Few can afford to be massively tariffed by the US, let alone sanctioned, and most aren’t willing to burn their bridges with the US for ideological reasons at the expense of their immediate economic interests.
Indian External Affairs Minister Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankarclarified earlier this month that
“India has never been for de-dollarization. Right now there is no proposal to have a BRICS currency. BRICS do discuss financial transactions, [but] the United States is our largest trade partner and we have no interest in weakening the dollar at all.”
This was in response to Trump threatening to impose 100% tariffs on any country that de-dollarizes. Here are three background briefings for those who haven’t followed this:
As the first explained, “BRICS can be compared to a Zoom conference: members actively participate in talks on financial multipolarity, partners observe their discussions in real time, and everyone else with an interest in them hears about the outcome afterwards.” The second one confirmed the veracity of this assessment after the last BRICS Summit had no tangible outcome other than a joint statement. And finally, the last reaffirms the preceding two’s insight, which corrects false perceptions about BRICS.
India is on pace to become the world’s third largest economy by 2030, which requires continued flows of American investment and maintaining access to its enormous market. At the same time, however, it also wants to internationalize the rupee. That last-mentioned policy isn’t de-dollarization per se, but pragmatic and a form of hedging, so Trump shouldn’t be too perturbed. He’s also expected to have the most Indophilic administration in history that’ll be reluctant to sanction India anyhow.
The Indian way represents the model for other Global South countries to follow. Few can afford to be massively tariffed by the US, let alone sanctioned, and most aren’t willing to burn their bridges with the US for ideological reasons at the expense of their immediate economic interests. Furthermore, those that take this chance are making themselves dependent on someone else, namely China. Therefore, this policy comes at the expense of sovereignty, though it’s ironically supposed to strengthen such.
The middle ground between remaining trapped in the dollar system and experiencing its wrath after trying to liberate oneself is to gradually increase the use of one’s national currencies. In parallel with this, having access to alternative non-Western platforms like Chinese ones and whatever BRICS may or may not unveil can help, but they mustn’t become replacements. The goal is to diversify currencies and platforms, not replace one dependency with another, and it’ll take time implement.
Barring a black swan that completely revolutionizes the global financial system, the dollar will likely remain the world’s reserve currency, and Trump will take drastic action against China if it dares to unveil the so-called “petroyuan”. Those suppliers and clients who also decide to use it will face his fury as well. The “petroyuan” might therefore only remain a euphemism for China’s potential use of this currency in some of its bilateral energy deals while probably falling fall short of expectations in the medium-term.
The long term is too far out to forecast, but if the US keeps de-dollarization trends in check under Trump and institutionalizes the means that he’s expected to employ, then that’ll naturally have an adverse effect on internationalizing the yuan. At most, it might begin to be used more in bilateral trade deals too, but the US’ grand strategic goal is for the dollar to remain the currency of choice in energy deals. Internationalizing the ruble like Russia has done with its energy deals isn’t a threat to the dollar at all.
The only reason it even happened was because the US prohibited the use of dollars by others when purchasing Russian energy products, but curtailing and eventually even lifting these sanctions (as well as the associated one banning Russia’s use of SWIFT) could likely reverse this trend to a large degree. After all, it’s much more convenient for everyone to go back to the old order of business, though the US’ weaponization of the financial system since 2022 left an impression that’ll lead to continued hedging.
Image: New Development Bank’s logo in the HQ of the bank in Shanghai (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)
As “politically incorrect” as it may sound, China already complies with some of these same Western sanctions against Russia despite still officially criticizing them as hegemonic. This is proven by the Chinese-based BRICS New Development Bank and the SCO Bank suspending projects in Russia and not allowing the transfer of Russia’s dues respectively as proven here and here. RT also drew attention to Russia’s payment problems with China in early September, which were analyzed at length here.
It might therefore be unwise for any country to make itself dependent on China by promulgating radical de-dollarization policies since there’s no guarantee that the People’s Republic will have its back. The fact of the matter is that China’s complex interdependencies with the West are too deep, and this places major limits on its financial policymaking capabilities, thus explaining why it hasn’t fully supported Russia. This observation could lead to self-imposed restraints among aspiring de-dollarizing states.
No responsible country like India would feel comfortable fully returning to the former system so the increased use of national currencies and utilization of alternative platforms will persist into the future. So long as these trends remain manageable, and Trump is expected to do his utmost to this end, then no radical changes are expected anytime soon. Everything will continue moving more or less in the same direction, but at a gradual pace, and that’s best for the West and the Global South at this point in time.
*
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.
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.
While several reports on the Mayotte cyclone have spoken of hundreds of people dying, other reports, which have also quoted local officials, have expressed the apprehension that the number of dead may even be in the thousands. (See Reuters report ‘several hundred, may be thousands have died in Mayotte cyclone’, CBS report ‘Thousands feared dead after Cyclone Chido hits French territory’, NBC report ‘Thousands feared dead in the archipelago of Mayotte’). What is more, recent reports, such as those by DW, have stated that following the weekend disaster there is a shortage of rescue workers and related help, despite rescue teams being sent from France.
Mayotte is located in Indian Ocean off the East African coast, with Mozambique and Madagascar closest and France being as much as 8000km away. There has been growing social unrest in this French territory which has experienced prolonged neglect and widespread poverty. Over 75% of the people here are reported to be living below poverty line. People have suffered from chronic shortage of drinking water. Many of them live in shanty colonies. People returning to ancestral homes are sometimes labeled illegal settlers.
The people living in poor, weak shelters are highly vulnerable to disasters like sea storms and cyclones whose intensity has been rising in times of climate change. Last year, in 2023, Cyclone Freddy which devastated some neighboring areas was recorded as one of the highest intensity cyclones. Cyclone Chido which has just struck is also being talked about as a very high intensity cyclone.
.
The path of Tropical Cyclone Chido Emergency Response Coordination Centre ERCC (Source: Emergency Response Coordination Centre ERCC)
.
However with adequate preparation and planning, even several low income countries have been able to improve disaster preparedness to such an extent that by combining timely warning and evacuation to special shelters that have been created nearby, it has been possible to prevent or significantly reduce loss of life even at the time of those cyclones which have destroyed a very large number of houses.
However despite the high vulnerability of the people of Mayotte, it is clear that adequate preventive and precautionary steps were not taken here.
Mayotte has a population of a little over 320,000 and for such a large number of deaths to take place in such a small population is a big tragedy. This has happened because no significant steps have been taken to improve the safety ad resilience of the people at a time of increasing threats and in fact the vulnerability of the people here has been increasing.
Recent reports from the area have stated that due to the strong religious feelings of burying the dead within 24 hours as well as due to other factors such as problems of data collection, the exact number of those who die may never be known, but at least steps can still be taken to improve the medical help for injured people and also to step up the rescue work in those areas where there are still chances of the life of trapped people being saved. The devastation has been so huge that the rehabilitation and reconstruction effort will be a big challenge. France is a rich country and must learn to give much more care and attention to the people of its several distant territories, instead of leaving three-fourths of the people in a place like Mayotte to live in poverty. In particular protection from disasters in these widely scattered places must get much higher attention matched by the inflow of adequate resources to take up the necessary protective and safety works.
*
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.
Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Planet in Peril, Protecting Earth for Children and A Day in 2071. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: Soldiers remove fallen trees in the French territory of Mayotte in the Indian Ocean, after Cyclone Chido caused extensive damage with reports of several fatalities on Sunday Dec. 15, 2024. France mobilized emergency aid on Monday, deploying ships and military aircraft to assist Mayotte, its impoverished overseas territory in the Indian Ocean, after the island was devastated by its most severe storm in nearly a century. Etat Major des Armées/AP
The notion that Tehran might be attacked doesn’t come from pure speculation. It has been in the works for decades, (See Global Research Video, Lux Mediaprogram at Lux Media). NATO aggression on Syria plays a critical role in the long-term strategy aimed against Iran.
If Biden is of the belief that raw politics infected the prosecution of his son, the shoddy case against Assange is even clearer. It was political, personal and misguided. Here was a vindictive effort, steered by characters of such clouded malevolence as former CIA director Mike Pompeo and an overzealous prosecution team in the Department of Justice, to punish a figure who had muddied the sanctimonious waters of the Imperial Republic.
Romania isn’t as indispensable for NATO’s military logistics to Ukraine as Poland is, but it still borders Ukraine’s western and southwestern regions that are of strategic importance for the bloc.
The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency and the Medical Board of Australia did a criminal thing in March 2021 and issued a gag order to all nurses, doctors, psychologists and every other health practitioner in Australia to shut up and be quiet about the risks of so-called COVID vaccines.
The Korean war never really ended, of course. It was just put on hold. The war itself lasted three years from 1950 to 1953, with both sides — the ROK in the south backed primarily by the US, and the DPRK in the North with significant military support from communist China — storming across the 38th parallel dividing north and south, only to be beaten back after vicious fighting.
Our analysis confirms that the “War on Iran” has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon since the mid-1990s under US Central Command’s (USCENTCOM) “Strategy of Dual Containment” directed against the Rogue States of Iraq and Iran formulated during the Clinton administration.
Since 2020, the vaccine industry has committed highly visible and deadly crimes. The COVID-19 operation and its toxic genetic injections, misrepresented as “safe and effective vaccines,” have killed tens of millions of people and injured at least one billion.
Image: Edmundo González in 2024 (From the Public Domain)
In the first case, Washington DC thinks it can arbitrarily “elect” Venezuelan presidents, as was the case with Juan Guaido back in 2019. And although he seems to have fallen out of favor since then, the US never has issues finding replacements. Namely, on November 19, State Secretary Antony Blinken declared that Edmundo Gonzalez retroactively “won” and that Venezuelans “spoke resoundingly on July 28” and made him “the president-elect”, insisting that “democracy demands respect for the will of the voters”.
Now, if you think that this is largely inconsequential, as Blinken is part of an outgoing administration, you’d be wrong, because many Republicans are just as hostile to sovereigntist governments, particularly in Latin America. For instance, Marco Rubio, the most likely candidate as Blinken’s successor, openly supports overthrowing Maduro.
Other prominent GOP members who are after Venezuela include Elliott Abrams, who was the US Special Envoy tasked with ensuring a coup in the country precisely during the nearly fateful 2019-2021 period.
It’s still unclear whether Trump would reappoint Abrams to any position, but if he does so, it would certainly indicate that he’s recommitting to America’s aggression on Venezuela.
NATO aggression on Syria plays a critical role in the long-term strategy aimed against Iran. Namely, the country is at the forefront of the Axis of Resistance (AoR), an alliance that includes a number of actors in the Middle East and beyond, but is largely deployed in Iran, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon.
Syria was one of the most prominent members of AoR, making its destruction by NATO-backed terrorists and occupation forces a major blow to the alliance. Worse yet, Damascus is not only out of the game as an ally, but is now effectively an enemy, as the Islamic radicals who occupied the country are extremely hostile to Tehran. Not to mention that Hezbollah is now cut off.
Instability in Syria could now easily spill over to Iraq, where various Shia militias are closely aligned with Iran. This was likely one of the intended consequences of overthrowing Bashar al-Assad, as destabilizing Iraq could give the Pentagon a casus belli to attack Shia militias. This would push the US, its allies, vassals and satellite states all the way to Iran’s western borders, leaving it extremely vulnerable to crawling destabilization.
Israeli ties with Turkey and Azerbaijan might play a major role in this, as both countries are eyeing Iran. Namely, their pan-Turkist, Neo-Ottoman ambitions include northwestern parts of the country, where ethnic Azeris dominate. Tehran is certainly aware of these megalomaniacal, expansionist policies, but is still trying to pursue peaceful coexistence. However, this might be too optimistic as the US keeps pushing for war, which will also require the participation of its regional allies.
Namely, as the “FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018” expires on December 20, the government might be using this to “manipulate the Congress into passing the new H.R.8610 (Counter-UAS Authority Security, Safety, and Reauthorization Act of 2024) which will include appropriations and enhanced government powers to control citizens, and they’re even going so far as to use it to push for acts of war against other countries”. In other words, back to square one.
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.
The “globalization of war” is a hegemonic project. Major military and covert intelligence operations are being undertaken simultaneously in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia and the Far East. The U.S. military agenda combines both major theater operations as well as covert actions geared towards destabilizing sovereign states.
Restaurants Canada is pleased by today’s announcement from the federal government of a two-month GST holiday on restaurant meals, among other products. This is a big win for the restaurant industry and comes after months of relentless advocacy from Restaurants Canada for meaningful cost relief for our sector and for Canadians.
The restaurant industry is doing worse today than at any time in recent history, including the pandemic. More than half (53%) of restaurant companies are operating at a loss or just breaking even, up from 12% pre-pandemic. They are seeing fewer guests and smaller cheques as a result of Canadians reducing their discretionary spending during the affordability crisis. At the same time, restaurants are still carrying heavy debt loads and all their operating costs have gone up by 20% or more.
The recent drop in foot traffic has been deeply discouraging for our operators as they head into the challenging winter season. Today’s announcement restores some much-needed hope to our industry and we are optimistic it will translate to increased spending at local restaurants across the country.
When GST was introduced in 1991, it led to an immediate reduction in meals consumed at restaurants, especially as other food products sold at grocery stores were exempt. The foodservice industry suffered an 11% decline in real sales, 7% of which was attributed to GST. Based on Restaurants Canada’s econometric model, today’s announcement could result in a 5% increase in sales for the average restaurant. For a restaurant with $1.5 million in sales, this would result in an additional $5,700 in sales per month.
Today’s announcement by the Prime Minister means that more Canadians will be able to celebrate with loved ones at a restaurant, have lunch with colleagues or treat themselves to a morning pastry on their way to work. We also appreciate that the relief will be extended over January, which is typically the lowest time of the year for our industry, and right through to Valentine’s Day.
We congratulate Prime Minister Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland on this significant announcement and encourage them to look at other ways they can support Canadians through this difficult time. Restaurants Canada has been urging the government to reduce EI payroll tax by 2% to put more money back in workers’ pockets and help employers invest in hiring and wages.
*
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.
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.
Our analysis confirms that the “War on Iran” has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon since the mid-1990s under US Central Command’s (USCENTCOM) “Strategy of Dual Containment’ directed against the Rogue States of Iraq and Iran” formulated during the Clinton administration.
“First Iraq, then Iran”: The stockpiling and deployment of advanced weapons systems directed against Iran started in the immediate wake of the 2003 bombing and invasion of Iraq.
From the outset, these war plans were led by the US, in liaison with NATO and Israel. The objective of the war on Iran was carefully outlined by US Central Command in liaison with US Strategic Command:
“The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the President’s National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Chairman’s National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of the United States Central Command’s theater strategy. The NSS directs implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests, to other states in the region, and to their own citizens.
Dual containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM’s theater strategy is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement, as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States’ vital interest in the region – uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil.” (USCENTCOM, 1995, emphasis added)
See Below:
NSS Strategy of “Containment of the Rogue States”:
“United States’ Vital Interest in the Region – Uninterrupted, Secure U.S./Allied Access to Gulf Oil”
In other words the US NSS hegemonic objective is to take control of Iran’s OIL and GAS Reserves. “It’s America’s Promised Land”
(which ironically are portrayed as a threat to the environment, ie. CO2 and the fake Global Warming narrative)
1. Iran. Third Largest Reserves of Oil Worldwide
Iran is not only second in terms of its gas reserves after Russia, it ranks third Worldwide in relation to its oil reserves (12% of Worldwide oil reserves) versus a meagre 4% for the U.S.
2. Iran Reserves of Natural Gas
Iran ranks Second after Russia. Russia, Iran and Qatar possess 54.1 percent of the World’s reserves of natural gas.
-Russia 24.3%,
-Iran 17.3%,
-Qatar, 12.5 % (in partnership with Iran)
versus 5.3 % for the US
3. Taking Control of the Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Maritime Gas Corridor
Extending from the Egyptian border, Gaza and the Levant coastline. The unspoken objective is to take control and confiscate the maritime gas reserves.
The Unspoken Role of U.S. “Allies”: Threaten Iran on Behalf of Washington
Following the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration identified Iran and Syria as the next stage of “the road map to war”.
Under the Trump administration, a US Attack on Iran was contemplated with the support of Israel and Saudi Arabia. The US design was to incite its Middle East allies including Israel “to threaten Iran on behalf of Washington”.
In the words of former Vice President Dick Cheney
“Israel will do the dirty work for us” (paraphrase). According to Cheney: (2005)
“The Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards,”
In the present context, “the Dirty Work” concept applies to all America’s “Allies”. They are “Allies” as well Instruments of US Hegemony.
From a military standpoint, the member states of NATO, most of which are part of the European Union act on behalf of America’s hegemonic agenda. While they are “instruments” of the US hegemonic agenda, they are also the target and the victims of US sponsored “economic warfare”.
Most countries of the European Union are de facto enemies of the U.S., namely the victims of strong economic medicine, austerity measures, hikes in energy prices, the collapse of purchasing power, poverty, unemployment and the demise of the Welfare State. In turn, “regime change” is applied Worldwide, elections are manipulated, heads of State and heads of government are “appointed” and generously coopted by the financial establishment, funded by the billionaire foundations.
Meanwhile, World public opinion is led to believe that Israel is waging war against Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, and that the US presidency must pressure Israel and call for a “cease fire”.
The pro-Israel Zionist Lobby is a useful instrument. While it has ideological and historical underpinnings, it serves the interests of the financial establishment. The World is led to believe that this is a “war of religions”. The unspoken objective is to provide “a human face” to America’s Acts of war: Responsibility to Protect (R2P), The Just War.
Bear in mind “Greater Israel”in the contemporary context “is not strictly a Zionist Project for the Middle East, it has become an integral part of US foreign policy, its strategic objective is to extend US hegemony as well as fracture and balkanize the Middle East.”
The Tenets of International Law. “Complicity in Genocide”
A genocide is being conducted by the Netanyahu proxy government against the people of Palestine. By supporting Israel, Western governments are complicitin the conduct of genocide under Articles III and IV of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Article III (e) Complicity in genocide.
Article IV. Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished [Article III(e)], whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.” *emphasis added)
It is important that the peace movement take cognizance of the fact that their own heads of State and heads of government, namely Biden, Starmer, Trudeau, Macron, Scholz, et. al. are from a legal standpoint “complicit” (Genocide Convention),
Moreover, since World War II, all U.S. led wars have deliberately targeted civilians, which is a crime against humanity under The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC).
“La classe politique criminalisée”. It’s the “criminalization of politics”.
“Protest” is invariably redundant. The Anti-war movement must question their legitimacy.
“Theater Iran Near Term” (TIRANNT)
The article below reviews the details of a declassified 2003 plan and scenario of a war on Iran entitled “Theater Iran Near Term” (TIRANNT) to be implemented in the immediate wake of the war on Iraq.
This Pentagon blueprint had identified several thousand targets inside Iran as part of a “Shock and Awe” Blitzkrieg. In all likelihood, many of these targets are still on the drawing board of the Pentagon.
And Israel is being used by the Pentagon. The people of Israel have no interest in conquering Iran.
Economic Warfare vs. The Military Option
In the last few years (prior to October 7, 2023), US sanctions against Iran have gone into high gear. Washington’s strategy was to “Force Iranian Oil Exports to Zero” with a view to destabilizing Iran’s national economy. Formulated by Mike Pompeo during the Trump administration:
“The goal of the policy is to drive up the costs of Iran’s malign behavior and more strongly address the broad range of threats to peace and security their regime presents,” according to State Department official. (quoted by WaPo).
While the “military option” against Iran was “temporarily” put on hold, a “surprise war” on Lebanon was contemplated by Israel with the support of the US as part Washington’s broader Middle East military agenda.
According to Elijah J. Magnier, “Hezbollah leader Sayyed HassanNasrallah held a private meeting [in April 2019] with his top military commanders in which he warned them to prepare for a hot Summer because Israel plans to launch a surprise war against Lebanon.“
I may not remain among you for very long; it is possible that the entire first level of leadership could be killed, including myself. Israel may succeed in assassinating many leaders and commanders. The death of some key personalities will not be the end of Hezbollah, because the party doesn’t rely merely on individuals but rather on the entire society that is an essential part of its existence”, said Sayyed Nasrallah to the gathering.
That was back in April 2019, –which suggests that the broader war against Palestine, Lebanon and Iran was not a “surprise attack” It had been on the drawing board of the Pentagon (in consultation with Israel and NATO) for at least four years prior to October 7, 2023.
The following video published by Global Research in late October 2023 explains the nature of the secret memorandum, the False Flags and the conduct of the genocide which is supported by Western governments.
The genocide was planned well in advance of the so-called October 7, 2023 “Surprise Attack”.
Video: Genocide as Confirmed by the Ministry of Intelligence’s “Secret Memorandum”
Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 12, 2024, revisions October 14, 2024
“Theater Iran Near Term” (TIRANNT).
The Ongoing Planning of War against Iran
Michel Chossudovsky
February 2007
Code named by US military planners as TIRANNT, “Theater Iran Near Term” has identified several thousand targets inside Iran as part of a “Shock and Awe” Blitzkrieg, which is now in its final planning stages.
Revealed last April 2006 by William Arkin, a former US intelligence analyst, writing in the Washington Post, TIRANNT was first established in May 2003, following the invasion of Iraq:
“In early 2003, even as U.S. forces were on the brink of war with Iraq, the Army had already begun conducting an analysis for a full-scale war with Iran. The analysis, called TIRANNT, for “theater Iran near term,” was coupled with a mock scenario for a Marine Corps invasion and a simulation of the Iranian missile force. U.S. and British planners conducted a Caspian Sea war game around the same time. And Bush directed the U.S. Strategic Command to draw up a global strike war plan for an attack against Iranian weapons of mass destruction.
All of this will ultimately feed into a new war plan for “major combat operations” against Iran that military sources confirm now exists in draft form.
… Under TIRANNT, Army and U.S. Central Command planners have been examining both near-term and out-year scenarios for war with Iran, including all aspects of a major combat operation, from mobilization and deployment of forces through postwar stability operations after regime change.” (William Arkin, Washington Post, 16 April 2006)
First Iraq, then Iran
The 2003 decision to target Iran under TIRANNT should come as no surprise. It is part of the broader military roadmap. Already during the Clinton administration, US Central Command (USCENTCOM) had formulated in 1995 “in war theater plans” to invade first Iraq and then Iran.
“The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the President’s National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Chairman’s National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of the United States Central Command’s theater strategy. The NSS directs implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests, to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. Dual containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM’s theater strategy is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement, as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States’ vital interest in the region – uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil.”
Consistent with CENTCOM’s 1995 “sequencing” of theater operations, the plans to target Iran were activated under TIRANNT in the immediate wake of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Confirmed by Arkin, the active component of the Iran military agenda was launched in May 2003 “when modelers and intelligence specialists pulled together the data needed for theater-level (meaning large-scale) scenario analysis for Iran.” (Arkin, op cit). In October 2003, different theater scenarios for an Iran war were contemplated:
“The US army, navy, air force and marines have all prepared battle plans and spent four years building bases and training for “Operation Iranian Freedom”. Admiral Fallon, the new head of US Central Command, has inherited computerized plans under the name TIRANNT (Theatre Iran Near Term).” (New Statesman, 19 Feb 2007)
Concurrently, the various parallel components of TIRANNT were put in place including the Marines “Concept of Operations”:
“The Marines, meanwhile, have not only been involved in CENTCOM’s war planning, but have been focused on their own specialty, “forcible entry.” In April 2003, the Corps published its “Concept of Operations” for a maneuver against a mock country that explores the possibility of moving forces from ship to shore against a determined enemy without establishing a beachhead first. Though the Marine Corps enemy is described only as a deeply religious revolutionary country named Karona, it is — with its Revolutionary Guards, WMD and oil wealth — unmistakably meant to be Iran.
Various scenarios involving Iran’s missile force have also been examined in another study, initiated in 2004 and known as BMD-I (ballistic missile defense — Iran). In this study, the Center for Army Analysis modeled the performance of U.S. and Iranian weapons systems to determine the number of Iranian missiles expected to leak through a coalition defense.
The day-to-day planning for dealing with Iran’s missile force falls to the U.S. Strategic Command in Omaha. In June 2004, Rumsfeld alerted the command to be prepared to implement CONPLAN 8022, a global strike plan that includes Iran. CONPLAN 8022 calls for bombers and missiles to be able to act within 12 hours of a presidential order. The new task force, sources have told me, mostly worries that if it were called upon to deliver “prompt” global strikes against certain targets in Iran under some emergency circumstances, the president might have to be told that the only option is a nuclear one. (William Arkin, Washington Post, 16 April 2006)
“Shock and Awe”
US military planning includes specific roles to be performed by NATO and Israel in the event of an attack on Iran. The German navy is deployed formally under a UN mandate in the Eastern Mediterranean. NATO bases in Europe would also be involved.
Documented by Global Research, extensive war games were conducted since last Summer by Iran and its allies of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, including Russia and China. In turn, the US has conducted war games off the Iranian coastline.
The Pentagon’s Second 9/11
What is now being contemplated by Washington is an overwhelming use of military force in retaliation to Iran’s alleged non-compliance. This of course is the pretext, the justification for waging war. The Pentagon has also contemplated retaliating against Iran in the case of a second 9/11 attack:
“A third plan sets out how the military can both disrupt and respond to another major terrorist strike on the United States. It includes lengthy annexes that offer a menu of options for the military to retaliate quickly against specific terrorist groups, individuals or state sponsors depending on who is believed to be behind an attack. Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets, according to current and former defense officials familiar with the plan.
This plan details “what terrorists or bad guys we would hit if the gloves came off. The gloves are not off,” said one official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. (emphasis added, WP 23 April 2006)
The presumption of this military document, is that a Second 911 attack “which is lacking today” would usefully create both a “justification and an opportunity” to wage war on “some known targets [Iran and Syria]”.
