição firme ao não autorizar a utilização de quaisquer armas de longo alcance, mas a pressão do lobby pró-guerra é tão forte que muitos cidadãos alemães temem que o governo acabe por ceder – por esta razão, as pessoas estão a sair às ruas para mostrar claramente a sua posição, criando assim uma espécie de “anti-lobby” contra os grupos pró-guerra.

Além da questão ucraniana, os manifestantes também protestaram contra o envolvimento alemão noutros conflitos pelo mundo, como a guerra entre Israel e as milícias aliadas do Irã no Oriente Médio. Os países ocidentais têm historicamente apoiado Israel em todos os seus conflitos na região, razão pela qual as pessoas temem que a escalada encoraje um maior envolvimento alemão na guerra. Os manifestantes mostraram solidariedade para com o povo palestino e deixaram claro que não querem que o seu país seja envolvido nas hostilidades.

“Não há mísseis Taurus na Ucrânia (…) Não há 100 mil milhões para armamentos e guerra (…) Não me vão mandar para a guerra (…) Acabar com o genocídio em Gaza (…) Libertar a Palestina”, alguns disseram manifestantes enquanto protestavam em Berlim.

A reação dos ativistas pela paz deve-se ao fato de a Alemanha ter prometido recentemente ainda mais envolvimento nos atuais conflitos. Apesar de tentar evitar o envio de armas capazes de atingir alvos “profundos” na Rússia, Olaf Scholz anunciou que irá enviar um novo pacote de ajuda militar a Kiev, avaliado em 1,4 mil milhões de euros. Scholz promete fazer todo o possível para garantir que a Alemanha continue a ser o maior apoiador de Israel na Europa, enquanto continua enviando grandes quantidades de armas, equipamento e dinheiro para as forças armadas de Kiev.

“A Alemanha é o mais forte apoiador militar da Ucrânia na Europa. Vai continuar assim. Posso assegurar-vos disso”, disse ele.

Na mesma linha, em 10 de outubro, Scholz prometeu enviar mais armas a Israel. Ele disse que quaisquer rumores sobre uma diminuição da ajuda alemã a Israel são falsos, esclarecendo que o país continuará a expandir a cooperação militar com Tel Aviv.

“(Apesar dos rumores e da pressão) Não decidimos não fornecer armas (para Israel). Fornecemos armas e (continuaremos a) fornecer armas. (O governo alemão tomou decisões) que também garantem que haverá novas remessas em breve”, disse ele recentemente.

Na verdade, têm surgido gradualmente relatos de uma diminuição da ajuda militar alemã aos países parceiros. Estas avaliações baseiam-se em dois fatores: por um lado, a pressão pública contra o frágil governo Scholz, que se revela fraco e impopular; por outro lado, existem as circunstâncias da própria capacidade produtiva da Alemanha, que diminui dia a dia devido a dificuldades econômicas e energéticas. Na verdade, é muito difícil para Berlim continuar a ser um importante fornecedor de tecnologia militar aos países aliados ocidentais a longo prazo, simplesmente porque o povo alemão não o quer e porque a situação social no país não permite tais despesas. .

A insistência de Scholz em manter o envolvimento alemão nos conflitos atuais apenas irá expandir ainda mais a crise de legitimidade do seu governo. Os protestos tornar-se-ão em breve mais frequentes e possivelmente mais tensos, uma vez que o povo alemão está a mostrar a sua insatisfação com a situação atual. É possível dizer que Scholz está cometendo um verdadeiro “suicídio” político ao priorizar o apoio à Ucrânia e a Israel em detrimento da sua própria popularidade entre os cidadãos do país.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

Artigo em inglês : In Germany thousands of protesters show their opposition to Ukraine aid program, InfoBrics, 14 de outubro de 2024.

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, membro da Associação de Jornalistas do BRICS, pesquisador do Centro de Estudos Geoestratégicos, especialista militar.

Você pode seguir Lucas Leiroz em: https://t.me/lucasleiroz e https://x.com/leiroz_lucas

Support for Democratic candidate Kamala Harris among Arab-American and Muslim voters, as well as among progressive and young voters, has plummeted in recent weeks due to her backing of Israel’s military actions in Gaza and Lebanon, putting her victory in key states like Michigan at risk.

On September 9, Quinnipiac University released its final polls before the US general elections. The survey, which covered three of the most critical states key to the aspirations of Harris and Republican Donald Trump, showed a notable decline for the Democrat in the voting intention of those surveyed, but none more so than in Michigan. There, the current vice president went from having 50% of voting intention in September (compared to Trump’s 45%) to obtaining 47% in October, with the Republican moving into the lead with 50%.

According to many analysts, the decline is due to Harris’ supposed conservative shift in recent weeks, which has seen her campaigning with former Republican Liz Cheney and boasting about the support of her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, the architect of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, to toughening her rhetoric on Latin American immigrants and, especially, her alignment with Israel at a time when the Jewish state is expanding its airstrikes against Lebanon, Syria and Yemen.

By backing President Joe Biden’s staunch defence of Israel, Harris has suffered in the voting intention among the young and progressive electorate, but especially among Arab American and Muslim voters. The latter has historically voted for Democratic candidates in every election.

Michigan has the largest number of voters who are descendants or immigrants from Arab countries. It is one of the key states in Harris’ campaign to win the election.

If Harris does not win Michigan, which Biden won by three points in 2020 but Hillary Clinton marginally lost in 2016, her path to obtaining the 370 Electoral College votes becomes almost impossible since, according to all the polls, the Republican is showing great strength in other Democrat states such as Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

Harris’s refusal to distance herself from Biden’s absolute support for Netanyahu could be catastrophic for the Democratic candidate.

Under other circumstances, Michigan might have facilitated Harris’ victory, but this is one of the most disconcerting aspects of her campaign: the fact that she has not sought to reach out to that electorate – even if for electoral reasons, not moral ones – that is critical of Israel’s actions. It is recalled that Harris’ campaign refused even to have a Palestinian speaker at the Democratic Convention, despite the fact that they invited Israeli speakers. Harris herself has refused to commit to stopping the shipment of American weapons to Israel if she wins the election.

While the Arab and Muslim electorate represents 4% of Michigan’s total population, which translates into 200,000 potential voters, Trump’s margin of victory over Clinton in 2016 was just 10,000 votes. If the shift in voting intention materialises, it could give the election to the former president.

Today, according to the latest polls, not only does Trump lead Harris among the general electorate in Michigan, but he also leads her among the Arab and Muslim population, something that no one could have imagined just two years ago. In the past, that electorate has leaned overwhelmingly Democratic in every presidential election, including in 2020, when Biden captured 60% of that vote, with Trump getting just 37%.

The reason for such an abrupt change in just four years has an obvious explanation – Biden’s support for Israel’s military action in the Middle East, which has left tens of thousands of dead in Gaza and Lebanon in the last year, most of them civilians. Voters see Biden and Harris talking about a ceasefire in Gaza, but not only do they fail to achieve it, they continue to send weapons to Israel.

Trump has promised in this campaign that he will re-implement the executive order he established in 2017, which prohibits the entry into the country of citizens from a series of Muslim-majority countries. But for Arab-Americans, this is not comparable to Biden and Harris financing and supporting Israel.

Many pro-Palestine voters prefer Trump as they see him as a pragmatic politician, believing that while the Republican has a good relationship with Netanyahu, he would not hesitate to get rid of the Israeli prime minister if he became politically inconvenient for him. On the contrary, Biden has repeatedly said throughout his career that he considers himself a “Zionist” who always defends Israel, leading many voters to believe that he will not change his mind regarding the continued sending of weapons to Israel instead of deepening a diplomatic solution.

In many cases, the shift of this electorate towards Trump is explained by the logic of the lesser evil, and it is not illogical that the desire to punish Biden and Harris for allowing Israel to bomb their countries of origin daily than any other argument.

Other voters in that group, on the other hand, have decided to support the independent candidate Jill Stein, who is expected to obtain almost a third of the votes from Arabs and Muslims in Michigan. Again, this would be catastrophic for Harris because many of these voters traditionally support the Democrats. However, Stein is the best option for these voters because she is the only candidate who has openly criticised Netanyahu.

It is inexplicable that Harris was recruited at the last minute after Biden’s debacle in the presidential debate with Trump. She now wants to distance herself from the unpopular Biden administration but maintains the same position on most issues, including Israel. It is clearly a bad electoral strategy. But if there is one thing that Washington cannot object to, it is the war machine, and Harris is proving it, even if it hurts her election chances.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Official portrait of Vice President Kamala Harris. (From the Public Domain)

Germany Dismisses Ukraine’s Demands for Taurus Missiles and NATO Membership

By Ahmed Adel, October 14, 2024

Berlin has spurned two key demands that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tried to “sell” during his European tour to promote his so-called Victory Plan: getting the green light for deep strikes into Russian territory (which would require German Taurus missiles, among others) and speeding up Ukraine’s accession to NATO, German media reported.

Extermination Works. At First. “If Israel Is Not Stopped”…. Chris Hedges

By Chris Hedges, October 15, 2024

Extermination works. At first. This is the terrible lesson of history. If Israel is not stopped — and no outside power appears willing to halt the genocide in Gaza or the destruction of Lebanon — it will achieve its goals of depopulating and annexing northern Gaza and turning southern Gaza into a charnel house where Palestinians are burned alive, decimated by bombs and die from starvation and infectious diseases, until they are driven out.

Israel’s War on the United Nations

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, October 15, 2024

A number of recent incidents reveals the poor regard the United Nations is held in, notably within Israel’s warring circles.  Its agency aiding Palestinians, UNRWA, is threatened by two bills before the Israeli parliament that will significantly hamper its operations by evicting the body from its premise in territories within Israel’s control.

Continuity of Barbarism. Western Proxies Murder Children as Policy

By Mark Taliano, October 15, 2024

The horror that is the current Western/Zionist perpetrated genocide in occupied Palestine is a continuum of the horror that the West and its proxies have been inflicting on prey countries such as Syria for years. The “mechanisms of terror” are the same. The targeting and slaughter of civilians, including children, is a Western/Zionist military policy designed to displace and annihilate prey populations.

Vaccine Protest: Northern Ireland Man Tells How Life Ruined by Pfizer COVID Booster

By Gemma Murray, October 15, 2024

Larry Lowe says his life changed after he got the Pfizer Covid booster on December 15, 2021. Then 54-years-old and fit running 10km most days, Mr Lowe says his life changed after getting the vaccination.

‘We Lose Total Control’: Clinton Continues Her Censorship Campaign on CNN, “Crack Down on Opposing Views”

By Jonathan Turley, October 15, 2024

Hillary Clinton is continuing her global efforts to get countries, including the United States, to crackdown on opposing views. Clinton went on CNN to lament the continued resistance to censorship and to call upon Congress to limit free speech.

Britain’s Struggle Against Nazi Germany

By Shane Quinn, October 14, 2024

The author discusses the challenges and strategies of Nazi Germany’s planned invasion of Britain in 1940, highlighting the logistical difficulties, military preparations, and the potential impact of the campaign amid Britain’s defensive efforts.

As the Kiev regime forces are suffering massive losses across the entire frontline, the continuously growing tensions in other regions of the world and the expected (geo)political changes in the United States make the Kiev regime’s prospects grimmer by the day.

The warmongers in Washington DC is desperate to start a war it can win somewhere and it’s increasingly apparent that’s not the case for the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict.

Thus, the political West keeps escalating tensions elsewhere.

The increasingly contested Asia-Pacific region is one possible battleground, but it’s also too big of a bite for the time being. This is why we’re seeing the Middle East being targeted for destabilization by the US and its vassals and satellite states for the umpteenth time.

However, the potential for escalation in Europe is certainly not exhausted. Quite the contrary, NATO is just getting started. Namely, Ukraine is only one episode in the wider Russia-NATO confrontation that the latter has been planning for decades. To that end, the US is using endemically Russophobic countries as the future cannon fodder. Unfortunately, Poland stands at the forefront of the massive militarization of Eastern Europe. Right now, Warsaw is even making war plans that count on the Kiev regime’s total defeat. Various sources report that the mounting losses of the Neo-Nazi junta forces in the Kursk oblast (region) and the Donbas are further exacerbated by the political West’s (in)ability to sustain the functioning of the Kiev regime through continuous financial injections.

And indeed, it’s highly unlikely that the European Union will be able (or willing) to provide hundreds of billions of euros to the Neo-Nazi junta if the political shift in the US stops the flow of American money.

Poland seems to be preparing for this exact eventuality, with its high command already planning for a future conflict with Russia. General Rajmund Andrzejczak, former Chief of the Polish General Staff, thinks this is the most likely scenario and wants a new “deterrence policy against Moscow following a Russian takeover of Ukraine”. Andrzejczak served at the top position in the Polish military from 2018 to 2023, so he’s certainly aware of the actual situation on the frontlines in Ukraine. According to military sources, he’s quite belligerent toward the Kremlin, insisting on Poland’s battle readiness.

“After a Russian victory in Ukraine, we would have a Russian division in Lviv, one in Brest and one in Grodno. […] If they attack even an inch of Lithuanian territory, the response will come immediately. Not on the first day, but in the first minute. We will hit all strategic targets within a radius of 300 km. We will attack St. Petersburg directly,” he insisted, adding: “[Poland] must take the initiative. Russia must realize that an attack on Poland or the Baltic countries would also mean its end… That is the only way to deter the Kremlin from such aggression.”

Andrzejczak also stated that Warsaw is acquiring “800 missiles with a range of 900 km” to this end, although he didn’t explain which type of missiles. Right now, Poland is indeed acquiring a large number of South Korean K239 “Chunmoo” and US-made HIMARS systems. What is known so far is that Warsaw planned on buying upwards of 500 HIMARS and exactly 288 “Chunmoo” launchers, along with tens of thousands of rockets for each (around 23,000 for the South Korean MLRS). However, the US Military Industrial Complex (MIC) is not capable of delivering that many systems within the scope of the contract, meaning that it’s highly unlikely we’ll see hundreds of HIMARS launchers in Polish service anytime soon. In addition, no missile with a range of 900 km is available for these systems.

In its most advanced variant, the ATACMS has a maximum range of 300 km, while the latest PrSM (Precision Strike Missile) that reportedly entered service only in December 2023 and is available only in the US military has a maximum range of 500 km. Although this is significantly superior to the ATACMS, this missile is not yet widely deployed. The Pentagon claims that future variants of the PrSM will have a range of up to 1000 km, although it’s unclear at what point this version will be ready. Andrzejczak’s statement could’ve referred to this missile, although it’s clear that this is mere chest-thumping, as even if Poland had hundreds of these missiles, it would still be a fraction of Russia’s arsenal of thousands of missile systems such as the now legendary “Iskander” (in several variants).

It should also be noted that the “Iskander-M” is now being upgraded to reach targets at ranges of 1000 km, a very real capability that the Russian military doesn’t need to wait for years and doesn’t need to buy from anyone, as Moscow has a world-class domestic military-industrial base that can provide such technologies completely independently. All this is without even considering the fact that Russia’s strategic arsenal is more than enough to obliterate the entirety of Poland in minutes, so it would be wise for Andrzejczak (and his successors) to take a step back and think about the consequences of making such threats to a global superpower. Not to mention that Warsaw is not militarily more powerful than the Kiev regime, which got hundreds of billions in so-called “military aid”, but to no avail.

This is clearly implied by the very fact that the former Chief of the Polish General Staff said all this at the “Defending Baltics” conference in Lithuania’s Vilnius.

It’s a clear indicator that the political West is aware of the actual performance of its Neo-Nazi puppets, otherwise they wouldn’t be planning for a “defense of the Baltics”. Poland’s war plans have been in the works for quite some time, but they seem to be more akin to equipping a suicide vest rather than a viable military strategy. Russian dominance in fields such as artillery and long-range strike systems indicates how a conflict with its military would unfold.

Not to mention that it would be “gloves off” for the Kremlin in any sort of direct confrontation with NATO forces, especially those that are endemically Russophobic (Poland and the Baltic states in particular).

The support that the world’s most vile racketeering cartel provides to the Kiev regime, especially in terms of ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) would be severely disrupted (or even negated entirely) by the Russian military, meaning that the Polish military would be effectively blind in such a conflict. This would greatly increase casualties for NATO, which is precisely why its top-ranking military officers are planning for such an eventuality. In addition, the Russian military wouldn’t have to send any ground troops to fight such a war, but could focus entirely on delivering pinpoint precision strikes at ranges Poland simply can’t match. Either way, Warsaw is getting ready to take the Kiev regime’s place, an extremely unflattering strategic position that even some former Polish top-ranking military officers are warning about.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. 

Featured image source

Meli Kaylan, a journalist writing for Forbes, warns that, with a cease-fire, Zelensky risks suffering a coup from the Ukrainian far-right over the issue of Donbass and Crimea. His piece is actually titled “Moscow’s hidden plans for exploiting a ceasefire with Ukraine”, and a cursory reading might leave the reader with the impression that he is writing about some evil Russian plan to support a fascist coup d’état in Ukraine. It is a little more complicated than that, though – if one is able to read between the lines.

Kaylan argues that if Zelensky “is forced to cede the occupied territories pro term in exchange for promises of joining Nato”, then “ultra-nationalist elements of the army” would “revolt and stage a coup against Zelensky for giving away Donbas and Crimea.”

In this scenario, those evil Russians, he argues, could exploit the situation, and so on. Kaylan does not elaborate on who these “ultra-nationalists” are. If one knows and understands the premises behind such a scenario, however, the picture becomes clear enough: Kaylan is talking about a regime that is, at the very least, hostage to neo-fascists, neo-Nazis and ultra-nationalists militias. What he is basically arguing (implicitly) is that since at least 1945, much of the world (and the West particularly, one would assume) does not like such kind of people. Most people simply don’t like ultra-nationalists and Nazis, and thus, “Russian propaganda” could cunningly exploit that inconvenient fact for its own evil purposes. One must admit it is a very peculiar way of denouncing “Russian propaganda”.

The “ultra-nationalists elements of the army” mentioned by Kaylan do exist, however. Let us recall that shortly after taking the oath as Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky was the target of a quite public threat from the nation’s armed far-right, namely from Dmytro Yarosh, then adviser to no less than Valerii Zaluzhny, who at the time was the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

In an interview to Ukrainian news portal Obozrevatel, Yarosh, who is also a former commander of the far-right Ukrainian Volunteer Army (UVA), said that the President would “lose his life” and end up “hanging on a tree on Khreshchatyk” if he ever “betrayed” Ukrainian nationalists by negotiating with Moscow to end the civil war in Donbass.

This is what Meli Kaylan means by “ultra-nationalists”. This kind of guys.

.

Screenshot from Forbes

.

In October 2022, there was already some controversy about the aforementioned General Valerii Zaluzhnyi  being “photographed with far-right paraphernalia.” Zaluzhnyi was dismissed in February 2024 when Zelensky named a new Army Chief. Shortly after that, the General was photographed being awarded by the 67th OMBR “DUK”, a part of the  67th Separate Mechanized Brigade, formed by the so-called “Right Sector” paramilitary. The photograph might strike Westerns as being quite Fascistic – but it is very normal in post-Maidan Ukraine. The aforementioned Brigade itself was after all based on the Ukrainian Volunteer Corps (UVK), the armed wing of the Right Sector. Of course it employs fascist aesthetics and symbology. In 2015 media outlets such as the BBC and Reuters were reporting on the tensions in Ukraine over the rise of Yarosh (who went all to become an adviser to the general). The same year, Forward described him as an anti-semite. Yarosh was also on Interpol’s “wanted” list for “public incitement to extremist activities” and “public incitement to terrorist activities”. General Valerii Zaluzhnyi was appointed as Ukraine’s ambassador to the United Kingdom in March, and Yarosh remains active in Ukrainian politics.

.

Zaluzhnyi with Colonel General Oleksandr Syrskyi (left) during the Battle of Kyiv, March 2022 (Licensed under CC BY 4.0) 

.

Let us recall that when Zelensky was elected, Volodymyr Groysman served as his First Minister for a short period of time, thereby briefly making Ukraine the only country in the world (other than Israel) led by a Jewish head of state and a Jewish head of government. It is also the only country in the world whose state has legalized neo-nazi militias, making them part of the National Guard while keeping their symbology. And it is arguably the only state in the world which officially glorifies genocidal Nazi collaborators, a matter which to this day sours its otherwise good relations with neighboring Poland. For example, just last month, Radosław Sikorski, the Polish foreign minister, called on Kyiv to allow the exhumation of victims of the so-called Volhynia massacres (during WWII, Ukrainian nationalists massacred about 100,000 ethnic Poles).

In January 2023, The New Statesman featured a story about the country’s “problematic nationalist heroes” (quite the euphemism), which also mentioned that “the official parliamentary Twitter account shared a photo of Valerii Zaluzhnyi, the commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, under a portrait of Bandera. The caption directly linked the present war to Bandera’s fight against the Soviet Union: ‘The complete and final victory of Ukrainian nationalism will come when the Russian empire ceases to exist’.”

The story also lets the reader know that Bandera’s Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), under the leadership of the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B), “was responsible for the massacre of up to 100,000 Poles and tens of thousands of Jews during the war” and that both organizations “collaborated with the Nazis during the German occupation of western Ukraine.” One might reason that it is rather awkward for a General serving under a Jewish President to glorify Nazi collaborators and to be photographed with neo-Fascists – but again, this is post-2014 Ukraine, a country that is simply not for beginners.