Civilian Targets
Press reports in the Middle East confirm that the planned air strikes are by no means limited to Iran’s nuclear facilities. Central Command Headquarters in Florida (CENTCOM) has already selected a comprehensive list of military and civilian targets.
Industrial sites, civilian infrastructure including roads, water systems, bridges, electric power plants telecommunications towers, government buildings are part of the assumptions underlying the Blitzkrieg. “A single raid could result in 10,000 targets being hit with warplanes flying from the US and Diego Garcia” (Gulf News, 21 Feb 2007, emphasis added)
Meanwhile, the US has been mustering support for its agenda following the holding of a regional Security Conference in the UAE.
Nuclear War
Military planners are said to favor the use of conventional weapons. The use of tactical nuclear weapons, which are now part of the Middle East war theater arsenal, are not explicitly contemplated, at least in the first round of the US sponsored Blitzkrieg. However, the fact that nuclear weapons are acknowledged as a possible choice in the conventional war theater is indicative that their use is an integral part of military planning.
In November 2004, US Strategic Command conducted a major exercise of a “global strike plan” entitled “Global Lightening”. The latter involved a simulated attack using both conventional and nuclear weapons against a “fictitious enemy” [Iran]. Following the “Global Lightening” exercise, US Strategic Command declared an advanced state of readiness.
In this context, CONPLAN is the operational plan pursuant to the Global Strike Plan. It is described as “an actual plan that the Navy and the Air Force translate into strike package for their submarines and bombers,’
CONPLAN 8022 is ‘the overall umbrella plan for sort of the pre-planned strategic scenarios involving nuclear weapons.’
‘It’s specifically focused on these new types of threats — Iran, North Korea — proliferators and potentially terrorists too,’ he said. ‘There’s nothing that says that they can’t use CONPLAN 8022 in limited scenarios against Russian and Chinese targets.’ (According to Hans Kristensen, of the Nuclear Information Project, quoted in Japanese economic News Wire, op cit)
The use of tactical nuclear weapons is contemplated under CONPLAN 8022 alongside conventional weapons, as part of the Bush administration’s preemptive war doctrine. In May 2004, National Security Presidential Directive NSPD 35 entitled Nuclear Weapons Deployment Authorization was issued. While its contents remains classified, the presumption is that NSPD 35 pertains to the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in the Middle East war theater in compliance with CONPLAN 8022.
For further details on the US nuclear option, see Michel Chossudovsky:
The attacks are slated to be carried out in three separate waves “with the radar and communications jamming protection being provided by U.S. Air Force AWACS and other U.S. aircraft in the area”. (See W Madsen, Global Research, October 22, 2004)
The bunker buster bombs can also be used to deliver tactical nuclear bombs. The B61-11 is the “nuclear version” of the “conventional” BLU 113. It can be delivered in much same way as the conventional bunker buster bomb.
According to a recent report in the London’s Sunday Times (7 January 2007): “Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear “bunker-busters”, according to several Israeli military sources.”
If Iran were to respond to US-Israeli attacks in the form of targeted strikes on US military facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Gulf States, the war would escalate to the entire region. In this case, the US could retaliate in the form of “pre-emptive” nuclear attacks on Iran using bunker buster tactical nuclear war heads.
The most likely scenario is that Iran, in the logic of its own military planning, would indeed respond to the US sponsored attacks as well as deploy ground forces inside occupied Iraq.
Naval Deployment
Three strike groups including the Stennis, the Eisenhower and the Nimitz are being deployed in the Persian Gulf. According to Gulf News, “The Stennis strike group… is now strengthening a high level of US Navy presence in the Gulf. The Stennis and the carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower, already in the region, will soon be joined by the carrier Nimitz. (Gulf News, 21 Feb 2007). According to British military sources, the US navy can put six carriers into battle at a month’s notice.
Redeployment of US Troops
Confirmed by military sources, some 8500 of US troops are being redeployed from US military facilities in Germany and Italy to Afghanistan and Iraq, both of which border on Iran. One assumes that they are being dispatched to the Middle East war theater in the eventuality that the air strikes will lead into a ground war with Iran.
The Pentagon, contradicting its own statements, has dismissed as “ludicrous” the press reports that the US is planning an all out attack on Iran in the “near term”.
Meanwhile, Iran has launched a three days war games entitled Eghtedar or Grandeur. These exercises which involve naval, air and ground forces are larger than those conducted last Summer. They are slated to take place in 16 out of Iran’s 30 provinces. The stated objective is to establish a state of readiness to defend Iran in the eventuality of a US attack.
Vigilant Shield 07 War Games
From September through December 2006, the US conducted a New Cold War scenario of all out war directed against Iran and its Cold war era enemies:
Entitled Vigilant Shield 07, the war games are not limited to a single Middle East war theater (e.g. Iran), they also include Russia, China and North Korea.
The details of the Vigilant Shield 07 exercise scenario, is contained in a U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) briefing dated August 2006 (revealed by William Arkin in a WP article) .
The enemies are Irmingham [Iran], Nemazee [North Korea], Ruebek [Russia], Churya [China]
• Additional Nemazee ICBM Shipments to Launch Facilities • RMOB [Russian main operating bases] Acft Conduct LR Navigation Flights • AS-15 [nuclear armed cruise missile] Handling at RMOBs
– Minus 41 Days: • Additional Nemazee ICBM Preps at Launch Pad # 2 – Minus 40 Days: • Activity at Nemazee Nuclear Test Facilities – Minus 35 Days: • DOS [Department of State] Travel Warning – Minus 30 Days: • Ruebek LRA Deploys Acft to Anadyr & Vorkuta
• Phase 2 Minus 30 Days:
• Growing International Condemnation of Ruebek • Ruebek Deploys Submarines
– Minus 20 Days: • Nemazee Recalls Reservists – Minus 14 Days: • DOS Draw-down Sequencing – Minus 13 Days: • Ruebek Closes US Embassy in Washington DC – Minus 11 Days: • Nemazee Conducts Fueling of Additional ICBMs • Ruebeki Presidential Statement on Possible US Attack
• Phase 2 Minus 10 Days:
• POTUS Addresses Congress on War Powers Act
– Minus 6 Days: • Ruebek President Calls “Situation Grave” – Minus 5 Days: • CALCM Activity at Anadyr, Vorkuta, and Tiksi • Ruebeki SS-25 [nuclear armed mobile ICBMs] Conduct out of Garrison Deployments • Nemazee Assembling ICBM for Probable Launch – Minus 4 Days: • Ruebek Closes US Embassy in Washington DC • Ruebek Acft Conduct Outer ADIZ [air defense identification zone] Penetrations • Mid-Air Collison w/NORAD Acft During ADIZ Penetration
• Phase 2 Minus 4 Days:
• Nemazee ICBM Launch Azimuth Threatens US
– Minus 3 Days: • NATO Diplomatic Efforts Fail to Diffuse Crisis • USAMB to Ruebek Recalled for Consultation • POTUS Addresses Nation – Minus 2 Days: • Nemazee Leadership Movement – Minus 1 Day: • Ruebek Expels US Mission
• Phase 2 / Execution: 10 – 14 Dec 06
– Pre-Attack I & W – Imminent Terrorist Attack on Pentagon Suggests Pentagon COOP [continuity of operations plan] – Nemazee Conducts 2 x ICBM Combat Launches Against United States – Ruebek Conducts Limited Strategic Attack on United States • Wave 1 – 8 x Bear H Defense Suppression w/CALCM • Wave 2 – Limited ICBM & SLBM Attack – 2 x ICBM Launched (1 impacts CMOC [Cheyenne Mountain], 1 malfunctions) – 2 x SLBM Launched Pierside (1 impacts SITE-R [“Raven Rock” bunker on the Maryland-Pennsylvania border], 1 malfunctions) – 3 x Bear H from Dispersal Bases w/ALCM (Eielson AFB, CANR, Cold Lake) – US Conducts Limited Retaliatory Attack on Ruebek • 1 x ICBM C2 Facility • 1 x ICBM Against ICBM Launch Location • Phase 2 / Execution: – Ruebek Prepares Additional Attack on United States • Wave 3 – Prepares for Additional Strategic Attacks – 1 x ICBM Movement, NO Launch – 3 x SLBM PACFLT Pierside Missile Handling Activity (NO Launch) – 6 x BEAR H (launch & RTB [return to base]) w/6 x ALCM (NO launch)” [source Northern Command and William Arkin, Washington Post)
Complacency of Western Public Opinion
The complacency of Western public opinion (including the US anti-war movement) is disturbing.
No concern has been expressed at the political level as to the likely consequences of these simulated attacks, which could evolve towards a World War III scenario, with Russia and China siding with Iran.
With the exception of the Middle East, the war on Iran and the dangers of escalation are not considered “front page news.”
All of which contributes to the real possibility that the war could be carried out, leading to the unthinkable: a nuclear holocaust over a large part of the Middle East.
It should be noted that a nuclear nighmare could occur even if nuclear weapons are not used. The bombing of Iran’s nuclear facitlities using conventional weapons would contribute to unleashing a Chernobyl type disaster with extensive radioactive fallout.
Michel Chossudovsky is the author of the international best America’s “War on Terrorism” Second Edition, Global Research, 2005. He is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Center for Research on Globalization.
Note: Readers are welcome to cross-post this article with a view to spreading the word and warning people of the dangers of a broader Middle East war. Please indicate the source and copyright note.
Since making what was likely a life-saving plea deal to spare himself from the medieval barbarities of the US prison system, Julian Assange, and his campaign intimates, are now focusing on the next step. Having been directly targeted by the speech stomping apparatus known as the US Espionage Act, and convicted under it, the US government made the WikiLeaks publisher an example. On June 24, 2024, he pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defence information under the Act, or section 793(g) (Title 18, USC). In one respect, it was an improvement, reducing the original charge sheet of 18 alleged offences, 17 of them based on elements of espionage.
While Assange’s conviction delighted those scribbling defenders of the national security state, the toadies, the paid-up worthies, and anyone from the CIA to CBS (“Assange: hacker, thief and exposer of confidential sources!” came the shrill voice of approval), his prosecution and ultimate conviction on a single charge of the Espionage Act served only one purpose: pouring oil on obtaining, using and discussing material about the crimes and vices of national security, notably the sort supplied by whistleblowers.
One way of diminishing the sinister implications of that thuggish legacy is to persuade Freedom Land’s highest, doddering magistrate to show a skerrick of good sense – whatever is left of it. The Assange campaign has now shifted its focus to obtaining a pardon for the publisher, with a goal of persuading up to 30,000 people to write to US President Joe Biden to do just that.
“By granting a pardon to Julian Assange,” the campaign online site states, “President Biden can not only correct a grave injustice but also send a powerful message that defending democracy and press freedom remains at the core of his presidency. He can reaffirm America’s dedication to truth and the First Amendment.”
Two US lawmakers are convinced that one of Biden’s last acts in office should be just that. It would be fitting, in some ways, that he does so. In the dying days of his administration, President Barack Obama commuted the sentence of one of WikiLeaks’ most invaluable sources, Chelsea Manning. While it fell short of a pardon, its effect was to modify the crushing sentence of 35 years imposed by a military tribunal for disclosing classified government information to WikiLeaks.
Last month, US Reps. James McGovern (D-Mass.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) penned a letter to Biden approving the “resolution of the criminal case against” the WikiLeaks founder, thereby ending his “protracted detention”, permitting him to return to Australia and be reunited with his family. But they expressed grave concerns “that the agreement that ended the case required Mr Assange to plead guilty to felony charges under section 793 of the Espionage Act”. Doing so “set off alarms” among various members of Congress and advocates of free speech and freedom of the press by setting “a precedent that greatly deepens our concern.” It was, fundamentally, “the first time the Act has been deployed against a publisher”.
The letter went on to note that section 793 of the Espionage Act had always posed a risk that it could be used against journalists and news organisations “particularly those who cover national security topics” as it “criminalizes the obtaining, retaining, or disclosing of sensitive information”. It was precisely that risk that “informed the Obama administration’s decision not to prosecute Mr Assange”. Accordingly, “a pardon would remove the precedent set by the plea”.
As for the prospects for an actual pardon from the Biden Whitehouse, one can hardly tell. Certainly, the president is in a frightful muddle after pardoning his own son Hunter for felony gun and tax convictions, an act of familial indulgence he said he would never succumb to. It was also complicated by its sheer broadness. In his justification, Biden’s words struck a familiar note, largely because they could have come out of the mouth of his opponent and successor, Donald Trump. While he believed “in the justice system […] I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it has led to a miscarriage of justice”.
CBS is now reporting that Biden is ruminating over the possibility of issuing various preemptive pardons for senior White House aides and members of the House Jan. 6 committee in anticipation of any retributive campaign that might be waged by the incoming Trump administration. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has also publicly urged the president to do the same. The president has also granted clemency to almost 1,500 individuals placed in home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic, and pardoned 39 individuals convicted of non-violent crimes. Could all of this possibly make Biden mellow towards the man he once accused of high-tech cyberterrorism?
A pardon would go some way to thinning the toxic legacy Assange’s conviction under the Espionage Act, one that, by its very nature, signals a global warning to all publishers and journalists involved in exposing the crimes and misdemeanours of state. Assange was the first non-US national foreign publisher working outside the United States to be charged and convicted under that archaically oppressive law, ostensibly for injuring the national security of the US when exposing the identities of informants and sources.
Assange’s plea deal, much like his entire prosecution, is also imbued with farce and gross pantomime. Was former New York Rep. Peter King right to claim, as he did in November 2010, that the WikiLeaks publications were “worse even than a physical attack on Americans”, worse, even, “than a military attack”? Not according to the Northern Mariana Islands Chief Judge, Ramona V. Manglona, presiding over the final proceedings facing the publisher.
“The government has indicated that there is no personal victim here. That tells me the dissemination of this information did not result in any known physical injury.”
If Biden is of the belief that raw politics infected the prosecution of his son, the shoddy case against Assange is even clearer. It was political, personal and misguided. Here was a vindictive effort, steered by characters of such clouded malevolence as former CIA director MikePompeo and an overzealous prosecution team in the Department of Justice, to punish a figure who had muddied the sanctimonious waters of the Imperial Republic. As he has now assumed the mantle of pardoner-in-chief, Biden has a chance to bulk the folder and make history of the right sort.
*
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.
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]
But somehow, the Anti-War and 9/11 Truth movements have not really been able to come together to advance their related causes.
Both agree that we’re being lied to on a regular basis about wars and foreign policy agendas, but not all in the two movements agree that 9/11 was one of those lies.
And that’s a shame given the number of wars justified by the 9/11 deception.
Given recent world events – particularly the dangerous willingness of the outgoing Biden administration to risk World War 3 by backing the launching of long-range missiles into Russia – one might wonder whether there is a new opportunity for the two movements to find common ground. The timing seems particularly good since there is now greater willingness on the part of political figures like Tucker Carlson, Jimmy Dore, Russell Brand, and Jill Stein to openly question the 9/11 official story.
To figure out why the two movements haven’t worked together more closely, one must look at what happened in the years right after 9/11. Was it simply a lack of communication and understanding? Or was possible cooperation prevented by agents of the deep state?
Anti-war activist and 9/11 truther Phil Restino has been fighting on both fronts since he became an active opponent of the Iraq War in the early to mid 2000s. He particularly remembers being angered by George W. Bush’s flippant comments at the 2005 White House Correspondents’ Dinner about the government’s inability to produce the weapons of mass destruction that it had claimed were in Iraq. (Not only did Bush make a joke about looking for the WMDs under the podium, but politicians and journalists in attendance laughed along with him.)
“Kids were coming home in body bags every day, and they were laughing.” Restino says.
He talks about how he wanted to end the wars taking place after 9/11 even before he realized that 9/11 was a false flag.
“I remember watching the buildings coming down on 9/11 and thinking, ‘This can’t be happening,’” he explains. “But the power of the media and all the propaganda arms is just amazing. So that questioning went away, and the narrative was plugged in.”
But once he did see through the deception, he committed himself to exposing the truth about 9/11 and ending the wars that resulted.
“It was just common sense,” he says. “The wars are based on the 9/11 lie, and these are the 9/11 wars.”
Restino, who spent two years in the Army (although not in combat), approached the group Veterans For Peace about starting a new chapter in Central Florida, where he lives. Joining the chapter was famed veteran, whistleblower, and peace activist Col. Bob Bowman, who had headed up the government’s Strategic Defense Initiative in the 1970s.
Image: Col. Bob Bowman became an active voice for 9/11 Truth.
Bowman ended up protesting what the Reagan administration did with SDI in the 1980s, which led to him being attacked and ostracized by many of his military colleagues. He went on to become an active member of Veterans For Peace as well as working for 9/11 Truth until his death in 2013.
Restino explains that his idea in 2005 was to approach local Vietnam veterans about joining the new chapter, but that wasn’t as successful as he’d hoped.
“I thought if they had this information about how much of a lie this was, they would not allow what happened to them – being lied into that war – to happen to this generation.”
Unfortunately, he adds, many veterans likened questioning the war to “not supporting the troops who were in harms way.”
Restino points out that in the early years after 9/11, truthers and peace activists did find themselves allied to a greater degree than they were later. He recalls being part of a major Anti-War protest in Washington D.C. in 2005 that was attended by people like George Galloway, Cindy Sheehan, and Cynthia McKinney, a former congresswoman who also became a voice for 9/11 truth.
But as time went on, Restino noticed that the leadership of major peace groups like Veterans For Peace and CODEPINK was cool to the idea of pursuing challenges to the 9/11 story. Meanwhile, rank and file peace activists were being discouraged from questioning 9/11 by being branded as “conspiracy theorists.”
Image: Restino with Cynthia McKinney and WeAreChange’s Brett Bracewell in 2010
As to why the leaders of the Anti-War Movement were not interested in 9/11 Truth, Restino posits that the movement may well have been co-opted, pointing out that while the FBI’s COINTELPRO program was supposedly discontinued in 1971, efforts to infiltrate activist groups continue to this day.
“Those who pulled off 9/11 to justify the wars that followed had to know there would be some kind of anti-war movement,” Restino says. “To think that these guys didn’t have people in place in the 9/11 Truth and Anti-War movements is naïve at best.”
Other longtime peace activists – who are also active in 9/11 Truth – will suggest that infiltration of the peace movement has played a significant role in keeping the two factions from combining their efforts.
Longtime Canadian journalist Barrie Zwicker, author of the essential book Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-Up of 9/11, says he remembers going to an Anti-War conference in Boston years ago, and he noted that 9/11 was obvious in its omission from the agenda.
“We know that agents of the state have long infiltrated the peace movement – and then the 9/11 Truth Movement, and that these agents’ orders would include stymying of mutual reinforcement by the two movements.”
Image: Restino and then partner Kathy Bracewell of CODEPINK in 2006
Also, Cheryl Curtiss, who has participated in both movements (she and I are co-facilitators of the monthly 9/11 and Other Deep State Teleconference) says that the Anti-War Movement gained prominence after 9/11, particularly because the Bush administration falsely blamed Saddam Hussein for 9/11, a charge that was used to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
“The peace movement got really huge after 9/11,” she explains. “I mean, at one point there were something like 15 million people around the world protesting at the same time against the war in Iraq.”
Curtiss says that those in the peace movement knew that the justification given for the war was based on lies, but only some were prepared to also question 9/11.
It is obvious now, as it was to many in those first few years of the new millennium, that wars are almost always justified by lies and propaganda. Lies continue to be told about what happened on 9/11, just as they were to justify the invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other countries.
Today, new lies are being added to justify new wars and new mass murder. It is essential that we have the courage to see through the kinds of deceptions that get us into wars if we ever want to break the pattern. The Anti-War and 9/11 Truth movements both understand the damage these lies do.
Imagine how much truth they could uncover if they worked together.
*
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.
On December 4th, 2024, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released a 500-page report (Read Here.) concluding the 2-year investigation into the COVID Operation. This after-action review describes congressional findings on fraudulent practices during the pandemic, particularly by government actors and government grantees. The report cites specific names and the responsibilities thereof.
The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic was originally constituted as the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis by the 116th Congress to oversee the pandemic response by the first Trump Administration in April 2020. However, it wasn’t until the 118th Congress that the subcommittee’s activities resumed and was renamed what it is today.
Since February of 2023, the Subcommittee, as per its final report, has conducted more than 30 transcribed interviews and depositions, held 25 hearings and meetings, and reviewed more than one million pages of documents.
.
.
The Report
In the introductory letter of the Final Report, written by the Chairman of the Select Subcommittee, Brad Wenstrup, he lays out five points in which he mentions that “bipartisan consensus” was reached. These points are as follows:
The possibility that COVID-19 emerged because of a laboratory or research related accident is not a conspiracy theory.
EcoHealth Alliance, Inc. and Dr. Peter Daszak should never again receive U.S. taxpayer dollars.
Scientific messaging must be clear and concise, backed by evidentiary support, and come from trusted messengers, such as front-line doctors treating patients.
Public health officials must work to regain American’s trust; Americans want to be educated, not indoctrinated.
Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo participated in medical malpractice and publicly covered up the total number of nursing homes fatalities in New York.
The 557-page report provides detailed information and clear evidence of malpractice and fraudulent activity in the public health response to the COVID Operation. Not only that, but they also admit that the SARS-CoV-2 virus “possesses a biological characteristic that is not found in nature”, within their five strongest arguments in favor of the “lab leak” theory.
The report is divided into various sections that describe in detail the occurrences of the pandemic and the resulting policy. The sections are as follows:
The Origins of the Coronavirus Pandemic, Including but Not Limited to the Federal Government’s Funding of Gain-of-Function Research
The Efficacy, Effectiveness, and Transparency of the Use of Taxpayer Funds and Relief Programs to Address the Coronavirus Pandemic, Including Any Reports of Waste, Fraud, or Abuse
The Implementation or Effectiveness of Any Federal Law or Regulation Applied, Enacted, or Under Consideration to Address the Coronavirus Pandemic and Prepare for Future Pandemics
The Development of Vaccines and Treatments, and the Development and Implementation of Vaccination Policies for Federal Employees and Members of the Armed Forces
The Economic Impact of the Coronavirus Pandemic and Associated Government Response on Individuals, Communities, Small Businesses, Health Care Providers, States, and Local Government Entities
The Societal Impact of Decisions to Close Schools, How the Decisions Were Made and Whether There is Evidence of Widespread Learning Loss or Other Negative Effects as a Result of These Decisions
Cooperation By the Executive Branch and Others with Congress, the Inspectors General, the Government Accountability Office, and Others in Connection with Oversight of the Preparedness for and Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic
The purpose of this report ultimately was to investigate the facts of the pandemic response by the U.S. government, but also to lay the groundwork for future public health responses. Chairman Wenstrup mentions:
“This work will help the United States, and the world, predict the next pandemic, prepare for the next pandemic, protect ourselves from the next pandemic, and hopefully prevent the next pandemic.”
What This Means
For those of us who have been fighting for this cause since Day 1, not much of this is news. However, the fact that the official discourse is finally ceding ground to some key points marks a positive development. First of all, the point that the virus did not originate naturally. Second of all, not only did the vaccines not work, but the mandates were ultimately harmful.
This report is in essence Biopolitiks. They admitted some fundamental things that mark, as stated in the title, “a path forward.” Showcasing that there is a blueprint for a better response if there is to be another Operation of this magnitude.
In February of 2023, nearly two years ago, I had the honor of being invited to the Mexican Senate of the Republic by brave lawmakers, such as Senator Rafael Espino, to speak about these topics. With quite a similar title to the report, interestingly, “Pandemic and Vaccines, Lessons Learned.” At this conference, I was able to present to lawmakers and members of civil society the true consequences of the dangerous public policy that came to rise in the pandemic era.
The message I intended to convey to this audience was—that the damage was already done, and how can we learn from these experiences and move forward. The pandemic policy was catastrophic. I explained to them how the mass formation psychosis generated by the official discourse, did not allow people a choice and that the lack of coordination of official messaging caused this chaos. This is precisely what the congressional report explains, specifically the points outlined above by Chairman Brad Wenstrup. Coordination in the messaging is a necessity in the path forward.
But more important than that, it’s first vital that we define who the authorized voices should be leading the discourse. Chairman Wenstrup also gives us insight into this, which I agree with 100%. He says that the “trusted messengers” on these topics should be “front-line doctors treating patients” This is fundamentally Biopolitikal. The experts in the field coordinating with the political class in the public health decision-making process.
In my opinion, public health guidance for future communicable disease contingencies should be the following:
Step 1: Stay Calm
Step 2: Analyze the Situation Rationally
Step 3: Call the Best (trusted messengers)
Undoubtedly, the COVID operation has been the worst public health catastrophe in recent history. And looking forward, there are many potential biological threats. For example, there are about 25 or so viral families that are most likely to harbor a novel “Disease X”. No one can predict where or when the next Disease X will emerge, but now we know how not to react.
Many questions arise in the aftermath, one of them being why physicians worldwide violated their Hippocratic Oath, “First do no harm.”
What would’ve happened if governments had listened to the experts? How many lives could’ve been saved?
These are considerations that only clinicians who treated patients during this Operation understand. Perspective is vital. We faced a disease treated by everyday clinicians and front-line doctors, but never once did any government agency or bureaucrat consult with them for recommendations. They instead relied on faulty epidemiological data, which seeped into norms of care, eventually influencing the way physicians treated their patients. What resulted was not only faulty population health policy but also faulty treatment of individual cases.
For example, billions of PCR tests were conducted worldwide as part of efforts to detect SARS-CoV-2 infections. However, even Kary Mullis, 1993 Nobel Prize-winning biochemist, recognized for his invention of PCR, emphasized that PCR technology was developed as a technique to amplify DNA sequences for research purposes, not as a definitive diagnostic tool.
Additionally, the use of Computed Tomography Scans (CT Scans) to diagnose COVID pneumonia was unprecedented. That was the standard of care. A chest CT scanexposes you to about 50–70 times more radiation than a single chest X-ray, the use of ventilators with a fatality rate between 45-84% depending on the age group, as well as the toxic effect of the “miracle drug”, Remdesivir.
Here are some of my questions, since the beginning of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the early 1980s, it is estimated that approximately 40.4 million people have died from AIDS. in 44 years they haven’t been able to develop a vaccine for HIV yet it took them less than a year to research, develop, and distribute a vaccine with a new technology mRNA for a new virus.
More than pointing fingers at those responsible, I believe that it’s time for a revision in the way we approach public health globally. In places such as the United States, healthcare and pharma are set to be reshaped completely by the incoming health secretary, RFK Jr. The new administration has emphasized accountability, not retroactively but rather proactively. More trials, and further research to evaluate the safety of the products we consume.
As citizens, we don’t care about the origin as much as we do the solutions. How we will react the next time something like this occurs, that’s what the public cares about.
The views of freedom-fighting causes are permeating into public policy initiatives. As I mentioned previously—for those who have been fighting since Day 1, not much of this is news to us. I do, however, see this as a major step in the right direction. This is a new dawn for Biopolitiks.
I’d like to recognize the efforts of awakened doctors, nurses, and healthcare providers during this crisis, who have risked more than their careers for the truth. I believe the release of this report closes a chapter in history. However, it also opens a new chapter in the history of global health. One in which we as citizens alongside the government shape the way public health is done, worldwide.
*
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.
Dr. Alejandro Diaz is a Pediatric Allergist / Immunologist and Global Health Expert with extensive international experience. he has delivered conferences in over 27 countries around the globe on topics of medicine, migration, biosecurity, and related topics. This includes prestigious venues such as the White House, the US Capitol, the Romanian Parliament, the European Parliament in Brussels, the Mexican Senate of the Republic, the United Nations in Geneva, Japanese Parliament, among others.
His career encompasses diverse roles in healthcare including private practice, health systems, and advisory positions for medical service companies, governments, and government entities worldwide.
Apesar de todas as advertências russas de que o conflito na Ucrânia está a atingir um ponto perigoso, o Ocidente continua as suas medidas de escalada. Recentemente, um importante político britânico apelou à expansão da assistência militar a Kiev, mostrando claramente que Londres não está interessada na desescalada. Parece não haver limites para a belicosidade dos líderes ocidentais, que querem levar a guerra com a Rússia até às últimas consequências.
Numa conversa privada com outros líderes do G7, o primeiro-ministro britânico, Keir Starmer, disse que é necessário “continuar a maximizar a dor de Putin” através de medidas militares e econômicas. Ele disse que os países do G7 precisam de expandir a sua assistência militar, bem como as sanções econômicas, impondo medidas ainda mais coercivas contra a Federação Russa e os seus aliados.
O gabinete de Starmer divulgou comunicado sobre a reunião, esclarecendo os temas que ele comentou. O primeiro-ministro do Reino Unido disse que o presidente russo, Vladimir Putin, parece forte e obstinado em continuar as ações militares na Ucrânia, o que Starmer disse ser devido à fraqueza do Ocidente em impor-lhe “dor”. O líder britânico acredita que só infligindo danos à Rússia será possível fazer Putin “repensar” a operação militar especial e, eventualmente, desistir.
“O primeiro-ministro disse que com [o presidente russo Vladimir] Putin não mostrando nenhum sinal de ceder, é vital que reforcemos o nosso apoio para colocar a Ucrânia na melhor posição possível para o futuro (…) Ele apelou aos colegas do G7 que continuem a maximizar a dor de Putin, aumentando o apoio militar aos ucranianos e aumentando a pressão econômica, inclusive através de novas sanções, sempre que possível”, diz a declaração.
Starmer não parece acreditar em qualquer caminho diplomático, ignorando completamente qualquer possibilidade de diálogo com a Rússia. Ao contrário do seu homólogo alemão, Olaf Scholz, que conversou recentemente com Putin e prometeu fazê-lo novamente, o chefe do parlamento britânico afirma que é necessário alcançar a vitória ucraniana desgastando a Rússia, acreditando assim que o plano da OTAN para uma guerra prolongada com Moscou é viável.
Ao agir desta forma, o Primeiro-Ministro britânico ignora todos os alertas recentes dados pela Federação Russa sobre os perigos de uma escalada descontrolada do conflito. Moscou alerta o Ocidente sobre o perigo que representa a participação cada vez mais ativa da OTAN nas ações militares ucranianas, especialmente no que diz respeito à utilização de mísseis de longo alcance contra alvos no território russo reconhecido. O Reino Unido está entre os países que fornecem estas armas à Ucrânia e, portanto, é participante nos crimes cometidos pelo regime de Kiev contra regiões russas fora da zona de conflito.
Como é sabido, estas armas de longo alcance contêm tecnologia especial que a OTAN não quer dar aos ucranianos. Neste sentido, o equipamento militar é operado por pessoal especializado ocidental baseado ilegalmente em solo ucraniano. Isto significa que tais ataques são ações deliberadas do Ocidente contra territórios russos reconhecidos.
De acordo com a nova doutrina nuclear russa, tais ataques da Ucrânia estão a legitimar uma resposta nuclear russa. Moscou abstém-se de tomar tais medidas para evitar uma catástrofe, mas se as provocações continuarem a aumentar, poderá chegar o momento em que será impossível evitar a resposta.
Ao ignorar estes avisos russos, Starmer contribui deliberadamente para a escalada do conflito e aproxima-o cada vez mais do ponto sem retorno. Deve-se ressaltar que restam poucas medidas militares a serem tomadas. Dado que já estão a ser utilizadas armas de longo alcance, há pouco que o Ocidente possa fazer para aumentar ainda mais a escalada. Alguns falcões da OTAN apelam ao envio de tropas para o terreno ou à entrega de armas nucleares à Ucrânia, por exemplo. É claro que qualquer uma destas ações irresponsáveis desencadearia uma resposta nuclear russa.
Quanto às sanções, o sucesso econômico da Rússia nos últimos três anos deixou claro que nenhuma medida comercial coerciva terá qualquer efeito prático. Moscou preparou-se para a guerra comercial do Ocidente criando uma estratégia para entrar no mercado asiático antes de perder as suas parcerias com a Europa. No final, os lucros russos expandiram-se e o próprio Ocidente, especialmente os países europeus, foi prejudicado pelas sanções. Portanto, exigir medidas mais coercivas é apenas uma perda de tempo, uma vez que isto afetará o próprio Ocidente e não a Rússia.
O Ocidente tem agora de escolher entre ir às consequências extremas, potencialmente nucleares, da guerra ou seguir o caminho da desescalada. Falcões como Starmer parecem estar prontos para arriscar uma guerra total, mas espera-se que prevaleça uma visão mais racional do conflito para evitar o pior cenário.
Western democracy is just a process for legitimizing elite interests, and these same elites sometimes repeat the process until they get their desired result.
It was assessed late last month that “The Outcome Of Romania’s Presidential Election Could Spoil The US’ Potential Escalation Plans” if then-frontrunner Calin Georgescu, a populist conservative-nationalist that’s critical of NATO’s proxy war on Russian in Ukraine, had won the second round on 8 December. His first-round victory was annulled by the Constitutional Coup in a move that he condemned as a coup, however, on the pretext that his pre-election support on TikTok might have been due to foreign backing.
Nothing like this has ever happened before. Nobody alleges that the electoral process itself was fraudulent. The only claim is that classified evidence supposedly exists allegedly suggesting that the popularization of Georgescu’s content on TikTok might have been inorganic. When all was said and done, however, more voters still chose him over anyone else. This means that speculative degrees of separation between them and a foreign actor via social media was enough to annul the election.
This is a disturbing precedent that can easily be exploited by the West the next time that a populist conservative-nationalist with “politically incorrect” foreign policy views wins an election. At the time of writing, a redo hasn’t yet been scheduled, but it’s expected after the new pro-Western parliament convenes on 20 December. About that, their elections were held after the first presidential round, but no accusations of foul play followed. This is obviously due to the West receiving its desired result.
It remains unclear who’ll serve as Commander-in-Chief until the next one is elected, but whoever it is, nobody should anticipate them implementing any radical policies like Georgescu’s. Accordingly, more time has been bought for NATO to organize its reportedly planned peacekeeping mission in Ukraine, even if it’s carried out under a non-NATO mandate. Had Georgescu won the second round and been inaugurated later this month, he could have ruled out his country’s participation in this possible plan.
Romania isn’t as indispensable for NATO’s military logistics to Ukraine as Poland is, but it still borders Ukraine’s western and southwestern regions that are of strategic importance for the bloc. Even if Romania wouldn’t directly participate in any such mission, regardless of whether it’s carried out under the peacekeeper pretext, it could still let the alliance’s troops and equipment transit through its territory to Odessa for example. Georgescu, however, could have cut that off and greatly complicated their plans.
Keeping him out of office or at least delaying his victory, if he’s even allowed to run again that is (and the results aren’t annulled again or defrauded like they were in neighboringMoldova), is therefore of supreme Western importance in order to keep their military logistics options open. Even if they succeed, there are still “10 Obstacles To Trump’s Reported Plan For Western/NATO Peacekeepers In Ukraine” that he’d have to overcome, which readers can learn about from the preceding hyperlinked analysis.
It might therefore turn out that all of this meddling was for naught if no such peacekeeping mission follows or if Romania doesn’t play a significant role therein. In any case, that’s the cost that the West was willing to pay simply to keep such options maximally open, thus showing how its leaders really feel about the democratic process. At the end of the day, Western democracy is just a process for legitimizing elite interests, and these same elites sometimes repeat the process until they get their desired result.
*
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.
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.
The case that began on September 17 concerning the control of the Murdoch family trust has been decided. It saw a dicey attempt by the one of the most ruthless newspaper and media moguls in history to limit influence and control of his publishing and broadcasting empire after his death. The relevant parties? The children, of course.
The central instrument of dispute was a trust, intended as an irrevocable instrument born from the divorce of Rupert Murdoch and his second wife Anna Torv Murdoch Mann. Anna’s wish was that Rupert and the children share control over the businesses of the imperium. Any new contenders – namely those arising from Rupert’s union with Wendy Deng – would also be shut out, though not financially. This meant that Prudence, Elisabeth, Lachlan and James would each have an equal voting share concerning company decisions after their father’s croaking.
Power, and its exercise, instils a permanent restlessness. Rupert was unlikely to leave the trust, whatever its status, alone. Patriarchs of such character are bound to have their favourites, angling for those who advance their concerns and interests while marginalising perceived threats and inadequate helpers. Over time, Lachlan seemed to push his way through to the front as one most likely to continue the father’s media vision. According to The New York Times, it was he who ultimately pushed matters to alter the trust in mid-2023 given rattling moves from Elisabeth Murdoch. At a subsequent meeting of the trust, Rupert stated that, while he loved his brood, “these companies need a designated leader and Lachlan is that leader”.
The other children had also stirred the patriarch’s sense of peace, much of it arising from the role played by Fox News and News Corp. James, for instance, is seen as the most “troublesome” by Lachlan, given his grumblings over the Fox-News Corp besmirching of climate change science and other unenviable causes. The result was Project Harmony, an attempt to cut out the other children from making decisions on the future direction of the media imperium. This change of heart was always going to be difficult to realise, given the limits imposed on any unilateral changes made by the “settlor” in Nevada law.
In June, Nevada’s Probate Commissioner gave Rupert a streak of hope. Changes could be made to the trust subject to the proviso that they be done in good faith and for the sole benefit of the heirs. The father’s sly contention was that granting Lachlan full control would end up advantaging all the children. The tribal chieftain had spoken.
This month, Commissioner Edmund J. Gorman Jr. made his sharp assessment: he was far from impressed.
“The effort was an attempt to stack the deck in Lachlan Murdoch’s favour after Rupert Murdoch’s passing so that the succession would be immutable. The play might have worked; but an evidentiary hearing, like a showdown in a game of poker, is where gamesmanship collides with the facts and at its conclusion all the bluffs are called and the cards lie face up.”
Both Rupert and Lachlan had acted in bad faith in engaging what Gorman regarded as a “carefully drafted charade” intended to favour Lachlan’s position of power.
James, Elisabeth, and Prudence, keeping up appearances, supplied a statement to The New York Times welcoming the Commissioner’s finding “and hope that we can move beyond this litigation to focus on strengthening and rebuilding relationships among all family members.” This seems unlikely, given a few contingencies. For one thing, the commissioner’s finding is to be passed on to the Probate Court, requiring a district judge to ratify or reject it. Either way, this will permit the defeated party to appeal the ruling. The lawyers on all sides are swooning.
Media vultures in search of carrion see this ruling as remarkable – probably more so than it is. A former Murdoch editor turned snow white, Eric Beecher, argues that the leadership of both New Corp and Fox “is now deeply uncertain as a result of the commissioner’s ruling. The non-Murdoch shareholders – who own more than 80% of each company – have woken up to the news that their chairman is likely to lose when his father dies”. Shareholders and markets, Beecher goes on to remind us, “hate uncertainty.”
This certainly presents a problem for the Murdoch family. Whatever their disagreements, the cash incentive has always been sovereign in power. Principles have been treated as baubles and luxuries. Fox News, beastly as it is, remains a sacred cow in the profit stakes. For over 20 years, it has raked in the viewer numbers. It has an enviable primacy over others in the swill bucket of cable news, seizing some 70% of the market in November. Competitors such as CNN and MSNBC have seen their audiences fall since the November election.
That said, the model Fox News breathes and feeds on has an inbuilt obsolescence. Alternative avenues were cultivated by the Trump campaign in 2024, most notably through podcast formats offered by such figures as Joe Rogan. Subscription television is on a precipitous decline in the US. Lachlan’s siblings may end up seeing the very outlets of Daddy Rupert they despise yet profit from atrophy over time. No one should shed a tear for that fact.
*
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.
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]
“The vaccines were forced on the people by the Australian Government.
The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency and the Medical Board of Australia did a criminal thing in March 2021 and issued a gag order to all nurses, doctors, psychologists and every other health practitioner in Australia to shut up and be quiet about the risks of so-called COVID vaccines.”
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.
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
Ukrainian fighters are deprived of the possibility of holding their positions while the Russian Armed Forces are steadily advancing, writes the newspaper Le Figaro, citing a source in the French Army. Although Russian forces are methodically advancing, majorly contributing to the rapid collapse of Ukrainian frontlines is the retaliatory destruction of energy infrastructure following the Kiev regime’s missile attacks on Russian territory.
According to the French interlocutor, Ukrainian troops are facing serious problems due to a lack of resources and troop rotation, to the point that they cannot even build defensive structures.
“The Russians are not accelerating their offensive. The Ukrainians are simply no longer able to hold the front. At this point, no decisive momentum is visible. The Russians are advancing methodically, sector by sector,” the article quotes the source as saying.
It is also noted that the Ukrainian landscape, composed mainly of the steppe, benefits the Russian military by allowing them to detect and destroy enemy equipment quickly.
“Such tactics are a consequence of the transparency of the battlefield: any concentration of forces for the offensive is immediately detected and hit by the adversary. […] The Ukrainians have almost no alternative options,” concluded the author.
Russia’s methodical advance is not only forcing the collapse of the Ukrainian military but is also taking its toll on the country’s energy infrastructure.
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine has not built a single power plant. All of its nuclear, hydroelectric and thermal power plants were built during the Soviet era. Now, after months of combat and a campaign of precision Russian strikes triggered by Kiev’s attacks on Russian territory, some 80 percent of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure lies in ruins.
This grim situation is further exacerbated by rampant corruption, which is hampering efforts to protect Ukrainian energy facilities by moving them to reinforced underground shelters.
Kiev has already lamented that if Russian attacks on energy infrastructure continue, Ukrainians could face power outages lasting 12 to 20 hours a day this winter. The dire state of Ukraine’s power grid has also begun to affect the country’s remaining nuclear power plants.
Russia, on December 13, launched a huge attack on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, the 12th large-scale attack on energy facilities this year, which, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, was conducted with 93 missiles and more than 200 drones. Authorities in Ivano-Frankivsk said it was the worst attack on the region so far.
Five of Ukraine’s nine operational nuclear reactors were forced to slow their output on December 13 at the behest of the Ukrainian power grid operator. These changes were made because nuclear plants require reliable connections to the power grid, not only to transmit the power they generate but also to receive the electricity needed for cooling. The lack of such connections would require shutting down the plant or facing the prospect of failures in safety systems with potentially catastrophic consequences.
The Kremlin highlighted that the attack was in response to the Kiev regime striking a military airbase in southwest Russia using US-made missiles.
A day before the attack, President-elect Donald Trump told Time magazine that he “very vehemently” disagreed with American-made missiles targeting sites in Russia, describing it as “crazy.”
“We’re just escalating this war and making it worse,” he said.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that Trump’s comments were “fully aligned” with Moscow’s position.
“That impresses us,” he continued. “It is obvious that Trump understands exactly what is escalating the situation.”
Since the beginning of the war, Russian forces have destroyed eight power plants and more than 800 heat supply facilities in Ukraine, leading to more than $10 billion in damage to the country’s energy system.
In August alone, Russia fired more than 200 missiles and drones at Ukrainian power production facilities to cut out energy generation capacity. On November 17, Russia launched one of its largest attacks against Ukraine’s power grid since the start of the war, consisting of 120 missiles and 90 drones. Then, as mentioned, there were the devastating attacks on December 13.
Russia’s wave of coordinated strikes on Ukraine’s energy facilities, including thermal power plants, plunges the entire country into the dark of winter and disrupts water distribution, heating, sewage and sanitation systems, and electrical supplies. Due to this, Ukrainian civilians and businesses have suffered from sustained blackouts and power outages, creating fear since the energy situation will become even more dire as the winter deepens.
Yet, even with front lines collapsing and the energy situation becoming increasingly dire, Zelensky refuses to negotiate an end to the war and remove the 2022 decree that ruled out talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin and other Russian officials, meaning that the suffering for ordinary Ukrainians is only going to get much worse before it gets any better.
*
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.
“Im sorry, but I don’t want to be an emperor. That’s not my business. I don’t want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone – if possible – Jew, Gentile – black man – white. We all want to help one another.
Human beings are like that. We want to live by each other’s happiness – not by each other’s misery.
We don’t want to hate and despise one another.
In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way.
….
In the 17th Chapter of St Luke it is written: “the Kingdom of God is within man” – not one man nor a group of men, but in all men! In you! You, the people have the power – the power to create machines. The power to create happiness! You, the people, have the power to make this life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure.
Then – in the name of democracy – let us use that power – let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world – a decent world that will give men a chance to work – that will give youth a future and old age a security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power. But they lie! They do not fulfil that promise. They never will!
Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people! Now let us fight to fulfil that promise! Let us fight to free the world – to do away with national barriers – to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!
We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness.
Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost…”
Click the video below to watch it on youtube.
TRANSCRIPT
I’m sorry, but I don’t want to be an emperor. That’s not my business. I don’t want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone – if possible – Jew, Gentile – black man – white. We all want to help one another.
Human beings are like that. We want to live by each other’s happiness – not by each other’s misery.
We don’t want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way.
Greed has poisoned men’s souls, has barricaded the world with hate, has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed. We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in.
Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost…
The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men – cries out for universal brotherhood – for the unity of us all. Even now my voice is reaching millions throughout the world – millions of despairing men, women, and little children – victims of a system that makes men torture and imprison innocent people.
.
.
To those who can hear me, I say – do not despair.
The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed – the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress.
The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish…
Soldiers! don’t give yourselves to brutes – men who despise you – enslave you – who regiment your lives – tell you what to do – what to think and what to feel! Who drill you – diet you – treat you like cattle, use you as cannon fodder.
Don’t give yourselves to these unnatural men – machine men with machine minds and machine hearts! You are not machines! You are not cattle! You are men! You have the love of humanity in your hearts! You don’t hate! Only the unloved hate – the unloved and the unnatural! Soldiers! Don’t fight for slavery! Fight for liberty!
In the 17th Chapter of St Luke it is written: “the Kingdom of God is within man” – not one man nor a group of men, but in all men! In you! You, the people have the power – the power to create machines. The power to create happiness! You, the people, have the power to make this life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure.
Then – in the name of democracy – let us use that power – let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world – a decent world that will give men a chance to work – that will give youth a future and old age a security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power. But they lie! They do not fulfil that promise. They never will!
Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people! Now let us fight to fulfil that promise! Let us fight to free the world – to do away with national barriers – to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!
Chaplin spent many months drafting and re-writing the speech for the end of the film, a call for peace from the barber who has been mistaken for Hynkel. Many people criticized the speech, and thought it was superfluous to the film. Others found it uplifting. Regrettably Chaplin’s words are as relevant today as they were in 1940.
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.
“Here in Deir al-Balah, it’s like an apocalypse. There is no room for you to pitch a tent; you have to set it up near the coast… You have to protect your children from insects, from the heat, and there is no clean water, no toilets, all while the bombing never stops. You feel like you are subhuman here.” —Mohammed, a 42-year-old father of three, speaking in June 2024 about his experience of displacement from Rafah to Deir al-Balah governorate.
On 7 October 2023, Israel embarked on a military offensive on the occupied Gaza Strip (Gaza) of unprecedented magnitude, scale and duration. Since then, it has carried out relentless aerial and ground attacks, many of them with large explosive weapons, which have caused massive damage and flattened entire neighbourhoods and cities across Gaza, along with their life-supporting infrastructure, agricultural land, and cultural and religious sites and symbols deeply engrained in Palestinians’ collective memory. Israel’s military offensive has killed and seriously injured tens of thousands of Palestinians, including thousands of children, many of them in direct or indiscriminate attacks, often wiping out entire multigenerational families. Israel has forcibly displaced 90% of Gaza’s 2.2 million inhabitants, many of them multiple times, into ever-shrinking, ever-changing pockets of land that lacked basic infrastructure, forcing people to live in conditions that exposed them to a slow and calculated death. It has deliberately obstructed or denied the import and delivery of life-saving goods and humanitarian aid. It has restricted power supplies that, together with damage and destruction, led to the collapse of the water, sanitation and healthcare systems. It has subjected hundreds, if not thousands, of Palestinians from Gaza to incommunicado detention and acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment that had apparently resulted in at least 53 deaths by August 2024. The unlawful acts inflicted on Palestinians simultaneously, for months without respite, have had a profound, cumulative impact on the mental and physical health of Gaza’s entire population: those who survived were left weakened, hungry or traumatized, with likely permanent effects on their mental and physical health.
Such is the treatment that Israel has inflicted upon Palestinians in Gaza in retaliation for the Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel on 7 October 2023. Early that morning, Hamas fighters indiscriminately fired a barrage of rockets into Israel and, joined by fighters from other Palestinian armed groups, breached the border fence that surrounds Gaza. Hamas and other armed groups attacked civilian and military targets, carrying out deliberate mass killings, summary killings and other abuses, causing suffering and physical injuries. They destroyed civilian property by burning houses, making them uninhabitable and causing the internal displacement of civilians. They abducted 223 civilians, Israeli and foreigners, including children, and captured 27 Israeli soldiers. Some of their actions constituted war crimes under international law. With approximately 1,200 people killed, over 800 of them civilians, including at least 36 children, these were the deadliest single-day attacks in Israel’s history. Amnesty International’s detailed findings about the crimes perpetrated by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups in the context of their attacks on Israel on 7 October 2023 are the focus of a forthcoming publication.
.
Photo released by the Israeli military from the events of October 7, 2023. (Photo: Israeli Defense Forces)
.
This report focuses on the Israeli authorities’ policies and actions in Gaza as part of the military offensive they launched in the wake of the Hamas-led attacks on 7 October 2023 while situating them within the broader context of Israel’s unlawful occupation, and system of apartheid against Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Israel. It assesses allegations of violations and crimes under international law by Israel in Gaza within the framework of genocide under international law, concluding that there is sufficient evidence to believe that Israel’s conduct in Gaza following 7 October 2023 amounts to genocide.
Given that the report is based on Amnesty International’s field and desk research into violations perpetrated by Israel in Gaza between 7 October 2023 and early July 2024, it focuses on this nine-month period. However, it reflects overarching data until early October 2024 and key international developments until the end of November 2024.
To make a determination on genocide, Amnesty International first examined whether Palestinians in Gaza constitute part of a protected group under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention), that is a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. It then focused on three out of the five prohibited acts under the Genocide Convention: “killing members of the group”; “causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group”; and “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”. It finally examined whether Israel committed these acts with the specific “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, [the] group, as such”.
To this end, Amnesty International interviewed 212 people as part of its research. They included Palestinian victims, survivors and witnesses of air strikes, displacement, detention, the destruction of farms, homes and agricultural land, as well as individuals who faced the impact of Israel’s restrictions on humanitarian aid. Amnesty International also spoke with members of local authorities in Gaza, Palestinian healthcare workers and representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and UN agencies involved in the humanitarian response in Gaza.
Amnesty International complemented these interviews with its analysis of an extensive range of visual and digital evidence, including satellite imagery, video footage and photographs posted on social media or obtained directly by its researchers. It authenticated and, where possible, geolocated video footage and photographs. It reviewed an extensive collection of media reports, statements, reports and data sets published by UN agencies and humanitarian organizations operating in Gaza, as well as Palestinian and Israeli human rights groups. It reviewed statements by senior Israeli government and military officials and official Israeli bodies, including spokespersons of the Israeli military and the Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), a unit within Israel’s Ministry of Defense tasked with administering civilian matters in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). Amnesty International also examined submissions made to and decisions taken by the Israeli Supreme Court as well as publicly available material relating to South Africa’s case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Despite its repeated attempts to engage with the Israeli authorities through information and meeting requests, the organization received no substantive answer to any of its letters sent between 30 October 2023 and 16 October 2024.