It is about time to acknowledge the peculiar nature of the post-Maidan regime. Doing so, however, would surely complicate Western propaganda efforts and war rhetoric. The price for not doing so, on the other hand, has been to normalize things like the Canadian Parliament giving a standing ovation to a Nazi SS war veteran (that is, Yaroslav Hunka, who fought in the SS Division Galicia of the Waffen-SS). As the saying goes, “to hide a lie, a thousand lies are needed” – the lie being the Western propaganda notion that there is no such thing as an (often neo-Nazi) radical ethnic nationalism problem in Ukraine. There is – it has also been aided, armed, funded and whitewashed by the West and it has been a huge part of the crisis since 2014.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Uriel Araujo, PhD, is an anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: U.S. allies in Ukraine, with NATO, Azov Battalion and neo-Nazi flags. Photo by russia-insider.com

Israel’s War on the United Nations

October 15th, 2024 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

The United Nations is an easy body to hate.  At times, it seems to be effusion without substance, body with no backbone.  It was conceived in a fit of post-war idealism, when egos were humbled and hatred briefly stemmed.  Over the ruins of the Second World War, the builders were favoured over the destroyers and mischief makers – at least for a time.

On its establishment, the UN became a hostage to the political intrigues and power blocs that have continued to plague it for its duration.  Of particular concern was the body’s pursuit of international law protocols – formulation, drafting and implementation.  A central feature of this: resolutions passed by various bodies, the most significant being by the UN Security Council.  Such measures are followed by nation states when convenient, ignored when not.

One such nation state in the mischief making class is Israel.  Its relationship with the UN has often been tetchy.  The Anti-Defamation League, for instance, admits that the body “played a pivotal role in the establishment of the Jewish State by passing UN Resolution 181 in 1947”.  The resolution, with its hefty consequences, called for “the partition of British Mandate Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab.”  The same organisation, however, goes on to note with satisfaction the remarks in April 2007 by then UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon:

“Unfortunately, because of the [Israeli-Palestinian] conflict, Israel’s been weighed down by criticism and suffered from bias – and sometimes even discrimination.”

For various periods of its history, Israel has felt hard done by in the international forum.  The folder of resolutions against it has burgeoned.  Notable ones include UNSC Resolution 242 (1967) which asserts, in accordance with the UN Charter principles, that a “just and lasting peace in the Middle East” includes the withdrawal of Israel’s armed forces from territories occupied during the Six-Day War and the termination of territorial claims and affirmation of sovereignty of all States in the area.  UNSC Resolution 338 (1973), passed in response to the Yom Kippur War between Israel, Egypt and Syria, called on the parties to cease hostilities within 12 hours and implement Resolution 242 “in all its parts”.

.

undefined

Territories occupied by Israel during the Six-Day War, including the Sinai (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

.

UN Resolution 2334, passed in December 2016, particularly hurt, striking at the expansionist, displacing drive of the Jewish state through settlements in occupied territory that amount to de facto colonisation. It particularly condemned “all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem”.  This included, among other matters, the expansion of the settlements, the transfer of Israeli settlers, the confiscation of land and the displacement of Palestinian civilians.

.

File:United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334.pdf

United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 urging an end to Israeli settlements (Public Domain)

.

Instead of seeing such a measure as a clear assessment of predation in breach of international law and the principles of the UN Charter, Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, called it an unnecessary reward to the Palestinians “to continue down a dangerous path they have chosen” in avoiding direct negotiations with Israel. That Israel cared not a jot on that score hardly mattered.

A number of recent incidents reveals the poor regard the United Nations is held in, notably within Israel’s warring circles.  Its agency aiding Palestinians, UNRWA, is threatened by two bills before the Israeli parliament that will significantly hamper its operations by evicting the body from its premise in territories within Israel’s control.  The proposed laws will also abolish any associated privileges and immunities.  Having failed to convince all major donors to the organisation that it should be defunded for being packed with Hamas apologists and operatives (the evidence has always been paltry on that score), the Israeli government is using a legal sledgehammer fashioned by the Knesset.

The passage of the bills, warns UN Secretary-General António Guterres, “would effectively end coordination to protect UN convoys, offices and shelters serving hundreds of thousands of people.”  The provision of shelter, food and healthcare “would grind to a halt” without the agency.  Some 600,000 children “would lose the only entity that is able to re-start education, risking the fate of an entire generation.”

With Israel’s broadening campaign against Hezbollah to the north, the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) is facing continuous harassment by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).  Established in 1978 by the Security Council to confirm the withdrawal of Israel from Lebanon and aid Lebanese authorities restore peace and security in the area, UNIFIL has been a source of endless irritation to the IDF’s operations.

In an October 13 statement, UNIFIL revealed that two IDF Merkava tanks at 4.30 that morning had gone about the business of destroying the main gate of their post in Ramyah, near the Israeli border.  The tanks forcibly entered, after which Israeli personnel demanded that the base turn out its lights.  “The tanks left about 45 minutes later after UNIFIL protested through our liaison mechanism, saying that IDF presence was putting peacekeepers in danger.”

At 6.40 am, peacekeepers at the same post reported the firing of several smoke emitting rounds 100 metres to the north.  “Despite putting on protective masks, fifteen peacekeepers suffered effects, including skin irritation and gastrointestinal reactions, after the smoke entered the camp.”

On October 14, persisting in its approach of impeding and harrying the peacekeeping force, the IDF halted “a critical UNIFIL logistical movement near Meiss ej Jebel, denying it passage.  The critical movement could not be completed.”

The statement goes on to remind the IDF about its obligations to ensure the safety and security of the UN peacekeepers and property.  Breaching a UN position violated UN Security Council Resolution 1701 (2006), while any deliberate attack on peacekeepers was a serious violation of international humanitarian law, in addition to breaching resolution 1701.

In an almost disdainful manner, the IDF suggested in a statement that the peacekeepers had entirely misunderstood the brutal encroachment.  The actions had been motivated by goodwill to evacuate soldiers wounded by an anti-tank missile.  “For the sake of evacuating the wounded, two tanks drove backwards, in a place where they could not advance otherwise in light of the threat of shooting, a few metres towards the UNIFIL position.”  The smokescreen had been created to aid the evacuation, while the entire operation was conducted throughout with continuous contact with the UN peacekeepers. After a time, the dressing of lies becomes tatty and banal.

Typically, it fell to the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to shed some light on the mendacious fog.  UNIFIL, he suggested, had to immediately withdraw its forces from southern Lebanon.  “It is time for you,” stated the PM in a pointed message to Guterres, “to withdraw UNIFIL from Hezbollah strongholds and from the areas of combat.”  Yet again, international law which, in this case, provides legitimacy to the UN peacekeeping operations in the area, could be treated as a tissue easily torn.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures at RMIT University.  He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). Email: [email protected] 

Featured image: Danny Danon

Extermination works. At first. This is the terrible lesson of history. If Israel is not stopped — and no outside power appears willing to halt the genocide in Gaza or the destruction of Lebanon — it will achieve its goals of depopulating and annexing northern Gaza and turning southern Gaza into a charnel house where Palestinians are burned alive, decimated by bombs and die from starvation and infectious diseases, until they are driven out. It will achieve its goal of destroying Lebanon — 2,255 people have been killed and over one million Lebanese have been displaced — in an attempt to turn it into a failed state. And, it may soon realize its long cherished dream of forcing the United States into war with Iran. Israeli leaders are publicly salivating over proposals to assassinate Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei and carry out airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear installations and oil facilities.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his cabinet, like those driving Middle East policy in the White House — Antony Blinken, raised in a staunch Zionist family, Brett McGurk, Amos Hochstein, who was born in Israel and served in the Israeli military, and Jake Sullivan — are true believers in the doctrine that violence can mold the world to fit their demented vision. That this doctrine has been a spectacular failure in Israel’s occupied territories, and did not work in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya, and a generation earlier in Vietnam, does not deter them. This time, they assure us, it will succeed.   

In the short term they are right. This is not good news for Palestinians or the Lebanese. The U.S. and Israel will continue to use their arsenal of industrial weapons to kill huge numbers of people and turn cities into rubble. But in the long term, this indiscriminate violence sows dragon’s teeth. It creates adversaries that, sometimes a generation later, outdo in savagery — we call it terrorism — what was done to those slain in the previous generation. 

Hate and a lust of vengeance, as I learned covering the war in the former Yugoslavia, are passed down like a poisonous elixir from one generation to the next. Our disastrous interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen, along with Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982, which created Hezbollah, should have taught us this. 

Those of us who covered the Middle East were stunned that the Bush administration imagined it would be greeted as liberators in Iraq when the U.S. had spent over a decade imposing sanctions that resulted in severe shortages of food and medicine, causing the deaths of at least one million Iraqis, including 500,000 children. Denis Halliday, the United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq, resigned in 1998 over U.S.-imposed sanctions, calling them “genocidal” because they represented “a deliberate policy to destroy the people of Iraq.”

Israel’s occupation of Palestine and its saturation bombing of Lebanon in 1982, were the catalyst for Osama bin Laden’s attack on the Twin Towers in New York City in 2001, along with U.S. support for attacks on Muslims in Somalia, Chechnya, Kashmir and the South of the Philippines, U.S. military assistance to Israel and the sanctions on Iraq.

Will the international community continue to stand by passively and allow Israel to carry out a mass extermination campaign? Will there ever be limits? Or will war with Lebanon and Iran provide a smokescreen — Israel’s worst campaigns of ethnic cleansing and mass murder have always been done under the cover of war — to turn what is happening in Palestine into an updated version of the Armenian genocide?

I fear, given that the Israel lobby has bought and paid for Congress and the two ruling parties, as well as cowed the media and universities, the rivers of blood will continue to swell. There is money to be made in war. A lot of it. And the influence of the war industry, buttressed by hundreds of millions of dollars spent on political campaigns by the Zionists, will be a formidable barrier to peace, not to mention sanity. 

Unless, as Chalmers Johnson writes in “Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic,” “we abolish the CIA, restore intelligence gathering to the State Department, and remove all but purely military functions from the Pentagon” we will “never again know peace, nor in all probability survive very long as a nation.”

Genocide is done by attrition. Once a targeted group is stripped of its rights the next steps are the displacement of the population, destruction of the infrastructure and the wholesale killing of civilians. Israel is also attacking and killing international monitors, human rights organizations, aid workers and United Nations staff, a feature of most genocides. Foreign journalists are being arrested and accused of “aiding the enemy,” while Palestinian journalists are being assassinated and their families wiped out. Israel carries out continuous assaults in Gaza on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), where two-thirds of its facilities have been damaged or destroyed, and 223 of its staff have been killed. It has attacked the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), where peacekeepers have been fired upon, tear gassed and wounded. This tactic replicates the Bosnian Serb attacks in July 1995, which I covered, on the U.N. Protection Force outposts in Srebrenica. The Serbs, who had cut off food deliveries to the Bosnian enclave, resulting in severe malnutrition and starvation, overran the U.N. outposts and took 30 U.N. troops hostage before massacring more than 8,000 Bosniak Muslim men and boys. 

These initial phases are complete in Gaza. The final stage is mass death, not only from bullets and bombs, but famine and disease. No food has entered northern Gaza since the beginning of this month. 

.

Water shortage in Gaza (Source)

.

Israel has been dropping leaflets demanding everyone in the north evacuate. 400,000 Palestinians in northern Gaza must leave or die. It has ordered the evacuation of hospitals — Israel is also targeting hospitals in Lebanon — deployed drones to fire indiscriminately on civilians, including those attempting to take the wounded for treatment, bombed schools that serve as shelters and turned the Jabaliya refugee camp into a free fire zone. As usual, Israel continues to target journalists, including Al Jazeera’s Fadi Al-Wahidi, who was shot in the neck and remains in critical condition. At least 175 journalists and media workers are estimated to have been killed by Israeli troops in Gaza since Oct. 7, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health.

The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs warns that aid shipments to all of Gaza are at their lowest level in months. “People have run out of ways to cope, food systems have collapsed, and the risk of famine persists,” it notes.

The total siege imposed on northern Gaza will, in the next stage, be imposed on southern Gaza. Incremental death. And the primary weapon, as in the north, will be famine. 

Egypt and the other Arab states have refused to consider accepting Palestinian refugees. But Israel is banking on creating a humanitarian disaster of such catastrophic proportions that these countries, or other countries, will relent so they can depopulate Gaza and turn their attention to ethnically cleansing the West Bank. That is the plan, although no one, including Israel, knows if it will work.

Israeli Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich, in August complained openly that international pressure is preventing Israel from starving the Palestinians, “even though it might be justified and moral, until our hostages are returned.” 

What is happening in Gaza is not unprecedented. Indonesia’s military, backed by the U.S., carried out a year-long campaign in 1965 to exterminate those accused of being communist leaders, functionaries, party members and sympathizers. The bloodbath — much of it carried out by rogue death squads and paramilitary gangs — decimated the labor union movement along with the intellectual and artistic class, opposition parties, university student leaders, journalists and ethnic Chinese. A million people were slaughtered. Many of the bodies were dumped into rivers, hastily buried or left to rot on roadsides.

This campaign of mass murder is today mythologized in Indonesia, as it will be in Israel. It is portrayed as an epic battle against the forces of evil, just as Israel equates the Palestinians with Nazis. 

The killers in the Indonesian war against “communism” are cheered at political rallies. They are lionized for saving the country. They are interviewed on television about their “heroic” battles. The three-million-strong Pancasila Youth — Indonesia’s equivalent of the “Brownshirts” or the Hitler Youth — in 1965, joined in the genocidal mayhem and are held up as the pillars of the nation. 

Image source

Joshua Oppenheimer’s documentary “The Act of Killing,” which took eight years to make, exposes the dark psychology of a society that engages in genocide and venerates mass murderers. 

We are as depraved as the killers in Indonesia and Israel. We mythologize our genocide of Native Americans, romanticizing our killers, gunmen, outlaws, militias and cavalry units. We, like Israel, fetishize the military.

Our mass killing in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq – what the sociologist James William Gibson calls “technowar”— defines Israel’s assault on Gaza and Lebanon. Technowar is centered on the concept of “overkill.” Overkill, with its intentionally large numbers of civilian casualties, is justified as an effective form of deterrence.

We, like Israel, as Nick Turse points out in “Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam” deliberately maimed, abused, beat, tortured, raped, wounded and killed hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians, including children. 

The slaughters, Turse writes, “were the inevitable outcome of deliberate policies, dictated at the highest levels of the military.” 

Many of the Vietnamese — like Palestinians — who were murdered, Turse relates, were first subjected to degrading forms of public abuse. They were, Turse writes, when first detained “confined to tiny barbed wire ‘cow cages’ and sometimes jabbed with sharpened bamboo sticks while inside them.” Other detainees “were placed in large drums filled with water; the containers were then struck with great force, which caused internal injuries but left no scars.” Some were “suspended by ropes for hours on end or hung upside down and beaten, a practice called ‘the plane ride.’” They were subjected to electric shocks from crank-operated field telephones, battery-powered devices, or even cattle prods.” Soles of feet were beaten. Fingers were dismembered. Detainees were slashed with knives, “suffocated, burned by cigarettes, or beaten with truncheons, clubs, sticks, bamboo flails, baseball bats, and other objects. Many were threatened with death or even subjected to mock executions.” Turse found — again like Israel — that “detained civilians and captured guerrillas were often used as human mine detectors and regularly died in the process.” And while soldiers and Marines were engaged in daily acts of brutality and murder, the CIA “organized, coordinated, and paid for” a clandestine program of targeted assassinations “of specific individuals without any attempt to capture them alive or any thought of a legal trial.” 

Image source

Kill Anything That Moves

“After the war,” Turse concludes, “most scholars wrote off the accounts of widespread war crimes that recur throughout Vietnamese revolutionary publications and American antiwar literature as merely so much propaganda. Few academic historians even thought to cite such sources, and almost none did so extensively. Meanwhile, My Lai came to stand for — and thus blot out — all other American atrocities. Vietnam War bookshelves are now filled with big-picture histories, sober studies of diplomacy and military tactics, and combat memoirs told from the soldiers’ perspective. Buried in forgotten U.S. government archives, locked away in the memories of atrocity survivors, the real American war in Vietnam has all but vanished from public consciousness.”

There is no difference between us and Israel. This is why we do not halt the genocide. Israel is doing exactly what we would do in its place. Israel’s bloodlust is our own. As ProPublica reported, “Israel Deliberately Blocked Humanitarian Aid to Gaza, Two Government Bodies Concluded. Antony Blinken Rejected Them.” 

U.S. law requires the government to suspend weapons shipments to countries that prevent the delivery of U.S.-backed humanitarian aid.

Historical amnesia is a vital part of extermination campaigns once they end, at least for the victors. But for the victims, the memory of genocide, along with a yearning for retribution, is a sacred calling. The vanquished reappear in ways the genocidal killers cannot predict, fueling new conflicts and new animosities. The physical eradication of all Palestinians, the only way genocide works, is an impossibility given that six million Palestinians alone live in the diaspora. Over five million live in Gaza and the West Bank.

Israel’s genocide has enraged the 1.9 billion Muslims worldwide, as well as most of the Global South. It has discredited and weakened the corrupt and fragile regimes of the dictatorships and monarchies in the Arab world, home to 456 million Muslims, who collaborate with the U.S. and Israel. It has fueled the ranks of the Palestinian resistance. And it has turned Israel and the U.S. into despised pariahs.

Israel and the U.S. will probably win this round. But ultimately, they have signed their own death warrants. 

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for fifteen years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East Bureau Chief and Balkan Bureau Chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning News, The Christian Science Monitor, and NPR. He is the host of show The Chris Hedges Report.

Featured image: Extermination Nation – by Mr. Fish

Hillary Clinton is continuing her global efforts to get countries, including the United States, to crackdown on opposing views. Clinton went on CNN to lament the continued resistance to censorship and to call upon Congress to limit free speech. In pushing her latest book, “Something Lost and Something Gained,” Clinton amplified on her warnings about the dangers of free speech. What is clear is that the gain of greater power for leaders like Clinton would be the loss of free speech for ordinary citizens.

Clinton heralded the growing anti-free speech movement and noted that “there are people who are championing it, but it’s been a long and difficult road to getting anything done.” She is right, of course. As I discuss in my book, the challenge for anti-free speech champions like Clinton is that it is not easy to convince a free people to give up their freedom.

That is why figures like Clinton are going “old school” and turning to government or corporations to simply crackdown on citizens. One of the lowest moments came after Elon Musk bought Twitter on a pledge to restore free speech protections, Clinton called upon European officials to force Elon Musk to censor American citizens under the infamous Digital Services Act (DSA). This is a former democratic presidential nominee calling upon Europeans to force the censorship of Americans.

She was joined recently by another former democratic presidential nominee, John Kerry, who called for government crackdowns on free speech.

Other democrats have praised Brazil for banning X. For her part, Clinton praised the anti-free speech efforts in California and New York and called for the rest of the country to replicate the approach of those states.

Clinton added a particularly illuminating line that said the quiet part out loud. This is all about power and the fear that she and others will “lose control” over speech:

“Whether it’s Facebook or Twitter or X or Instagram or TikTok, whatever they are, if they don’t moderate and monitor the content we lose total control and it’s not just the social and psychological effects it’s real harm, it’s child porn and threats of violence, things that are terribly dangerous.”

Clinton continues to offer a textbook example of the anti-free speech narrative. While seeking sweeping censorship for anything deemed disinformation, Clinton cites specific examples that are already barred under federal law like child porn.

Despite the amplified message on sites like CNN, most citizens may not be as aggrieved as Clinton that she and her allies could “lose total control” over the Internet. The greater fear is that she and her allies could regain control of social media. The Internet is the single greatest invention for free speech since the printing press. That is precisely why figures like Clinton are panicked over the inability to control it.

If citizens remain true to their values and this indispensable right, Clinton will hopefully continue to face “a long and difficult road to getting anything done” in limiting the free speech of her fellow citizens.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”

Featured image: Clinton in 2015 (Licensed under CC BY 2.0)

Larry Lowe says his life changed after he got the Pfizer Covid booster on December 15, 2021.

Then 54-years-old and fit running 10km most days, Mr Lowe says his life changed after getting the vaccination.

The Omagh man told the BBC that within days he developed numbness in the right side of his face and started experiencing pain.

“I had lost all the feeling in my face, teeth, nose, tongue, eye, that whole side of my head,” he said.

These symptoms have spread through his body and intensified over the years, with doctors across the UK saying the vaccine is to blame.

Mr Lowe’s admission comes as hundreds gathered in Belfast on Saturday to make a stand against potential new laws to deal with another public health emergency like Covid-19.

Concerns have been raised that the assembly is planning to introduce mandatory vaccinations and forced quarantine as part of any new legislation.

DUP MLA Diane Dodds said the proposals “represent a huge overreach and must be rejected” and called for the consultation to be scrapped.

.

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. .

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. Photo: Presseye

.

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. .

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. Photo: Presseye

.

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. .

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. Photo: Presseye

.

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. .

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. Photo: Presseye

.

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill.

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. Photo: Presseye

.

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. .

Protestors pictured at Belfast City Hall against the NI Public Health Bill. Photo: Presseye

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image is from News Letter


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

Nothing illustrates the malfeasance of the mass media like the vast disparity between how they’re covering the killing of four 19 year-old IDF soldiers by Hezbollah versus their complete lack of interest in a 19 year-old hospital patient who was burned alive by the IDF in Gaza.