Overview of Israel’s Offensive
Hours after the 7 October 2023 attacks, Israel conducted a first wave of retaliatory air strikes on Gaza. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed that the offensive would continue “with neither limitations nor respite” until Israel destroyed Hamas’s military and governing capabilities and brought all hostages back to Israel. He translated his words into actions. In the first two months of the offensive alone, the Israeli air force carried out about 10,000 air strikes in Gaza. Many used large explosive weapons with wide area effects on densely populated residential areas, including in the vicinity of hospitals and other critical infrastructure. The impact of such attacks on one of the most densely populated places on earth, with about 6,300 people per square kilometre, was devastating.
On 13 October 2023, the Israeli military issued its first mass “evacuation” order, instructing some 1.1 million people – the entire population living north of Wadi Gaza – to move to the area south of Wadi Gaza “for their safety and protection”, and failing to take measures to ensure the displaced population’s access to basic necessities. The order applied to hundreds of thousands of people who were already displaced and were sheltering in UN schools, as well as all patients and staff working in 23 hospitals and medical facilities in the area. Humanitarian organizations, which had used Gaza City as their hub for years, were also subjected to the order and forced to leave behind warehouse supplies, equipment and vehicles, and to re-establish a humanitarian infrastructure from scratch in Rafah.
.
A boy sits in rubble in Gaza. Photo Credit: UNICEF
.
Meanwhile, senior Israeli military and government officials intensified their calls for the destruction of Palestinians in Gaza, using racist and dehumanizing language that equated Palestinian civilians with the enemy to be destroyed.
In a widely publicized statement made at a press conference on 12 October 2023, President Isaac Herzog held all Palestinians in Gaza responsible for Hamas’s attacks:
“It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved.”
While he maintained that his words had been misinterpreted, the slogan “there are no uninvolved civilians” was later scrawled near settlements in the occupied West Bank, demonstrating the statement’s spread. In another illustrative example, on 11 November 2023, Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir posted a video clip from a show on Israeli TV in which he said that Palestinians who expressed support for Hamas and its actions were considered “terrorists” and must also be destroyed. He added this comment:
“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 sweets, all of these are terrorists. And they should be eliminated!”
Within weeks of Israel’s offensive, genocide and legal scholars, UN experts, as well as civil society organizations, warned that Palestinians in Gaza may be at risk of genocide. On 29 December 2023, South Africa instituted proceedings against Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over alleged breaches by Israel of its obligations under the Genocide Convention in relation to Palestinians in Gaza. This prompted the court to issue a series of legally binding provisional measures over the following months to guarantee the right of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide. Yet, Israel failed to implement them. Despite expressing concern over Israel’s conduct, and in the face of the ICJ’s orders, the international community failed to take sufficient action to modify or stop Israel’s actions. When the UN Security Council eventually adopted a three-phase ceasefire plan in June 2024, after an earlier resolution called for a time-limited ceasefire during the month of Ramadan in March 2024, it was too little too late.
On 6 May 2024, Israeli forces went ahead with a long-threatened ground operation in Rafah despite a consensus among humanitarian organizations and repeated warnings by many states, including Israel’s staunchest allies, that it would have cataclysmic implications for Palestinian civilians and the humanitarian response. Not only did Rafah provide shelter for over 1 million Palestinians after they were displaced following a series of mass “evacuation” orders by the Israeli military, but it also served at that point as the main hub for the humanitarian response. The operation drew near-unanimous international condemnation and prompted the ICJ to issue new provisional measures ordering Israel to “immediately halt its military offensive”. Israeli officials knew precisely the devastation the ground operation in Rafah would inflict on Palestinian civilians.
.
Israeli airstrike on an apartment building in Rafah, the last refuge in southern Gaza. Photo credit: MENAFN
.
The offensive on Rafah was launched a week after Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich, a member of Israel’s security cabinet, explicitly called for the city’s destruction by referring to a well-known Biblical story of absolute vengeance in which an entire nation – the people of Amalek – is ordered to be destroyed:
“There are no jobs half done. Rafah, Deir al-Balah, Nuseirat, destruction! Blot out the memory of [the people of] Amalek from under heaven,” he said at a public event on 29 April 2024.
In fact, Minister of Finance Smotrich and Minister of National Security Ben-Gvir, who also made some of the most explicit calls for the destruction of Palestinians in Gaza, threatened to quit the government coalition if Prime Minister Netanyahu abandoned plans to attack Rafah. Minister of Finance Smotrich’s statement came months after Prime Minister Netanyahu first referred to the story of the total destruction of the people of Amalek in the first week of Israel’s ground offensive in late October and early November 2023. He used it to garner support for what was, at the time, a new and highly destructive phase of the conflict. As Israel’s highest office-holder, who oversaw the offensive on Gaza, Prime Minister Netanyahu would have most certainly known that his words would be understood by soldiers, particularly those affiliated with the settler movement and religious nationalist parties led by the two ministers, as calls for the destruction of Palestinians in Gaza.
Following the operation, almost the entirety of Rafah’s population, residents and displaced people, were forced to look for new temporary shelters in the governorate of Khan Younis, which had been made nearly uninhabitable due to the large-scale destruction caused by Israeli attacks and fighting with Palestinian armed groups, and in the Israeli-designated “humanitarian zone” of Al-Mawasi and “expanded humanitarian area” of Deir al-Balah, where newly displaced families struggled to find space to set themselves up amid tightly packed tents. Those forced out of Rafah were not able to return, and neither were those forced out of the area north of Wadi Gaza. The Rafah crossing, largely destroyed by Israeli forces, closed, cutting off Gaza’s lifeline to Egypt.
By 7 October 2024, the Gaza-based Ministry of Health had recorded 42,010 Palestinian fatalities in Gaza, the vast majority of which were of Palestinians killed during Israel’s offensive, and 97,590 other Palestinians injured since 7 October 2023. The actual toll of those killed during the offensive may be higher and will only become apparent once the conflict is over, including when rescue teams are able to count the dead and retrieve missing bodies from under the rubble. The armed conflict in Gaza has seen some of the highest known death tolls among children (13,319 by 7 October 2024), journalists, as well as health and humanitarian workers of any recent conflict in the world.
The level and speed of damage to and destruction of homes and infrastructure across all sectors of economic activity has similarly not been seen in any other conflict in the 21st century, with remote sensing experts noting that it was “much faster and more extensive” than anything they had mapped before. About 62% of all homes in Gaza were damaged or destroyed by January 2024, affecting approximately 1.08 million people, according to a joint Interim Damage Assessment published by the World Bank, the EU and the UN in March 2024. By July 2024, around 63% of the total structures in Gaza had been damaged or destroyed, according to a UN Satellite Centre (UNOSAT) satellite imagery-based assessment. Amnesty International estimated that there was, on average, one damaged or destroyed building every 17 metres in Gaza by then. Meanwhile, some 625,000 students missed out on an entire academic year, with an estimated 85% of schools having sustained some form of damage.
In May 2024, the announcement by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) that he had applied to the court for arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant over their alleged criminal responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity prompted Israel’s Military Advocate General to publicly confirm that the military police had opened criminal investigations into 70 incidents where the commission of a criminal offence was suspected. This included allegations of deaths under torture, killings and other incidents of violence. However, as far as Amnesty International has been able to confirm from publicly available sources, by 30 September 2024, there had been only one indictment of an Israeli soldier in relation to the torture of Palestinian detainees, demonstrating a near-total lack of accountability in line with a well-documented long-standing pattern of impunity.
Finally, instead of complying with the ICJ advisory opinion issued in July 2024, which concluded that Israel’s 57-year-old occupation and annexation of Palestinian territory is unlawful and called on Israel to withdraw all of its military forces and remove civilian settlements and settlers, Israel entrenched its military presence in Gaza by establishing and maintaining a linear military zone that it referred to as the “Netzarim Corridor” on either side of an existing east-west road south of Gaza City, which cut off the area north of Wadi Gaza from the area south of it. The zone threatened to perpetuate displacement and the fragmentation of Gaza.
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.
Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, today’s de facto ruler of Damascus, has an eloquent history: he began his jihadist militancy in al-Qaeda’s ranks as an associate of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the “caliph” who founded ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, in 2013.
Given the destruction and partitioning of Syria, it has become impossible to consider United States foreign policy without some acceptance that it is driven and, in a sense, directed by Israel and Israel’s formidable domestic lobby in the US.
While Article 13 of the Washington Treaty appears to be simplistic, one can expect numerous pressures and fraudulent actions with a view to preventing a NATO member state from canceling its NATO membership. What is crucial is to fracture and weaken NATO: an intergovernmental alliance of 32 member states.
In a 296-page report sporting the ominous title “You Feel Like You Are Subhuman”, the human rights body, after considering the events in Gaza between October 2023 and July 2024, identified a “pattern of conduct” that indicated genocidal intent.
There are times when withholding the truth would be in the highest interest. Someone lying to the police to protect someone from unjust persecution at the hands of an unjust system. A journalist protecting a source by obfuscating the truth from government agents. A battered wife lying to her husband to calm him down. An abused child lying to their abuser about what they’ve been doing.
The future of Syria and the concerned parties is far from clear now, there being lots of room for infighting among the different rebel factions. Turkey, which has long occupied northern Syria, has taken advantage of the ceasefire in Lebanon to give the rebels the green-light for launching an offensive (with Iran weakened in Syria and Hezbollah cornered in Lebanon).
December 2024 is the fifth anniversary of the “nightmare pandemic” which would radically change our lives! A massive “blunder” that we weren’t ready for! The world was convinced to undertake extreme efforts to contain this “killer virus” in order to limit the carnage that would have resulted.
Dr. Rahul Jandial’s 25 years as a neurosurgeon reveals that dreams are deeply connected to neurological functions, with brain imaging showing distinct patterns between waking and dreaming states
During sleep, your brain’s executive network (prefrontal cortex) becomes less active while your imagination network dominates, allowing for emotionally intense and illogical dream experiences
Your brain remains highly active during sleep, with electrical patterns similar to wakefulness. This “paradoxical sleep” serves to maintain brain health and adaptability
Lucid dreaming, where people become aware they’re dreaming, has been scientifically validated through brain scans and even enabled researcher-dreamer communication through eye movements
Dreams with lingering emotional effects are particularly worthy of reflection, as they provide unique insights into your subconscious mind and waking life experiences
*
In the video above, Dr. Rahul Jandial, a neurosurgeon and neurobiologist, explores the power of dreams, bridging the gap between your waking consciousness and the vivid landscapes of your nocturnal visions.1 His insights not only challenge conventional perceptions but also offer a scientific framework to understand the profound impact of dreaming on your daily life.
With 25 years of experience as a brain surgeon, Jandial has witnessed firsthand the delicate interplay of neurons, emotions and the subconscious mind. Drawing from thousands of patient stories, he emphasizes how dreams are intertwined with neurological functions.
“Dreams that are altered, removing parts of brains and dreams that persist, dreams that can’t be stopped,” he notes,2 highlighting the resilience and complexity of our dreaming minds. His transition from the operating room to the laboratory underscores the advancements in neuroscience, enabling a deeper understanding of dreams through exotic imaging and electrical measurements.
The Waking and Dreaming Brain — Two Sides of the Same Coin
Jandial’s presentation includes a compelling comparison between the waking and dreaming brain. “There’s no way to talk about the dreaming brain unless we talk about the waking brain. It’s inseparable from the knowledge of neuroscience,” he asserts.3 This interconnectedness is visualized through brain scans that reveal both similarities and stark differences in neural activation.
During wakefulness, the executive network, primarily located in your prefrontal cortex, dominates. This network is responsible for logic, calculation and task-oriented activities. However, in the dreaming state, this region becomes “dampened,” leading to a reduction in logical processing.
Instead, the imagination network takes the forefront, allowing for the rich, often illogical narratives that characterize our dreams. This shift explains why dreams are fertile grounds for creativity and emotional exploration, unbound by the constraints of our waking logic.
The Electrifying Nature of Dreams
Jandial paints a vivid picture of the brain as an “electrical garden” teeming with 100 billion neurons firing incessantly.4 Even during sleep, your brain remains highly active, challenging the archaic notion that it merely “hibernates.”
“The patterns in certain stages of sleep are so active electrically, metabolically that they’re similar to the patterns we have during waking,” Jandial says.5 This active state, known as paradoxical sleep, underscoring your brain’s relentless pursuit of activity and connectivity.
This persistent activity is not without purpose. Jandial posits that dreaming serves as a fundamental process for maintaining your brain’s health and adaptability, with distinct characteristics from wakefulness:6
“The dreaming brain is hyper-emotional and the waking brain is hyper-executive-task-oriented. These are the two features of the waking brain and dreaming brain that we have to keep in mind. They are the same brain. They produce the same electricity. There’s blood flow going all the time. There’s no activation and deactivation really. There’s just a modulation of shifts.
The waking brain is executive network pointing outward, relying on the prefrontal cortex more. The dreaming brain is less prefrontal cortex and to compensate a lot more emotion, so much emotion can happen in the dreaming brain that even if you tried to be as wild as you could with your waking brain, you couldn’t match it. The top speed of emotion and visual dynamics in the dreaming brain exceed what is possible during the waking brain.”
While highlighting your brain’s capacity to process emotions and visualize scenarios at an intensity unmatched during wakeful hours, this hyperactivity during dreaming facilitates your brain’s ability to fine-tune itself, fostering creativity, problem-solving and emotional resilience.
Decoding Erotic Dreams Offers a Window Into Your Subconscious
Among the myriad of dreams, erotic dreams hold a special place in Jandial’s exploration. Contrary to popular belief, these dreams do not rely on physical stimulation or sensory input. “The sensations are just created by the imagination,” he states, illustrating your brain’s remarkable ability to generate complex emotional and sensory experiences independently.7
Interestingly, erotic dreams often precede the actual development of sensual capabilities in individuals. This phenomenon suggests that dreams play a role in priming your brain for future experiences, a concept that bridges developmental biology and dream science. Moreover, the prevalence of infidelity themes in erotic dreams raises intriguing questions about the interplay between desire, societal norms and subconscious processing.
Understanding the architecture of sleep is pivotal to comprehending the dreaming process. Jandial introduces the concepts of sleep entry and sleep exit — transitionary states that bridge the gap between wakefulness and sleep. These periods are important, as they represent moments where the boundaries between dreaming and waking blur, allowing for a seamless transition of consciousness.
Sleep paralysis, a phenomenon where your mind awakens before your body, often leads to intense experiences of terror and suffocation. Jandial offers a scientific explanation for these experiences, linking them to your brain’s neurotransmitter fluctuations during sleep transitions.
“The feeling of suffocation is you’re feeling panic of being locked in your brain,” he explains, demystifying the age-old tales of goblins and demons that cultures worldwide have used to describe these nocturnal terrors.8
The Reality of Lucid Dreaming — Science Meets Consciousness
Jandial’s talk also covers lucid dreaming — the rare state where individuals become aware that they’re dreaming and exert control over their dream narratives. Initially skeptical, Jandial was persuaded by scientific evidence demonstrating the real-time activation of the executive network in the brain during lucid dreams.
Studies involving medications like the Alzheimer’s drug galantamine have shown a dose-dependent increase in lucid dreaming occurrences, providing tangible proof of its biological underpinnings.
Furthermore, techniques involving eye movements in sleep labs have enabled researchers to communicate with lucid dreamers, confirming the authenticity of their conscious awareness within dreams. This research not only validates the existence of lucid dreaming but also opens avenues for harnessing its potential for creativity and self-exploration.
Jandial even explains the potential of dreams to predict future neurological conditions, particularly Parkinson’s disease. Through observations in sleep laboratories, he discovered that patients who would later develop Parkinson’s exhibited distinct dreaming patterns years before their diagnosis.
These precognitive dreams often involved intense physical movements that, paradoxically, were executed with fluidity in the dreaming state but translated to rigidity and impaired movements in waking life.
This phenomenon, known as paradoxical kinesia, serves as a harbinger of the brain’s impending degeneration. “The dreams in that way reveal what will happen with the human brain — they predict what will happen,” Jandial says, revealing implications of this discovery for early diagnosis and intervention.9
Interpreting Dreams Using a Multifaceted Approach
Dream interpretation, a practice as old as humanity itself, takes on new dimensions with Jandial’s scientific insights. He categorizes dreams into various types — genre dreams, universal dreams, nightmares and erotic dreams — each serving distinct functions in your subconscious processing.
While some dreams require no interpretation, such as those directly reflecting your waking anxieties, others offer deeper insights into your emotional and psychological states. For instance, expansive dreams experienced by terminally ill patients symbolize a predictable companion to their intense emotional journeys.
Junk dreams, characterized by random and seemingly meaningless imagery, serve as your brain’s way of releasing unnecessary cognitive clutter. Jandial advises focusing on dreams with lingering emotional residues, as they offer valuable reflections on your life and mental state:10
“The ones you have a lingering, long emotional residue with — to me those are the ones to reflect upon. Those are the ones to think about the next day because they may offer you an insight into your life and into your mind, into your waking life, that you simply couldn’t get elsewhere. This is the therapist built in.
These are the portals to your subconscious — the emotional dreams that happen in the dreaming brain and the occasional memory and the residue that lingers with you as you wake up.”
The Complexities of Sleep Disorders, Dreams and Technology
The Q&A session following Jandial’s presentation explored practical concerns about sleep and dreams. Addressing questions on insomnia, night terrors and neurodiversity, he reiterated the brain-centric nature of sleep. “Sleep is for the brain,” he affirms, dispelling myths that attribute sleep solely to bodily rest.11
For individuals experiencing night terrors and sleepwalking, Jandial acknowledges the lack of definitive treatments but offers hope through understanding the underlying neurological mechanisms. By recognizing these disorders as manifestations of your dreaming brain’s wildness, patients better navigate their experiences and seek appropriate interventions.
In an era where technology is rapidly advancing, Jandial also pondered the intersection of dreams and artificial intelligence (AI). While acknowledging technologies like Neuralink and large language models, he maintains a critical perspective on the feasibility of translating dream patterns into digital formats.
“Dreaming is divergent,” he explains, contrasting it with the predictive nature of computer algorithms.12 For AI to emulate the adaptability of the human brain, it would need to incorporate a form of dream-like noise to prevent overfitting — a challenge that remains largely unresolved.
Nonetheless, Jandial remains optimistic about the future of integrating dream science with technological innovation, envisioning a symbiotic relationship that enhances both human cognition and artificial intelligence.
The Ever-Present Dreaming Process
Jandial also emphasized the inevitability and necessity of dreaming. “The dreaming process of liberating emotion, liberating movement, liberating vision is happening every night,” he asserts, “Our memory of it, by design I think, is meant to be minimal so we don’t have dreaming and waking life confusion.”13
He likens the process to the brain’s way of keeping itself fine-tuned and adaptable. Whether through sleep entry and exit or the constant toggling between your imagination and executive networks, dreams are integral to your cognitive and emotional well-being.
He encourages individuals to engage actively with their dreams through dream journals, lucid dreaming techniques and mindful reflection. By doing so, you harness the full potential of your dreaming mind, unlocking insights that transcend the limitations of your waking consciousness.
Dreams are not mere byproducts of sleep but essential processes that shape your creativity, emotional resilience and even your future neurological health. In embracing the insights shared by Jandial, you foster a deeper appreciation for your dreaming mind — a place where science meets mystery, and where your innermost self finds expression in the silent narratives of the night.
*
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.
“That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be.”
This is a line by fantasy author PC Hodgell, though it’s often misattributed to Carl Sagan.
I think about this quote a lot.
I think about it when reflecting on the way Israel is exterminating Palestinian journalists in Gaza while keeping western journalists out of the enclave to prevent the world from learning the truth about what the IDF is doing there.
.
.
I think about it when reflecting on the mountains of government secrecy with which the western empire protects its information interests, imprisoning whistleblowers and persecuting journalists who try to expose the truth about its criminal actions around the world.
I think about it when reflecting on the nonstop deluge of empire propaganda that public consciousness is hammered with to manipulate the masses into accepting the global leadership the US-centralized power structure.
I think about it when reflecting on the US war machine and how all the military operations of Washington and its allies are always justified by lies.
I think about it when reflecting on dysfunctional relationships that are held in place by secrets and dishonesty, preventing the ones being deceived from freeing themselves and finding their way into a life of authenticity.
I think about it when reflecting on the ego and how easily its illusory nature can be seen with a penetrating insight into the truth of how human perception and cognition are really operating.
.
.
There are times when withholding the truth would be in the highest interest. Someone lying to the police to protect someone from unjust persecution at the hands of an unjust system. A journalist protecting a source by obfuscating the truth from government agents. A battered wife lying to her husband to calm him down. An abused child lying to their abuser about what they’ve been doing.
But as near as I can tell the only times when withholding the truth is in the highest interest is when there’s an abusive power dynamic at play and the person in the down-power position is using untruth to protect someone in an unjust situation which should not exist in the first place. In all other instances, truth is best.
Truth is the great equalizer. It makes the abuses of the powerful much more difficult to execute, and gives the disempowered much more power. This is why our rulers are constantly working to expand surveillance and eliminate the privacy of ordinary citizens while increasing government secrecy to allow themselves to hide the truth, when in a healthy society it would be the exact opposite. In a healthy society ordinary members of the public would have enshrined privacy protections against the government, and any governmental systems would be as transparent as air.
In a healthy society there would be a direct one-to-one correlation between power and transparency. The more power you have the more transparency should be required of you, and the less power you have the more secrecy you should be shielded with. This would protect ordinary citizens from abuse at the hands of the powerful, and prevent the powerful from becoming abusive toward the citizenry. We know this is true because all the most abusive power structures work constantly to reverse this dynamic to the furthest extent possible.
A healthy society will be a truth-based society. It’s hard to imagine what a society that is guided by truth would look like, because we live in a society that is made of lies. If deceit magically became impossible today, all our institutions would crumble by tomorrow. A truth-based society would mean the total destruction of all that is familiar to us right now. But that which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
Truth can be scary, because in any situation sustained by falsehood, truth is a destructive force. It can cause political upheaval. It can end relationships. It can annihilate egoic delusion. Any of these will typically feel like a giant leap into the unknown, and are generally terrifying for exactly that reason. But this is the only path toward health.
If we are to survive on this planet, eventually we’re going to have to take that leap. Eventually we’re going to have to become a truth-driven species. Everything about our current status quo will resist this movement — the untruth in our current power structures, and the untruth within ourselves.
Maybe we won’t take that leap until things get so bad that the unknown looks less terrifying than what the familiar has become. Maybe we will find our courage before it comes to that point. But we’re going to have to jump for it eventually, or we will go the way of the dinosaur.
And if it does come to that, if we are collectively unable to take the leap because we value our lies more than our lives, that too will reveal a truth to us about who we are and what we were always made of. One way or the other, truth will have the final say.
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be. And, eventually, will be.
*
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.
Corporate media is heralding the fall of Bashar al-Assad and the emergence of Abu Mohammed al-Jolani as the new leader of Syria, despite his deep ties to both al-Qaeda and ISIS.
“How Syria’s ‘diversity-friendly’ jihadists plan on building a state,” runs the headline from an article in Britain’s Daily Telegraph that suggests that Jolani will construct a new Syria, respectful of minority rights. The same newspaper also labeled him a “moderate Jihadist.” The Washington Post described him as a pragmatic and charismatic leader, while CNN portrayed him as a “blazer-wearing revolutionary.”
Meanwhile, an in-depth portrait from Rolling Stone describes him as a “ruthlessly pragmatic, astute politician who has renounced ‘global jihad’” and intends to “unite Syria.” His “strategic acumen is apparent,” writes Rolling Stone, between paragraphs praising Jolani for leading a successful movement against a dictator.
CNN even scored an exclusive, sit-down interview with Jolani, even as his movement was storming Damascus. When asked by host Jomana Karadsheh about his past actions, he responded by saying,
“I believe that everyone in life goes through phases and experiences…As you grow, you learn, and you continue to learn until the very last day of your life,” as if he were discussing embarrassing teenage mistakes, not establishing and leading the Al-Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda’s franchise in Syria.
This is a far cry from the first time CNN covered Jolani. In 2013, the network labeled him one of “the world’s 10 most dangerous terrorists,” known for abducting, torturing and slaughtering racial and religious minorities.
Still on the U.S. terrorist list today, the FBI is offering a $10 million reward for information about his whereabouts. Washington and other Western governments consider Jolani’s new organization, Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), as one and the same as Al-Qaeda/Al-Nusra.
This poses a serious public relations dilemma for Western nations, who supported the HTS-led overthrow of President Bashar al-Assad. And thus, Politico and others report there is a “huge scramble” in Washington to remove HTS and Jolani from the terrorist list as quickly as possible.
The Making of a Radical
Jolani has sought to distance himself from his past and present himself as a moderating force that can attempt to unite an intensely divided Syria. While he has, in recent years, displayed a willingness to compromise with other forces and factions, it is far from clear whether the tens of thousands of soldiers he commands – units made up primarily of former fighters from al-Qaeda/al-Nusra and ISIS – will be in a charitable mood once they cement their power.
“Syria is being purified,” he told a crowd in Damascus on Sunday. “This victory is born from the people who have languished in prison, and the fighters broke their chains,” he added.
Jolani – whose real name is Ahmed Hussein al-Shar’a – was born in 1982 in Saudi Arabia to parents who fled the Golan Heights area of Syria after the 1967 Israeli invasion. In 2003, he went to Iraq to fight against American forces. After three years of war, he was captured by the U.S. military and spent over five years in prison, including a stint at the notorious Abu Ghraib torture center.
While in Iraq, Jolani fought with ISIS and was even a deputy to its founder. Immediately upon release in 2011, ISIS sent him to Syria with a rumored $1 billion to found the Syrian wing of al-Qaeda and participate in the armed protest movement against Assad that arose out of the Arab Spring.
Realizing the extremely poor reputation al-Qaeda had in the region and across the world, Jolani attempted to rebrand his forces, officially shuttering the al-Nusra Front in January 2017 and, on the same day, founding HTS. He claimed that HTS preaches a very different ideology and that it will respect Syrian diversity. Not everyone is convinced of this, least of all the British government, who immediately proscribed HTS, describing it as merely an alias of Al-Qaeda.
“Al-Qaeda/ISIS man didn’t ‘reinvent himself.’ He had the whole propaganda and intelligence apparatus of the ‘West,’ including the BBC, doing it for him,” remarked co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah.
The New Government: Likes Israel, Hates Hezbollah
The name “al-Jolani” translates to “From the Golan Heights.” And yet, the leader appears distinctly unconcerned with the Israeli invasion of his homeland. The IDF has taken much of southern Syria, including the strategic Mount Hermon, overlooking Damascus. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stated that this is part of a permanent operation. “The Golan Heights…will forever be an inseparable part of the State of Israel,” he proclaimed.
Jolani has already said that he has no intention of confronting Israel.
“Syria is not ready for war and does not intend to go into another war. The source of concern was the Iranian militias, and Hezbollah, and the danger has passed,” he said – a strange thing to say while Israel is carrying out the largest Air Force operation in its history, pounding military targets all over Syria.
Other HTS spokespersons have also categorically refused to comment on Israel’s attack on the country, even when pressed by incredulous Western journalists.
Jolani’s comments, singling out two Shia forces rather than Israel as enemies of the state, will have many concerned that this could signal a return to the process of Shia slaughter ISIS waged over much of Syria and Iraq. In 2016, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 383-0 to classify this process as a genocide.
Fortunately, the new government will likely be a coalition of disparate and moderating forces. However, these groups seem to share a common thread: they all appear to be pro-Israel. A commander of the secular Free Syrian Army, for example, recently gave an interview to The Times of Israel, where he looked forward to a new era of “friendship” and “harmony” with its neighbor to the south.
“We will go for full peace with Israel… Since the outbreak of the Syrian civil war, we have never made any critical comments against Israel, unlike Hezbollah, who stated they aim to liberate Jerusalem and the Golan Heights,” he said.
The commander added that
“Israel will plant a rose in the Syrian garden” and asked for the country’s financial support in forming a new government.
Other anti-Assad forces have gone even further, with one individual stating that
Israel “isn’t hostile to those who are not hostile toward it. We don’t hate you, we love you very much…we were quite happy when you attacked Hezbollah, really happy, and we’re glad that you won.”
Statements like these might surprise a casual observer. But the reality is that Israel has been funding, training and arming much of the Syrian opposition since its inception. This includes Al-Qaeda, whose wounded fighters are treated by Israel.
And while radical Islamist forces appeared to be enemies with everyone, the one group they fastidiously avoided any confrontation with was Israel. Indeed, in 2016, ISIS fighters accidentally fired upon an Israeli position in the Golan Heights, thinking they were Syrian government forces, then quickly issued an apology for doing so.
From the Golan Heights, the year-long Israeli campaign against Hezbollah and Syrian Army positions also seriously weakened both forces, aiding the opposition in their victory.
Al-Qaeda and the U.S.: A Complicated Relationship
While both journalists and politicians in the U.S. are scrambling to change their opinions on Jolani and HTS, the reality is that, for much of its existence, Washington has enjoyed a very close relationship with al-Qaeda. The organization was born in Afghanistan in the 1980s, thanks in no small part to the CIA. Between 1979 and 1992, the CIA spent billions of dollars funding, arming, and training Afghan Mujahideen militiamen (like Osama bin Laden) in an attempt to bleed the Soviet occupation dry. It was from the ranks of the Mujahideen that bin Laden built his organization.
During the 1990s, bin Laden’s relationship with the U.S. soured, and it eventually became a principal target for al-Qaeda, culminating in the infamous September 11, 2001, attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C.
The Bush administration would use these attacks as a pretext to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq, claiming that America could never be safe if al-Qaeda were not thoroughly destroyed. Bin Laden became perhaps the most notorious individual in the world, and American society was turned upside down in a self-described effort to rout Islamic extremism.
And yet, by the 2010s, even as the U.S. was ostensibly at war with al-Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was secretly working with it in Syria on a plan to overthrow Assad. The CIA spent around $1 billion per year training and arming a wide network of rebel groups to this end. As National Security Advisor Jake Sullivantold Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a leaked 2012 email, “AQ [al-Qaeda] is on our side in Syria.”
Thus, while many casual observers may be shocked to see the media and political class embrace the leader of al-Qaeda in Syria as a modern, progressive champion, the reality is that the U.S. relationship with the group is merely reverting to a position it has previously held. Consequently, it appears that the War on Terror will come to an end with the “terrorists” being redesignated as “moderate rebels” and “freedom fighters.”
Who Gets to Define “Terrorist”?
Of course, many have argued that the U.S. Terrorist List is entirely arbitrary to begin with and is merely a barometer of who is in Washington’s good books at any given time. In 2020, the Trump administration removed Sudan from its state sponsors of terror list in exchange for the country normalizing relations with Israel, proving how transactional the list was.
A few months later, it removed the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (a Uyghur militia currently active in Syria) from its list because of its hardening attitude towards China, seeing ETIM as a useful pawn to play against Beijing.
Washington also continues to keep Cuba on its terror list despite there being no evidence of the island supporting terror groups.
And the U.S. refused to remove Nelson Mandela from its list of the world’s most notorious terrorists until 2008 – 14 years after he became President of South Africa. In comparison, Jolani’s redesignation might take fewer than fourteen days.
A giant rebranding operation is taking place. Both corporate media and the U.S. government have attempted to transform the founder and head of an al-Qaeda affiliate organization into a woke, progressive actor. It remains to be seen how exactly Jolani will govern and whether he can maintain support from a wide range of Syrian groups. Given what we have seen in the past week, however, he can be confident of enjoying strong support from the Western press.
*
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.
It was bound to happen. With continuing operations in Gaza, and increasingly violent activities being conducted against Palestinians in the occupied territories, human rights organisations are making increasingly severe assessments of Israel’s warring cause. While the world awaits the findings of the International Court of Justice on whether Israel’s campaign, as argued by South Africa, amounts to genocide, Amnesty International has already reached its conclusions.
In a 296-page report sporting the ominous title “You Feel Like You Are Subhuman”, the human rights body, after considering the events in Gaza between October 2023 and July 2024, identified a “pattern of conduct” that indicated genocidal intent. These included, among other things, persistent direct attacks on civilians and objects “and deliberately indiscriminate strikes over the nine-month period, wiping out entire families repeatedly launched at times when these strikes would result in high numbers of casualties”; the nature of the weapons used; the speed and scale of destruction to civilian objects and infrastructure (homes, shelters, health facilities, water and sanitation infrastructure, agricultural land”; the use of bulldozing and controlled demolitions; and the use of “incomprehensible, misleading and arbitrary ‘evacuation’ orders’”.
The report does much to focus on statements made from the highest officials to the common soldiery to reveal the mental state necessary to reveal genocide. 102 statements made by members of the Knesset, government officials and high-ranking commanders “dehumanized Palestinians, or called for, or justified genocidal acts or other crimes under international law against them.” The report also examined 62 videos, audio recordings and photographs posted online featuring gleeful Israeli soldiers rejoicing in the “destruction of Gaza or the denial of essential services to people in Gaza, or celebrated the destruction of Palestinian homes, mosques, schools and universities, including through controlled demolitions, in some cases without apparent military necessity.”
From its alternative universe, the Israeli public relations machine drew from its own agitprop specialists, working on mangling the language of the report. The formula is familiar: attack the authors first, not their premises.
“The deplorable and fanatical organisation Amnesty International has once again produced a fabricated response that is entirely based on lies,” came the howl from Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesperson Oren Marmorstein.
Other methods of repudiation involve detaching Hamas and its war with Israel from any historical continuum, not least the fact that it was aided, supported and backed by Israel for years as a counter to Fatah in the West Bank. Isolating Hamas as a terrorist aberration also serves to treat it as alien, artificially foreign and not part of any resistance movement against suffocating Israeli occupation and strangulation. They, so goes this argument, are genocidal, and countering such a body can never be, by any stretch, genocidal. The pro-Israeli group NGO Monitor abides by this line of reasoning, calling allegations of genocide against Israel “a reversal of the actual and clearly established intent of Hamas and its allies (including its patron, Iran), to wipe Israel off the map”.
Israel’s closest ally and sponsor, the United States, proved predictable in rejecting the findings while still claiming to respect the humanitarian line. The US State Department’s principal deputy spokesman, Vedant Patel, expressed disagreement “with the conclusions of such a report. We had said previously and continue to find that the allegations of genocide are unfounded.” Patel did, however, pay lip service to the “vital role that civil society organizations like Amnesty International and human rights groups and NGOs play in providing information and analysis as it relates to Gaza and what’s going on.” Vital, but only up to a point.
Far less guarded assessments can be found in the American pro-Israeli chatter sphere. These follow the usual pattern. Orde Kittrie, senior fellow of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a name that can only imply that crimes committed in such a cause are bound to be justifiable, offers a neat illustration. Amnesty, he argues, “systematically and repeatedly mischaracterizes both the facts and the law.” Kittrie suggests his own mischaracterisation by parroting the IDF’s line that Hamas had “increased casualty counts by illegally using Palestinian civilian shields and by hiding weapons and war fighters in and below homes, hospitals, mosques, and other buildings.” This conveniently ignores that point that the numbers are not necessarily proof of genocidal intent, though it helps.
The report also notes that, even in the face of such tactics by Hamas, Israel was still “obligated to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians and avoid attacks that would be indiscriminate or disproportionate.”
Amnesty International’s report is yet another addition to the gloomy literature on the subject. Human Rights Watch, in November, pointed to violations of the laws of war, crimes against humanity, and the provisional measures of the ICJ issued urging Israel to abide by the obligations imposed by the UN Genocide Convention of 1948. The Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem stated in no uncertain terms in October that “Israel intends to forcibly displace northern Gaza’s residents by committing some of the gravest crimes under the laws of war”.
Battling over the designation of whether a campaign is genocidal can act as a distraction, a field of quibbles for paper pushing pedants. The “specific intent” in proof must be unequivocally demonstrated and beyond any other reasonable inference. A smokescreen is thereby deployed that risks masking the broader ambit of war crimes and crimes against humanity. But no amount of pedantry and disagreement can arrest the sense that Israel’s lethal conduct, whatever threshold it may reach in international law, is directed at destroying not merely Palestinian life but any worthwhile sense of a viable sovereignty. Amnesty Israel, while rejecting the central claim of the parent organisation’s report did make one concession: the country’s brutal response following October 7, 2023 “may amount to crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.”
*
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.
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]
Since 2020, the vaccine industry has committed highly visible and deadly crimes. The COVID-19 operation and its toxic genetic injections, misrepresented as “safe and effective vaccines,” have killed tens of millions of people and injured at least one billion. The claimed ingredients of these products are not consistent with the ingredients of traditional vaccines. (Learn more)
The COVID-19 operation has exposed ruthless individuals within the vaccine industry. (Details here) However, it has also revealed a rare group of trustworthy scientists, doctors, nurses, and others who stood firm in defending truth, health, and human rights—even when governments and institutions were weaponized against them for doing so.
We were alerted to the vaccine industry’s darker side by the blatant fraud and reckless harm caused by the COVID injections. This scrutiny has brought the industry’s history into sharp focus. As we delve into its practices over the last century, we are uncovering a disturbing pattern of scientific fraud, toxic injections, corruption, and systemic cover-ups.
Long before COVID, Ted Kuntz and Vaccine Choice Canada were working tirelessly to expose the hidden truths and medical crimes of the vaccine industry, advocating for the well-being of us all.
With deep respect for Ted and Vaccine Choice Canada, I share the letter below, embrace its wisdom, contribute what I can, and encourage others to share it as well.
***
Dear VCC Community,
The vaccine industry claims that vaccines are “safe and effective”. This is blatantly dishonest. And this deception is not due to incompetence or a lack of information. Recent studies from Dr Anthony Mawson, Joy Garner, Dr Brian Hooker, Dr Peter Aaby, Neil Miller, Dr Paul Thomas and many others provide irrefutable evidence that vaccinated children are sicker than unvaccinated children.
In his latest book, Vax Facts, Dr. Paul Thomas makes the statement that the vaccine industry is poisoning our children. He unambiguously declares – “the poisoning needs to stop”. Vaccine Choice Canada concurs with Dr. Thomas. We have been battling the lies and deception from the vaccine industry and public health for 42 years.
Not only is the vaccine industry harming our children, they have also captured our regulatory agencies, colleges of physicians and surgeons, public health agencies, medical journals and governments. Their goal is to make vaccines mandatory for all citizens everywhere. Two provinces in Canada – Ontario and New Brunswick, have already imposed vaccine mandates for children to attend school. And while exemptions exist to enable parents to opt out of forced vaccination, most parents are unaware of the exemptions.
Many parents have accepted the mantra of “safe and effective”. They have been misled into believing that injecting aluminum, mercury, polysorbate 80, aborted fetal cells, mRNA technology, and other toxic ingredients will make their children healthier. The evidence is overwhelming that vaccinated children are not healthier. The real pandemic today is the pandemic of chronic illness. More that 50% of children today have a lifelong chronic disease.
At the NCI hearings in Vancouver in October, Dr. Paul Thomas provided evidence that the risk of death is higher with every vaccine than from the disease condition the vaccine is intended to provide protection from. This means that our children are more likely to die from the vaccine than from contracting the disease. This fact alone should bring a halt to all vaccines.
We all want healthy children. But vaccines are making our children sicker.
As a result of the egregious violations of rights and freedom, medical ethics, and standards of safety testing, more and more parents are waking up to the lie of vaccination. There is a window of opportunity now where parents are willing to question what they have been told about all vaccines. This is why the New Parents Guide to Understanding Vaccination is so important. This is why we need to support parents to raise their children naturally.
I suggest that our work at Vaccine Choice Canada was never more important. Twice a year we ask for your financial support. Your support helps to keep Vaccine Choice Canada going, and enables us to develop new resources like The New Parents Guide to Understanding Vaccination and Raising Natures Child.
This Fall we have been blessed by the generous support of Laura and Rick Hayes, parents of a vaccine injured child. Laura and Rick have offered to match donations dollar for dollar to a maximum of $25,000. This means that your donation of $100.00 gives $200.00 to Vaccine Choice Canada. To date, we have received approximately $10,000 in donations.
As there are only a few more weeks left in our Fall campaign, I ask you to give generously so that we can make full use of the Hayes’ gift. And more importantly, to educate young parents how to keep their children healthy.
Sincerely,
Ted Kuntz, President
*
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.
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
Take a look at the map below. It explains everything.
This is roughly the situation on the ground today. The majority of Syria’s landmass is controlled by 5 groups: Al Qaida (HTS), the Kurds (SDF), the IDF (Israel), the Turks, and remnants of the Syrian Army (SAA). Of course, the situation is extremely fluid so some of the territory is likely to change hands in the near future as rival groups fight among themselves. But here’s what won’t change: A government will not emerge that is capable of stitching together a unified, contiguous, viable centrally-governed Syrian state. That’s not going to happen. The various armies are too powerful for any one group to crush the others and reestablish a government that rules all of Syria’s previously controlled territory.
.
.
.
.
Why does that matter?
Because we need to acknowledge that Israel has accomplished what it sought from the very beginning; they not only enlisted allies to help them topple Assad, but they also obliterated the Syrian state. Syria is gone; it no longer exists. And that has been Israel’s goal for more than 40 years.
So, we shouldn’t view the events of the last week as random or spontaneous, because they are neither. Everything that has taken place aligns closely with a strategic blueprint produced by a Zionist intellectual (Oded Yinon) more than four decades ago and which—according to biographer Israel Shahak—concocted “an accurate and detailed plan….for the Middle East which is based on the division of the whole area into small states, and the dissolution of all the existing Arab states.” Full Stop.
This is where readers need to pause for a moment and honestly consider whether this accurately explains the endless fighting and turmoil we’ve seen in the Middle East for the last two decades?
The answer is: It does. Iraq, Libya, Lebanon, Syria etc. These are not just countries; they are agenda items on a Zionist checklist for regional domination. So, stop thinking that the wars have something to do with Assad or oil or pipelines or Hamas or even Israeli security. Because they don’t. These are wars aimed at establishing Israeli hegemony across the Middle East. Let’s look at the document itself which is titled A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties by Oded Yinon:
The Moslem Arab World is built like a temporary house of cards put together by foreigners without the wishes and desires of the inhabitants having been taken into account. …every Arab Moslem state nowadays faces ethnic social destruction from within, and in some a civil war is already raging. All of the Arab states east of Israel are torn apart, broken up and riddled with conflict… This national ethnic minority picture extending from Morocco to India and from Somalia to Turkey points to the absence of stability and a rapid degeneration in the entire region. When this picture is added to the economic one, we see how the entire region is built like a house of cards, unable to withstand its severe problems…..A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties, Oded Yinon, voltairenet
So, in the opening paragraphs, the author identifies the vulnerabilities within the current societies that can be exploited for Israel’s strategic advantage. The focus, of course, is on “ethnic minorities” that can be incited to exacerbate existing divisions within the society in order to weaken the larger body politic leading to regime change. Here’s the kicker:
The Western front… is in fact less complicated than the Eastern front. Lebanon’s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precendent for the entire Arab World….. The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart in accordance with its ethnic and reliegious strtucture, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi’ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northenr Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today…. A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties, Oded Yinon, voltairenet
Repeat: “This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run.” In other words, inciting ethnic and religious violence against other groups within the society, is the operational strategy for achieving regional dominance. In order to establish Israeli security, Arabs must be encouraged to kill each other.
Are we clear about that?
Regarding the Palestinians, there’s this little nugget:
Genuine coexistence and peace will reign over the land only when the Arabs understand that without Jewish rule between the Jordan and the sea, they will have neither existence nor security. A nation of their own and security will be theirs only in Jordan. A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties,
Keep in mind, this was written in 1982 which means—that among the politicos in Netanyahu’s party—there was never any intention of exchanging land for peace or fulfilling their obligations under US Resolution 242 to evacuate the occupied territories. It was always a ruse aimed at confusing credulous nitwits in the US.
Economist Jeffrey Sachs has confirmed much of what we’ve stated here. He has recently been quite outspoken in a number of interviews on YouTube where he has laid blame for all the recent wars in the Middle East on Benjamin Netanyahu. Here’s Sach’s in a recent piece at Consortium News:
The fall of Syria this week is the culmination of the Israel-U.S. campaign against Syria that goes back to 1996 with Netanyahu’s arrival in office as prime minister. The Israel-U.S. war on Syria escalated in 2011 and 2012, when former U.S. President Barack Obama covertly tasked the C.I.A. with the overthrow of the Syrian Government in Operation Timber Sycamore. ….
Syria’s fall came swiftly because of more than a decade of crushing economic sanctions, the burdens of war, the U.S. seizure of Syria’s oil….. and most immediately, Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah… Netanyahu’s ambition to transform the region through war, which dates back almost three decades, is playing out in front of our eyes…
The long history of Israel’s campaign to overthrow the Syrian government is not widely understood, yet the documentary record is clear….
Israel’s war on Syria began with U.S. and Israeli neoconservatives in 1996, who fashioned a “Clean Break” strategy for the Middle East for Netanyahu as he came to office…..The core of the “clean break” strategy called for the Israel (and the U.S.) to reject “land for peace,” the idea that Israel would withdraw from the occupied Palestinian lands in return for peace….
...Netanyahu’s strategy was integrated into U.S. foreign policy. Taking out Syria was always a key part of the plan. This was confirmed by General Wesley Clark after 9/11. (The role of the Israel Lobby is spelled out in Ilan Pappé’s new book, Lobbying for Zionism on Both Sides of the Atlantic)….
The U.S. has by now led or sponsored wars against Iraq (invasion in 2003), Lebanon (U.S. funding and arming Israel), Libya (NATO bombing in 2011), Syria (C.I.A. operation during 2010s), Sudan (supporting rebels to break Sudan apart in 2011), and Somalia (backing Ethiopia’s invasion in 2006).
A prospective U.S. war with Iran, ardently sought by Israel, is still pending….. The U.S. and Israel are high-fiving that they have successfully wrecked yet another adversary of Israel and defender of the Palestinian cause, with Netanyahu claiming “credit for starting the historic process.”...
American interference, at the behest of Netanyahu’s Israel, has left the Middle East in ruins, with over a million dead and open wars raging in Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, and with Iran on the brink of a nuclear arsenal, being pushed against its own inclinations to this eventuality. US & Israel Destroyed Syria & Called it Peace, Jeffrey Sachs, Consortium News
.
.
These are Israel’s wars, and they are prosecuted to pursue Israeli interests not American interests. The US military (and political class) has been hijacked by the maneuverings of strongarm lobbyists who know how to work the levers of power to achieve their own ends. Their rate of success speaks for itself. Much of the Middle East lies in ruins which was the plan from the get-go.
But now comes the hard part, because nothing has really been resolved in Syria. Yes, Assad is gone and, yes, the Syrian state has disintegrated. But how long will it take before Turkey is fighting the US-backed Kurds in the East, or before Israeli and Turkish interests clash in central or southern Syria or before HTS proves to be the unreliable terrorist organization it is known to be and refuses to follow its marching orders from Washington and Tel Aviv? So, yes, the invaders may be congratulating themselves this week “for a job well done”, but the Syrian conflagration is not over yet, not by a long-shot.
There was an important development that took place last week that provides a window into future goings-on in the battered country, although the statement was downplayed by most of the media. On Wednesday, officials of Hayat Tahrir-al Sham (HTS) announced that Mohammed al-Bashir had been appointed as Syria’s interim prime minister. Al-Bashir, who has been running the Idlib province, has been chosen to lead a small cabinet whose job will be to make sure the government agencies, banks and public services continue operate without interruption. More importantly,al-Bashir, who speaks English, is the likely the designated technocrat chosen by Washington to jumpstart the sale of the country’s state-owned assets and businesses, its natural resources, and anything else of value. Judging from past experience, he will probably oversee a sharp reduction in government spending, as well as dramatic cutbacks in education, public safety and health care. He will also seek hefty loans from the IMF for reconstruction that will be diverted to foreign accounts for his family and cronies leaving ordinary Syrians with an ocean of red ink they can never hope to repay. Sound familiar?
Unfortunately, Bashir’s debut did not go as well as expected. Here’s the story from NBC News:
When Syria’s new interim prime minister, Mohammad al-Bashir, chaired a Cabinet meeting in Damascus on Tuesday, hanging behind him was the flag of the country’s suddenly victorious opposition. Next to it, however, was a second banner popular with the region’s Sunni Islamist fighters, featuring the large Arabic letters of the Shahada, an Islamic declaration of faith.
As a new Syria fast emerges from the ruins of the Assad regime, the world is watching for hints of what that might look like — and that second flag has concerned those hoping for a future of moderation and tolerance….
HTS is banned as a terrorist organization in the United Statesand elsewhere and grew out of a branch of Al Qaeda. Its leader, Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, said a decade ago that there would be no room for religious minorities in the Islamist Syria of which he dreamed about. He also suggested that he could bring terrorism to the West unless it withdrew from the Middle East’s wars.
More recently, however, Jolani, who now uses his real name, Ahmad al-Sharaa, has undergone something of a rebrand, trimming his beard, donning Westernized green fatigues and espousing tolerance for all of Syria’s myriad faiths. Nevertheless plenty of observers are reserving judgment until these words become actions….
Seeing Syria’s corridors of power welcome a flag “indicating Islamist-Salafist leanings” has “put people on alert,” Sukkar said. Although he does not think deploying the emblem was a “wise” move, he sees it as more reflective of the rebels’ origins in Idlib rather than anything else….
The classic worry among Western foreign policy watchers was that Assad might be toppled but replaced by something that is not much better: an extremist terror group….
Displaying the flag in an image meant to represent Syria’s new transition government shows how HTS and Jolani are still “deeply entrenched in their Salafist-Sunni ideology and worldview”….
With the group now making more moderate noises, and also in a position of considerable influence, the United States is exploring removing HTS’ terrorist designation, two current administration officials and a former senior U.S. official told NBC News. Although Washington will watch closely the militant group’s moves from its new political vantage point. Why a photo of Syria’s interim leader could hint at trouble ahead,NBC News
.
Mohammed al-Bashir before and after his Western Facelift
.
Let’s see if I got this right: The Biden administration replaces Assad with a terrorist organization but is suddenly surprised when it discovers the group is led by terrorists. Is that it?
Indeed, it is. As you can see, none of this resolves the basic crisis created by the removal of Assad. Instead, the main proponents of regime change—Turkey, the US and Israel—have merely transformed Syria into an even bigger battleground where their own competing interests will soon play out by way of mortal combat.
How long will it be before Turkey locks horns with Israel or the United States? How long before sectarian war engulfs the country?
Not long, I’d wager. And for the people who thought that toppling the “evil dictator” would bring peace and security. They’d better think again.
*
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.
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 is from MintPress News / All the other images are from TUR
Supporters have clapped and cheered in court after a doctor who clashed with regulators over COVID-19 vaccines had a medical ban lifted.
Dr William Anicha Bay had his registration as a medical practitioner suspended by the Medical Board of Australia on August 17, 2022 in response to five complaints involving his anti-vaccine activities.
Brisbane Supreme Court Justice Thomas Bradley overturned that suspension on Friday after finding Dr Bay had been subject to “bias and failure to afford fair process” over complaints unrelated to his clinical practice.