A shockingly horrible headline appeared in Sky News on Monday reading, “Israel names teenage soldiers killed in Hezbollah drone attack — as ‘23 die’ in Gaza school strike.” It opens with the even more horrid paragraph “Israel has named the four teenage victims of a Hezbollah drone strike on a military base — as at least 23 people were reportedly killed in an attack on a central Gaza school.”

Notice the scare quotes and passive language in Sky’s use of “23 die”, and the way these active duty combatants are being framed as innocent little children who were the “victims” of an unprovoked attack which “killed” them. The killings in Gaza are always framed by the mainstream press as “deaths” which passively happen, always couched in doubtful language like “reportedly” and “according to the Hamas-run health ministry,” whereas Israelis are always “victims” who are “killed”.

The western media’s propagandistic use of language to frame Israel in a sympathetic light and Palestinians in an unsympathetic light is widespread, and has been extensively documented. All the way back in January, The Intercept published a study showing that outlets like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Los Angeles Times used wildly different language to describe the killings of Israelis on October 7 than the killings of Palestinians in the months since, with inflammatory words like “slaughter”, “horrific” and “massacre” used consistently with the former and never with the latter. Another report by The Intercept this past April revealed that this is not an accident; a leaked internal memo from The New York Times reveals the outlet’s staff receiving explicit instructions to avoid specific language that harms Israeli information interests.

Look at the way Sky News names the armed Israeli soldiers killed in battle while framing them as innocent little babies who were slaughtered by monsters, and contrast this with the fact that you’re not seeing the name Sha’ban al-Dalou anywhere in the mainstream press.

Sha’ban al-Dalou was also 19 years old when he died, but unlike those Israeli soldiers, he was a civilian lying in a hospital bed, and he died a much more painful and horrific death than them. 

If you’ve been on social media at all recently, you may have seen the gut-wrenching footage of al-Dalou burning to death in a hospital bed while still connected to his IV after an Israeli airstrike on the al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital, desperately crying out for help in a blazing inferno. 

As of this writing, al-Dalou’s name appears exactly one time in any article I can find on Google News, and it’s from Middle East Eye

The Middle East Eye write-up reads as follows:

“Sha’ban al-Dalou, a 19-year-old software engineering student at Al-Azhar University in Gaza and a memoriser of the Quran, was burned alive after an Israeli air strike hit Al-Aqsa Hospital which killed three others.

“Sha’ban, who was forcefully displaced last year after Israeli forces destroyed his home, had just started his university studies in September 2023.

“Last week, Sha’ban miraculously survived an Israeli strike on a mosque that claimed 20 lives.

“Sha’ban and his mother perished in a fire after Israel attacked the hospital engulfing the tent camp for displaced civilians in Gaza.”

Any mentions I can find of al-Dalou’s death in the mainstream press do not name him, referring to him only as a “man” or a “person” (not a “teenager”) who died in a fire.

“Videos from the scene appeared to show one man being burned alive as bystanders could do little but watch,” The Washington Post reports.

“In multiple videos shared on social media and verified by NBC News, at least one person could be seen reaching their hands out from the flames as they were burned alive,” reports NBC News.

Contrast this with the solemn, reverent way Sky News reads out the names of the four IDF soldiers in its segment on their deaths, repeatedly emphasizing the fact that “all four were just 19 years old.”

Sky News, which Rupert Murdoch sold to Comcast in 2018, has been working overtime to spin Israel’s surging criminality in a positive light these last couple of days. Its Sunday evening report on the Hezbollah attack which killed the four soldiers made not one single mention of the fact that the attack was on a military base throughout the entire segment, leaving the audience with the impression that Hezbollah had attacked an Israeli shopping center or something. A Sky News write-up on London’s response to Iran’s missile strikes on Israel came under fire for using a photo of the burning medical center in Gaza where al-Dalou was killed as its feature image, implying that the burning building was caused by Iran and not Israel.

The massive disparity between the way the mainstream press report on Israeli deaths versus Palestinian deaths is evidence that the mainstream press are propaganda services for the US-centralized power alliance. But it is also evidence that Palestinians are not viewed as human beings by the western political-media class. 

As Lebanese writer Lina Mounzer recently wrote,

“Ask any Arab what the most painful realization of the last year has been and it is this: that we have discovered the extent of our dehumanization to such a degree that it’s impossible to function in the world in the same way.”

As Aaron Bushnell said before he himself burned to death, “This is what our ruling class has decided will be normal.”

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image is a screenshot from Sky News via Caitlin Johnstone

Western-supported proxies: Zionists in occupied Palestine, and sectarian terrorists (ISIS, al Qaeda and affiliates) in Syria, murder children as policy.

In a 2018 interview, Israeli Brigadier-General (Reserve) Zvika Fogel admitted:

“I know how these orders are given. I know how a sniper does the shooting. I know how many authorizations he needs before he receives an authorization to open fire. It is not the whim of one or the other sniper who identifies the small body of a child now and decides he’ll shoot. Someone marks the target for him very well and tells him exactly why one has to shoot and what the threat is from that individual. And to my great sorrow, sometimes when you shoot at a small body and you intended to hit his arm or shoulder, it goes even higher.” (1)

More recently, Dr. Mark Perlmutter, an orthopedic surgeon from North Carolina who has worked in Gaza, described how Zionist snipers shoot children, saying, “No toddler gets shot twice by mistake by ‘the world’s best sniper.’” His observations are echoed by fellow surgeons, thus contradicting any notion that the children were somehow killed by mistake.

Transcript

Reporter: When were you in Gaza?

Dr Mark Perlmutter: End of April, for the first couple of weeks of May.

R: Dr. Mark Perlmutter, an Orthopaedic Surgeon from North Carolina and Vice President of the International College of Surgeons, volunteered in Gaza.

R: So, of all the disaster zones you’ve seen, how does Gaza compare?

Dr. Mark Perlmutter: All of the disasters I have seen combined, combined, 40 mission trips, 30 years, Ground Zero, earthquakes, all of that combined, doesn’t equal the level of carnage that I saw against civilians, in just my first week in Gaza.

R: And when you say civilians, is it mostly children?

Dr. Mark Perlmutter: Almost exclusively children. I’ve never seen that before. Never seen that. I ’ve seen more incinerated children than I’ve ever seen in my entire life combined. I have seen more shredded children in just the first week.

R: Shredded.

Dr. Mark Perlmutter: Shredded.

R: What do you mean?

Dr. Mark Perlmutter: Missing body parts, being crushed by buildings, the greatest majority, or bomb explosions, the next greatest majority. We’ve taken shrapnel as big as my thumb out of eight-year-olds. And then there’s sniper bullets. I have children that were shot twice.

R: Wait, you’re saying that children in Gaza are being shot by snipers?

Dr. Mark Perlmutter: Definitively. I have two children that I have photographs of that were shot so perfectly in the chest, I couldn’t put my stethoscope over their heart more accurately, and directly on the side of the head, in the same child. No toddler gets shot twice by mistake by the world’s best sniper. And they’re dead-center shots.

R: In fact, more than 20 doctors recently in Gaza also told Sunday Morning about gunshot wounds to children. One American doctor told us he even reviewed CT scans to confirm what he saw because he, quote, “didn’t believe that this many children could be admitted to a single hospital with gunshot wounds to the head.”

Some shootings have been captured on video. The Israel Defense Forces declined our requests for an on-camera interview. But in an email, a spokesperson told CBS news, quote, “The IDF has never, and will never deliberately target children”, adding, quote, “remaining in an active combat zone has inherent risks”.

And the IDF stressed that it calls for the evacuation of civilians from combat zones.

The UN reports that to date, more than 80% of Gaza’s population has been displaced and the majority of its buildings destroyed. A reality which has taken its own toll on the well-being of children.

R: What about the emotional wounds?

Dr. Mark Perlmutter: How can you measure that? I can’t measure my own. How do you be an orphan watching your family, you know melted in front of you and shredded in front of you, how do you fix that, ever fix that?

R: In fact, so many Palestinian children have had family members killed, that doctors created a shorthand term, WCNSF, Wounded Child, No Surviving Family.

Last month speaking in Washington D.C., (American Physicians Eyewitness Account from Gaza) other American doctors echoed Dr. Perlmutter’s calls for help.

Dr. Feroze Sidhwa: We’ve described it as a catastrophe, a nightmare, a hell on earth, its all of these and worse.

Dr. Zena Saleh: We didn’t even have hand sanitizer or alcohol or soap most of the time.

Dr. Adam Hamawy: And while we we’re there we’re listening to, aid is getting in, we’re taking care of civilians, they’re not being targeted and yet we’re witnessing a completely different story.

Dr. Mark Perlmutter: For dozens of miles, we saw 18-wheelers parked bumper to bumper, engines off, outside of Gaza. food or health care could not get in.

R: How many kids are in danger of starvation in Gaza?

Dr. Mark Perlmutter: All of them, absolutely all of them.

R: United Nations experts have accused Israel of carrying out a targeted starvation campaign, but Israeli officials say they’ve allowed the delivery of more than 600,000 tons of food and supplies, quote, “with the goal of bringing as much aid into the Gaza strip as possible”.

Western proxies in Syria, too, have a long history of targeting and murdering children.  Why do these terrorists commit such barbarous crimes?

In a recent interview with Basma Qaddour, Syrian political researcher and author Housam Taleb explained that,

“The terrorist groups’  criminal act is similar to what the Israeli occupation is doing in the occupied Palestine. The Israeli enemy targets children and women  to terrify people and displace them with the aim of making certain areas free of population either through killing them or  forcing them to leave their homes. There is a link between the policy being adopted by terrorists groups in Syria and Israeli enemy in Palestine and Lebanon. They have the same terrorist mind.” (2)

The horror that is the current Western/Zionist perpetrated genocide in occupied Palestine is a continuum of the horror that the West and its proxies have been inflicting on prey countries such as Syria for years. The “mechanisms of terror” are the same.

The targeting and slaughter of civilians, including children, is a Western/Zionist military policy designed to displace and annihilate prey populations.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Research Assistance by Basma Qaddour

Mark Taliano is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and the author of Voices from Syria, Global Research Publishers, 2017. He writes on his website where this article was originally published.

Notes

(1) Ali Abunimah, “Snipers ordered to shoot children, Israeli general confirms.” Electronic Intifada, 22 April, 2018. (Snipers ordered to shoot children, Israeli general confirms | The Electronic Intifada) Accessed 14 October, 2014.

See also: “Everyday Children Were Shot In The Head” NYT Details Israeli War Crimes Against Children (youtube.com)

(2) Basma Qaddour, “Interview with Syrian Researcher Housam Taleb.” 14 October, 2024, Voices from Syria. (Interview with Syrian Researcher Housam Taleb/ By Basma Qaddour – Mark Taliano (marktanliano.net)) Accessed 14 October, 2024.

Featured image source


Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

**Voices from Syria**

Author: Mark Taliano

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-9-1

Year: 2017

Product Type: PDF File

List Price: $6.50

Special Offer: $5.00 

Click to order.

DMSO Could Save Millions from Brain and Spinal Injury

October 15th, 2024 by A Midwestern Doctor

DMSO is a remarkably safe chemical that protects cells from otherwise fatal stressors (e.g., freezing, burning, shockwaves, ischemia)

Since the heart, brain, and spinal cord are particularly vulnerable to injury, DMSO can produce miraculous results when those injuries happen

Despite decades of research, many serious shortcomings exist with how we treat strokes (including brain bleeds), heart attacks, and spinal cord injuries

As I will show here, had the FDA not sabotaged DMSO’s adoption, in addition to countless lives being saved, millions could have been protected from a lifetime of disability or paralysis

*

If I were stranded on a desert island or knew the world was ending and I could only bring a few therapies with me, one of them, without a doubt, would be DMSO. This is because:

  • It effectively addresses acute injuries (e.g., sprains) and chronic musculoskeletal disorders (e.g., arthritis).
  • It’s one of the most effective pain killers in existence.
  • It treats severe, often incurable illnesses and prevents long-term disability.
  • It’s one of the safest medically active substances available.

Yet, despite it taking the world by storm in the 1960s and thousands of studies being performed that corroborated its benefits, outside of it being a laboratory chemical or an alternative therapy some people use for joint pain, few are even aware of DMSO’s existence.

This was due to the FDA waging a multi-decade long war against DMSO (despite widespread outcry from Congress and the public).

What Is DMSO?

Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO) exists throughout nature1 and has two breakdown products within the body.

.

what is dmso

.

Most of it is oxidized to methylsulfonylmethane (MSM — a commonly used joint healing supplement), while a small amount is reduced to DMS and gives rise to DMSO’s characteristic “side effect” a distinctive garlic or clam-like odor that is excreted through the mouth and skin for a few hours that some individuals have difficulty tolerating.

Note: Individuals with insufficient oxidation (who are in a state of reductive stress) are more likely to produce DMS. In turn, when this is addressed, their “DMSO odor” often disappears.

Due to its unique chemistry, DMSO has two remarkable properties:

  • It acts as a near-universal solvent (e.g., it interacts with a vast range of biomolecules).2,3
  • It’s able to pass through biological membranes without damaging them (something to my knowledge, nothing else can do).4

Because of this, DMSO will rapidly enter the body (including the brain) regardless of its route of administration (e.g., within 5 minutes after going on the skin it can be found in the blood,5 and within an hour it can be found within the bones6), but simultaneously does not accumulate within the body.7

DMSO, in turn, has an almost endless number of uses as it can be applied in almost any manner. Almost any drug or substance can be combined with it and administered through the skin (e.g., steroids, NSAIDs, vitamin C, or hydrogen peroxide). In many cases, the effect of those drugs is enhanced, and simultaneously, their toxicity is reduced (although, in some cases, the toxicity increases).

Cellular Protection

DMSO’s ability to spread throughout the body (including into the brain) initially seems concerning — however rather than be toxic to cells, DMSO heals them and protects them from damage from many otherwise lethal stressors (e.g., heat, blood loss, radiation, sonic shockwaves).

For example, since DMSO does not expand when it freezes and greatly lowers the freezing point of cells, it was a revolutionary substance for preserving frozen cells,8 and likewise, many cases exist of DMSO saving the fingers or toes that otherwise would have required amputation.

Note: Due to the intense scrutiny DMSO received, thousands of papers have been published on its biological effects (including numerous animal safety studies and one where humans were exposed to 3 to 30 times the typical dose for 90 days9) — all of which did not report any significant side effects from DMSO.

In turn, those studies found the most common side effect (affecting 50% to 75% of users) is (reversible) irritation at the site when 70% DMSO is applied topically on the skin (which can be easily mitigated) and the most significant was an allergic reaction in approximately 1 out of every 2000 people (which can easily be screened for).

Circulatory Disorders

DMSO is remarkably effective in managing circulatory disorders, effectively protecting tissues and enhancing blood flow by removing excess fluid, improving circulation, and dissolving clots. Its benefits are particularly evident in conditions like Raynaud’s syndrome, where it eliminated symptoms in 50% of patients,10 and in diabetic circulatory issues, with studies showing over a 94% success11 rate in treating diabetic ulcers.

DMSO also works wonders for varicose veins, often providing noticeable improvements within minutes by strengthening vessel walls and enhancing capillary circulation. In a study of 67 patients with varicose ulcers,12 remarkable responses were documented, even in chronic cases. Additionally, DMSO has been shown to help many other circulatory disorders:13,14

.

dmso condition

dmso conditions

Key mechanisms behind DMSO’s effectiveness include:

  • Heart function — It can increase or decrease heart contractions without affecting rhythm, enhancing cardiac output and simultaneously dilates critical blood vessels.15
  • Anticlotting properties — DMSO prevents blood clot formation in the body, reduces clot promoting prostaglandins, and is a powerful platelet deaggregator.16,17,18 Its ability to safely block platelet bonding, scavenge harmful radicals, and inhibit tissue factor expression makes DMSO a standout in circulatory health.19

Heart Attacks

.

cardiac actions

.

Given all of these protective and circulatory enhancing properties, DMSO is an immensely promising treatment for heart attacks and heart attack recovery,20 and this benefit has been demonstrated in numerous animal studies.21,22 Likewise, I and colleagues have had a few situations arise where DMSO was administered to someone having a heart attack and successfully treated it.

Note: We’ve also had some success treating heart attacks by rapidly restoring someone’s physiologic zeta potential.

DMSO and Strokes

Roughly 3.1% of adult Americans have experienced a stroke23 (a figure we expect to rise from the COVID-19 vaccines). Each year, this translates to about 800,000 people in the United States having a stroke, in 2022, 165,393 dying and between 20% to 40% of survivors experiencing long term disability.24

Because of the harm strokes pose to society, and the rate at which brain tissue deteriorates once its blood supply is lost, the medical system prioritizes treating strokes as soon as possible.

Strokes come in two main types: ischemic (caused by clots blocking blood flow) and hemorrhagic (due to ruptured blood vessels). The standard treatment for ischemic strokes is tPA,25 a clot-busting drug. However, administering tPA can be deadly if the stroke is hemorrhagic, so patients must first wait for a CT scan before receiving it.

Furthermore, tPA is only effective within a limited time frame (up to 3 to 4.5 hours26), and only a small percentage of patients (1.8% to 8.5%) actually receive it. Among those who do, only 13%27 see significant improvement. Additionally, tPA can cause serious bleeding complications28 (e.g., 6.4% risk29 of a symptomatic brain bleed) and can’t eliminate larger clots.

In short, strokes remain a leading cause of death and disability worldwide.30 This highlights the need for a better treatment that can safely:

  • Effectively treat ischemic strokes
  • Could easily be taken at home, and more importantly, be quickly given on ambulances
  • Prevented reperfusion injuries
  • Has no risk of worsening a hemorrhagic stroke
  • Protected brain tissue from dying
  • Healed damaged brain tissue after a stroke

DMSO has been known for over 50 years to do just that. For example, a 2002 trial with DMSO combined with fructose diphosphate (FDP — a source of cellular energy) indicated that 63% of elderly patients experienced improved neurological status when treated within 12 hours of a stroke, compared to only 20% with standard care.31

.

dmso fdp

dmso angiogram

.

One of the most important aspects of this trial was that while DMSO is the most helpful when given immediately after a stroke, the trial showed DMSO could save the neurons long after the stroke had happened.32

.

dmso stroke

.

Given the existing options for strokes, a trial like this should have been immediately replicated by premier institutions around the world — but instead almost no one even knows it happened.

Note: Numerous animal studies (listed here) have also demonstrated DMSO’s effectiveness in treating ischemic strokes. Sadly this revolutionary medical treatment remains a forgotten side of medicine.

After I learned how unconscionable the FDA’s prohibition against DMSO was, I made a point to begin telling people I felt were at risk of a stroke to stock DMSO at home, and since then, I’ve had instances where someone (or their caretaker) called me up, described a stroke, I gave them instructions on what to do (since they already had DMSO at home), and by the time they got to the ER, the stroke was “resolved.”

Note: In my opinion, IV DMSO would have been ideal (and more effective) in those situations, but in each case, it was not feasible to implement.

Likewise, many compelling cases have been recorded33 of individuals who treated their strokes with DMSO:

“A Los Angeles school teacher suffered a major stroke just after Christmas, found unconscious at home. Immediately, she was treated with DMSO: first applied topically to her head and then given by intramuscular injection — all without ever going to the hospital, thanks to a family friend’s advice.

Remarkably, she regained consciousness later that day and continued daily DMSO treatments. By the time school resumed in January, she was back teaching, fully recovered and without any mention of her ordeal. She continued her teaching career until retirement, healthy and free of disability.”

In another case, a woman in a coma for three months after a stroke showed no signs of life. Daily topical DMSO treatment was started, and within a month, her brain began to respond. After four months, she returned home and began a regimen of daily DMSO in water alongside topical applications. Three years later, she was living a normal life with only a slight speech defect, claiming her memory was sharper than her husband’s.

Note: There are also many reported cases of individuals who took DMSO for musculoskeletal or pain disorders (by far the most common use of DMSO) who then experienced a permanent improvement of stroke symptoms.

Hemorrhagic Strokes and Traumatic Brain Injuries

While ischemic strokes are difficult to treat, hemorrhagic ones (and other traumatic brain injuries) are even more challenging, and after decades, there has been surprisingly little progress in neurologic intensive care, particularly in preventing long-term paralysis and disability.34

“It was, as if the hand of God had somehow touched the [experimental] animal’s forehead. ‘I don’t believe it,’ I stammered. But it was true. I felt a tingling in my spine because this reawakening of a virtually dead animal had all the markings of a medical breakthrough.

Instead, the discovery, the potential for saving lives and the continued research that should have uncovered other uses for dimethyl sulfoxide and similar agents was quietly laid to rest in the coffers of forgotten medicine.”

Note: Dr. Jack de la Torre’s observations were partly based on the fact he saw numerous animals with flatlined EEGs (which typically precede brain death and then actual death) have the EEGs come back within 10 minutes of receiving DMSO.

.

dmso eeg

.

In cases of severe brain bleeds, key challenges like increased intracranial pressure (ICP) and inflammation can severely damage brain tissue. Common treatments often fail, leading to further complications (e.g., the most commonly used ICP lowering agents like mannitol can create a “rebound ICP” which is higher than it was at the start).

Remarkably, DMSO35 effectively lowers ICP36 without the rebound effect seen with other agents, while enhancing cerebral blood flow and reducing inflammation.