Justice Bradley said he was not entering the debate about COVID-19 vaccines.
“The court is concerned only with whether the decision or the conduct (of the medical board) was free from an error,” Justice Bradley stated.
One of the complaints was that Dr Bay had posted a social media video claiming COVID-19 vaccines had killed his patient and harmed others.
Another complaint stated Dr Bay had attended an anti-vaccination protest outside the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) office in Brisbane in July 2022.
A health professional filed a mandatory complaint that Dr Bay had interrupted an Australian Medical Association conference while live streaming video to the internet, yelling “stop forcing these vaccines on the people of Australia who are getting killed by them”.
The medical board found Dr Bay’s public statements undermined medical regulators’ “position on COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccination”.
It said his statements also “further contravenes the position of local, state and federal government and health authorities, which are in place to protect public health and safety”.
Justice Bradley said the COVID-19 pandemic was an “extraordinary period of history” in which governments encouraged widespread vaccine use.
However he said that did not allow the medical board to deny Dr Bay information about the complaints or disregard potential bias at hearings.
“None of these measures extended the board’s regulatory role to include protection of government and regulatory agencies from political criticism,” Justice Bradley said.
He ordered the medical board and AHPRA to cover Dr Bay’s reasonable legal costs as the regulators had extended the proceedings and made partial admissions at a late stage.
*
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.
Featured image: Dr William Bay, who protested against COVID-19 vaccination, has had a medical ban overturned. Photo: Darren England/AAP PHOTOS
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
My former CIA colleague Larry Johnson has a real ability to clarify the significance of the constantly growing deep dark hole that Joe “Mumbles” Biden, he of failing mental capacity, has hurled the American people into. Larry wrote on December 12th that
“There is still plenty of time before Donald Trump is inaugurated for Joe Biden’s team of cretins to start World War III. I think the biggest risk is that Israel may be emboldened to attack Iran and try to destroy sites, and may be encouraged to do so by the Biden lackeys. In short, American interference, at the behest of Netanyahu’s Israel, has left the Middle East in ruins, with over a million dead and open wars raging in Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, and with Iran on the brink of a nuclear arsenal, being pushed against its own inclinations to this eventuality. The collapse of the Assad regime has prompted a punishing military response from Israel, which has launched airstrikes at military targets across Syria and deployed ground troops both into and beyond a demilitarized buffer zone for the first time in 50 years.”
Given the destruction and partitioning of Syria, it has become impossible to consider United States foreign policy without some acceptance that it is driven and, in a sense, directed by Israel and Israel’s formidable domestic lobby in the US. “The Lobby,” as it is commonly referred to, controls both Congress and the White House on key issues and manages the media narrative in such a fashion as to make Israel the permanent victim, never the aggressor. Even though Israel is now marching in triumph across what remains of Syria and has indicated that it will be sticking around as an occupier, the move is being described as “temporary” and “defensive” by White House spokesmen. The Lobby’s success rests on the corruption that lots of money can buy, obvious to nearly everyone in politics, but a forbidden topic, sometimes referred to as an antisemitic “trope,” i.e. “Jews and money.” Israel’s role in managing the Joe Bidens and Donald Trumps is largely exercised in the broader Middle East but it also includes passionately supporting Volodymyr Zelensky’s Ukraine, a process derived in part from Jewish mythologizing and obtaining revenge for the alleged “pogroms” carried out in imperial Russia. Subsequent Jewish dominance of the Soviet intelligence and security services, which saw the killing of millions of Christians in Russia, Ukraine and Eastern Europe, are carefully excluded from the narrative.
In the latest bit of “mowing the grass” by the Israeli military, the country’s new Defense Minister Israel Katz told the press that the Israel Air Force (IAF) had carried out more than 480 strikes across Syria during the two days after the initial invasion, deliberately destroying most of Syria’s strategic weapon stockpiles. Meanwhile, the Israeli navy totally destroyed the Syrian fleet based at Latakia overnight. Katz hailed the operation as “a great success.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, on the day before, had called the rapid defeat of the Bashar al-Assad’s regime as “a new and dramatic chapter… The collapse of the Syrian regime is a direct result of the severe blows with which we have struck Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran… we are changing the face of the Middle East.”
When informed of the initial invasion of al-Assad’s Syria by Israeli, Turkish, insurgent and US forces, Donald Trump said that the conflict was none of our business and it would be best to keep out of it. Hopefully that will be the policy after January 20th inauguration, but one recalls that Trump’s record of pandering to Israel is almost as bad as Biden’s, and he was the one who decided (admittedly under pressure from the Pentagon) to continue in 2017 the military occupation of a third of Syria that included its oil resources and its best agricultural land. Add in the crippling US and European sanctions on Damascus and one might argue that since that time Syrians have been poor and starving, causing refugee flows and hostility towards al-Assad government that contributed to the success of the recent uprising.
To be sure, many Syrians are celebrating the fall of an admittedly repressive, authoritarian, and corrupt Bashar al-Assad government. But other Syrians, particularly from hitherto protected minority groups like Christians, Alawites and Shiites, are now living in fear of or fleeing from the violent sectarian insurgents that have taken the place of President al-Assad. Christian Churches have already been looted and desecrated and warned not to hold Christmas services, not to sponsor Christmas parades, and not to display the image of St. Nicholas.
To be sure, fearing what is to come is legitimate as the “rebel” leader of the al-Qaeda derived Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) Terror group, Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, who now goes by his given name Ahmed al-Shara, is a founder of al-Qaeda in Syria, al-Nusra, and a former deputy to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. The US State Department has listed him as a terrorist as well as HTS as a terrorist group, and has placed a $10 million bounty on al-Jolani’s head, which presumably will soon be removed by Joe Biden. There is plenty of blood on al-Jolani’s hands and little in the way of evidence that he will not opt to slaughter those who he sees as his enemies, much of the killing being guided by the extreme religious groups that make up his followers. Indeed, there are already reports of group killings, including numerous soldiers in the Syrian Arab Army who surrendered rather than fight the insurgents.
Al-Jolani now claims that his extremism was just a “phase” and he has several times confirmed that he wants good relations with Israel, clearly a condition imposed by the US to allow him to remain in power. He has even suggested that Israeli air support enabled his warriors to move quickly from their bases in the north to Damascus. But al-Jolani has never actually apologized for or disowned the atrocities committed on his watch in 2011-3 when he was actively killing fellow Syrians. This includes August 2013 massacres in some of the Alawite areas of Latakia, which included “the systematic killing of entire families,” an international investigation later determined. One observer also reported that the insurgents were devoted to “sectarian mass murder” This is the legacy of the new “inclusive” government in Syria. According to one other ominous report, it appears that Sharia law has already been announced by the newly installed justice minister, Shadi Alwaisi.
So, what is in it for the United States? Nothing but a curt thank you from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who clearly connived with Joe Biden’s Special Envoy Amos Hochstein, an Israeli by birth, to set the ball rolling towards Syria through adroit use of an attack on southern Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah followed by a phony ceasefire in Lebanon that gave Netanyahu a free hand and empowered Israel to invade and overthrow its neighbor Syria, parts of which will undoubtedly be annexed to help create Eretz or “Greater” Israel. It was and is all part of a plan by the US and Israel to reshape the Middle East to benefit the Jewish state and you can bet that Iran is the next target. And a delusional Joe Biden took credit for it all in his usual haphazard way, claiming after the regime change that Assad’s “main allies” — Iran, Hezbollah, and Russia — “are far weaker today than they were when I took office.” Their inability to save Assad was “a direct result of the blows that Ukraine, Israel have delivered upon their own self-defense, with unflagging support of the United States.”
Sure Joe, what bullshit. At the end of the day, to bring down Syria the US spent billions of dollars arming an insurgency that they knew was dominated by al-Qaeda in a government replacement scheme that benefited only Israel and Turkey and which targeted a country that in no way threatened the United States. It sure makes sense to me and I hope you will be comforted by it when you are hauled off to prison after you leave office and are prosecuted for exceeding your constitutional authority by involving the United States in two unnecessary wars. Some might call it treason!
*
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.
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: NICE SUNSET by NEMØ, Politicalcartoons.com
O regime de Kiev deixou claro mais uma vez que não irá cooperar com qualquer esforço de redução de tensões, boicotando todas as iniciativas tomadas para aliviar o sofrimento de soldados e civis. Recentemente, o primeiro-ministro húngaro revelou que as autoridades ucranianas rejeitaram uma proposta de cessar-fogo durante as celebrações de Natal, o que mostra claramente a falta de respeito da Ucrânia pela fé do seu próprio povo.
Viktor Orban afirmou em um discurso recente que o presidente ucraniano, Vladimir Zelensky, rejeitou uma proposta conjunta para um armistício de Natal e uma troca em grande escala de prisioneiros. A medida estava sendo negociada de forma conjunta pelos húngaros e outros europeus, mas não foi aceita pelos ucranianos, que a rejeitaram sem sequer avaliá-la adequadamente.
“No final da presidência húngara da UE, fizemos novos esforços pela paz. Propusemos um cessar-fogo de Natal e uma troca em grande escala de prisioneiros. É triste que [Zelensky] tenha claramente rejeitado e descartado isso hoje. Fizemos o que pudemos!”, disse Orban.
Em vez de seguir o caminho da desescalada, Zelensky não apenas rejeitou a medida, mas também criticou fortemente Orban por tentar estabelecer o acordo. Segundo o líder ucraniano, o primeiro-ministro húngaro tem intenções políticas egoístas ao promover tal diálogo. Zelensky acusou Orban de tentar aumentar sua própria imagem pessoal, e de não se preocupar verdadeiramente com o povo ucraniano. Zelensky pediu que os europeus se unissem e acrescentou que só por meio da união os europeus podem alcançar o sucesso compartilhado. Não apenas isso, o presidente neonazista afirmou que não é possível manter diálogo com os russos, não admitindo qualquer possibilidade de discutir uma resolução dentro do quadro diplomático.
“Ninguém deve aumentar a imagem pessoal à custa da união geral; todos devem focar no sucesso compartilhado. A unidade na Europa sempre foi a chave para alcançá-lo. Não pode haver discussões sobre a guerra que a Rússia trava contra a Ucrânia sem a Ucrânia”, disse Zelensky.
Além disso, Dmitry Litvin, um assessor de Zelensky, afirmou que não há possibilidade de diálogo entre Kiev e Budapeste sobre cessar-fogo ou troca de prisioneiros. Segundo ele, essas questões não podem ser discutidas com a Hungria, sugerindo que a participação de Orban em um processo diplomático não é bem-vinda pelo regime de Kiev. No entanto, Litvin confirmou que houve conversas, supostamente sem a presença húngara, sobre uma possível troca de prisioneiros até o final do ano.
“Como sempre, a Ucrânia não autorizou a Hungria a fazer nada. Como sempre, a Ucrânia está trabalhando diariamente para libertar prisioneiros, e há duas semanas contatos relevantes estão em andamento sobre uma troca significativa até o final do ano”, disse Litvin a jornalistas ucranianos.
Não é a primeira vez que há discussões sobre possíveis acordos de cessar-fogo em datas religiosas. Anteriormente, a Rússia tomou a iniciativa de parar temporariamente as hostilidades em datas importantes para ambos os lados. No entanto, Kiev nunca respeitou tais iniciativas, agindo sempre de maneira a prejudicar qualquer processo de redução de tensões no conflito.
Não é surpreendente que o regime neonazista ignore propostas de cessar-fogo durante os feriados cristãos. Recentemente, a junta de Maidan aprovou uma lei banindo a Igreja Ortodoxa, tornando ilegal a fé de mais de 80% dos ucranianos. De fato, a perseguição religiosa e o desrespeito pela fé tradicional tornaram-se comuns na Ucrânia de Zelensky, e é por isso que qualquer trégua de Natal deve ser ignorada.
No entanto, é interessante observar como a Hungria está tentando manter uma postura conciliatória e diplomática, enquanto a Ucrânia age de maneira hostil em relação a Budapeste. Em vez de aceitar os esforços de Orban pela paz e tentar cooperar para reduzir as tensões no continente europeu, o governo de Zelensky parece estar interessado apenas em levar o conflito às suas últimas consequências – mesmo sabendo que tais consequências podem ser catastróficas para Kiev.
Um cessar-fogo temporário de um ou dois dias seria extremamente benéfico para os ucranianos, pois traria alívio para as tropas e ajudaria com questões como moral e condições de combate. No entanto, os políticos e burocratas ucranianos não estão interessados no que é melhor para suas tropas, mas apenas em ganhar dinheiro com os pacotes de ajuda ocidentais de bilhões de dólares, com os soldados sendo meros sacrifícios para que possam alcançar tais ganhos.
بعدمرور أسبوع على ديكين روميين في عيد الشكر، أصدر الرئيس بايدن عفوا عن ابنه هانتر. لقد أُدين هانتر بايدن بالكذب في مسألة استخدام المخدرات في عملية شراء أسلحة فيدرالية في عام 2018، والتهرب الضريبي بمئات الآلاف من الدولارات، ومنها اقتطاعات تكاليف المرافقين والتسجيل في نادٍ جنسي. وقد منحه الرئيس، والده، عفواً كاملاً وغير مشروط عن هذه الجرائم. وقد أثار هذا انتقادات حتى في الحزب الديمقراطي. لكن لا أحد يتحدث عن الصفقات القذرة الأكثر خطورة التي لعب فيها هانتر بايدن دورا قياديا.
وفي عام 2014، بعد انقلاب “الميدان” في أوكرانيا، انضم إلى مجلس إدارة شركة أنشأها قطب الغاز، وهو وزير أوكراني سابق، كان يحاول إعادة بناء صورته بينما يواجه تحقيقا دوليا بتهمة غسيل الأموال. من خلال تعيينه في مجلس الإدارة ودفع راتب جيد لابن جو بايدن، الذي كان آنذاك نائب رئيس إدارة أوباما، يوفر رجل الأعمال لنفسه غطاء فعالا لمسائله الغامضة.
والأخطر من ذلك بكثير هو الدور الذي لعبه هانتر بايدن في إنشاء شبكة أمريكية من المختبرات الحيوية في أوكرانيا يروج لها ويمولها البنتاغون. تظهر أدلة دامغة من تحقيق نشره “ذا ناشيونل بالز” The National Pulse في 24 مارس 2022، وهو مركز أمريكي للصحافة الاستقصائية مقره واشنطن:
“شركة رزمونت سَناكا تكنولوجي بارتنرز، (RSTP)، التي يشغل هانتر بايدن وكريستوفر هاينز منصب مديرها الإداري، والثاني هو صهر جون كيري، وزير الخارجية في ذلك الوقت في إدارة أوباما، تضم في محفظتها شركة “ميتابيوتا كومْبني”، يقع مقرها الرئيسي في سان فرانسيسكو، وهدفها المعلن هو اكتشاف وتتبع وتحليل الأمراض المعدية الناشئة، وتعمل في اتصال وثيق مع معهد “أنتوني فوسي” الوطني للحساسية والأمراض المعدية (NIAID)..
“كما يتضح من عقود “ميتابيوتا” مع وزارة الدفاع الأمريكية والمختبرات الحيوية الأوكرانية، فقد تلقت “ميتابيوتا” في عام 2014 منحة قدرها 18.4 مليون دولار لمشاريع بحثية في أوكرانيا، بما في ذلك تلك التي تعزل سلالات مسببات الأمراض القاتلة مثل فيروس حمى الخنازير الأفريقية. أجرى باحثون من ميتابيوتا وثلاثة معاهد مقرها في أوكرانيا تسلسل الجينوم الكامل لفيروس حمى الخنازير الأفريقية الخبيثة من خنزير محلي في أوكرانيا”.
وكما يظهر أيضًا من خلال تحقيق موثق أجراه الاتحاد الروسي، فليس من المعقول أن يكون الهدف من أكثر من 30 مختبرًا بيولوجيًا أنشأتها الولايات المتحدة بشكل مباشر وغير مباشر في أوكرانيا هو إجراء أبحاث حول الفيروسات القاتلة لحماية السكان الأوكرانيين. ولو كان الأمر كذلك، فلا حاجة لما يربو عن ثلاثين مختبراً، ولو كان الهدف مدنياً، لما كان من الضروري أن يتم تكليف البنتاغون بإجراء الأبحاث والتجارب. ينبغي فتح تحقيق دولي في أنشطة المختبرات البيولوجية في أوكرانيا، وهي جزء من أكثر من 300 مختبر بيولوجي أنشأته الولايات المتحدة في 36 دولة حول العالم.
الحقيقة قالها بوضوح روبرت كينيدي جونيور في مقابلة مع منشط قناة فوكس تاكر كارلسون (اوت، آب 2023): “لدينا مختبرات بيولوجية في أوكرانيا لأننا نطور أسلحة بيولوجية. وتستخدم هذه الأسلحة البيولوجية جميع أنواع البيولوجيا الاصطناعية الجديدة وتقنيات الهندسة الوراثية التي لم تكن متاحة للجيل السابق”.
وعلى هذه الخلفية لا ينبغي أن نتفاجأ بالمعلومات التي نشرتها صحيفة كييف بوست الأوكرانية ومفادها أن الجماعات الإسلامية المرتبطة سابقاً بتنظيم القاعدة والتي احتلت حلب في سوريا قد تم تدريبها على يد القوات الخاصة التابعة لمجموعة خيميك التابعة لمديرية المخابرات الأوكرانية. . وهذا يؤكد أن سيناريو الحرب الأوكرانية، في إطار استراتيجية الولايات المتحدة وحلف شمال الأطلسي، مرتبط بسيناريو الشرق الأوسط، حيث تمتد الحرب إلى لبنان وسوريا، في حين تبني إسرائيل قواعد عسكرية على أراضي غزة وتتواجد في المنطقة. عملية الاستيلاء على الضفة الغربية لمحو دولة فلسطين بشكل نهائي.
ملخص موجز للاستعراض الصحفي الدولي Grandangolo
6 ديسمبر 2024 على قناة Byoblu التلفزيونية الإيطالية
“لقد تم رفع راية الإسلام السلفي السوداء في سماء دمشق.. لقد فاز تنظيم الدولة الإسلامية- القاعدة.. انهم الإرهابيون انفسهم الذين هاجمونا في 11 سبتمبر.. الذين شننا عليهم الحرب في أفغانستان والعراق وأماكن أخرى.. لقد فقدنا الآلاف من جنودنا، رجالا ونساء. بتكلفة تريليونات الدولارات.. لقد فازوا.. ولقد ساعدناهم.. أمريكا لم تعد تمثل أي شيء”.
سكوت ريتر
حذر الجنرال مايك فلين، وهو رئيس سابق لوكالة الاستخبارات الدفاعية التابعة للبنتاغون (DIA)، زملاءه في إدارة أوباما من أن دعم جماعات إرهابية لشن حروب بالوكالة نيابة عن واشنطن هو مشروع محفوف بالمخاطر قد ينقلب في نهاية الأمر ضدهم، مع إنشاء الولايات المتحدة لـ”إمارة سلفية في سوريا”.. لقد أصبح هذا التحذير حقيقة الآن.
من بين المقالات الرئيسية الخمسين تقريبا المخصصة لسقوط الحكومة السورية، لم يكلف أي منها نفسه عناء الإشارة إلى أن الميليشيا السنية التي أطاحت ببشار الأسد موجودة حاليا على قائمة وزارة الدفاع للمنظمات الإرهابية. كما أنهم لم يذكروا أن هذه الجماعة الجهادية نفسها مدرجة في قائمة الأمم المتحدة للمنظمات الإرهابية. كما لم يذكروا أن زعيم العصابة أبو محمد الجولاني تم رصد مكافأة من الحكومة الأمريكية مقابل القبض عليه بقيمة 10 ملايين دولار. لم يتم نشر أي من هذه المعلومات للجمهور لأن وسائل الإعلام لا تريد أن يعرف الشعب الأمريكي أن واشنطن ساعدت للتو في تثبيت نظام إرهابي في وسط الشرق الأوسط. ومع ذلك فإن هذا ما يحدث بالفعل.
ان الأمور أسوأ بكثير مما تبدو عليه، فالحملة على سوريا، التي استمرت 13 عاما، لا تستهدف سوريا حقا في نهاية المطاف، ، بل إيران.. إن سوريا لم تكن سوى العقبة الأخيرة على الطريق إلى طهران.. لكن طهران هي كرز الزينة على الكعكة.
من خلال القضاء على إيران، ستحتل إسرائيل “رأس الجسر” في الشرق الأوسط وتثبت نفسها كقوة مهيمنة في المنطقة. في هذه الأثناء، يتمكن العم سام من الوصول إلى ممرات خطوط الأنابيب التي كان يطمع فيها منذ أكثر من عشرين عاما، وهي الممرات التي ستنقل الغاز الطبيعي من قطر إلى البحر الأبيض المتوسط، ثم إلى الأسواق الأوروبية.
سيتم توفير الغاز من خلال دمية في يد الولايات المتحدة، تستغلها شركات النفط الغربية، ويباع بالدولار الأمريكي ويستخدم للحفاظ على قبضته على السياسة الأوروبية. وفي الوقت نفسه، سيتعرض جميع المنافسين الآخرين الى العقاب، أو سيتم تخريبهم، أو استبعادهم تماما.
لا يدرك معظم الناس مدى تأثير سياسة خط أنابيب الغاز على الأحداث في سوريا، ما جعل هذا البلد هدفاً للعدوان الأمريكي. لكن منذ عام 1949 الى يومنا هذا، حاولت أجهزة المخابرات الأمريكية مراراً وتكراراً الإطاحة برئيس الحكومة السورية من أجل الإشراف والسيطرة على خط أنابيب عبر العرب: “يهدف إلى ربط حقول النفط السعودية بموانئ لبنان عبر سوريا”. . وقد لخص روبرت ف. كينيدي ذلك في مقال رائع كتبه منذ أكثر من عقد من الزمن:
بدأت وكالة الاستخبارات المركزية (الامريكية) التدخل النشط في سوريا في عام 1949، بالكاد بعد مرور عام على تأسيس الوكالة. وكان الوطنيون السوريون قد أعلنوا الحرب على النازيين، وطردوا الحكام الاستعماريين الفرنسيين الموالين لـ”فيشي”، وأنشأوا ديمقراطية علمانية هشة على أساس النموذج الأمريكي.
لكن في مارس 1949، تردد الرئيس السوري المنتخب ديمقراطيا، شكري القوتلي، في الموافقة على خط الأنابيب العابر للمنطقة العربية، وهو مشروع أمريكي يهدف إلى ربط حقول النفط السعودية بالموانئ اللبنانية عبر سوريا. في كتابه “إرث الرماد”، يروي “تيم وينر”، مؤرخ وكالة المخابرات المركزية الامريكية، أنه ردا على عدم تحمس القوتلي لخط الأنابيب الأمريكي، نظمت وكالة المخابرات المركزية انقلابا لاستبدال القوتلي بدكتاتور اختارته وكالة المخابرات المركزية، وهو محتال مُدان يُدعى حسني الزعيم. ولم يكد الزعيم يأخذ وقته الكافي لحل البرلمان والموافقة على خط الأنابيب الأمريكي حتى عزله مواطنوه بعد أربعة أشهر ونصف من توليه الحكم..
مقال: “لماذا لا يريدنا العرب في سوريا؟”
روبرت كينيدي/ بوليتيكو.
فهذا، إذن، السبب الذي يجعل سوريا تلعب مثل هذا الدور المهم في الخطط الجيوسياسية الأمريكية.. خطط للسيطرة على الموارد الحيوية للحفاظ على هيمنة الدولار واحتواء النمو الاقتصادي الهائل في الصين. إن الولايات المتحدة عازمة على السيطرة على الموارد الهائلة في الشرق الأوسط للحفاظ على هيمنتها على النظام العالمي. وهذا ليس كل شيء:
“من خلال الموافقة على “خط أنابيب الغاز الإسلامي” الذي أقرته روسيا، والذي من شأنه أن يربط الجزء الإيراني من حقل الغاز بالموانئ السورية واللبنانية، زاد الأسد من غضب ملوك الخليج السنيين. إذ من شأن خط أنابيب الغاز الإسلامي هذا أن يجعل إيران الشيعية، وليس قطر السنية، المورد الرئيسي لسوق الطاقة الأوروبية، وسيزيد بشكل كبير من نفوذ طهران في الشرق الأوسط وفي جميع أنحاء العالم. وكانت إسرائيل مصممة أيضاً على إحباط خط الأنابيب الإسلامي، الذي من شأنه أن يثري إيران وسوريا، وبالتالي يساهم في ازدهار وكيليهما، حزب الله وحماس.
تشير برقيات وتقارير سرية واردة من وكالات الاستخبارات الأمريكية والسعودية والإسرائيلية إلى أنه بمجرد أن رفض الأسد خط أنابيب الغاز القطري، أجمع المخططون العسكريون والاستخباراتيون بسرعة على إثارة انتفاضة سنية في سوريا للإطاحة ببشار الأسد غير المتعاون، وكان هذا هو أفضل وسيلة لتحقيق الهدف المشترك المتمثل في الانتهاء من ربط الغاز بين قطر وتركيا.
في عام 2009، وفقا لموقع ويكيليكس، بعد وقت قصير من رفض بشار الأسد خط أنابيب الغاز القطري، بدأت وكالة المخابرات المركزية في تمويل جماعات المعارضة في سوريا. وتجدر الإشارة إلى أن هذا حدث قبل وقت طويل من الانتفاضة ضد الأسد التي أطلقها الربيع العربي.
“لماذا لا يريدنا العرب في سوريا”.
روبرت كينيدي/ بوليتيكو
وهكذا، فبالتصديق على “خط الأنابيب الإسلامي”، فإن الأسد قد أخطأ، ولن تسمح واشنطن أبداً لمثل هذا السيناريو ان يتجسد. وكما تم بيانه سابقاً، فإن واشنطن اضطلعت بالسيطرة على الموارد الحيوية في الشرق الأوسط، محاولة احتواء الصين والحفاظ على قبضتها غير المؤكدة بشكل متزايد على القوة العالمية. تعد اتفاقيات أبراهام أيضًا جزءًا من هذه الاستراتيجية الجيوسياسية، من خلال تطبيع العلاقات بين إسرائيل وجيرانها الإسلاميين (المملكة العربية السعودية بشكل رئيسي، من أجل إنشاء ممر اقتصادي يشجع النقل السريع للمنتجات المصنعة من الهند إلى أوروبا). تتصور واشنطن أن التكامل الاقتصادي في المنطقة هو المحرك الرئيسي لتفوقها على بقية العالم، لا يعني هذا أن طموحات إسرائيل في السيطرة على الشرق الأوسط لم تكن الدافع الأقوى للحرب.. كان هذا هو الحال في سوريا والإطاحة بالأسد، لكن الاعتبارات الجيوسياسية الأخرى لعبت دوراً أيضاً.
ولهذا السبب أرادت الولايات المتحدة تشكيل حكومة أكثر تقبلاً لمصالح واشنطن. ومع ذلك، من الصعب أن نفهم كيف من المفترض أن يعمل كل هذا. لقد رحل الأسد وانتصرت القاعدة. نحن نعرف ذلك.. والآن ماذا يحدث؟
لم أستطع أن أتخيل أن المجندين الشباب الذين أمضوا السنوات العشر الأخيرة من حياتهم يجوبون الصحراء بسيارات الدفع الرباعي ويفجرون كل شيء يتحرك، يعرفون كيف يديرون الحكومة. إذن، من سيتولى إدارة الوكالات، ودفع رواتب الموظفين، وتنفيذ المهام الإدارية اليومية المتوقعة من أي حكومة؟ من سيدير المدارس ويصلح الطرق وينفذ أعمال الشرطة في الشوارع؟
بالطبع، ربما يكون لدى السيد الجولاني مواهب خفية وسوف يرقى بأعجوبة إلى مستوى الحدث، من خلال ضمان عمل الوكالات بسلاسة وتشغيل القطارات في الوقت المحدد، ولكن هذا السيناريو يبدو مستبعدا للغاية. والأكثر من ذلك هو أن مهندسي هذا الفشل الذريع خططوا لإغراق البلاد واقتصادها المتعثر، وتكثيف معاناة المواطنين العاديين بشكل كبير، وزيادة استياء السكان حتى يتعرض النظام الجديد لإطاحة وحشية.
ربما لا.. ليس لدى مقاتلي هيئة تحرير الشام السنية سوى فرصة ضئيلة لتلبية احتياجات السكان وتوجيههم نحو مستقبل مزدهر وآمن. لكننا نعلم جميعا أن هذا لن يحدث. إن هذا النظام مجرد أداة في أيدي المصالح الأجنبية الحريصة على الاستيلاء على أكبر قدر ممكن من الثروات الطبيعية لسوريا، مع العمل في الوقت نفسه على إزالة التهديد المحتمل للتوسع الإسرائيلي المتواصل. باختصار، فإن المحافظين الجدد الذين أثاروا هذه الاستراتيجية الشيطانية فعلوا ذلك دون أدنى اهتمام بسلامة ورفاهية 23 مليون شخص يعيشون حالياً في سوريا.. حياتهم لا يهم.
ما يهم (بالنسبة لتل أبيب وواشنطن) هو وجود جيش احتياطي جاهز لتنفيذ أوامرها في الحرب المقبلة ضد إيران. هذا ما يهم. ولهذا تلجأ الولايات المتحدة وتركيا الى جنود “متعاقدين” سيفعلون ما يُطلب منهم مقابل رواتب باهظة. يتم الدفع لهيئة تحرير الشام مقابل خدماتها، وستتضمن هذه الخدمات هجمات على إيران وحزب الله. وبالتالي فإن هذه “ليست” تجربة لأشكال جديدة من الحكم. هيئة تحرير الشام لا تسعى إلى الحكم على الإطلاق. سوريا ليست سوى القاعدة العملياتية لنشر الهجمات ضد إيران وحزب الله. هذا كل شيء. هذا هو ما يدفعون له، لخوض الحرب.
الأمر كله يتعلق بالجغرافيا والغاز والدولار الأمريكي وإسرائيل. ومن بين هذه العناصر الأربعة، تحتل إسرائيل المكانة الغالبة.
Article 13 of the Washington Treaty describes a simple procedure for a NATO member state, to cancel its membership.
Below is the stated objective of NATO: Peace and Security, Individual Liberty and the Rule of Law, Safeguard Freedom and Democracy.
See below:
“The Parties to this Treaty reaffirm their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments.
They are determined to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. They seek to promote stability and well-being in the North Atlantic area.
They are resolved to unite their efforts for collective defence and for the preservation of peace and security. They therefore agree to this North Atlantic Treaty.”
Sounds good but it’s a bold face lie.
NATO is an instrument of continuous warfare. What utter nonsense. They do not support the Charter of the United Nations.
image: (Afganistan, famine)
US-NATO-Israel’s “humanitarian wars” consist of crimes against humanity, genocide and the destruction and fragmentation of entire countries:
not to mention military coup’s, regime change, color revolutions, … poverty and famine.
Famine in Afghanistan (invaded by NATO forces in October 2001) on the pretext that Afghanistan had attacked America on 9/11 allegedly in support of Al Qaeda.
Read Article 13 of the Washington Treaty which describes the procedure.
“After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.
A NATO Member State may cease to be “A Party of NATO ” one year after its notice of denunciation has been given the the Government of the U.S.A” (emphasis added)
A NATO member state may decide to “WITHDRAW from NATO.”
We are at a dangerous crossroads in our history which is characterized by a system of alliances of nation-states (namely NATO) which unequivocally supports and finances the United States military agenda. The latter also includes an option to conduct nuclear war. A 1.3 trillion dollar nuclear weapons program, slated to increase to 2 trillion by 2030.
While Article 13 of the Washington Treaty appears to be simplistic, one can expect numerous pressures and fraudulent actions with a view to preventing a NATO member state from canceling its NATO membership.
What is crucial is to fracture and weaken NATO: an intergovernmental alliance of 32 member states.
There is also the issue of cross-cutting alliances and coalitions, namely countries which are members of NATO, while also having alliances or agreements with so-called enemies of NATO. Turkey is a NATO member state which has economic and strategic alliances with both Russia and Iran.
The withdrawal from NATO of one or more member states could have a significant impact. It creates a precedent, which would encourage more NATO member states, “to say goodbye.”
How to Reverse the Tide of War: “Say Goodbye to Nato”
A. Withdrawal (Art 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty)
1. A mass movement at the grassroots of society to withdraw from NATO (Art. 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty)
2. Actions within the legislature of the 32 member states. Motions “to cease to be a party” of NATO (Art 13)
B. NATO Wants Money From Member States. It Also Wants Weapons
“During the 2014 summit, all NATO members agreed to spend at least 2% of their GDPs on defense by 2025″.
Pressure governments to freeze defense spending. Demand withdrawal of soldiers from the war theater.C. The Restoration of Peace and Democracy
3. Persistent actions against corrupt heads of state who support NATO.
4. Restoration of the democratic process, elect politicians firmly committed to “CEASING TO BE A PARTY” OF NATO (ART 13)
C. Democratization of the Media
5. Actions against media, which are supportive of terrorism and crimes against humanity committed by NATO forces.
D. Actions Within the United Nations System
6. Meaningful actions within the United Nations System.
Actions against NGOs which support NATO.
E. Legal Actions
7. Legal actions against the military industrial complex and the financial establishment
8. Actions against the billionaire philanthropists which endorse and finance US NATO Israel, acts of war
The Motto of NATO: “Increase defense spending to prevent war. NATO must spend more.”
See the text of Article 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty below.
.
.
Text of Article 13
A NATO Member State may take the decision to WITHDRAW from NATO.
The procedure is described in Article 13 of the Washington Treaty.
Article 13
After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.
A NATO Member State may cease to be “A Party of NATO ” one year after its notice of denunciation has been given the the Government of the U.S.A.
This interview serves as a reminder regarding the diabolical timeline of America’s hegemonic project. Is Iran the next target “to be taken out”?
All these countries including Lebanon and Iran are on the Pentagon’s drawing board. These seven countries have directly or indirectly been the object of US aggression.
America’s hegemonic military agenda has reached a dangerous threshold: The assassination of IRG General Soleimani ordered by Donald Trump in early January was tantamount to an Act of War against Iran.
The Beirut explosion of August 4th. Is this tragic event part of a Middle East War Timeline?
Washington’s stated objective (according to General Wesley Clark) is to take Lebanon and Iran, with the support of Israel.
And Israel’s diabolical objective is “To Take Out” Palestine, with the support of the US, as part of “The Greater Israel Project”.
Michel Chossudovsky, January 4, 2019, August 24, 2024
.
***
General Wesley Clark. Retired 4-star U.S. Army general, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the 1999 War on Yugoslavia .
Complete Transcript of Program, Democracy Now.
Today we spend the hour with General Wesley Clark, the retired four-star general. He was the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the Kosovo War. In 2004 he unsuccessfully ran for the Democratic presidential nomination. He recently edited a series of books about famous U.S. generals including Dwight Eisenhower and Ulysses Grant – both of whom became president after their military careers ended.
Complete Video Interview:
Well for the rest of the hour we are going to hear General Wesley Clark on the possibility of a U.S. attack on Iran, the impeachment of President Bush, the use of cluster bombs, the bombing of Radio Television Serbia during the Kosovo War and much more. I interviewed Wesley Clark on Tuesday at the 92nd Street Y in New York.
Short version of video interview:
Gen. Wesley Clark. Retired 4-star US Army general. Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the Kosovo War.
AMY GOODMAN: Today, an exclusive hour with General Wesley Clark, the retired four-star general. He was Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the Kosovo War. He has been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom. In 2004, he unsuccessfully ran for the Democratic presidential nomination. He recently edited a series of books about famous US generals, including Dwight Eisenhower and Ulysses Grant, both of whom became president after their military careers ended.
On Tuesday, I interviewed Wesley Clark at the 92nd Street Y Cultural Center here in New York City before a live audience and asked him about his presidential ambitions.
AMY GOODMAN: What do you think of these generals who run for president?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I like them. It’s happened before.
AMY GOODMAN: Will it happen again?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: It might.
AMY GOODMAN: Later in the interview, I followed up on that question.
AMY GOODMAN: Will you announce for president?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I haven’t said I won’t.
AMY GOODMAN: What are you waiting for?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I’m waiting for several different preconditions, which I’m not at liberty to discuss. But I will tell you this: I think about it every single day.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, for the rest of the hour, we’ll hear General Wesley Clark in his own words on the possibility of a US attack on Iran; the impeachment of President Bush; the use of cluster bombs; the bombing of Radio Television Serbia during the Kosovo War under his command; and much more. I interviewed General Clark on Tuesday at the 92nd Street Y in New York.
AMY GOODMAN: Now, let’s talk about Iran. You have a whole website devoted to stopping war.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see a replay in what happened in the lead-up to the war with Iraq — the allegations of the weapons of mass destruction, the media leaping onto the bandwagon?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran.
I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”
So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”
AMY GOODMAN: I’m sorry. What did you say his name was?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I’m not going to give you his name.
AMY GOODMAN: So, go through the countries again.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, starting with Iraq, then Syria and Lebanon, then Libya, then Somalia and Sudan, and back to Iran. So when you look at Iran, you say, “Is it a replay?” It’s not exactly a replay. But here’s the truth: that Iran, from the beginning, has seen that the presence of the United States in Iraq was a threat — a blessing, because we took out Saddam Hussein and the Baathists. They couldn’t handle them. We took care of it for them. But also a threat, because they knew that they were next on the hit list. And so, of course, they got engaged. They lost a million people during the war with Iraq, and they’ve got a long and unprotectable, unsecurable border. So it was in their vital interest to be deeply involved inside Iraq. They tolerated our attacks on the Baathists. They were happy we captured Saddam Hussein.
But they’re building up their own network of influence, and to cement it, they occasionally give some military assistance and training and advice, either directly or indirectly, to both the insurgents and to the militias. And in that sense, it’s not exactly parallel, because there has been, I believe, continuous Iranian engagement, some of it legitimate, some of it illegitimate. I mean, you can hardly fault Iran because they’re offering to do eye operations for Iraqis who need medical attention. That’s not an offense that you can go to war over, perhaps. But it is an effort to gain influence.
And the administration has stubbornly refused to talk with Iran about their perception, in part because they don’t want to pay the price with their domestic — our US domestic political base, the rightwing base, but also because they don’t want to legitimate a government that they’ve been trying to overthrow. If you were Iran, you’d probably believe that you were mostly already at war with the United States anyway, since we’ve asserted that their government needs regime change, and we’ve asked congress to appropriate $75 million to do it, and we are supporting terrorist groups, apparently, who are infiltrating and blowing up things inside Iraq — Iran. And if we’re not doing it, let’s put it this way: we’re probably cognizant of it and encouraging it. So it’s not surprising that we’re moving to a point of confrontation and crisis with Iran.
My point on this is not that the Iranians are good guys — they’re not — but that you shouldn’t use force, except as a last, last, last resort. There is a military option, but it’s a bad one.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to get your response to Seymour Hersh’s piece in The New Yorker to two key points this week, reporting the Pentagon’s established a special planning group within the office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to plan a bombing attack on Iran, that this is coming as the Bush administration and Saudi Arabia are pumping money for covert operations into many areas of the Middle East, including Lebanon, Syria, and Iran, in an effort to strengthen Saudi-supported Sunni Islam groups and weaken Iranian-backed Shias — some of the covert money has been given to jihadist groups in Lebanon with ties to al-Qaeda — fighting the Shias by funding with Prince Bandar and then with US money not approved by Congress, funding the Sunnis connected to al-Qaeda.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I don’t have any direct information to confirm it or deny it. It’s certainly plausible. The Saudis have taken a more active role. You know, the Saudis have —
AMY GOODMAN: You were just in Saudi Arabia.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Hmm?
AMY GOODMAN: You just came back from Saudi Arabia.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Yeah. Well, the Saudis have basically recognized that they have an enormous stake in the outcome in Iraq, and they don’t particularly trust the judgment of the United States in this area. We haven’t exactly proved our competence in Iraq. So they’re trying to take matters into their own hands.
The real danger is, and one of the reasons this is so complicated is because — let’s say we did follow the desires of some people who say, “Just pull out, and pull out now.” Well, yeah. We could mechanically do that. It would be ugly, and it might take three or four months, but you could line up the battalions on the road one by one, and you could put the gunners in the Humvees and load and cock their weapons and shoot their way out of Iraq. You’d have a few roadside bombs. But if you line everybody up there won’t be any roadside bombs. Maybe some sniping. You can fly helicopters over, do your air cover. You’d probably get safely out of there. But when you leave, the Saudis have got to find someone to fight the Shias. Who are they going to find? Al-Qaeda, because the groups of Sunnis who would be extremists and willing to fight would probably be the groups connected to al-Qaeda. So one of the weird inconsistencies in this is that were we to get out early, we’d be intensifying the threat against us of a super powerful Sunni extremist group, which was now legitimated by overt Saudi funding in an effort to hang onto a toehold inside Iraq and block Iranian expansionism.
AMY GOODMAN: And interestingly, today, John Negroponte has just become the number two man, resigning his post as National Intelligence Director to go to the State Department, Seymour Hersh says, because of his discomfort that the administration’s covert actions in the Middle East so closely echo the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s, and Negroponte was involved with that.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I’m sure there are a lot of reasons why John would go back to the State Department. John’s a good — he’s a good man. But, you know, the question is, in government is, can you — are you bigger than your job? Because if you’re not bigger than your job, you get trapped by the pressures of events and processes into going along with actions that you know you shouldn’t. And I don’t know. I don’t know why he left the National Intelligence Director’s position. He started in the State Department. Maybe he’s got a fondness to return and finish off his career in State.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about — do you know who the generals are, who are threatening to resign if the United States attacks Iran?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: No, I don’t. No, I don’t. And I don’t want to know.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you agree with them?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I’ll put it this way. On Labor Day weekend of 1994, when I was the J5 — I was a three-star general. I was in the Pentagon. And it was a Saturday morning, and so I was in the office. Walt Kross was the director of the Joint Staff, and he was in the office. And I think it was either Howell Estes or Jack Sheehan who was the J3 at the time. The three of us — I think it was Jack still on the job for the last couple of days. And the three of us were in Shalikashvili’s office about 11:00 in the morning on a Saturday morning, and he had just come back from a White House meeting. And he was all fired up in the way that Shali could be. And he said, “So,” he said, “we will see who will be the real soldiers this weekend! There’s much work to be done! This operation on Haiti has to be completed! The planning must be done correctly, and it must be done this weekend! So we will see who are the real soldiers!”
Then the phone buzzed, and he got up from this little round table the four of us were sitting at to take the call from the White House. We started looking at each other. We said, “Gosh, I wonder where this came from.” I mean, we were all getting ready to check out of the building in an hour or so. We had finished off the messages and paperwork. And we just usually got together because there was normally a crisis every Saturday anyway, and so we normally would come in for the Saturday morning crisis. And so, Shali came back, and so I said to him, I said, “Well, sir, we’ve been talking amongst ourselves, and we’re happy to work all weekend to get all this done, but this is just a drill, right, on Haiti?”
He looked at me, and he said, “Wes,” he said, “this is no drill.” He said, “I’m not authorized to tell you this. But,” he said “the decision has been made, and the United States will invade Haiti. The date is the 20th” — I think it was this date — “of the 20th of September. And the planning must be done, and it must be done now. And if any of you have reservations about this, this is the time to leave.” So I looked at Jack, and I looked at Walt. They looked at me. I mean, we kind of shrugged our shoulders and said, “OK, if you want to invade Haiti, I mean, it’s not illegal. It’s not the country we’d most like to invade. The opposition there consists of five armored vehicles. But sure, I mean, if the President says to do it, yeah, we’re not going resign over it.” And so, we didn’t resign. Nobody resigned.
But Shali was a very smart man. He knew. He knew he was bigger than his job, and he knew that you had to ask yourself the moral, legal and ethical questions first. And so, I’m encouraged by the fact that some of these generals have said this about Iran. They should be asking these questions first.
AMY GOODMAN: General Wesley Clark. He says he thinks about running for president again every day. We’ll come back to my interview with him in a minute.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We go back to my interview with General Wesley Clark.
AMY GOODMAN: What about the soldiers who are saying no to going to Iraq right now?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Iraq?
AMY GOODMAN: To going to Iraq. People like First Lieutenant Ehren Watada, first commissioned officer to say no to deploy. And they just declared a mistrial in his court-martial. He will face another court-martial in a few weeks. What do you think of these young men and women — there are now thousands — who are refusing? But, for example, Ehren Watada, who says he feels it’s wrong. He feels it’s illegal and immoral, and he doesn’t want to lead men and women there.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think, you know, he’s certainly made a personally courageous statement. And he’ll pay with the consequences of it.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think he should have to go to jail for that?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think that you have to have an effective armed forces. And I think that it’s not up to the men and women in the Armed Forces to choose where they’ll go to war, because at the very time you need the Armed Forces the most is — there will be a certain number of people who will see it the other way. And so, I support his right to refuse to go, and I support the government’s effort to bring charges against him. This is the way the system works.
Now, the difference is, the case that I described with Shalikashvili is, we would have been given the chance to retire. We would have left our jobs. We might not have retired as three-star generals, because we hadn’t done our duty. But we weren’t in the same circumstance that he is, so there wasn’t necessarily going to be charges brought against us.
But an armed forces has to have discipline. It’s a voluntary organization to join. But it’s not voluntary unless it’s illegal. And you can bring — the trouble with Iraq is it’s not illegal. It was authorized by the United States Congress. It was authorized by the United Nations Security Council resolution. It’s an illegitimate war, but not an illegal war.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think it’s wrong?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: It’s wrong to fight in Iraq? Well, I think it’s a mistake. I think it’s a bad strategy. I think it’s brought us a lot of grief, and it will bring us a lot more grief. I think it’s been a tremendous distraction from the war on terror, a diversion of resources, and it’s reinforced our enemies. But on the other hand, his case is a moral case, not a legal case. And if you’re going to be a conscientious objector morally like this, then what makes it commendable is that you’ll take your stand on principle and pay the price. If there’s no price to be paid for it, then the courage of your act isn’t self-evident. So he’s taken a very personally courageous stand. But on the other hand, you have to also appreciate the fact that the Armed Forces has to be able to function.
So, you know, in World War I in France, there were a series of terribly misplaced offensives, and they brought — they failed again and again and again. The French took incredible losses. And these were conscript armies. And after one of these failures, a group of thousands of soldiers simply said, “We’re not doing this again. It’s wrong.” You know what the French did? They did what they call decimation. They lined up the troops. They took every tenth soldier, and they shot them. Now, the general who ordered that, he suffered some severe repercussions, personally, morally, but after that the soldiers in France didn’t disobey. Had the army disintegrated at that point, Germany would have occupied France. So when you’re dealing with the use of force, there is an element of compulsion in the Armed Forces.
AMY GOODMAN: But if the politicians will not stop it — as you pointed out, the Democrats joined with the Republicans in authorizing the war — then it’s quite significant, I think, that you, as a general, are saying that this man has taken a courageous act. Then it’s up to the people who are being sent to go to say no.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Yeah. But the courage that we need is not his courage. We need the courage of the leaders in the United States government: the generals who could affect the policy, the people in Congress who could force the President to change his strategy. That’s the current — that’s the courage that’s needed.
AMY GOODMAN: And how could they do that?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, you start with a non-binding resolution in the United States Congress, and you build your momentum from there. And you keep hammering it. The Congress has three principal powers. It has the power to appoint, power to investigate, power to fund. And you go after all three. On all three fronts, you find out what the President needs, until he takes it seriously. I think it’s a difficult maneuver to use a scalpel and say, “Well, we’re going to support funding, but we’re not going to support funding for the surge,” because that’s requiring a degree of micro-management that Congress can’t do.
But you can certainly put enough squeeze on the President that he finally calls in the leaders of the Congress and says, “OK, OK, what’s it going to take? I’ve got to get my White House budget passed. I’ve got to get thirty judges, federal judges, confirmed. I’ve got to get these federal prosecutors — you know, the ones that I caused to resign so I could handle it — they’ve got to get replacements in place. What do I have to do to get some support here?” I mean, it could be done. It’s hard bare-knuckle government.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think Congress should stop funding the war?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I think Congress should take a strong stand to get the strategy changed. I don’t think that if you cut off funding for the war, it’s in the — right now that’s not in the United States’ interest. What is in the United States’ interest is to change the strategy in the war. You cannot succeed by simply stopping the funding and saying, “You’ve got six months to get the Americans out.” That’s not going to end the misery in Iraq. It’s not going to restore the lives that have been lost. And it’s not going to give us the power in the region to prevent later threats.
What we do have to do is have a strategy that uses all the elements of America’s power: diplomatic, economic, legal and military. I would send a high-level diplomatic team into the region right now. I’d have no-holds-barred and no-preconditioned discussion with Iran and Syria. And I would let it be known that I’ve got in my bag all the tricks, including putting another 50,000 troops in Iraq and pulling all 150,000 troops out. And we’re going to reach an agreement on a statement of principles that brings stability and peace and order to the region. So let’s just sit down and start doing it. Now, that could be done with the right administrative leadership. It just hasn’t been done.
You know, think of it this way. You’re on a ship crossing the Atlantic. It’s a new ship. And it’s at night. And you’re looking out ahead of the ship, and you notice that there’s a part of the horizon. It’s a beautiful, starry night, except that there’s a part of the horizon, a sort of a regular hump out there where there are no stars visible. And you notice, as the ship plows through the water at thirty knots, that this area where there are no stars is getting larger. And finally, it hits you that there must be something out there that’s blocking the starlight, like an iceberg. So you run to the captain. And you say, “Captain, captain, there’s an iceberg, and we’re driving right toward it.” And he says, “Look, I can’t be bothered with the iceberg right now. We’re having an argument about the number of deck chairs on the fore deck versus the aft deck.” And you say, “But you’re going to hit an iceberg.” He says, “I’m sorry. Get out of here.” So you go to the first officer, and he says, “I’m fighting with the captain on the number of deck chairs.”
You know, we’re approaching an iceberg in the Middle East in our policy, and we’ve got Congress and the United States — and the President of the United States fighting over troop strength in Iraq. It’s the wrong issue. The issue is the strategy, not the troop strength.
AMY GOODMAN: General Clark, do you think Guantanamo Bay should be closed?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Absolutely.
AMY GOODMAN: If Congress cut off funds for the prison there, it would be closed. Should they?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think the first thing Congress should do is repeal the Military Commissions Act. I’m very disturbed that a number of people who are looking at the highest office in the land have supported an act which advertently or inadvertently authorizes the admission into evidence of information gained through torture. That’s not the America that I believe in. And the America that I believe in doesn’t detain people indefinitely without charges. So I’d start with the Military Commissions Act.
Then I’d get our NATO allies into the act. They’ve said they don’t like Guantanamo either. So I’d like to create an international tribunal, not a kangaroo court of military commissions. And let’s go back through the evidence. And let’s lay it out. Who are these people that have been held down there? And what have they been held for? And which ones can be released? And which ones should be tried in court and convicted?