Research shows DMSO can significantly improve outcomes in traumatic brain injuries. In several studies, patients with elevated ICP experienced rapid decreases in pressure and improved neurological function after DMSO treatment. For instance, one study demonstrated a drop in ICP within 30 minutes for patients with closed head trauma, leading to long-term neurological improvement.37

Additionally, DMSO also addresses many other critical aspects of traumatic brain injuries and brain bleeds (which under conventional care requires many different drugs):

.

dmso pathologic event

Animal studies further support these findings, showing DMSO’s ability to reduce brain swelling and improve survival rates in models of brain injury. Its unique properties make it a standout option in neurocritical care, addressing multiple challenges associated with brain injuries.38 To put all of this into context:

“A January 11, 1981, a news report39 in the Ocala Star Banner [page 6], carried the headline: ‘DOCTOR CLAIMS DMSO SAVED 11.’ The story read:

SAN DIEGO (AP) — A doctor at the University of San Diego credits the controversial drug DMSO with saving the lives of 11 people who suffered severe head injuries. Dr. Perry E. Camp, a UCSD Medical School neurosurgeon, said Friday that dimethyl sulfoxide was effective for 11 of 30 people judged near death and for which other lifesaving methods have proved useless.

‘To take patients like that and have even one out of 10 survive is phenomenal,’ Camp said. ‘The fact that we have any survivorship at all … doesn’t sound like much, but it is extremely encouraging,’ Camp said.”

Sadly, however, despite the immense amount of research conducted and these results being dramatically better than what the standard of care can offer, this remains an almost completely forgotten side of medicine.

Note: Many of the same principles hold true for concussions, and the pioneers of DMSO felt it was an essential treatment for athletes after they experienced one — particularly since unhealed concussions can predispose the athlete to long-term cognitive issues (e.g., both boxers and professional football players have a threefold risk of dementia).40,41

Spinal Cord Injuries

“We used to think that the damage caused at the moment of injury in a severe head or spinal cord injury was irreversible. But now there are animal studies and a handful of clinical cases that tell us something different. There is still a little bit of time before the injured cells die.

Based on what we’ve seen in animal studies and a handful of human situations, we think that if you can treat a head injury victim within a few hours of the injury, or a spinal cord victim within one hour, there is a good chance of preventing death or the paralysis that would otherwise occur.” — Dr. Jack de la Torre

As much of the same pathology that causes permanent damage in the brain also occurs in the spinal cord (the loss of blood flow and compressive post-traumatic swelling), DMSO can produce miraculous results.42 Despite decades of research, steroids remain the standard treatment, even though they’re largely ineffective and come with significant side effects.43 In fact, spinal surgeons often use steroids simply to avoid lawsuits.44

The greatest success comes when DMSO is administered intravenously within 90 minutes of injury.45 For example, dogs that were expected to be paralyzed after spinal cord trauma regained nearly normal function after DMSO treatment.

Numerous other animal studies have also shown46 DMSO prevents spinal cord injuries from causing paralysis, and in humans numerous miraculous stories exist, such as a 16-year-old quadriplegic girl gradually regained organ function and eventually walked after a year of DMSO therapy. Even older injuries see results — one man, paralyzed for 12 years, regained some feeling and movement after using a DMSO lotion.

Cognitive Impairment and Dementia

Since many neurological disorders are linked to poor blood flow to the brain, previous traumas (e.g., concussions or microstrokes), the accumulation of misfolded proteins or an autoimmune process (all things DMSO is also remarkably effective at treating), it stands to reason that many cognitive disorders would respond to DMSO.

In turn, we find that much in the same way DMSO reverses many other complications of aging (e.g., skin issue, hair loss, poor organ function) IV DMSO is one of the most effective antiaging therapies for the brain (along with ultraviolet blood irradiation or improving the physiologic zeta potential).

Likewise, IV DMSO is one of the only therapies I know of which can help challenging neurological diseases like Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinson’s and ALS. Likewise, I periodically come across anecdotes of DMSO consuming centenarians who have no cognitive impairment despite their age. Numerous animal and human studies demonstrate this. For example:

  • 18 patients with probable Alzheimer’s disease47 were treated with DMSO and tested regularly for nine months, with great improvements being noted after only three months of treatment, and becoming especially noticeable after six months of treatment. Areas of improvement included memory, concentration, and communication alongside a significant decrease of disorientation in time and space.
  • 100 patients with cerebrovascular diseases48 (e.g., a previous stroke, cerebral embolism, or a hardening of the arteries of the brain), many of whom were senile received DMSO orally and through intramuscular injections over the course of 50 days. In addition to their coronary heart disease (i.e., atherosclerosis) and high blood pressure improving in 96.12% of them, the observing neurologist noted that their cognition, mood and behavior improved.
  • A study of49 104 elderly adults with a disease process causing impaired cognition found DMSO was highly favorable for both their cognitive and psychiatric function.

Note: Since many psychiatric conditions are neurological in nature, DMSO has also been shown to be remarkably effectively here (e.g., a study50 found it had a 100% success rate in treating acute schizophrenia, and an excellent effect on psychosis from manic-depression or alcoholism, chronic schizophrenia, anxiety and obsessive compulsive disorder).

Conclusion

DMSO was discovered during a time when the scientific community was open to exploring unconventional ideas, as science had not yet been handcuffed by a grant system designed to thwart unconventional ideas. In turn, thousands of studies were published on its potential, thanks to dedicated researchers with strong institutional support.

However, despite this promising research, the FDA suppressed its development, consigning years of scientific effort and countless animal sacrifices to the dustbin of history.

This is particularly tragic given the immense suffering caused by conditions that DMSO could potentially alleviate. Decades of research and billions of dollars later, conventional medicine still struggles to treat many of these disorders effectively. Dr. Pierre Kory, after reviewing this article, shared my sentiments:

“In over 15 years of running ICUs and treating brain injuries, strokes, and bleeds, it saddens and infuriates me to know an intervention like DMSO could’ve helped so many. The treatments I relied on were often limited or came with major risks.”

My goal in presenting this work is to give DMSO another chance to flourish and help those in need. I sincerely thank you for your attention and allowing me to do this!

[Author’s note: This is an abridged version of a longer article about the remarkable utility of DMSO which goes into greater detail on the points mentioned here (e.g., stroke recovery and spinal cord paralysis or how DMSO protects tissues from a variety of stressors), others not covered (e.g., the wealth of evidence DMSO can treat immensely challenging conditions like amyloidosis and Down Syndrome), and the protocols for internal DMSO use.

That article and its additional references can be read here (along with a companion article discussing DMSO’s remarkable utility for a variety of musculoskeletal injuries and chronic pain conditions).]

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Notes

1 Nature. 1963 Nov 30:200:885. doi: 10.1038/200885a0

2 Biosci Rep. 1994 Dec;14(6):259-81. doi: 10.1007/BF01199051

3, 4, 5 Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1975 Jan 27:243:20-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1975.tb25340.x

6 Annals of NYAOS, March 1967, Volume 141, Issue 1, Pages 85-95

7 J Clin Oncol. 1998 Feb;16(2):610-5. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.2.610

8 Cryobiology. 1987 Feb;24(1):11-6. doi: 10.1016/0011-2240(87)90003-4

9 The Human Toxicology of Dimethyl Sulfoxide, August 25, 2011 (Archived)

10 DMSO, The True Story of a Remarkable Pain-Killing Drug, January 1981 (Archived)

11 Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1975 Jan 27:243:408-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1975.tb25383.x

12 Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1975 Jan 27:243:395-402. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1975.tb25381.x

13 Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1975 Jan 27:243:403-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1975.tb25382.x

14 Annals of NYAOS, March 1967, Volume 141, Issue 1, Pages 586-598

15, 16 Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1975 Jan 27:243:110-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1975.tb25350.x

17, 19, 46 The Forgotten Side of Medicine, September 16, 2024

18 Prostaglandins. 1976 Apr;11(4):599-607. doi: 10.1016/0090-6980(76)90063-0

20, 35 Pharmacological Reports, 2009, 61, Pages 225-235 (Archived)

21 J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2010 Jan;55(1):106-9. doi: 10.1097/FJC.0b013e3181c87a65

22 Amazon, The Persecuted Drug: The Story of DMSO

23 CDC, Cerebrovascular Disease or Stroke

24 Brain Neurorehabil. 2022 Mar; 15(1): e5

25 NINDS, Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Acute Ischemic Stroke (Alteplase, Activase®)

26 Stroke, Volume 40, Number 6, doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.544171

27 Arch Neurol. 2008;65(11):1429-1433. doi: 10.1001/archneur.65.11.1429

28, 29 Neurohospitalist. 2011 Jul; 1(3): 138–147

30 Journal of the American Heart Association, Volume 11, Number 21, doi: 10.1161/JAHA.122.027044

31 Neurol Res 2002; 24: 73-80

32 Neurol Res. 2002 Jan;24(1):73-80. doi: 10.1179/016164102101199567

33 Amazon, The DMSO Handbook for Doctors

34 Ciba Found Symp. 1975:(34):3-21. doi: 10.1002/9780470720165.ch2

36 Neurosurgery. 1981 Jul;9(1):28-33. doi: 10.1227/00006123-198107000-00005

37 Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1991;40(1):113-4. doi: 10.1007/BF00315149

38 J Neurosurg. 1980 Jul;53(1):58-62. doi: 10.3171/jns.1980.53.1.0058

39 Google News, Ocala Star Banner, January 11, 1981

40, 41 eClinicalMedicine. 2023 Jul; 61: 102056

42 Surg Neurol. 1973 Jan;1(1):16-22

43 Korean J Neurotrauma. 2022 Apr; 18(1): 22–30

44 Can J Neurol Sci. 2008 Mar;35(1):41-5. doi: 10.1017/s031716710000754x

45 Amazon, Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO) in Trauma and Disease

47 Medical University, Kisheinev

48 Rev. Hosp. San Fco. De Borja, 1970

49 Rev. Hosp. Psiquiátrico (Santiago), 1970

50 Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1967 Mar 15;141(1):655-67

Featured image source

Introduction by Peter Koenig

13 October 2024 will be the first anniversary of Reiner Fuellmich’s pre-trial prison custody. His conditions, especially for someone who has not committed and is not suspected of a criminal act of violence are, to say it benignly, horrendous, bordering on torture.

Let me remind you, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich in 2020 founded the Corona Investigative Committee (CIC) in Germany, investigating the worldwide corona fraud. In a CIC internal strife, probably instigated from outside forces and secret services, he was unjustly accused of embezzlement. The CIC collapsed. Dr. Fuellmich attempted to return to California, where he had a license to practice law and where he also owned a house.

For some “bureaucratic” formalities (cooperation secret services Germany-US), he was “temporarily” refused entry to the US. He then settled with his wife in Mexico, where he created the International Crimes Investigative Committee (ICIC), and continued investigating crimes committed by the covid scam, as well as related social and economic misconducts by those who dictated the “rules-based order”, overriding all international, national and local laws.

In March 2023, the German Government issued an arrest warrant for Dr. Fuellmich. Since he had not committed a violent crime, an extradition order has no value outside of the EU / Schengen countries. 

Therefore, the German Government – through their secret agents – lured him to a German representation in Mexico, where they kidnapped him on 12 October 2023, took him immediately – as is, without a change of clothes, or even a toothbrush – to the airport, and flew him between two German guards to Frankfurt, where he was immediately arrested on 13 October 2023. Ever since, Reiner has been in pre-trial custody, under the most inhumane conditions, in the Göttingen high-security prison in Rosdorf.

Pretrial custody is on average six months in Germany, at most 11 months. He is detained in solitary confinement, cannot see and talk to anyone, not to his fellow prisoners, must walk alone for his daily hour of exercise in the prison yard, and can have contact by phone or visits by his family for no more than three hours a month.

For every court appearance, Reiner is body-searched, then handcuffed, tightly foot-shackled, and accompanied by two fully machine-gun armed prison guards with bulletproof vests – as if he was a mass murderer.

He is shackled and body-searched, naked, every time the court interrupts, and he is led to an isolated basement room of the court to wait.

This deeply dehumanizing humiliation reminds of German concentration camps during Hitler’s Third Reich regime over 80 years back. 

One would think that humanity has learned from the horrors of WWII, but nada, zilch, nothing.

Humanity is led by the same inhumane monsters; except much worse today. 

Then, the Third Reich was confined to Europe and North Africa; today, the New World Order or One World Order –  one that wants to become One World Government, for which Germany is again playing a leading role, spans the entire globe, all 193 UN member countries.

There is seemingly no way to escape. 

But as history has shown time and time again, any system of excesses, be it injustice no end, war atrocities, abhorrent dehumanization with torture, corruption and genocide no limits, will fall. There is no doubt that the diabolical Cult that allows Germany to hold an honest citizen in such atrocious prison conditions, wants to scare and shut up any others that may speak up against the crimes committed, and are still being committed, by the German Government, and by association, other western governments. 

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich is a western world political prisoner.

Reiner’s description, illustrations and photos speak for themselves.

*

Reiner Fuellmich – A Political Prisoner in the Federal Republic of Germany

A report by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich on his conditions of detention in the Göttingen high-security prison in Rosdorf, in response to the author Kerstin Heusinger, Germany correspondent for the French-language online publication BAM! With exclusive photos from the courtroom and sketches.

7:00 a.m., court date for the civil rights activist and lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich:

“Heavily armed officers with pistols and submachine guns equipped with bulletproof vests are there to greet me. They try to persuade me to put on a bulletproof vest, which I consistently refuse. They then make me sign a waiver releasing them from liability if I am injured or killed by gunfire.

One of the officers searches my body and then, as always, forces me to kneel on a stool while he puts ankle cuffs on me.

He ties a wide leather belt around my waist and then puts handcuffs on me, which are attached to the belt with chains that are in turn secured with a large padlock.

The ankle cuffs force me to take very small steps, making it difficult to get in and out of the transport vehicle. If I were to trip while cuffed like this, I would not be able to stop or soften my fall and would likely break my wrists.

Prison officials told me that they had never seen a defendant held in pre-trial custody for more than 11 months for a simple offense (and not for a serious crime or an act of terrorism), kept in solitary confinement, and, above all, brought to court hearings handcuffed at the hands and feet.

In court, I was taken to the basement, to a tiled cell with a simple wooden bench. Another strip-search. Then I had to wait to be handcuffed and led into the courtroom. Each time the proceedings were interrupted, I was handcuffed again and taken back to the “basement”.

Each time I returned from court, I was stripped naked in a transit room to undergo a thorough body search.

Harassment, humiliation, punishment

Mr. D., the deputy director responsible for pre-trial detention, ordered my complete isolation on the grounds that my legal advice to other detainees could incite them to revolt.

The Rosdorf prison is divided into two sections: the penal section (400 detainees) and the pre-trial detention section (80 detainees), where I have been detained since October 13, 2023.

The pre-trial detainees are spread over 4 levels. Those considered to be particularly dangerous or vulnerable are isolated on level A0, where security is increased and additional restrictions are imposed. I was placed there.

Like the other inmates on level A0, I am strictly forbidden to talk to any other inmate.

For 11 months I have had no internet access, no computer, and no cell phone. I am only allowed to watch TV. My only contact with the outside world is my lawyer and the 3 hours per month for visits or phone calls with my family. Yes, a total of 3 hours per month.

My isolation goes so far that even my daily walk in the courtyard must be done alone. This one-hour walk is suspended if I am caught communicating with another inmate, even if it is only a hand signal. Yes, if I exchange a greeting with a fellow inmate through the bars of a window, even if I just nod my head – he and I will be punished immediately.

All disciplinary measures are imposed without stating reasons and without the possibility of appeal.

Everyone is guilty!

The treatment of pre-trial detainees is particularly poor and borders on torture. Mr. D., who administers pre-trial detention, and also works as a social worker, makes no secret of his convictions: he believes that if you are in pre-trial detention, you are guilty.

His disregard for the presumption of innocence is the main reason why I was placed in solitary confinement.

He has committed serious and intentional breaches of duty, which I have witnessed. These violations were covered up by the prison management. With two exceptions, the security officers carry out the orders they receive without compunction, like robots.

On August 8, 2024, I asked to speak to the deputy director of the penal institution. I informed her that personal belongings and documents had disappeared from my cell during my absence for court hearings. The cells are normally searched regularly according to strict rules. These thefts occurred outside of the official inspections, which are recorded.

Persecution: Dr. Reiner Fuellmich refers to the case of Redzep [another, former case of unjustly incarcerating a man for murder which he did not commit, and the court knew it]

“The seriousness of the situation is demonstrated by the attacks on a pre-trial detainee, Kevin Redzep, who was seriously injured. He has allowed me to publish his name and story. He comes from Montenegro and although he is intelligent and speaks several languages, he cannot write or read German fluently. He was placed in a department where there were several violent inmates or those accused of premeditated murder. He was called a “gypsy” by his fellow inmates, threatened, and asked for help from Mr. D., who refused to take him to the high-risk inmates. The next day, Kevin Redzep was attacked by three fellow inmates during a walk. He was hit over the head with a glass bottle so severely that the zygomatic bone above his left eye was crushed and his vision was at risk.

On July 9, 2024, Kevin Redzep had to undergo surgery before returning to Rosdorf Prison, even before he had recovered. He was involved in another physical altercation with five or six prison officers who threw him to the ground and injured him again in the head. Mr. D. then ordered the isolation of Kevin Redzep, who was already severely traumatized.

Kevin Redzep, who wanted to sue Mr. D, the penal institution, and the state of Lower Saxony for assault, asked me for help. When Mr. D. learned that I had advised this inmate and provided him with a lawyer, Kevin Redzep disappeared. It is assumed that he was transferred to another prison. Since then, Ms. Wörmer, my lawyer, has been trying in vain to find him, hoping that he is still alive.

A glimmer of hope.

Despite the disciplinary punishments they face, the pre-trial detainees show solidarity with me. They encourage me. They shout to me, for example, “Don’t give up, keep going.”

Some prison officials have seen through the pandemic scam and know that my trial is a sham staged by the secret services. They let me know and wish me well.

What helps me most is the enormous support from the international public.

I receive a large number of letters that are no longer read by the prison administration. I read all the letters and I am deeply touched by the affection they show. I try to respond as best I can.

Sometimes I see the pickets and the people who greet me, while I’m sitting in the transport vehicle to court.

I feel the remarkably strong connection to all those who support me. It is this connection that allows us to overcome adversity together.

I have to go to the medical service twice a week to be examined because I refused to give blood. I argued that any medical act, especially any invasive medical act, constitutes a violation of physical integrity if the patient does not voluntarily give consent. I am therefore regularly examined because a prisoner suffering from tuberculosis could potentially have infected people with whom he has been in contact.

One of the prison doctors expressed sympathy for my work. He also told me that the medical staff believe that the health of many detainees is incompatible with detention. However, the prison management prefers to ignore this fact.

After having personally witnessed what happens in pre-trial detention – the suspension of the fundamental rights of the accused, their difficulties in accessing a defense that really cares about their fate – I am convinced that prisons only benefit those who profit from them, with pre-trial detention being more lucrative than post-sentencing detention.

I have not met a defendant who I would describe as “evil”. I have met many, many remand prisoners who appear innocent to me, or who, above all, need therapeutic treatment, as a prison doctor admitted.

If we did not need a few prisons for a few sociopaths, for example those responsible for the pandemic, the wars, the massacres like in Gaza and for the corrupt of the system, I would be in favor of abolishing prisons.”

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

 

This statement was recorded by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich on the phone of his lawyer, Katja Wörmer.

It was translated into French by Kerstin Heusinger; and translated into English by Peter Koenig via Deepl.com

Photos and sketches: Kerstin Heusinger

Plan of his cell: Dr. Reiner Fuellmich

Concept and design of the original article: Michel Caulea and Karo

Click here to read the original German version.

This report first appeared (in French) on BAM! NEWS.

All illustrations can be seen in the original German article.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

Featured image is by Kerstin Heusinger

Berlin has spurned two key demands that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tried to “sell” during his European tour to promote his so-called Victory Plan: getting the green light for deep strikes into Russian territory (which would require German Taurus missiles, among others) and speeding up Ukraine’s accession to NATO, German media reported.

According to Bild, Zelensky had a packed itinerary that included a whirlwind tour of the UK, France, Italy, and Germany in a bid to garner Western support for his “Victory Plan.” However, the outlet emphasised that although German Chancellor Olaf Scholz did not give a categorical “no”, he did not respond positively to the Ukrainian requests.

Moreover, Bild said the chancellor’s talk about the promised “billions in aid for Ukraine” at a press conference with Zelensky was nothing more than a farce. This package does not include any new weapons since the amount and projects mentioned were, in fact, “already approved and financed last year.”

The outlet said Kiev’s hopes of obtaining more Leopard 2 tanks had been dashed despite the Bundeswehr (German Armed Forces) still having around 300 of the main battle tanks in its inventory. The same applies to infantry fighting vehicles and armoured howitzers. The decision comes as the German Defence Ministry does not believe that Kiev will be able to carry out a new counteroffensive in the near future, the sources told the newspaper.

“By the end of the year, with the support of Belgium, Denmark and Norway, we will deliver another package to Ukraine worth €1.4 billion,” Scholz announced on October 11.

According to him, the package includes IRIS-T and Skynex air defence systems, Gepard anti-aircraft guns, self-propelled artillery systems, armoured vehicles, combat drones and radars.

Germany, Ukraine’s second-largest military donor after the US, has so far provided (or planned) military assistance worth approximately €28 billion. However, according to the draft budget, it has halved its military aid to Ukraine for 2025 compared to this year.

Although Zelensky has long insisted that there can be no peace negotiations with the Kremlin and that Russian forces must be driven back to its pre-2014 borders, officials in Kiev reportedly realise this position is unrealistic. The leadership of the current Ukrainian administration is beginning to discuss the handover of territories claimed by Ukraine as part of a peace agreement with Russia, a high-ranking Ukrainian official admitted to a German magazine.

The unnamed source also expressed concern that Washington will cut its previously generous support for Ukraine no matter who wins next month’s US presidential election. The prospects of losing foreign military aid, which has prolonged the conflict so far, coupled with growing discontent in Ukrainian society, may explain Kiev’s shift in position from refusing to negotiate with Russia and its other irreducible demands.

However, the magazine warned that powerful figures in Ukraine still remain staunchly opposed to peace talks.

Kiev’s insistence on joining NATO is a major obstacle to efforts to resolve the Ukrainian conflict through diplomacy. In addition to recognising the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, Russia insists that Ukraine must remain neutral, non-nuclear and unaligned with any military bloc. The Kiev regime, which cancelled elections scheduled for this year and remains in power without being re-elected, is losing Western support and has been considering negotiating with Russia because of this.

At the same time as the German reports, government sources in Berlin said US President Joe Biden will visit Germany this week after cancelling a planned trip last week due to Hurricane Milton.

Senior German officials who spoke on condition of anonymity confirmed media reports that Biden would most likely travel to Berlin within the week but declined to provide further details. According to German media, Biden will meet the chancellor, Olaf Scholz, and the president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, in Berlin on Friday for talks on Ukraine and the Middle East.

The original trip was cancelled, upending plans for a summit of the Ramstein group of countries providing weapons to Ukraine. The meeting at the US airbase of the same name would have discussed possible new aid commitments to Ukraine.

With Biden only after some weeks left in power before handing over the White House to Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, Ukraine has become a less important topic for the outgoing president as he instead aims to ensure that the Democrats remain in power. Coupled with German industry devastated due to anti-Russia sanctions boomeranging, it is easy to see why Ukraine has become a lessened priority for the country’s two largest donors, a projectory that will continue until the war finally concludes.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Olaf Scholz, federal chancellor of Germany, meets Volodymyr Zelenskyy, president of Ukraine, in Kiev, Feb. 14, 2022. (President of Ukraine)

Following the foreseeable Israeli attack on Iranian oil and nuclear infrastructures and the Iranian counter-response, the CIA and the Israeli Mossad would prepare false flag attacks in the Persian Gulf similar to the 1848 battleship Maine. And after attributing its authorship to the Iranians, the US Congress would declare a state of war against Iran with the dual objective of drying up China’s energy sources and setting up the cartography of the New Middle East.

Israel and the Media’s Spiral of Silence

The alleged Israeli security breach by belittling Egyptian reports that 10 days earlier warned that Hamas was preparing a major offensive would be the trap designed by Mossad to declare a state of war and raze Gaza, Lebanon and Iran in order to implement the Greater Israel.

Israeli military offensives against Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon would be covered by the “spiral of silence” of the world’s major mass media controlled by the transnational Zionist lobby, theory formulated by the German political scientist Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann in her book “The spiral of silence. Public opinion: our social skin” (1977).

This thesis would symbolize “the cognitive overlap formula that instigates censorship through a deliberate and suffocating accumulation of single-sign messages”, which would produce a spiral process or positive feedback loop and the consequent manipulation of world public opinion by the transnational Zionist lobby (the Palestinians and Lebanese are terrorists and Israel has the right to defend itself).

However, the asymmetrical punishment of the Israeli regime over the Gaza Strip with more than 42,000 civilian casualties, 10,000 dead buried under rubble and 90 per cent of civilian infrastructure destroyed, has unleashed a wave of worldwide support for the Gaza civilian population massacred by Israel.

Lebanon, the Next Phase of Greater Israel

Following the decision of the International Criminal Court to seek arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant for “crimes against humanity”, Netanyahu is aware that once the asymmetric war against Hamas is over, he risks an international criminal prosecution. So, Joe Biden, in an interview published by Time magazine, admitted that

“Netanyahu, would be prolonging the war for political reasons and to maintain power at the head of a complex coalition government”.

Thus, after the end of the Gaza campaign, and despite Israel not getting the response it expected in the form of an attack from Hezbollah, Netanyahu with the blessings of the United States, would have decided to invade South Lebanon in the hope of gaining time until the foreseeable victory in November of a Donald Trump, in the certainty that he will be able to count on his blessings to exonerate him from all guilt before the International Criminal Court.

The agreement reached between Biden and Netanyahu would also include the sending of 2,000-kilogram bombs to Israel to raze South Lebanon and move its 400,000 inhabitants across the Litani River, create a ring of security for Israeli settlements.

False Flag Attacks from the Mossad?

The assassination in Beirut of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah would be a new trap to involve Iran in the escalation of war and start its destabilization with US help.

Israel considers Iran “the largest exporter of terror and human rights violations in the world while continuing to enrich uranium and dangerously close to obtaining a nuclear bomb that it could achieve in the coming weeks”. However, following approval by the US Congress and Senate of a statement prepared by Lindsey Graham and Robert Menéndez that “if Israel is forced to defend itself and take action (against Iran), the US will be on its side to support it militarily and diplomatically”, we would be witnessing the increase of pressure from the pro-Israeli U.S. lobby (AIPAC) to destabilize Iran by expeditious means.

Thus, following the foreseeable Israeli attack on Iranian oil and nuclear infrastructures and the Iranian counter-attack, the CIA and the Israeli Mossad would prepare false flag attacks in the Persian Gulf similar to the 1898 battleship Maine, and after attributing its authorship to the Iranians, the US Congress would declare a state of war. This process is known as “statutory authorization” and is a prerequisite for President Biden to implement the War Powers Act of 1973, which authorizes him to send troops abroad.

Consequently, taking advantage of the fact that Russia is occupied with Ukraine, China surrounded by the AUKUS nuclear crisis arc to protect Taiwan and that the US strategic reserves are at maximum, the Pentagon will use Iran’s response to start a new Middle East War with the dual objective of drying up China’s energy sources and setting up the mapping of the New Middle East.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

German Gorraiz Lopez is a political analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

“Theater Iran Near Term” (TIRANNT). The Ongoing Planning of War Against Iran

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 12, 2024

In recent developments, there have been numerous statements to the effect that Israel is at war with Iran. Israel is an instrument of the Pentagon. Netanyahu is a proxy. Israel does not act without the consent of  US-NATO.

Middle Eastern and Global Crises: Who Are the Perpetrators?

By Peter Koenig and Daniel Estulin, October 14, 2024

All the industrialists and big corporations – especially the Tech Corporations, Big Finance, Big Pharma, and of course, the Military / War Industrial Complex and others — have already signed up for Agenda 2030 / The WEF’s Great Reset and the WEF’s 4th Industrial Revolution, an all-digitized slave land or Gulag.

7 October” Plan: Iran in Sights. “False Flag.” The 9/11 of the Middle East

By Manlio Dinucci, October 14, 2024

The plan carried out by Hamas on 7 October 2023 had been known for a year to Israel’s leaders, who were not surprised by the attack but facilitated it. This is confirmed by testimonies published in recent days by the Wall Street Journal of young female Israeli soldiers in charge of the electronic barrier around Gaza.

The Biden Regime Has Just Issued a Very Suspicious Directive Permitting Military Intervention in US Domestic Affairs. Dr. Paul C. Roberts

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, October 14, 2024

The Department of Homeland Security has flagged individuals questioning COVID-19 origins, vaccine efficacy, and election integrity as potential domestic terrorism threats. Is a coup being set in place?

How Significant Is the US’ THAAD Deployment to Israel?

By Andrew Korybko, October 14, 2024

The Pentagon confirmed that it’ll dispatch nearly 100 troops to Israel to operate one of its premier air defense systems, the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), of which it only has seven in total. This comes ahead of Israel’s expected retaliation to Iran’s latest missile strike on the first of the month that it carried out to restore deterrence after the assassination of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and Hezbollah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut.

If Israel Attacks Iran, Russia Is Not Going to Stay on the Sideline.

By Mike Whitney, October 14, 2024

On Saturday, more than 10 articles appeared on Google News with the exact same byline: “Israel has narrowed down what they will target.” The impression this mantra is supposed to create is that Israel’s blatant act of aggression is actually a measured and thoughtful act of self-defense.

Israel Takes Aim at the United Nations in Brazen Attack in Lebanon

By Steven Sahiounie, October 14, 2024

The International community was united in strong condemnation of the Israeli breach of international law. Israel was aware of the location of the UNIFIL watchtower in Naqoura, and that the UN personnel are to remain safe from attacks. The Israeli Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, explained that there was no mistake, and they preferred that the UN get out of the way.

On October 10, an Israeli Mekava tank attacked the UNIFIL headquarters in southern Lebanon, injuring two Indonesian peacekeepers who are recovering in hospital, although Israel is also bombing hospitals and killing paramedics in Lebanon. Indonesia, a steadfast supporter of Palestine, and critic of Israel, has about 1,232 personnel currently deployed with UNIFIL in Lebanon. The International community was united in strong condemnation of the Israeli breach of international law. Israel was aware of the location of the UNIFIL watchtower in Naqoura, and that the UN personnel are to remain safe from attacks. The Israeli Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, explained that there was no mistake, and they preferred that the UN get out of the way.

UNIFIL stated any attack on peacekeepers is a “grave violation of international humanitarian law”. The peacekeeping organization, established in 1978, consists of about 10,000 peacekeepers from 50 countries. The group said Israeli forces had deliberately fired at its positions along the border previously since the outset of current Israeli military escalation in Lebanon beginning September 23.

Those voicing condemnation of the attack on UNIFIL are the following:

Jean-Pierre Lacroix, the UN undersecretary general for peace operations, said the “safety and security” of UN peacekeepers in Lebanon is “increasingly in jeopardy”.

Indonesia’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, Retno Marsudi, said “Attacking UN personnel and property is a major violation of International Humanitarian Law.”

The US stated, “While they undertake these operations, it is critical that they not threaten UN peacekeepers’ safety and security.”

The European Union’s Foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, said the attack is an “inadmissible act, for which there is no justification”.

Italy’s Minister of Defense Guido Crosetto said, “It could constitute a war crime and represented a very serious violation of international military law.

”France’s Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs condemned any attack on the security of UNIFIL.

Spain’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs called the attack a “grave violation of international law”.

Ireland’s leader, Simon Harris, condemned the attack and said that “any firing in the vicinity of UNIFIL troops or facilities is reckless and must stop”.

Turkey’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said, “Israel’s attack on UN forces, following its massacres against civilians in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon is a manifestation of its perception that its crimes go unpunished.”

The Taoiseach (Irish Prime Minister) Simon Harris was in Washington, DC. when the Israeli strike on UNIFIL took place. Standing in the country which shields Israel, and enables Israel to carry out war crimes, genocide, apartheid and crimes against international law, he commented on Israel’s request that the UNIFIL peacekeepers withdraw from Southern Lebanon, but Harris rejected that, and said “We cannot have a situation where aggression can force a peacekeeping mission to leave.” Ireland is one of several European countries that has recognized the state of Palestine, but the US is against that recognition.

Israel has always been above the law, and has refused to comply with any UN resolution, while brazenly invading Lebanon in order to enforce a UN resolution upon Beirut. In an ultimate display of hypocrisy, Israel wants to force the UN 1701 resolution.

UN Security Council resolution 1701 gives UNIFIL a mandate to assist the Lebanese army as they seek to keep the southern border free of weapons or armed fighters other than those of the Lebanese state. But, when did Israel ever comply with any UN resolution, or International Court of Justice order? Israel has never complied with any UN resolution and has never been held to account for their crimes. The US, UK and France have shielded Israel from all criticism.

In fact, if any group protests the breach of international law, or human rights carried out by Israel, the US and its allies defend genocide and war crimes by calling the criticism ‘anti-Semitism’, thus enabling Israel to get away with murder. America and its western European allies are enablers. They can be compared to the protective parents who buys drugs for their addicted child, for fear the child might be arrested or come to harm by drug dealers.

Instead of confronting the addiction, and seeking treatment for the addiction, the enabler will allow the addict to continue, but in an allusion of safety.Israel’s inhumanity to Palestinians, and its breaking of thousands of international laws is only possible because Israel is never held accountable for its crimes.

While protests raged across the US and the globe, Washington, London and France were silent on any sanctions against Israel, such as the halt of military supplies to be used in a genocide against a civilian population, evidenced by the fact that the majority of the 42,000 dead in Gaza are mainly women and children.

When the Merkava tank operator took aim and fired at a known UNIFIL watchtower, Israel was not making a mistake. This was a message from Tel Aviv to get out of the way, or face death.

The Merkava tank operator was demonstrating the Israeli disdain at everything called the United Nations. Israel has a UN Ambassador, but does not demonstrate that they are part of an international body having the mission of keeping the peace through the use of diplomacy, so as to not resort to armed conflicts.

Since the formation of Israeli in 1948, Israel has failed to abide by any UN resolutions on Palestine and the occupied territories, regardless of those passed by the General Assembly, or the Security Council.

The resolutions passed by the Security Council are legally binding, with penalties ranging from sanctions to armed interventions.

The dozens of resolutions calling for the Palestinian right to self-determination and restoration of human rights have gone completely ignored, and with no penalties on Israel.

The UN has failed deliver the implementation of numerous resolutions against Israel because of being shackled by the veto power held by the US, UK and France. Those western centers of freedom and democracy stand with Israel and provide it the impunity to violate international laws without any possibility of penalties or accountability.

The core American value of freedom and independence was fought for by Americans in 1776. Patrick Henry said, “Give me liberty, or give me death” as the Patriots fought the British colonizers for freedom. Why do Americans enjoy freedom, and pay their tax-dollars to prevent the freedom of the Palestinian people?The French have a motto, “Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood.” Why are those words cherished in Paris, and denied in Gaza and Bethlehem?

A great awakening is underway as countries are aware of the crimes committed by Israel, and are demanding accountability and justice.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was taken from Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from MD

I don’t think there is an implicit obligation for the United States to follow like a stupid mule whatever the Israelis do. If they decide to start a war, simply on the assumption that we’ll automatically be drawn into it, I think it is the obligation of friendship to say, ‘you’re not going to be making a national decision for us.’ I think that the United States has the right to have its own national security policy.”Zbigniew Brzezinski

The US foreign policy establishment used to include men who were capable of strategic thinking. No more. What passes for strategic thinking now is the endless reiteration of Israeli talking points uttered by retired generals who are owned by the weapons industry and the Israeli lobby. These men—who represent the views of an infinitesimal percentage of the overall population—are an essential part of the larger machine that prepares the public for intervention, escalation and war. Their current assignment is to convince the American people that Israel’s impending attack on Iran serves America’s national security interests which, of course, it doesn’t. In fact, the country is being boondoggled into a bloody conflagration that will, in all probability, precipitate a sharp decline in US global power followed by a swift end to the so-called American Century.

All of this was forecast by one of America’s most scholarly foreign policy analysts, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who delivered a warning on the topic of Iran more than a decade ago in an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times. Here’s what he said:

….an attack on Iran would be an act of political folly, setting in motion a progressive upheaval in world affairs. With the U.S. increasingly the object of widespread hostility, the era of American preponderance could even come to a premature end. Although the United States is clearly dominant in the world at the moment, it has neither the power nor the domestic inclination to impose and then to sustain its will in the face of protracted and costly resistance….

It is therefore high time for the administration to sober up and think strategically, with a historic perspective and the U.S…. It’s time to cool the rhetoric. The United States should not be guided by emotions or a sense of a religiously inspired mission… our choice is either to be stampeded into a reckless adventure profoundly damaging to long-term U.S. national interests or to become serious about giving negotiations with Iran a genuine chance…..

Treating Iran with respect and within a historical perspective would help to advance that objective. American policy should not be swayed by the current contrived atmosphere of urgency ominously reminiscent of what preceded the misguided intervention in Iraq. Been there, done that, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Los Angeles Times

Well-said. One can only wish that the lamebrain pundits on cable news would circulate the article among themselves.

Like him or hate him, Brzezinski provided a coherent, well-researched analysis that dispassionately evaluated whether the costs of a particular operation were greater than the benefits. In this case, there is simply no comparison. The US is rushing towards a conflict that serves no national interest, that it can’t win, and that will have a catastrophic impact on the nation’s future. Here’s Brzezinski again:

We do not need to increase the scale of the conflict in the region because an increase in that conflict involving the Iranians …would likely reignite the conflict in Iraq, would set the Persian Gulf ablaze, would increase the price of oil 2-fold, 3-fold, 4-fold...Europe would become even more dependent on Russia for its energy…. So, what is the benefit to us?

All I know as an analyst of international politics is (a war with Iran) this would be a disaster. And, frankly, I think it will be a disaster for us more than for Israel because, as a result of the war…. we will be forced out of the region... because of the dynamic hatred that develops. And, have no illusions about it, if the conflict spreads, we’re going to be alone… And if we are driven out, how much would you bet on the survival of Israel for more than five or ten years? Zbigniew Brzezinski, Real News Network, 2:15 min

So, it would not just be disastrous for the United States, but disastrous for Israel as well, which—absent Washington’s “unconditional” support—would wither on the vine in 5 or 10 years. Perhaps, there are some who would disagree with this analysis? Perhaps there are some who think that a tiny belligerent colony at the heart of the Arab world—that has made every effort to make itself a damned nuisance for the last 75 years—could survive without US assistance?

It’s possible, I suppose. But not likely. This is from an article at NBC News on Saturday:

U.S. officials believe Israel has narrowed down what they will target in their response to Iran’s attack, which these officials describe as Iranian military and energy infrastructure.

There is no indication that Israel will target nuclear facilities or carry out assassinations, but U.S. officials stressed that the Israelis have not made a final decision about how and when to act….

The U.S. does not know when Israel’s response could come but officials said the Israeli military is poised and ready to go at any time once the order is given….U.S. and Israeli officials said a response could come during the Yom Kippur holiday. ..

The U.S. is poised to defend its assets in the region from any immediate counterattack from Iran but is not likely to provide direct military support to the operation.

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin spoke with his Israeli counterpart, Yoav Gallant, last night and they discussed broad strokes about an Israeli response. However, it’s not clear that Gallant provided any concrete details. NBC News

On Saturday, more than 10 articles appeared on Google News with the exact same byline: “Israel has narrowed down what they will target.” The impression this mantra is supposed to create is that Israel’s blatant act of aggression is actually a measured and thoughtful act of self-defense. What a joke; and what a humiliation for the Biden administration who are not even informed as to how their bombs, their jets, their refueling aircraft, and their logistical support are going to be used. When did the US become such a spineless patsy that allows itself to be pushed around by the gangsters in Tel Aviv? It’s shocking.

What’s lost in the hullabaloo surrounding Israel’s upcoming attack on Iran, is the fact that Russia has been stealthily conducting its own diplomatic campaign aimed at strengthening Iran’s defenses and preparing for the hostilities ahead.

On Friday, Putin met with Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan to discuss the deteriorating situation in the Middle East and the probability of a regional war. The carefully choreographed meeting was intended to show that Russia regards Iran as both a friend and ally who can depend on Russia’s support if hostilities break out. Hours earlier, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov issued an ominous warning that an Israeli strike on Iran’s civilian nuclear facilities would constitute a “serious provocation.”

Speaking at a news conference in Laos, Lavrov emphasized that—according to the International Atomic Energy Agency—Iran has remained compliant with current regulations and has not diverted any nuclear material to banned weapons programs. (Israel’s spurious claims on this matter are pure propaganda.)

If any plans or threats to attack the Islamic Republic of Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities are realized, it would indeed be a very serious provocation.

Between Lavrov’s comments and Putin’s meeting, there’s little doubt that Moscow supports Iran in its clash with Israel although it is not possible to know whether Russia will actively intervene if war breaks out. (We should also remember that Russia’s Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin visited Tehran just two days before Iran launched its ballistic missile attack on Israel. This suggests that Iran got the green light from Moscow to take action that corresponds with Putin’s idea of a “proportionate response.”)

The point we’re making, is that Russia is following developments very closely and has moved military assets to within range of the prospective battlespace. It is logical to assume that Russia will engage Iran’s enemies if that is what the situation requires. Military analyst Will Schryver summed it up like this:

I cannot understand how more people do not fully appreciate that fighting alongside Iran against the empire is not a choice for Russia, but an existential imperative. It is also something for which the Russians have feverishly prepared since no later than the summer of 2022. —Will Schryver

Keep in mind, Russia and Iran have significantly strengthened their military ties over the last few years to the point they are openly committed to each other’s security. Here’s Schryver again:

Russia, China, and Iran have now formed a de facto military and economic alliance — what they prefer to call a “partnership”. In the case of Russia and China, a comprehensive full-spectrum partnership has emerged: military, economic, and monetary….

Russia, China, and Iran conduct regular joint exercises in the Arabian Sea. Those exercises have increased in both scope and frequency in recent years.

Both Russia and China are investing vast sums of capital in Iran, much of it in the energy sector and in ambitious transportation projects aiming to construct fast and efficient trade corridors linking China, Iran, and Russia as primary nodes of Eurasian commerce…Arms and technology transfers between the three countries have reached unprecedented levels….

It is increasingly evident that Russia, China, and Iran recognize that an attack against any one of them would constitute an existential threat to them all. The strategic interests of all three countries are now inextricably intertwined. Most importantly, they are united in a single overriding strategic objective: to dismantle the dominion of the long-reigning Anglo-American empire….

In a putative war between the United States and Iran, both Russia and China would actively support Iran… Iran would simply be supplemented with arms and other logistical necessities from both its partners — and quite possibly taken under their nuclear umbrella in an explicit act of deterrence.

To the extent Russia, China, and Iran are determined to act all for one and one for all, they represent a combination of global military and economic power that cannot be defeated. All for One and One for All, Will Schryver, Twitter

Schryver’s view is shared by a great many analysts who (naturally) are banned from sharing their opinions in the major media. But that doesn’t change the underlying fact that Russia and Iran are strategic allies that will intervene militarily if they find themselves in peril.

It’s worth noting, that Iran provides China with 15 percent of its oil (China’s top oil producer), is an active participant in the International North–South Transport Corridor (which is a 4500 mile long multi-mode network of ship, rail, and road route for moving freight between India, Iran, Azerbaijan, Russia, Central Asia and Europe.), and is “situated at the crossroads of Central Asia, South Asia, and the Arab states of the Middle East.” Iran’s strategic positioning and its vast natural resources make it a critical part of the emerging multipolar world order that is fast replacing Washington’s threadbare rules-based system. Neither Russia nor China can allow Iran to be decimated or its government to be ousted. Here’s more background from author Dr Digby James Wren on Substack:

Russia’s president has authorized the signing of a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement with Iran. This follows a Tehran visit by the secretary of the Russian Security Council, preceded by a trip to St. Petersburg by the Iranian national security advisor…. Putin …. reportedly describing it as “expedient” and to be signed “at the highest level.“…

According to Iranian media, Putin hailed the “strategic” relations between Tehran and Moscow, which he said had grown stronger in recent years…. Relations between Moscow and Tehran have deepened considerably since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in Feb. 2022.

Cooperation between the two countries has become particularly pronounced in the military domain. Iran has supplied drones to Russia, which have reportedly been deployed against Ukraine. Additionally, Iran is believed to be supporting Russia’s efforts to localize drone production….

“Relations with Iran are a priority for us,” Putin told Pezeshkian...

Reports also emerged in August about alleged Russian arms shipments being delivered to Iran. The New York Times cited Iranian officials at the time as saying that Russia had begun to transfer advanced radar and air defense equipment to Tehran following a request made to the Kremlin. Persian Fire, Dr Digby James Wren, Substack

In other words, Putin anticipated the crisis that is unfolding today and began vigorously shoring up Iran’s defenses. Now, they are ready to go. Check it out:

The Supreme Commander-in-Chief Vladimir Putin discussed the situation in the Middle East and… set tasks that could only be discussed face to face. …. We will monitor the development of events; the army is combat ready, (and) the initiative is on our side… Victory will be ours, maybe not quickly, but we will definitely win. ⁃ Andrey Gurulev, Russian Lieutenant General @DD_Geopolitics

What we should expect now, is an Israeli attack on Iran’s vital infrastructure amplified by a decapitation operation aimed at its political and military leaders. The attack will have to exceed what US advisors have suggested in order to increase the chances of an exaggerated retaliation from Iran that will prompt Washington’s entry into the war. (which is Israel’s main objective) Iran’s response will be shaped in part by Russia who will emphasize a ‘proportionate response’. Putin will give Israel and the United States every opportunity to ‘lower the temperature’ and deescalate, but if they decide to intensify their attacks, we should expect the worst-case scenario.

There’s no way the United States comes out of a war with Iran unscathed. These are momentous times in which the cornerstone upon which the old order rests, is disintegrating before our eyes.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).  

Featured image source


WWIII ScenarioTowards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute   

How Significant Is the US’ THAAD Deployment to Israel?

October 14th, 2024 by Andrew Korybko

Something big is coming, and whatever it is, there’s now a heightened chance that the US will become directly involved.

The Pentagon confirmed that it’ll dispatch nearly 100 troops to Israel to operate one of its premier air defense systems, the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), of which it only has seven in total. This comes ahead of Israel’s expected retaliation to Iran’s latest missile strike on the first of the month that it carried out to restore deterrence after the assassination of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and Hezbollah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut. Here’s what this latest US move signifies:

1. Israel Is Probably Planning Something Big

Rumors have abounded about what exactly Israel is planning, but it’s probably something big and will provoke at least proportional retaliation from Iran, hence why the self-professed Jewish State requested that the US deploy one of its few THAADs to help defend it afterwards. THAAD specializes in intercepting ballistic missiles so it can be intuited that Israel and the US expect Iran to respond through these means. THAAD only carries 48 interceptors, however, so it could be overwhelmed if there’s a saturation strike.  

2. The Iron Dome Needs All The Help It Can Get

Many observers assessed that Iran’s latest missile strike exposed the limits of Israel’s famous Iron Dome. The footage that they saw and Israel’s panicked reaction afterwards in trying to cover up the damage, including by detaining Grayzone journalist Jeremy Loffredo and then investigating him for “aiding the enemy in a time of war” by reporting on it, leave little doubt that this is the case. Accordingly, the Iron Dome needs all the help it can get, hence why Israel requested that the US deploy THAAD to assist.

3. The US Risks Getting Caught In Mission Creep

Biden previously promised that “No US boots will be on the ground” in the West Asian conflict zone, yet he just went back on his word after his administration approved this latest deployment. The US thus risks getting caught in mission creep since hawkish policymakers might now argue that it’s worth scaling this deployment in pursuit of perceived national interests after this psychological line was just crossed. They might not succeed, and this could be all that’s sent, but more deployments also can’t be ruled out either.

4. The THAAD Team Is An Escalation Tripwire

Building upon the above, the THAAD team is an escalation tripwire since any harm that might befall them while attempting to intercept Iran’s expected retaliation to Israel’s presumably forthcoming attack could serve as the pretext for the US to strike Iran and/or deploy more troops to the conflict zone. While this move is being sold to the public as “defending Israel” and “deterring Iran”, policymakers nonetheless keenly understand what’s really at stake, yet they’re downplaying the dangers to avoid public outcry.

5. Israel-US Ties Remain Strong Despite Problems

And finally, the US’ THAAD deployment shows that inter-state ties remain strong despite the well-known Bibi-Biden rivalry, which saw Biden endorse Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s call for regime change against Bibi last spring. Whether one attributes this to the US’ permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) still appreciating their perceived mutual geostrategic interests or to the power of the Israel lobby, the point is that it testifies to the resilience of their ties.

*

The US’ THAAD deployment to Israel is a worrying step because it suggests that that something big is coming, and whatever it is, there’s now a heightened chance that the US will become directly involved. Whether its role remains defensive or evolves into an offensive one remains to be seen, but this team of nearly 100 operators essentially serves as an escalation tripwire. Hawkish policymakers want a larger war, and it’ll take self-restraint on Iran’s side and a little bit of luck to avoid that worst-case scenario.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on the author’s Substack, Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

 
 
First published on November 15, 2015, this incisive report was among Global Research’s most popular articles. As a result of media censorship it is no longer featured by the search engines.
 
.

Introductory Note by Michel Chossudovsky

Let us put this in a historical perspective: the commemoration of the War to End All Wars  acknowledges that 15 million lives were lost in the course of World War I (1914-18).

The loss of life in the second World War (1939-1945) was on a much large scale, when compared to World War I: 60 million lives both military and civilian were lost during World War II. (Four times those killed during World War I).

The largest WWII casualties  were China and the Soviet Union: 

  • 26 million in the Soviet Union,  
  • China estimates its losses at approximately 20 million deaths.

Ironically, these two countries (allies of the US during WWII) which lost a large share of their population during WWII are now under the Biden-Harris administration categorized as “enemies of America”, which are threatening the Western World.

Germany and Austria lost approximately 8 million people during WWII, Japan lost more than 2.5 million people. The US and Britain respectively lost more than 400,000 lives. 

This carefully researched article by James A. Lucas  documents the more than 20 million lives lost resulting from US led wars, military coups and intelligence ops carried out in the wake of WWII, in what is euphemistically called the “post-war era” (1945- ).

The extensive loss of life in Lebanon,  Syria, Yemen, Ukraine and Libya, Palestine is not included in this study.

Nor are the millions of deaths resulting from extreme poverty.

Acts of Economic Warfare 

In the post Cold War era, “shock and awe” IMF “economic medicine” applied in countries of the Global South as well as in Eastern Europe has resulted in mass poverty and an unprecedented process of economic and social destruction, under the helm of of the so-called Washington Consensus.

In the course of the last four years, 190 countries, member States of the United Nations have been subjected to the Covid 19 Lockdown which has resulted in extreme poverty and unemployment. In many regards this is an act of economic and social warfare against sovereign nation states.  

In turn, in response to a non-existent pandemic the Covid-19 “Vaccine” which was launched in mid-December 2020 has resulted in millions of deaths Worldwide.

Yes, It’s a killer vaccine. That message should be loud and clear. This is happening all over the world: children and adolescents are dying.

Crimes against humanity, crimes against our children.

Continuous US led warfare (1945- ): there was no “post-war era”.

And now, a World War III scenario is contemplated by US-NATO, in alliance with Israel.

A genocide is ongoing against the people of Palestine with the full support of Western countries.

NATO-US Forces are at Russia’s Doorstep. A so-called “preemptive nuclear war” against China, Russia and Iran is on the drawing board of the Pentagon. 

At no point since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945, has humanity been closer to the unthinkable. 

All the safeguards of the Cold War era, which categorized the nuclear bomb as “a weapon of last resort”, have been scrapped.

The Dangers of Nuclear War are Real. They are “Profit Driven”. 

Under Joe Biden, public funds allocated to nuclear weapons are slated to increase to 2 trillion by 2030 allegedly as a means to safeguarding peace and national security at taxpayers expense. (How many schools and hospitals could you finance with 2 trillion dollars?).

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research,  Hiroshima Day, August 6, 2023, October 13, 2024

***

The U.S. Has Killed More Than 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II

by James  A. Lucas

 

After the catastrophic attacks of September 11 2001 monumental sorrow and a feeling of desperate and understandable anger began to permeate the American psyche. A few people at that time attempted to promote a balanced perspective by pointing out that the United States had also been responsible for causing those same feelings in people in other nations, but they produced hardly a ripple. Although Americans understand in the abstract the wisdom of people around the world empathizing with the suffering of one another, such a reminder of wrongs committed by our nation got little hearing and was soon overshadowed by an accelerated “war on terrorism.”

But we must continue our efforts to develop understanding and compassion in the world. Hopefully, this article will assist in doing that by addressing the question “How many September 11ths has the United States caused in other nations since WWII?” This theme is developed in this report which contains an estimated numbers of such deaths in 37 nations as well as brief explanations of why the U.S. is considered culpable.

The causes of wars are complex. In some instances nations other than the U.S. may have been responsible for more deaths, but if the involvement of our nation appeared to have been a necessary cause of a war or conflict it was considered responsible for the deaths in it. In other words they probably would not have taken place if the U.S. had not used the heavy hand of its power. The military and economic power of the United States was crucial.

This study reveals that U.S. military forces were directly responsible for about 10 to 15 million deaths during the Korean and Vietnam Wars and the two Iraq Wars. The Korean War also includes Chinese deaths while the Vietnam War also includes fatalities in Cambodia and Laos.

The American public probably is not aware of these numbers and knows even less about the proxy wars for which the United States is also responsible. In the latter wars there were between nine and 14 million deaths in Afghanistan, Angola, Democratic Republic of the Congo, East Timor, Guatemala, Indonesia, Pakistan and Sudan.

But the victims are not just from big nations or one part of the world. The remaining deaths were in smaller ones which constitute over half the total number of nations. Virtually all parts of the world have been the target of U.S. intervention.

The overall conclusion reached is that the United States most likely has been responsible since WWII for the deaths of between 20 and 30 million people in wars and conflicts scattered over the world.

To the families and friends of these victims it makes little difference whether the causes were U.S. military action, proxy military forces, the provision of U.S. military supplies or advisors, or other ways, such as economic pressures applied by our nation. They had to make decisions about other things such as finding lost loved ones, whether to become refugees, and how to survive.

And the pain and anger is spread even further. Some authorities estimate that there are as many as 10 wounded for each person who dies in wars. Their visible, continued suffering is a continuing reminder to their fellow countrymen.

It is essential that Americans learn more about this topic so that they can begin to understand the pain that others feel. Someone once observed that the Germans during WWII “chose not to know.” We cannot allow history to say this about our country. The question posed above was “How many September 11ths has the United States caused in other nations since WWII?” The answer is: possibly 10,000.

Comments on Gathering These Numbers

Generally speaking, the much smaller number of Americans who have died is not included in this study, not because they are not important, but because this report focuses on the impact of U.S. actions on its adversaries.

An accurate count of the number of deaths is not easy to achieve, and this collection of data was undertaken with full realization of this fact. These estimates will probably be revised later either upward or downward by the reader and the author. But undoubtedly the total will remain in the millions.

The difficulty of gathering reliable information is shown by two estimates in this context. For several years I heard statements on radio that three million Cambodians had been killed under the rule of the Khmer Rouge. However, in recent years the figure I heard was one million. Another example is that the number of persons estimated to have died in Iraq due to sanctions after the first U.S. Iraq War was over 1 million, but in more recent years, based on a more recent study, a lower estimate of around a half a million has emerged.

Often information about wars is revealed only much later when someone decides to speak out, when more secret information is revealed due to persistent efforts of a few, or after special congressional committees make reports

Both victorious and defeated nations may have their own reasons for underreporting the number of deaths. Further, in recent wars involving the United States it was not uncommon to hear statements like “we do not do body counts” and references to “collateral damage” as a euphemism for dead and wounded. Life is cheap for some, especially those who manipulate people on the battlefield as if it were a chessboard.

To say that it is difficult to get exact figures is not to say that we should not try. Effort was needed to arrive at the figures of six million Jews killed during WWII, but knowledge of that number now is widespread and it has fueled the determination to prevent future holocausts. That struggle continues.

The author can be contacted at [email protected]

37 VICTIM NATIONS

Afghanistan

The U.S. is responsible for between 1 and 1.8 million deaths during the war between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan, by luring the Soviet Union into invading that nation. (1,2,3,4)

The Soviet Union had friendly relations its neighbor, Afghanistan, which had a secular government. The Soviets feared that if that government became fundamentalist this change could spill over into the Soviet Union.

In 1998, in an interview with the Parisian publication Le Novel Observateur, Zbigniew Brzezinski, adviser to President Carter, admitted that he had been responsible for instigating aid to the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan which caused the Soviets to invade. In his own words:

According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the President in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention. (5,1,6)

Brzezinski justified laying this trap, since he said it gave the Soviet Union its Vietnam and caused the breakup of the Soviet Union. “Regret what?” he said. “That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it?” (7)

The CIA spent 5 to 6 billion dollars on its operation in Afghanistan in order to bleed the Soviet Union. (1,2,3) When that 10-year war ended over a million people were dead and Afghan heroin had captured 60% of the U.S. market. (4)

The U.S. has been responsible directly for about 12,000 deaths in Afghanistan many of which resulted from bombing in retaliation for the attacks on U.S. property on September 11, 2001. Subsequently U.S. troops invaded that country. (4)

Angola

An indigenous armed struggle against Portuguese rule in Angola began in 1961. In 1977 an Angolan government was recognized by the U.N., although the U.S. was one of the few nations that opposed this action. In 1986 Uncle Sam approved material assistance to UNITA, a group that was trying to overthrow the government. Even today this struggle, which has involved many nations at times, continues.

U.S. intervention was justified to the U.S. public as a reaction to the intervention of 50,000 Cuban troops in Angola. However, according to Piero Gleijeses, a history professor at Johns Hopkins University the reverse was true. The Cuban intervention came as a result of a CIA – financed covert invasion via neighboring Zaire and a drive on the Angolan capital by the U.S. ally, South Africa1,2,3). (Three estimates of deaths range from 300,000 to 750,000 (4,5,6)

Argentina: See South America: Operation Condor

Bangladesh: See Pakistan

Bolivia

Hugo Banzer was the leader of a repressive regime in Bolivia in the 1970s. The U.S. had been disturbed when a previous leader nationalized the tin mines and distributed land to Indian peasants. Later that action to benefit the poor was reversed.

Banzer, who was trained at the U.S.-operated School of the Americas in Panama and later at Fort Hood, Texas, came back from exile frequently to confer with U.S. Air Force Major Robert Lundin. In 1971 he staged a successful coup with the help of the U.S. Air Force radio system. In the first years of his dictatorship he received twice as military assistance from the U.S. as in the previous dozen years together.

A few years later the Catholic Church denounced an army massacre of striking tin workers in 1975, Banzer, assisted by information provided by the CIA, was able to target and locate leftist priests and nuns. His anti-clergy strategy, known as the Banzer Plan, was adopted by nine other Latin American dictatorships in 1977. (2) He has been accused of being responsible for 400 deaths during his tenure. (1)

Also see: See South America: Operation Condor

Brazil: See South America: Operation Condor

Cambodia

U.S. bombing of Cambodia had already been underway for several years in secret under the Johnson and Nixon administrations, but when President Nixon openly began bombing in preparation for a land assault on Cambodia it caused major protests in the U.S. against the Vietnam War.

There is little awareness today of the scope of these bombings and the human suffering involved.

Immense damage was done to the villages and cities of Cambodia, causing refugees and internal displacement of the population. This unstable situation enabled the Khmer Rouge, a small political party led by Pol Pot, to assume power. Over the years we have repeatedly heard about the Khmer Rouge’s role in the deaths of millions in Cambodia without any acknowledgement being made this mass killing was made possible by the the U.S. bombing of that nation which destabilized it by death , injuries, hunger and dislocation of its people.

So the U.S. bears responsibility not only for the deaths from the bombings but also for those resulting from the activities of the Khmer Rouge – a total of about 2.5 million people. Even when Vietnam latrer invaded Cambodia in 1979 the CIA was still supporting the Khmer Rouge. (1,2,3)

Also see Vietnam

Chad

An estimated 40,000 people in Chad were killed and as many as 200,000 tortured by a government, headed by Hissen Habre who was brought to power in June, 1982 with the help of CIA money and arms. He remained in power for eight years. (1,2)

Human Rights Watch claimed that Habre was responsible for thousands of killings. In 2001, while living in Senegal, he was almost tried for crimes committed by him in Chad. However, a court there blocked these proceedings. Then human rights people decided to pursue the case in Belgium, because some of Habre’s torture victims lived there. The U.S., in June 2003, told Belgium that it risked losing its status as host to NATO’s headquarters if it allowed such a legal proceeding to happen. So the result was that the law that allowed victims to file complaints in Belgium for atrocities committed abroad was repealed. However, two months later a new law was passed which made special provision for the continuation of the case against Habre.

Chile

The CIA intervened in Chile’s 1958 and 1964 elections. In 1970 a socialist candidate, Salvador Allende, was elected president. The CIA wanted to incite a military coup to prevent his inauguration, but the Chilean army’s chief of staff, General Rene Schneider, opposed this action. The CIA then planned, along with some people in the Chilean military, to assassinate Schneider. This plot failed and Allende took office. President Nixon was not to be dissuaded and he ordered the CIA to create a coup climate: “Make the economy scream,” he said.

What followed were guerilla warfare, arson, bombing, sabotage and terror. ITT and other U.S. corporations with Chilean holdings sponsored demonstrations and strikes. Finally, on September 11, 1973 Allende died either by suicide or by assassination. At that time Henry Kissinger, U.S. Secretary of State, said the following regarding Chile: “I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist because of the irresponsibility of its own people.” (1)

During 17 years of terror under Allende’s successor, General Augusto Pinochet, an estimated 3,000 Chileans were killed and many others were tortured or “disappeared.” (2,3,4,5)

Also see South America: Operation Condor

China An estimated 900,000 Chinese died during the Korean War.

For more information, See: Korea.

Colombia

One estimate is that 67,000 deaths have occurred from the 1960s to recent years due to support by the U.S. of Colombian state terrorism. (1)

According to a 1994 Amnesty International report, more than 20,000 people were killed for political reasons in Colombia since 1986, mainly by the military and its paramilitary allies. Amnesty alleged that “U.S.- supplied military equipment, ostensibly delivered for use against narcotics traffickers, was being used by the Colombian military to commit abuses in the name of “counter-insurgency.” (2) In 2002 another estimate was made that 3,500 people die each year in a U.S. funded civilian war in Colombia. (3)

In 1996 Human Rights Watch issued a report “Assassination Squads in Colombia” which revealed that CIA agents went to Colombia in 1991 to help the military to train undercover agents in anti-subversive activity. (4,5)

In recent years the U.S. government has provided assistance under Plan Colombia. The Colombian government has been charged with using most of the funds for destruction of crops and support of the paramilitary group.

Cuba

In the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba on April 18, 1961 which ended after 3 days, 114 of the invading force were killed, 1,189 were taken prisoners and a few escaped to waiting U.S. ships. (1) The captured exiles were quickly tried, a few executed and the rest sentenced to thirty years in prison for treason. These exiles were released after 20 months in exchange for $53 million in food and medicine.

Some people estimate that the number of Cuban forces killed range from 2,000, to 4,000. Another estimate is that 1,800 Cuban forces were killed on an open highway by napalm. This appears to have been a precursor of the Highway of Death in Iraq in 1991 when U.S. forces mercilessly annihilated large numbers of Iraqis on a highway. (2)

Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire)

The beginning of massive violence was instigated in this country in 1879 by its colonizer King Leopold of Belgium. The Congo’s population was reduced by 10 million people over a period of 20 years which some have referred to as “Leopold’s Genocide.” (1) The U.S. has been responsible for about a third of that many deaths in that nation in the more recent past. (2)

In 1960 the Congo became an independent state with Patrice Lumumba being its first prime minister. He was assassinated with the CIA being implicated, although some say that his murder was actually the responsibility of Belgium. (3) But nevertheless, the CIA was planning to kill him. (4) Before his assassination the CIA sent one of its scientists, Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, to the Congo carrying “lethal biological material” intended for use in Lumumba’s assassination. This virus would have been able to produce a fatal disease indigenous to the Congo area of Africa and was transported in a diplomatic pouch.

Much of the time in recent years there has been a civil war within the Democratic Republic of Congo, fomented often by the U.S. and other nations, including neighboring nations. (5)

In April 1977, Newsday reported that the CIA was secretly supporting efforts to recruit several hundred mercenaries in the U.S. and Great Britain to serve alongside Zaire’s army. In that same year the U.S. provided $15 million of military supplies to the Zairian President Mobutu to fend off an invasion by a rival group operating in Angola. (6)

In May 1979, the U.S. sent several million dollars of aid to Mobutu who had been condemned 3 months earlier by the U.S. State Department for human rights violations. (7) During the Cold War the U.S. funneled over 300 million dollars in weapons into Zaire (8,9) $100 million in military training was provided to him. (2) In 2001 it was reported to a U.S. congressional committee that American companies, including one linked to former President George Bush Sr., were stoking the Congo for monetary gains. There is an international battle over resources in that country with over 125 companies and individuals being implicated. One of these substances is coltan, which is used in the manufacture of cell phones. (2)

Dominican Republic

In 1962, Juan Bosch became president of the Dominican Republic. He advocated such programs as land reform and public works programs. This did not bode well for his future relationship with the U.S., and after only 7 months in office, he was deposed by a CIA coup. In 1965 when a group was trying to reinstall him to his office President Johnson said, “This Bosch is no good.” Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Mann replied “He’s no good at all. If we don’t get a decent government in there, Mr. President, we get another Bosch. It’s just going to be another sinkhole.” Two days later a U.S. invasion started and 22,000 soldiers and marines entered the Dominican Republic and about 3,000 Dominicans died during the fighting. The cover excuse for doing this was that this was done to protect foreigners there. (1,2,3,4)

East Timor

In December 1975, Indonesia invaded East Timor. This incursion was launched the day after U.S. President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had left Indonesia where they had given President Suharto permission to use American arms, which under U.S. law, could not be used for aggression. Daniel Moynihan, U.S. ambassador to the UN. said that the U.S. wanted “things to turn out as they did.” (1,2) The result was an estimated 200,000 dead out of a population of 700,000. (1,2)

Sixteen years later, on November 12, 1991, two hundred and seventeen East Timorese protesters in Dili, many of them children, marching from a memorial service, were gunned down by Indonesian Kopassus shock troops who were headed by U.S.- trained commanders Prabowo Subianto (son in law of General Suharto) and Kiki Syahnakri. Trucks were seen dumping bodies into the sea. (5)

El Salvador

The civil war from 1981 to1992 in El Salvador was financed by $6 billion in U.S. aid given to support the government in its efforts to crush a movement to bring social justice to the people in that nation of about 8 million people. (1)
During that time U.S. military advisers demonstrated methods of torture on teenage prisoners, according to an interview with a deserter from the Salvadoran army published in the New York Times. This former member of the Salvadoran National Guard testified that he was a member of a squad of twelve who found people who they were told were guerillas and tortured them. Part of the training he received was in torture at a U.S. location somewhere in Panama. (2)

About 900 villagers were massacred in the village of El Mozote in 1981. Ten of the twelve El Salvadoran government soldiers cited as participating in this act were graduates of the School of the Americas operated by the U.S. (2) They were only a small part of about 75,000 people killed during that civil war. (1)

According to a 1993 United Nations’ Truth Commission report, over 96 % of the human rights violations carried out during the war were committed by the Salvadoran army or the paramilitary deaths squads associated with the Salvadoran army. (3)

That commission linked graduates of the School of the Americas to many notorious killings. The New York Times and the Washington Post followed with scathing articles. In 1996, the White House Oversight Board issued a report that supported many of the charges against that school made by Rev. Roy Bourgeois, head of the School of the Americas Watch. That same year the Pentagon released formerly classified reports indicating that graduates were trained in killing, extortion, and physical abuse for interrogations, false imprisonment and other methods of control. (4)

Grenada

The CIA began to destabilize Grenada in 1979 after Maurice Bishop became president, partially because he refused to join the quarantine of Cuba. The campaign against him resulted in his overthrow and the invasion by the U.S. of Grenada on October 25, 1983, with about 277 people dying. (1,2) It was fallaciously charged that an airport was being built in Grenada that could be used to attack the U.S. and it was also erroneously claimed that the lives of American medical students on that island were in danger.

Guatemala

In 1951 Jacobo Arbenz was elected president of Guatemala. He appropriated some unused land operated by the United Fruit Company and compensated the company. (1,2) That company then started a campaign to paint Arbenz as a tool of an international conspiracy and hired about 300 mercenaries who sabotaged oil supplies and trains. (3) In 1954 a CIA-orchestrated coup put him out of office and he left the country. During the next 40 years various regimes killed thousands of people.

In 1999 the Washington Post reported that an Historical Clarification Commission concluded that over 200,000 people had been killed during the civil war and that there had been 42,000 individual human rights violations, 29,000 of them fatal, 92% of which were committed by the army. The commission further reported that the U.S. government and the CIA had pressured the Guatemalan government into suppressing the guerilla movement by ruthless means. (4,5)

According to the Commission between 1981 and 1983 the military government of Guatemala – financed and supported by the U.S. government – destroyed some four hundred Mayan villages in a campaign of genocide. (4)
One of the documents made available to the commission was a 1966 memo from a U.S. State Department official, which described how a “safe house” was set up in the palace for use by Guatemalan security agents and their U.S. contacts. This was the headquarters for the Guatemalan “dirty war” against leftist insurgents and suspected allies. (2)

Haiti

From 1957 to 1986 Haiti was ruled by Papa Doc Duvalier and later by his son. During that time their private terrorist force killed between 30,000 and 100,000 people. (1) Millions of dollars in CIA subsidies flowed into Haiti during that time, mainly to suppress popular movements, (2) although most American military aid to the country, according to William Blum, was covertly channeled through Israel.

Reportedly, governments after the second Duvalier reign were responsible for an even larger number of fatalities, and the influence on Haiti by the U.S., particularly through the CIA, has continued. The U.S. later forced out of the presidential office a black Catholic priest, Jean Bertrand Aristide, even though he was elected with 67% of the vote in the early 1990s. The wealthy white class in Haiti opposed him in this predominantly black nation, because of his social programs designed to help the poor and end corruption. (3) Later he returned to office, but that did not last long. He was forced by the U.S. to leave office and now lives in South Africa.

Honduras

In the 1980s the CIA supported Battalion 316 in Honduras, which kidnapped, tortured and killed hundreds of its citizens. Torture equipment and manuals were provided by CIA Argentinean personnel who worked with U.S. agents in the training of the Hondurans. Approximately 400 people lost their lives. (1,2) This is another instance of torture in the world sponsored by the U.S. (3)

Battalion 316 used shock and suffocation devices in interrogations in the 1980s. Prisoners often were kept naked and, when no longer useful, killed and buried in unmarked graves. Declassified documents and other sources show that the CIA and the U.S. Embassy knew of numerous crimes, including murder and torture, yet continued to support Battalion 316 and collaborate with its leaders.” (4)

Honduras was a staging ground in the early 1980s for the Contras who were trying to overthrow the socialist Sandinista government in Nicaragua. John D. Negroponte, currently Deputy Secretary of State, was our embassador when our military aid to Honduras rose from $4 million to $77.4 million per year. Negroponte denies having had any knowledge of these atrocities during his tenure. However, his predecessor in that position, Jack R. Binns, had reported in 1981 that he was deeply concerned at increasing evidence of officially sponsored/sanctioned assassinations. (5)

Hungary

In 1956 Hungary, a Soviet satellite nation, revolted against the Soviet Union. During the uprising broadcasts by the U.S. Radio Free Europe into Hungary sometimes took on an aggressive tone, encouraging the rebels to believe that Western support was imminent, and even giving tactical advice on how to fight the Soviets. Their hopes were raised then dashed by these broadcasts which cast an even darker shadow over the Hungarian tragedy.“ (1) The Hungarian and Soviet death toll was about 3,000 and the revolution was crushed. (2)

Indonesia

In 1965, in Indonesia, a coup replaced General Sukarno with General Suharto as leader. The U.S. played a role in that change of government. Robert Martens,a former officer in the U.S. embassy in Indonesia, described how U.S. diplomats and CIA officers provided up to 5,000 names to Indonesian Army death squads in 1965 and checked them off as they were killed or captured. Martens admitted that “I probably have a lot of blood on my hands, but that’s not all bad. There’s a time when you have to strike hard at a decisive moment.” (1,2,3) Estimates of the number of deaths range from 500,000 to 3 million. (4,5,6)
From 1993 to 1997 the U.S. provided Jakarta with almost $400 million in economic aid and sold tens of million of dollars of weaponry to that nation. U.S. Green Berets provided training for the Indonesia’s elite force which was responsible for many of atrocities in East Timor. (3)

Iran

Iran lost about 262,000 people in the war against Iraq from 1980 to 1988. (1) See Iraq for more information about that war.

On July 3, 1988 the U.S. Navy ship, the Vincennes, was operating withing Iranian waters providing military support for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. During a battle against Iranian gunboats it fired two missiles at an Iranian Airbus, which was on a routine civilian flight. All 290 civilian on board were killed. (2,3)

Iraq

A. The Iraq-Iran War lasted from 1980 to 1988 and during that time there were about 105,000 Iraqi deaths according to the Washington Post. (1,2)

According to Howard Teicher, a former National Security Council official, the U.S. provided the Iraqis with billions of dollars in credits and helped Iraq in other ways such as making sure that Iraq had military equipment including biological agents This surge of help for Iraq came as Iran seemed to be winning the war and was close to Basra. (1) The U.S. was not adverse to both countries weakening themselves as a result of the war, but it did not appear to want either side to win.

B: The U.S.-Iraq War and the Sanctions Against Iraq extended from 1990 to 2003.

Iraq invaded Kuwait on August 2, 1990 and the U.S. responded by demanding that Iraq withdraw, and four days later the U.N. levied international sanctions.

Iraq had reason to believe that the U.S. would not object to its invasion of Kuwait, since U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, had told Saddam Hussein that the U.S. had no position on the dispute that his country had with Kuwait. So the green light was given, but it seemed to be more of a trap.

As a part of the public relations strategy to energize the American public into supporting an attack against Iraq the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the U.S. falsely testified before Congress that Iraqi troops were pulling the plugs on incubators in Iraqi hospitals. (1) This contributed to a war frenzy in the U.S.

The U.S. air assault started on January 17, 1991 and it lasted for 42 days. On February 23 President H.W. Bush ordered the U.S. ground assault to begin. The invasion took place with much needless killing of Iraqi military personnel. Only about 150 American military personnel died compared to about 200,000 Iraqis. Some of the Iraqis were mercilessly killed on the Highway of Death and about 400 tons of depleted uranium were left in that nation by the U.S. (2,3)

Other deaths later were from delayed deaths due to wounds, civilians killed, those killed by effects of damage of the Iraqi water treatment facilities and other aspects of its damaged infrastructure and by the sanctions.

In 1995 the Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N. reported that U.N sanctions against on Iraq had been responsible for the deaths of more than 560,000 children since 1990. (5)

Leslie Stahl on the TV Program 60 Minutes in 1996 mentioned to Madeleine Albright, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. “We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And – and you know, is the price worth it?” Albright replied “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price – we think is worth it.” (4)

In 1999 UNICEF reported that 5,000 children died each month as a result of the sanction and the War with the U.S. (6)

Richard Garfield later estimated that the more likely number of excess deaths among children under five years of age from 1990 through March 1998 to be 227,000 – double those of the previous decade. Garfield estimated that the numbers to be 350,000 through 2000 (based in part on result of another study). (7)

However, there are limitations to his study. His figures were not updated for the remaining three years of the sanctions. Also, two other somewhat vulnerable age groups were not studied: young children above the age of five and the elderly.

All of these reports were considerable indicators of massive numbers of deaths which the U.S. was aware of and which was a part of its strategy to cause enough pain and terror among Iraqis to cause them to revolt against their government.

C: Iraq-U.S. War started in 2003 and has not been concluded

Just as the end of the Cold War emboldened the U.S. to attack Iraq in 1991 so the attacks of September 11, 2001 laid the groundwork for the U.S. to launch the current war against Iraq. While in some other wars we learned much later about the lies that were used to deceive us, some of the deceptions that were used to get us into this war became known almost as soon as they were uttered. There were no weapons of mass destruction, we were not trying to promote democracy, we were not trying to save the Iraqi people from a dictator.

The total number of Iraqi deaths that are a result of our current Iraq against Iraq War is 654,000, of which 600,000 are attributed to acts of violence, according to Johns Hopkins researchers. (1,2)

Since these deaths are a result of the U.S. invasion, our leaders must accept responsibility for them.

Israeli-Palestinian War

About 100,000 to 200,000 Israelis and Palestinians, but mostly the latter, have been killed in the struggle between those two groups. The U.S. has been a strong supporter of Israel, providing billions of dollars in aid and supporting its possession of nuclear weapons. (1,2)

Korea, North and South

The Korean War started in 1950 when, according to the Truman administration, North Korea invaded South Korea on June 25th. However, since then another explanation has emerged which maintains that the attack by North Korea came during a time of many border incursions by both sides. South Korea initiated most of the border clashes with North Korea beginning in 1948. The North Korea government claimed that by 1949 the South Korean army committed 2,617 armed incursions. It was a myth that the Soviet Union ordered North Korea to attack South Korea. (1,2)

The U.S. started its attack before a U.N. resolution was passed supporting our nation’s intervention, and our military forces added to the mayhem in the war by introducing the use of napalm. (1)

During the war the bulk of the deaths were South Koreans, North Koreans and Chinese. Four sources give deaths counts ranging from 1.8 to 4.5 million. (3,4,5,6) Another source gives a total of 4 million but does not identify to which nation they belonged. (7)

John H. Kim, a U.S. Army veteran and the Chair of the Korea Committee of Veterans for Peace, stated in an article that during the Korean War “the U.S. Army, Air Force and Navy were directly involved in the killing of about three million civilians – both South and North Koreans – at many locations throughout Korea…It is reported that the U.S. dropped some 650,000 tons of bombs, including 43,000 tons of napalm bombs, during the Korean War.” It is presumed that this total does not include Chinese casualties.

Another source states a total of about 500,000 who were Koreans and presumably only military. (8,9)

Laos

From 1965 to 1973 during the Vietnam War the U.S. dropped over two million tons of bombs on Laos – more than was dropped in WWII by both sides. Over a quarter of the population became refugees. This was later called a “secret war,” since it occurred at the same time as the Vietnam War, but got little press. Hundreds of thousands were killed. Branfman make the only estimate that I am aware of , stating that hundreds of thousands died. This can be interpeted to mean that at least 200,000 died. (1,2,3)

U.S. military intervention in Laos actually began much earlier. A civil war started in the 1950s when the U.S. recruited a force of 40,000 Laotians to oppose the Pathet Lao, a leftist political party that ultimately took power in 1975.

Also See Vietnam

Nepal

Between 8,000 and 12,000 Nepalese have died since a civil war broke out in 1996. The death rate, according to Foreign Policy in Focus, sharply increased with the arrival of almost 8,400 American M-16 submachine guns (950 rpm) and U.S. advisers. Nepal is 85 percent rural and badly in need of land reform. Not surprisingly 42 % of its people live below the poverty level. (1,2)

In 2002, after another civil war erupted, President George W. Bush pushed a bill through Congress authorizing $20 million in military aid to the Nepalese government. (3)

Nicaragua

In 1981 the Sandinistas overthrew the Somoza government in Nicaragua, (1) and until 1990 about 25,000 Nicaraguans were killed in an armed struggle between the Sandinista government and Contra rebels who were formed from the remnants of Somoza’s national government. The use of assassination manuals by the Contras surfaced in 1984. (2,3)

The U.S. supported the victorious government regime by providing covert military aid to the Contras (anti-communist guerillas) starting in November, 1981. But when Congress discovered that the CIA had supervised acts of sabotage in Nicaragua without notifying Congress, it passed the Boland Amendment in 1983 which prohibited the CIA, Defense Department and any other government agency from providing any further covert military assistance. (4)

But ways were found to get around this prohibition. The National Security Council, which was not explicitly covered by the law, raised private and foreign funds for the Contras. In addition, arms were sold to Iran and the proceeds were diverted from those sales to the Contras engaged in the insurgency against the Sandinista government. (5) Finally, the Sandinistas were voted out of office in 1990 by voters who thought that a change in leadership would placate the U.S., which was causing misery to Nicaragua’s citizenry by it support of the Contras.

Pakistan

In 1971 West Pakistan, an authoritarian state supported by the U.S., brutally invaded East Pakistan. The war ended after India, whose economy was staggering after admitting about 10 million refugees, invaded East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and defeated the West Pakistani forces. (1)

Millions of people died during that brutal struggle, referred to by some as genocide committed by West Pakistan. That country had long been an ally of the U.S., starting with $411 million provided to establish its armed forces which spent 80% of its budget on its military. $15 million in arms flowed into W. Pakistan during the war. (2,3,4)

Three sources estimate that 3 million people died and (5,2,6) one source estimates 1.5 million. (3)

Panama

In December, 1989 U.S. troops invaded Panama, ostensibly to arrest Manuel Noriega, that nation’s president. This was an example of the U.S. view that it is the master of the world and can arrest anyone it wants to. For a number of years before that he had worked for the CIA, but fell out of favor partially because he was not an opponent of the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. (1) It has been estimated that between 500 and 4,000 people died. (2,3,4)

Paraguay: See South America: Operation Condor

Philippines

The Philippines were under the control of the U.S. for over a hundred years. In about the last 50 to 60 years the U.S. has funded and otherwise helped various Philippine governments which sought to suppress the activities of groups working for the welfare of its people. In 1969 the Symington Committee in the U.S. Congress revealed how war material was sent there for a counter-insurgency campaign. U.S. Special Forces and Marines were active in some combat operations. The estimated number of persons that were executed and disappeared under President Fernando Marcos was over 100,000. (1,2)

South America: Operation Condor

This was a joint operation of 6 despotic South American governments (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay) to share information about their political opponents. An estimated 13,000 people were killed under this plan. (1)

It was established on November 25, 1975 in Chile by an act of the Interamerican Reunion on Military Intelligence. According to U.S. embassy political officer, John Tipton, the CIA and the Chilean Secret Police were working together, although the CIA did not set up the operation to make this collaboration work. Reportedly, it ended in 1983. (2)

On March 6, 2001 the New York Times reported the existence of a recently declassified State Department document revealing that the United States facilitated communications for Operation Condor. (3)

Sudan

Since 1955, when it gained its independence, Sudan has been involved most of the time in a civil war. Until about 2003 approximately 2 million people had been killed. It not known if the death toll in Darfur is part of that total.

Human rights groups have complained that U.S. policies have helped to prolong the Sudanese civil war by supporting efforts to overthrow the central government in Khartoum. In 1999 U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright met with the leader of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) who said that she offered him food supplies if he would reject a peace plan sponsored by Egypt and Libya.

In 1978 the vastness of Sudan’s oil reservers was discovered and within two years it became the sixth largest recipient of U.S, military aid. It’s reasonable to assume that if the U.S. aid a government to come to power it will feel obligated to give the U.S. part of the oil pie.

A British group, Christian Aid, has accused foreign oil companies of complicity in the depopulation of villages. These companies – not American – receive government protection and in turn allow the government use of its airstrips and roads.

In August 1998 the U.S. bombed Khartoum, Sudan with 75 cruise míssiles. Our government said that the target was a chemical weapons factory owned by Osama bin Laden. Actually, bin Laden was no longer the owner, and the plant had been the sole supplier of pharmaceutical supplies for that poor nation. As a result of the bombing tens of thousands may have died because of the lack of medicines to treat malaria, tuberculosis and other diseases. The U.S. settled a lawsuit filed by the factory’s owner. (1,2)

Uruguay: See South America: Operation Condor

Vietnam

In Vietnam, under an agreement several decades ago, there was supposed to be an election for a unified North and South Vietnam. The U.S. opposed this and supported the Diem government in South Vietnam. In August, 1964 the CIA and others helped fabricate a phony Vietnamese attack on a U.S. ship in the Gulf of Tonkin and this was used as a pretext for greater U.S. involvement in Vietnam. (1)

During that war an American assassination operation,called Operation Phoenix, terrorized the South Vietnamese people, and during the war American troops were responsible in 1968 for the mass slaughter of the people in the village of My Lai.

According to a Vietnamese government statement in 1995 the number of deaths of civilians and military personnel during the Vietnam War was 5.1 million. (2)

Since deaths in Cambodia and Laos were about 2.7 million (See Cambodia and Laos) the estimated total for the Vietnam War is 7.8 million.

The Virtual Truth Commission provides a total for the war of 5 million, (3) and Robert McNamara, former Secretary Defense, according to the New York Times Magazine says that the number of Vietnamese dead is 3.4 million. (4,5)

Yugoslavia

Yugoslavia was a socialist federation of several republics. Since it refused to be closely tied to the Soviet Union during the Cold War, it gained some suport from the U.S. But when the Soviet Union dissolved, Yugoslavia’s usefulness to the U.S. ended, and the U.S and Germany worked to convert its socialist economy to a capitalist one by a process primarily of dividing and conquering. There were ethnic and religious differences between various parts of Yugoslavia which were manipulated by the U.S. to cause several wars which resulted in the dissolution of that country.

From the early 1990s until now Yugoslavia split into several independent nations whose lowered income, along with CIA connivance, has made it a pawn in the hands of capitalist countries. (1) The dissolution of Yugoslavia was caused primarily by the U.S. (2)

Here are estimates of some, if not all, of the internal wars in Yugoslavia. All wars: 107,000; (3,4)

Bosnia and Krajina: 250,000; (5) Bosnia: 20,000 to 30,000; (5) Croatia: 15,000; (6) and

Kosovo: 500 to 5,000. (7)

NOTES

Afghanistan

1.Mark Zepezauer, Boomerang (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2003), p.135.

2.Chronology of American State Terrorism
http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_
terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

3.Soviet War in Afghanistan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan

4.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.76

5.U.S Involvement in Afghanistan, Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in Afghanistan)

6.The CIA’s Intervention in Afghanistan, Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998, Posted at globalresearch.ca 15 October 2001, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html

7.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p.5

8.Unknown News, http://www.unknownnews.net/casualtiesw.html

Angola

1.Howard W. French “From Old Files, a New Story of the U.S. Role in the Angolan War” New York Times 3/31/02

2.Angolan Update, American Friends Service Committee FS, 11/1/99 flyer.

3.Norman Solomon, War Made Easy, (John Wiley & Sons, 2005) p. 82-83.

4.Lance Selfa, U.S. Imperialism, A Century of Slaughter, International Socialist Review Issue 7, Spring 1999 (as appears in Third world Traveler www. thirdworldtraveler.com/American_Empire/Century_Imperialism.html)

5. Jeffress Ramsay, Africa , (Dushkin/McGraw Hill Guilford Connecticut), 1997, p. 144-145.

6.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.54.

Argentina : See South America: Operation Condor

Bolivia

1. Phil Gunson, Guardian, 5/6/02,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/archive /article/0,4273,41-07884,00.html

2.Jerry Meldon, Return of Bolilvia’s Drug – Stained Dictator, Consortium,www.consortiumnews.com/archives/story40.html.

Brazil See South America: Operation Condor

Cambodia

1.Virtual Truth Commissiion http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/ .

2.David Model, President Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, and the Bombing of Cambodia excerpted from the book Lying for Empire How to Commit War Crimes With A Straight Face, Common Courage Press, 2005, paperhttp://thirdworldtraveler.com/American_Empire/Nixon_Cambodia_LFE.html.

3.Noam Chomsky, Chomsky on Cambodia under Pol Pot, etc.,http//zmag.org/forums/chomcambodforum.htm.

Chad

1.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 151-152 .

2.Richard Keeble, Crimes Against Humanity in Chad, Znet/Activism 12/4/06http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=11560&sectionID=1).

Chile

1.Parenti, Michael, The Sword and the Dollar (New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1989) p. 56.

2.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 142-143.

3.Moreorless: Heroes and Killers of the 20th Century, Augusto Pinochet Ugarte,

http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/pinochet.html

4.Associated Press,Pincohet on 91st Birthday, Takes Responsibility for Regimes’s Abuses, Dayton Daily News 11/26/06

5.Chalmers Johnson, Blowback, The Costs and Consequences of American Empire (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2000), p. 18.

China: See Korea

Colombia

1.Chronology of American State Terrorism, p.2

http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html).

2.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 163.

3.Millions Killed by Imperialism Washington Post May 6, 2002)http://www.etext.org./Politics/MIM/rail/impkills.html

4.Gabriella Gamini, CIA Set Up Death Squads in Colombia Times Newspapers Limited, Dec. 5, 1996,www.edu/CommunicationsStudies/ben/news/cia/961205.death.html).

5.Virtual Truth Commission, 1991

Human Rights Watch Report: Colombia’s Killer Networks–The Military-Paramilitary Partnership).

Cuba

1.St. James Encyclopedia of Popular Culture – on Bay of Pigs Invasionhttp://bookrags.com/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion.

2.Wikipedia http://bookrags.com/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion#Casualties.

Democratic Republic of Congo (Formerly Zaire)

1.F. Jeffress Ramsey, Africa (Guilford Connecticut, 1997), p. 85

2. Anup Shaw The Democratic Republic of Congo, 10/31/2003)http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/Africa/DRC.asp)

3.Kevin Whitelaw, A Killing in Congo, U. S. News and World Reporthttp://www.usnews.com/usnews/doubleissue/mysteries/patrice.htm

4.William Blum, Killing Hope (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995), p 158-159.

5.Ibid.,p. 260

6.Ibid.,p. 259

7.Ibid.,p.262

8.David Pickering, “World War in Africa, 6/26/02,
www.9-11peace.org/bulletin.php3

9.William D. Hartung and Bridget Moix, Deadly Legacy; U.S. Arms to Africa and the Congo War, Arms Trade Resource Center, January , 2000www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/congo.htm

Dominican Republic

1.Norman Solomon, (untitled) Baltimore Sun April 26, 2005
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/history/2005/0426spincycle.htm
Intervention Spin Cycle

2.Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Power_Pack

3.William Blum, Killing Hope (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995), p. 175.

4.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.26-27.

East Timor

1.Virtual Truth Commission, http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/date4.htm

2.Matthew Jardine, Unraveling Indonesia, Nonviolent Activist, 1997)

3.Chronology of American State Terrorismhttp://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

4.William Blum, Killing Hope (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995), p. 197.

5.US trained butchers of Timor, The Guardian, London. Cited by The Drudge Report, September 19, 1999. http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/indon.htm

El Salvador

1.Robert T. Buckman, Latin America 2003, (Stryker-Post Publications Baltimore 2003) p. 152-153.

2.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 54-55.

3.El Salvador, Wikipediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Salvador#The_20th_century_and_beyond)

4.Virtual Truth Commissiion http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/.

Grenada

1.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p. 66-67.

2.Stephen Zunes, The U.S. Invasion of Grenada,http://wwwfpif.org/papers/grenada2003.html .

Guatemala

1.Virtual Truth Commissiion http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/

2.Ibid.

3.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.2-13.

4.Robert T. Buckman, Latin America 2003 (Stryker-Post Publications Baltimore 2003) p. 162.

5.Douglas Farah, Papers Show U.S. Role in Guatemalan Abuses, Washington Post Foreign Service, March 11, 1999, A 26

Haiti

1.Francois Duvalier,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Duvalier#Reign_of_terror).

2.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p 87.

3.William Blum, Haiti 1986-1994: Who Will Rid Me of This Turbulent Priest,http://www.doublestandards.org/blum8.html

Honduras

1.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 55.

2.Reports by Country: Honduras, Virtual Truth Commissionhttp://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/honduras.htm

3.James A. Lucas, Torture Gets The Silence Treatment, Countercurrents, July 26, 2004.

4.Gary Cohn and Ginger Thompson, Unearthed: Fatal Secrets, Baltimore Sun, reprint of a series that appeared June 11-18, 1995 in Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer, School of Assassins, p. 46 Orbis Books 2001.

5.Michael Dobbs, Negroponte’s Time in Honduras at Issue, Washington Post, March 21, 2005

Hungary

1.Edited by Malcolm Byrne, The 1956 Hungarian Revoluiton: A history in Documents November 4, 2002http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB76/index2.htm

2.Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia,
http://www.answers.com/topic/hungarian-revolution-of-1956

Indonesia

1.Virtual Truth Commission http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/.

2.Editorial, Indonesia’s Killers, The Nation, March 30, 1998.

3.Matthew Jardine, Indonesia Unraveling, Non Violent Activist Sept–Oct, 1997 (Amnesty) 2/7/07.

4.Sison, Jose Maria, Reflections on the 1965 Massacre in Indonesia, p. 5.http://qc.indymedia.org/mail.php?id=5602;

5.Annie Pohlman, Women and the Indonesian Killings of 1965-1966: Gender Variables and Possible Direction for Research, p.4,http://coombs.anu.edu.au/SpecialProj/ASAA/biennial-conference/2004/Pohlman-A-ASAA.pdf

6.Peter Dale Scott, The United States and the Overthrow of Sukarno, 1965-1967, Pacific Affairs, 58, Summer 1985, pages 239-264.http://www.namebase.org/scott.

7.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.30.

Iran

1.Geoff Simons, Iraq from Sumer to Saddam, 1996, St. Martins Press, NY p. 317.

2.Chronology of American State Terrorismhttp://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html.

3.BBC 1988: US Warship Shoots Down Iranian Airlinerhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/default.stm )

Iraq

Iran-Iraq War

1.Michael Dobbs, U.S. Had Key role in Iraq Buildup, Washington Post December 30, 2002, p A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52241-2002Dec29?language=printer

2.Global Security.Org , Iran Iraq War (1980-1980)globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/iran-iraq.htm.

U.S. Iraq War and Sanctions

1.Ramsey Clark, The Fire This Time (New York, Thunder’s Mouth), 1994, p.31-32

2.Ibid., p. 52-54

3.Ibid., p. 43

4.Anthony Arnove, Iraq Under Siege, (South End Press Cambridge MA 2000). p. 175.

5.Food and Agricultural Organizaiton, The Children are Dying, 1995 World View Forum, Internationa Action Center, International Relief Association, p. 78

6.Anthony Arnove, Iraq Under Siege, South End Press Cambridge MA 2000. p. 61.

7.David Cortright, A Hard Look at Iraq Sanctions December 3, 2001, The Nation.

U.S-Iraq War 2003-?

1.Jonathan Bor 654,000 Deaths Tied to Iraq War Baltimore Sun , October 11,2006

2.News http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

Israeli-Palestinian War

1.Post-1967 Palestinian & Israeli Deaths from Occupation & Violence May 16, 2006 http://globalavoidablemortality.blogspot.com/2006/05/post-1967-palestinian-israeli-deaths.html)

2.Chronology of American State Terrorism

http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

Korea

1.James I. Matray Revisiting Korea: Exposing Myths of the Forgotten War, Korean War Teachers Conference: The Korean War, February 9, 2001http://www.truman/library.org/Korea/matray1.htm

2.William Blum, Killing Hope (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995), p. 46

3.Kanako Tokuno, Chinese Winter Offensive in Korean War – the Debacle of American Strategy, ICE Case Studies Number 186, May, 2006http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/chosin.htm.

4.John G. Stroessinger, Why Nations go to War, (New York; St. Martin’s Press), p. 99)

5.Britannica Concise Encyclopedia, as reported in Answers.comhttp://www.answers.com/topic/Korean-war

6.Exploring the Environment: Korean Enigmawww.cet.edu/ete/modules/korea/kwar.html)

7.S. Brian Wilson, Who are the Real Terrorists? Virtual Truth Commissonhttp://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/

8.Korean War Casualty Statistics www.century china.com/history/krwarcost.html)

9.S. Brian Wilson, Documenting U.S. War Crimes in North Korea (Veterans for Peace Newsletter) Spring, 2002) http://www.veteransforpeace.org/

Laos

1.William Blum Rogue State (Maine, Common Cause Press) p. 136

2.Chronology of American State Terrorismhttp://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

3.Fred Branfman, War Crimes in Indochina and our Troubled National Soul

www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2004/08/00_branfman_us-warcrimes-indochina.htm).

Nepal

1.Conn Hallinan, Nepal & the Bush Administration: Into Thin Air, February 3, 2004

fpif.org/commentary/2004/0402nepal.html.

2.Human Rights Watch, Nepal’s Civil War: the Conflict Resumes, March 2006 )

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/03/28/nepal13078.htm.

3.Wayne Madsen, Possible CIA Hand in the Murder of the Nepal Royal Family, India Independent Media Center, September 25, 2001http://india.indymedia.org/en/2002/09/2190.shtml.

Nicaragua

1.Virtual Truth Commission
http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/.

2.Timeline Nicaragua
www.stanford.edu/group/arts/nicaragua/discovery_eng/timeline/).

3.Chronology of American State Terrorism,
http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html.

4.William Blum, Nicaragua 1981-1990 Destabilization in Slow Motion

www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Nicaragua_KH.html.

5.Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair.

Pakistan

1.John G. Stoessinger, Why Nations Go to War, (New York: St. Martin’s Press), 1974 pp 157-172.

2.Asad Ismi, A U.S. – Financed Military Dictatorship, The CCPA Monitor, June 2002, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives http://www.policyaltematives.ca)www.ckln.fm/~asadismi/pakistan.html

3.Mark Zepezauer, Boomerang (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2003), p.123, 124.

4.Arjum Niaz ,When America Look the Other Way by,

www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=2821&sectionID=1

5.Leo Kuper, Genocide (Yale University Press, 1981), p. 79.

6.Bangladesh Liberation War , Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Liberation_War#USA_and_USSR)

Panama

1.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’s Greatest Hits, (Odonian Press 1998) p. 83.

2.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p.154.

3.U.S. Military Charged with Mass Murder, The Winds 9/96,www.apfn.org/thewinds/archive/war/a102896b.html

4.Mark Zepezauer, CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.83.

Paraguay See South America: Operation Condor

Philippines

1.Romeo T. Capulong, A Century of Crimes Against the Filipino People, Presentation, Public Interest Law Center, World Tribunal for Iraq Trial in New York City on August 25,2004.
http://www.peoplejudgebush.org/files/RomeoCapulong.pdf).

2.Roland B. Simbulan The CIA in Manila – Covert Operations and the CIA’s Hidden Hisotry in the Philippines Equipo Nizkor Information – Derechos, derechos.org/nizkor/filipinas/doc/cia.

South America: Operation Condor

1.John Dinges, Pulling Back the Veil on Condor, The Nation, July 24, 2000.

2.Virtual Truth Commission, Telling the Truth for a Better Americawww.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/condor.htm)

3.Operation Condorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor#US_involvement).

Sudan

1.Mark Zepezauer, Boomerang, (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2003), p. 30, 32,34,36.

2.The Black Commentator, Africa Action The Tale of Two Genocides: The Failed US Response to Rwanda and Darfur, 11 August 2006http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091706X.shtml.

Uruguay See South America: Operation Condor

Vietnam

1.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine:Common Courage Press,1994), p 24

2.Casualties – US vs NVA/VC,
http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html.

3.Brian Wilson, Virtual Truth Commission
http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/

4.Fred Branfman, U.S. War Crimes in Indochiona and our Duty to Truth August 26, 2004

www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=6105&sectionID=1

5.David K Shipler, Robert McNamara and the Ghosts of Vietnamnytimes.com/library/world/asia/081097vietnam-mcnamara.html

Yugoslavia

1.Sara Flounders, Bosnia Tragedy:The Unknown Role of the Pentagon in NATO in the Balkans (New York: International Action Center) p. 47-75

2.James A. Lucas, Media Disinformation on the War in Yugoslavia: The Dayton Peace Accords Revisited, Global Research, September 7, 2005 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=
viewArticle&code=LUC20050907&articleId=899

3.Yugoslav Wars in 1990s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_wars.

4.George Kenney, The Bosnia Calculation: How Many Have Died? Not nearly as many as some would have you think., NY Times Magazine, April 23, 1995

http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/politics/
war_crimes/srebrenica/bosnia_numbers.html
)

5.Chronology of American State Terrorism

http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/
ChronologyofTerror.html.

6.Croatian War of Independence, Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croatian_War_of_Independence

7.Human Rights Watch, New Figures on Civilian Deaths in Kosovo War, (February 7, 2000) http://www.hrw.org/press/2000/02/nato207.htm.

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on The U.S. Has Killed More Than 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II

The Department of Homeland Security has flagged individuals questioning COVID-19 origins, vaccine efficacy, and election integrity as potential domestic terrorism threats.

Is a coup being set in place?

A new Department of Defense directive 5240.01 issued September 27, 2024, just prior to the November presidential election allows the US military to use lethal force against American citizens in assisting police authorities in domestic disturbances.

A report on this development lists these civil liberties concerns:

  • Right to protest: There are fears that expanded authority could suppress legitimate protests.
  • Privacy rights: Increased military involvement in domestic intelligence gathering could infringe on privacy.
  • Due process: The military’s role in law enforcement could bypass standard due process protections.
  • Freedom of speech: The broad definition of “national security threats” could target individuals for their political beliefs.
  • Civilian control: The expanded military role could erode civilian oversight of the military.

Here are some Constitutional concerns:

  • Challenging the Posse Comitatus Act: This Act traditionally limits the powers of the federal government in using military personnel for domestic law enforcement. The new DoD directive, by permitting the use of lethal force through military assistance in civilian law enforcement, may push the boundaries of these limitations.
  • Potential First Amendment Concerns: Natural health advocates and others exercising their First Amendment rights, such as questioning the government’s response to COVID-19 or the integrity of elections, have been labeled as potential domestic extremists and/or terrorists by some agencies. This directive could expand those classifications into scenarios involving lethal force interventions, potentially chilling free speech under the guise of national security.
  • Fourth Amendment Considerations: This directive also allows intelligence sharing between military and law enforcement under emergency conditions, raising questions about the right to privacy and the potential for expanded surveillance.
  • Due Process Implications (Fifth Amendment): The possibility of military use of lethal force in domestic scenarios introduces concerns about how due process protections might be maintained before potentially life-altering decisions are made.

Why these ominous changes one month before the election? Is something in the works? Why is there no reporting and no debate on this change in policy?

Here is the Directive. (Suggest you read Section 1, pp. 3-6)

.


 

Here is the report.

Ever since the CIA used the Washington Post and the media to cover up the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the term, “conspiracy theory,” introduced by the CIA, has been used by the presstitutes and government to demonize truth and those who speak truth, and to protect official narratives, such as “Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.”

Unless Trump cuts a deal with Democrats not to hold them accountable and also a deal with the Ruling Elite not to interfere with their control, I can see no way that either will permit Trump to be President.

The Biden regime and the Trump Justice (sic) Department and FBI are criminal operations. I can see indictments and arrests for those who have weaponized law enforcement. The Ruling Elite and leading Democrats such as Hillary Clinton and John Kerry can all be arrested, honestly unlike Trump and his supporters, for insurrection as they have openly called for the overthrow of the United States by demanding the overthrow of the First Amendment of the US Constitution. No fooling, this is treason. The US is the Constitution. Advocating the overthrow of the Constitution is advocating the overthrow of the United States.

This is a major issue of our time, and it is not mentioned — which displays the control the elite have over what can be an issue subject to notice and discussion.

That one month prior to the presidential election the corrupt Biden regime issued a directive that permits the US military, purged of its patriotic officers, to use lethal force against American citizens is an indication that something is afoot. Why is such a directive suddenly needed, a directive that goes against all previous policy?

Here is a possible scenario: If despite the media’s assault on Trump and the in-place legalized election theft procedures in the swing states, the Democrats and Ruling Elite conclude that the election can neither be won nor stolen, an orchestrated false flag insurrection is staged that activates Department of Defense directive 5240.01 issued September 27, 2024. Trump, his supporters, the Republican Party, probably sparing the RINOs as a fake opposition party will be needed to carry on the illusion of democracy under one-party rule, will be arrested as insurrectionists. The courts will be helpless as they have no enforcement powers, and any intervention against the coup will be misrepresented as “siding with insurrectionists.”

Absurd! Extreme! Nutcase! No, I am none of these. Just think of all the violations of US law and international law by Democrat officials. They are subject to arrest nationally and internationally. Trump, unless he cuts the deals I mentioned, is a threat to the Ruling Establishment as he can put most of them in prison. How can the Democrats and the Ruling Elite let a man and a movement this dangerous to them become President? They cannot.

Unless Trump sells out, he is in a fight to the death. Elon Musk knows it. Musk wondered on Tucker Carlson how long his prison sentence would be if Trump loses the election. Most Americans, however, are too insouciant to realize that if Trump loses the election, or it is stolen from him, or prevented from happening, there will never again be an election in the United States of America. A Stalin type election, perhaps, where 99.9% of the votes are taken by the ruling personage.

A country whose government, intellectuals, and Ruling Elite do not believe in the Constitution do not believe in the country.

A country whose government, intellectuals, and Ruling Elite do not believe in family, borders, evil, that uses education to indoctrinate white people against themselves as racists, misogynists, domestic terrorists, that uses censorship to prevent the emergence of challenges to official narratives which are lies, has an agenda that it knows the American people will not accept. So the agenda is left unstated and forced on the people by controlling the explanations.

Over the course of my life I have watched the collapse of spiritual life and sexual morality. Female modesty and female chastity no longer exist. Mothers have 12 year old daughters on birth control pills. College girls maintain themselves with porn sites where they copulate for all the world to see. Who wants to marry a public whore?

The Democrats have raised hatred as their banner. The hated are white heterosexuals who have a traditional moral code.

The white heterosexuals are going to lose, because to them it is just a conspiracy theory.

John Kerry calls for a Ministry of Truth: “The First Amendment stands as a major roadblock for us right now.”

Hillary Says the First Amendment means “We Lose Total Control”

Fearful of the Public, Western Leaders Turn to Censorship

Wall Street Journal Editor Emma Tucker said: “We owned the news. We were the gatekeepers, and we very much owned the facts as well.”

She added that people are learning that they cannot trust the whore media and that, consequently, the presstitutes are having a difficult time protecting the official narratives, which are lies that permit a handful of corrupt elites to impose their agendas.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned author and academic, chairman of The Institute for Political Economy where this article was originally published. Dr. Roberts was previously associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal. He was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy during the Reagan Administration. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.