You see, essentially, you cannot win the war on terror by military force. It is first and foremost a battle of ideas. It is secondly a law enforcement effort and a cooperative effort among nations. And only as a last resort do you use military force. This president has distorted the capabilities of the United States Armed Forces. He’s used our men and women in uniform improperly in Guantanamo and engaged in actions that I think are totally against the Uniform Code of Military Justice and against what we stand for as the American people.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think that President Bush should be impeached?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think we ought to do first thing’s first, which is, we really need to understand and finish the job that Congress started with respect to the Iraq war investigation. Do you remember that there was going to be a study released by the Senate, that the senator from Iowa or from Kansas who was the Republican head of the Senate Intelligence Committee was going to do this study to determine whether the administration had, in fact, misused the intelligence information to mislead us into the war with Iraq? Well, I’ve never seen that study. I’d like to know where that study is. I’d like to know why we’ve spent three years investigating Scooter Libby, when we should have been investigating why this country went to war in Iraq.
AMY GOODMAN: The Center for Constitutional Rights has filed a complaint against Donald Rumsfeld, General Miller and others in a German court, because they have universal jurisdiction. Do you think that Donald Rumsfeld should be tried for war crimes?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I’d like to see what the evidence is against Rumsfeld. I do know this, that there was a lot of pressure put on the men and women in uniform to come up with intelligence. I remember — I think it was either General Sanchez or General Abizaid, who stated that we don’t need more troops — this is the fall of 2003 — we just need better information. Well, to me, that was immediate code words that we were really trying to soak these people for information.
And it’s only a short step from there to all the kinds of mistreatment that occur at places like Abu Ghraib. So we know that Al Gonzales wrote a couple of really — or authored, or his people authored and he approved, a couple of outrageous memos that attempted to define torture as deliberately inflicted pain, the equivalent of the loss of a major bodily organ or limb, which is — it’s not an adequate definition of torture. And we know that he authorized, to some degree, some coercive methods, which we have — and we know President Bush himself accepted implicitly in a signing statement to a 2005 act on military detainees that he would use whatever methods were appropriate or necessary. So there’s been some official condoning of these actions.
I think it’s a violation of international law and a violation of American law and a violation of the principles of good government in America. There have always been evidences of mistreatment of prisoners. Every army has probably done it in history. But our country hasn’t ever done it as a matter of deliberate policy. George Washington told his soldiers, when they captured the Hessians and the men wanted to run them through, because the Hessians were brutal and ruthless, he said, “No, treat them well.” He said, “They’ll join our side.” And many of them did. It was a smart policy, not only the right thing to do, but a smart policy to treat the enemy well. We’ve made countless enemies in that part of the world by the way we’ve treated people and disregarded them. It’s bad, bad policy.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask — you’re a FOX News contributor now?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Oh, at least.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask you what you think of the dean of West Point, Brigadier General Patrick Finnegan, together with a military interrogator named Tony Lagouranis and the group Human Rights First, going to the heads of the program 24, very popular hit show on FOX, to tell them that what they’re doing on this program, glorifying torture, is inspiring young men and women to go to Iraq and torture soldiers there, and to stop it?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: And not only that, but it doesn’t work. Yeah, Pat Finnegan is one of my heroes.
AMY GOODMAN: So what do you think about that?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I think it’s great.
AMY GOODMAN: And have you been involved in the conversation internally at FOX, which runs 24, to stop it?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, as far as I know, they actually put out a call to all the writers in Hollywood. My son’s a writer, and he was one of them who got a call. They were all told: stop talking about torture. It doesn’t work. So I think it was an effective move by Pat Finnegan.
AMY GOODMAN: So you support it?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Absolutely.
AMY GOODMAN: General Wesley Clark. I’m interviewing him at the 92nd Street Y. We’re going to come back to the conclusion of that interview in a minute.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: General Wesley Clark recently edited a series of books about famous US generals: Grant, LeMay, Patton and Eisenhower. When I interviewed him at the 92nd Street Y, I asked him a question about the presidency of General Dwight Eisenhower
AMY GOODMAN: 1953 was also a seminal date for today, and that was when Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of Teddy Roosevelt, went to Iran and led a coup against Mohammed Mossadegh under Eisenhower.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: People make mistakes. And one of the mistakes that the United States consistently made was that it could intervene and somehow adjust people’s governments, especially in the Middle East. I don’t know why we felt that — you can understand Latin America, because Latin America was always an area in which people would come to the United States, say, “You’ve got to help us down there. These are banditos, and they don’t know anything. And, you know, they don’t have a government. Just intervene and save our property.” And the United States did it a lot in the ’20s. Of course, Eisenhower was part of that culture. He had seen it.
But in the Middle East, we had never been there. We established a relationship during World War II, of course, to keep the Germans out of Iran. And so, the Soviets and the Brits put an Allied mission together. At the end of World War II, the Soviets didn’t want to withdraw, and Truman called their bluff in the United Nations. And Eisenhower knew all of this. And Iran somehow became incorporated into the American defense perimeter. And so, his view would have been, we couldn’t allow a communist to take over.
AMY GOODMAN: But wasn’t it more about British Petroleum?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Oh, it’s always — there are always interests. The truth is, about the Middle East is, had there been no oil there, it would be like Africa. Nobody is threatening to intervene in Africa. The problem is the opposite. We keep asking for people to intervene and stop it. There’s no question that the presence of petroleum throughout the region has sparked great power involvement. Whether that was the specific motivation for the coup or not, I can’t tell you. But there was definitely — there’s always been this attitude that somehow we could intervene and use force in the region. I mean, that was true with — I mean, imagine us arming and creating the Mujahideen to keep the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Why would we think we could do that? But we did. And, you know, my lesson on it is, whenever you use force, there are unintended consequences, so you should use force as a last resort. Whether it’s overt or covert, you pay enormous consequences for using force.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask you about what you think of the response to Jimmy Carter’s book, Peace, Not Apartheid.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I’m sorry to say I haven’t read the book. And it’s one of the things I’ve been meaning to read, and I just haven’t. I will tell you this, that we’re in a very, very difficult position in Israel. I say “we,” because every American president has committed to the protection and survival of the state of Israel. And I think that’s right. And I certainly feel that way, and I’m a very strong supporter of Israel.
But somehow we’ve got to move off top dead center in terms of these discussions with the Palestinians. And this administration has failed to lead. They came into office basically determined not to do anything that Bill Clinton did. I think that was the basic guideline. And so, they have allowed unremitting violence between Israel and the Palestinians with hardly an effort to stop that through US leadership. And now, it’s almost too late. So Condi was over there the other day, and she didn’t achieve what she wanted to achieve, and people want to blame the Saudis. But at least the Saudis tried to do something at Mecca by putting together a unity government. So I fault the administration.
Jimmy Carter has taken a lot of heat from people. I don’t know exactly what he said in the book. But people are very sensitive about Israel in this country. And I understand that. A lot of my friends have explained it to me and have explained to me the psychology of people who were in this country and saw what was happening in World War II, and maybe they didn’t feel like they spoke out strongly enough, soon enough, to stop it. And it’s not going to happen again.
AMY GOODMAN: General Clark, I wanted to ask you a tough question about journalists.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, now, that would be the first tough question you’ve asked me tonight.
AMY GOODMAN: There are more than a hundred journalists and media workers in Iraq who have died. And particularly hard hit are Arab journalists. I mean, you had Tariq Ayoub, the Al Jazeera reporter, who died on the roof of Al Jazeera when the US military shelled Al Jazeera, then went on to shell the Palestine Hotel and killed two reporters, a Reuters cameraman and one from Telecinco in Spain named Jose Couso. Many Arab journalists feel like they have been targeted, the idea of shooting the messenger. But this tough question goes back to your being Supreme Allied Commander in Yugoslavia and the bombing of Radio Television Serbia. Do you regret that that happened, that you did that?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: No, I don’t regret that at all. That was part of the Serb command and control network. And not only that, I was asked to take out that television by a lot of important political leaders. And before I took it out, I twice warned the Serbs we were going to take it out. We stopped, at one news conference in the Pentagon, we planted the question to get the attention of the Serbs, that we were going to target Serb Radio and Television.
AMY GOODMAN: RTS.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Yeah. And that night, in fact, Milosevic got the warning, because he summoned all the foreign journalists to come to a special mandatory party at RTS that night. But we weren’t bombing that night. We put the word out twice before we actually I did it.
AMY GOODMAN: You told CNN, which was also there, to leave?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I told — I used — I think I used CNN to plant the story and to leak it at the Pentagon press conference. But we didn’t tell anyone specifically to leave. What we told them was it’s now a target. And it was Milosevic who determined that he would keep people there in the middle of the night just so there would be someone killed if we struck it. So we struck it during the hours where there were not supposed to be anybody there.
AMY GOODMAN: But you killed civilians.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Six people died.
AMY GOODMAN: I think sixteen. But I think it’s the media — it’s the beauticians, the technicians. It was a civilian target.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Yeah, they were ordered to stay there by Milosevic. Yeah.
AMY GOODMAN: But it was a civilian target.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: It was not a civilian target. It was a military target. It was part of the Serb command and control network
AMY GOODMAN: What do you think of Amnesty International calling it a war crime?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, I think it was investigated by the International Criminal Tribunal in Yugoslavia and found to be a legitimate target. So I think it’s perfectly alright for Amnesty International to have their say, but everything we did was approved by lawyers, and every target was blessed. We would not have committed a war crime.
AMY GOODMAN: Upon reflection now and knowing who died there, the young people, the people who worked for RTS, who — as you said, if Milosevic wanted people to stay there, they were just following orders.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, it was a tragedy. But I’ll tell you something. If you want to talk about tragedies, how about this one? We bombed what we thought was a Serb police station in Kosovo. We saw the Serb vehicles. We flew unmanned aerial vehicles over it. And we did everything we could to identify it. And we found that there were Serb police vehicles parked there at night, so we sent an F-16 in, dropped two 500-pound laser-guided bombs and took it out. We killed eighty Albanians who had been imprisoned by the Serbs there. They were trying to escape, and the Serbs locked them up in this farmhouse and surrounded them with vehicles. So, I regret every single innocent person who died, and I prayed every night that there wouldn’t be any innocent people who died. But this is why I say you must use force only as a last resort.
I told this story to the high school kids earlier, but it bears repeating, I guess. We had a malfunction with a cluster bomb unit, and a couple of grenades fell on a schoolyard, and some, I think three, schoolchildren were killed in Nish. And two weeks later, I got a letter from a Serb grandfather. He said, “You’ve killed my granddaughter.” He said, “I hate you for this, and I’ll kill you.” And I got this in the middle of the war. And it made me very, very sad. We certainly never wanted to do anything like that. But in war, accidents happen. And that’s why you shouldn’t undertake military operations unless every other alternative has been exhausted, because innocent people do die. And I think the United States military was as humane and careful as it possibly could have been in the Kosovo campaign. But still, civilians died. And I’ll always regret that.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you think cluster bombs should be banned?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: You know, we used, I think 1,400-plus cluster bombs. And there’s a time when you have to use cluster bombs: when they’re the most appropriate and humane weapon. But I think you have to control the use very carefully. And I think we did in Yugoslavia.
AMY GOODMAN: Right now, the US has rejected an international call to ban the use of cluster bombs. On Friday, forty-six countries were in Oslo to develop a new international treaty to ban the use of cluster munitions by — I think it’s 2008. Would you support that?
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, you know, people who are against war often make the case by trying to attack the weapons of war and stripping away the legitimacy of those weapons. I’ve participated in some of that. I’d like to get rid of landmines. I did participate in getting rid of laser blinding weapons. And I was part of the team that put together the agreement that got rid of laser blinding weapons. I’d like to get rid of nuclear weapons. But I can’t agree with those who say that force has no place in international affairs. It simply does for this country. And I would like to work to make it so that it doesn’t. But the truth is, for now it does. And so, I can’t go against giving our men and women in uniform the appropriate weapons they need to fight, to fight effectively to succeed on the battlefield, and to minimize their own casualties.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’ll have to leave it there. I thank you very much, General Wesley Clark.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
AMY GOODMAN: General Wesley Clark. I interviewed him at the 92nd Street Y, the cultural center here in New York, on the publication of the Great General Series, on Grant, LeMay, Patton and Eisenhower.
The position of a state broadcaster, one funded directly by taxpayers from a particular country, places it in a delicate position. The risk of alignment with the views of the day, as dictated by one class over another; the danger that one political position will somehow find more air than another, is ever present. The pursuit of objectivity can itself become a distorting dogma.
Like its counterpart in the United Kingdom, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation can count itself lucky to be given a place of such dominance in the media market. None of that gimmickry to boost subscriber numbers. No need for annual, or half-yearly fund drives.
Why, then, did the ABC chairman, Kim Williams, do it? And by doing it, this involved attacking US-based podcaster Joe Rogan in an address to the National Press Club in Canberra, a foolish, bumbling excursion into the realms of broadcasting and podcasting the ABC might do well to learn from.
In the question session, when asked about the influence of Rogan (“the world’s most influential podcaster”, sighs the ABC journalist), Williams shows little interest in analysis. Rather than understanding the scope of his appeal, one that drew Donald Trump to the microphone in a meandering conversational epic of waffle and disclosure lasting three hours, he “personally” found “it deeply repulsive, and to think that someone has such remarkable power in the United States is something that I look at in disbelief.” He further felt a sense of “dismay that this can be a source of public entertainment when it’s really treating the public as plunder for purposes that are really quite malevolent.”
Williams makes a point of juxtaposing the weak, impressionable consumer of news – one who will evidently be set straight by the likes of his network – and those of Rogan and his tribe of entrepreneurial podcasting fantasists who “prey on all the elements that contribute to uncertainty in society”, suggesting that “conspiracy outcomes” are merely “a normal part of social narrative”.
It is worth noting here that Williams is a former chief executive of an organisation that loved (and still loves) preying on anxieties, testing the waters of fear, and pushing absurdly demagogic narratives in boosting readership and subscriptions. That most unscrupulous outfit is a certain News Corp, its imperishable tycoon Rupert Murdoch still clinging to the pulpit with savage commitment.
Once Williams crossed the commercial river to become ABC chair, he had something of a peace-loving conversion, all part of a festival of inclusivity that has proven tedious and meretricious. The public broadcaster, he said in June this year, should become a “national campfire” to enable a greater understanding of Australia’s diverse communities.
It did not take long for the Williams show of snark to make its way to Rogan Land and his defenders, notably Elon Musk, who spent time with Rogan in the lead-up to November’s US presidential election spruiking the credentials of Trump. Showing how Williams had exposed his flank, and that of the organisation he leads, the tech oligarch, relevantly the director of X Corp (formerly Twitter), was bound to say something given his ongoing skirmishes with Australian regulators and lawmakers in their efforts to regulate access to social media.
From such infantilising bureaucrats as eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant to the spluttering Williams who bemoans the “Joe Rogan effect”, Musk is being given, rather remarkably, a whitewash of respectability. Their efforts to protect Australians from any prospect of being offended, mentally corrupted, unduly influenced and one might even say being excited, is of such an order as to beggar belief. With little imagination, Musk retorted with boring predictability: “From the head of Australian government-funded media, their Pravda.”
“You make a comment in response to a legitimate question from a journalist, you answer it concisely and give an honest answer in terms of what your own perception of what [Rogan] is and suddenly I get this huge pile-on from people in the most aggressive way”.
Accusations include having “a warped outlook on the world”, being “an embarrassment” and showing signs of being “unhinged”. Ignorance would be the better distillation here.
There is something to be said about Williams being hermetic to media forms that have prevented him from getting to the national campfire he championed. He speaks of communities and users as vague constructions rather than accessible groups. He also ignores, for instance, that Rogan was open to allowing Trump’s opponent, the Democrat contender, Kamala Harris, to come onto his program conducted in his Texas podcast studio during the campaign. This offer was eventually withdrawn given the conditions Harris, ever terrified by unscripted formats and lengthy interviews, demanded Rogan follow. The strategists and handlers had to have their say, and for their role and for Harris’s caution, she paid a price.
For a man with a News Corp pedigree and one no doubt familiar with the Murdoch Empire’s creepy techniques of influence and seduction exercised over the electorates and political processes of other countries – the United States, the UK and Australia immediately come to mind – Williams has shown himself the media iteration of a bamboozled, charmless Colonel Blimp.
Williams might best focus on the problems at his own broadcaster, the organisation the Australians call Auntie. It boasts, constantly, that it is the place where “news” can be found, but more importantly, “news you can trust”. But the current iteration of news remains bland, benign and pitifully regulated. It is clear what the talking points are when it comes to reporting on such areas of the world as the Middle East. Killings by the Israeli Defence Forces, even if they do involve the liquidation of whole buildings and villagers, are never massacres but measures of overzealous self-defence. Hamas and Hezbollah, being Israel’s adversaries, are always prefaced as indulgent terrorists. The list goes on, and, it would seem, the problems Williams is facing.
*
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.
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]
There are two main approaches among Western public opinion regarding the role of Israel, its relations with the United States, and, consequently, the significance of both of these factors for the situation in the Middle East.
Israel as the US Colony
The first opinion, popular especially in leftist intellectual circles, sees Israel as merely a quasi-colony of the United States.
Thus, it is America that is therefore the driving force behind Middle Eastern conflicts, acting in accordance with the logic of imperialism.
This doesn’t, of course, reduce the responsibility of the Zionist regime for the crimes it commits and the wars it provokes, but from this perspective,
Bibi Netanyahu and others seem more like just collaborators with the American military-industrial complex and its interests.
They are bloodier tools rather than perpetrators.
American policy is therefore becoming the main target of the protests, and Washington is expected to act for peace in the Middle East and resolve the Palestinian issue in accordance with the officially proclaimed slogans of democracy and protection of human rights.
United States as the Zionist Colony
However the second position, much more popular in America, in anti-system circles of both right and left, sees the United States themselves rather as a colony of Israel.
“Capitol is occupied not less than Palestine!” – I’ve heard that sentence many times from my American friends.This is a completely different perspective, which forces us to focus on the immanent criminality of Zionism itself, which is more than just a convenient tool, an ideology used to cover imperialist goals.
This is the very essence of the Palestinian crisis, the reason why the solution to the Middle East issue is beyond the reach of the international debate, especially only with the participation of non-governmental organisations.
Nazi Question
The Nazi question haven’t been solved by negotiations or by wondering whether Hitler was working for big capital.
The options of “Nazism with a human face” or compromise with “Nazi pragmatists” were not on a table.
Nazism had to be defeated on the battlefields, in the bloodiest war in human history.The Nazi Third Reich was abolished as a state, the nation was denazified, and the territories conquered and occupied by the Nazis were returned to their historic inhabitants.Since Zionism is a specific, Israeli form of Nazism it would be utopian to believe that it can be treated differently from Hitlerism, i.e. German Nazism, or Banderism, i.e. Ukrainian Nazism.
And just as historically not all powers contributed equally to the victory over Nazism, so today the attitude of the main international actors towards Zionism differs significantly.Much more unequivocal, however, is the attitude of the nations themselves, making the matter clear: Zionism will meet the same end as Nazism in Hitler’s bunker under the ruins of the Reich Chancellery.
Political Limitations of Popular Movements
Actions such as Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) have a huge impact on integrating public opinion in its opposition to Zionist crimes and their sponsors.The reaction of Western societies to the genocide in Gaza, these multi-hundred-thousand marches for peace and for Palestine in London and other cities are the largest independent popular movements in decades.
This is a real awakening against war, racism and imperialism. However, we must be aware of the limits of such involvement.
In the West, we are dealing with a systemic crisis of liberal democracy, which is currently being extinguished as a form of political organisation of states and societies.
Oligarchies, which have always dominated Western politics, are now almost openly present, while the basic assumptions of liberal democracy, such as freedom of speech, freedom of the media and scholarship, democratic elections of political representation, are no longer of real importance.Even such a mass popular movement as the campaigns in support of Palestine are met with indifference at best, and more often with direct repressions.
Millions of people can march through the streets of Western cities to protest the genocide in Gaza, and Western governments can ignore it, continuing to provide active support to the Netanyahu’s regime, as the British Government does.
Breaking Apartheid
This confirms the futility of political assimilation of Muslims living in Europe. Their voice is not and cannot be heard within the framework of the current system, which has the characteristics of practical apartheid. All those suspected of sympathising with the Palestinian cause are eliminated from mainstream Western parties, and censorship prevails in universities and in the media, including social media.
In this situation, all opponents of Zionism, all supporters of peace, in order to be heard, to gain influence and control, must organise themselves.
There are currently around 28 million Muslims living in the countries of the European Union and in the UK, and their percentage will only grow.This is a potentially powerful force, if only it stops allowing itself to belimited to the matter of migration, divisions between old and new immigrants, or cultural issues.This is a force of potential geopolitical change, completely reevaluating the Western strategy towards the Middle East, Asia and Africa.
And there can be only one perspective: Zionist came from overseas – they should go further, across the ocean.They have New York, Miami and California, so they don’t need Palestine anymore. Unless, of course, it is the Anglo-Saxons who need a foothold in the Middle East, and the inhabitants of Palestine, regardless of nationality and religion, are only hostages of foreign geopolitical interests.Therefore, justifying the occupation with humanitarian reasons or “historical justice towards the Jewish nation” turns out to be all the more mendacious.The falsehoods are exposed.The Palestinian syndrome must be overtaken in one way or another and from the River to the See Palestine must be free.
*
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.
Washington finally completed its dirty war in Syria. What started as a CIA covert operation to smuggle weapons and jihadists from Libya to Syria has resulted in Syria leader Bashar al-Assad being deposed and replaced by Abu Mohammad al-Julani.
Julani found his way to Damascus by rising through the ranks of al-Qaeda in Iraq. Julani was a close associate of both AQI leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and founded the al-Qaeda affiliate group Syria in coordination with Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
As more Americans became aware of the CIA’s covert operation in Syria to back jihadists, Julani changed his organization’s name from Al Nusra to Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, then Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) to obscure his group’s al-Qaeda links. However,HTS was no moderate group and focused on bringing ISIS forces under Julani’s control following the collapse of Baghdadi’s caliphate.
Even the US State Department was not fooled by Julani’s rebrands. In 2017, the State Department issued a $10 million reward for the capture of Julani.
.
.
For most of the past decade, Julani has ruled over northwestern Syria under the protection of Washington’s NATO ally, Turkey. Had Turkish troops not set up outposts surrounding Julani’s territory, Syria, and its Russian, Iranian, and Hezbollah allies may have eliminated the lingering jihadist threat. During this period, Julani’s Idlib province was the largest safe haven for jihadists on the planet.
Since the ISIS caliphate was defeated, the frontlines in the Syrian War largely froze. Still, Washington and its allies engaged in a relentless assault on Damascus.
Turkey protected jihadists on Syria’s northern border, allowing them to terrorize the Kurds that lived there.
Israel engaged in weekly strikes on Assad and his allied forces. Over the past year, those strikes have escalated to hit civilian and diplomatic targets in downtown Damascus. Tel Aviv even bombed the Aleppo Airport following a major earthquake, preventing aid from reaching the desperate citizens.
The US illegally occupied the eastern quarter of Syria, exploiting and stealing some of Damasus’s most valuable resources. In this region, the US allowed the Kurds to lord power over the local Arabs. The Kurdish SDF runs a massive torture prison known as the al-Hol camp, and local citizens protest the Kurds conscripting their children as young as 15.
Washington waged an economic war on Syria, deliberately meant to prevent Damascus from rebuilding its war-destroyed infrastructure. The US also bombed Assad’s allied forces near the Iraq-Syria border.
Additionally, Turkey and Ukraine used this period to bolster the HTS forces.
The long-frozen conflict thawed rapidly over the past two weeks. Seemingly in coordination with the announcement of a truce in Lebanon, Julani’s forces went on the march, first seizing Aleppo. Reported to be aided by advanced drones, HTS made quick work of any Syria forces that resisted, and on Sunday, Julani arrived in Damascus and declared the “mujahideen” won the war. And Washington celebrated.
“Syria is free. The rebels won. The people liberated themselves from tyranny. Freedom won,” the Washington Post’s Josh Rogin wrote on X. “Russia, Iran, Hezbollah & Assad lost. Historic. The road ahead for Syria won’t be easy. But it will be better than the past. The world should celebrate Syria’s liberation & help it succeed.”
“Assad – after a quarter-century of ruthless rule – had fled the country. Syria was free at last.”
“The fall of Assad. On some days, one can believe that while the arc of the moral universe is long, it bends toward justice,” neocon Bill Krystol wrote on X.
Of course, what happened to Syria is not about the Syrians. The real goal of Washington was to weaken Damascus because they believed it would weaken Moscow, Tehran, and Hezbollah.
What happens next in Syria is unlikely to be good for many of the minority groups that enjoyed some level of protection under Assad. However, Washington and its allies are swooping in like hungry vultures to feats on the remains of Syria.
Shortly after Assad left Damascus, in Tel Aviv Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahuannounced Israel would be seizing a “buffer zone” in southwestern Syria. Turkey also launched airstrikes on a Kurdish-held city in northern Syria.
No doubt, in the coming days, we will hear crowing from the hawks in Washington about their triumph in Syria by severing Tehran’s land connection to Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon. In the White House, Biden’s staff is no doubt discussing how to exploit Assad’s downfall as far as possible; this includes attempts to remove Russia from its military bases along Syria’s Mediterranean coast.
The biggest losers in Syria are the Syrian people, who, for nearly a decade and a half, have been subject to a brutal and complex war that shows no signs of ending. They have been bombed by a seemingly unending number of countries, all with their unique geopolitical interests. The Syrian people have been intentionally starved and impoverished by the US to bring about Assad’s downfall. While Assad was a tyrant, no doubt Julani will come with his own, and likely more oppressive, tyranny.
Among the other losers are the American people. More American lives and treasure were wasted on a project to dispose of another Middle East dictator. In Iraq and Libya, this policy caused unimaginable suffering for the locals.
The top threat is that our government has empowered the only true enemies of the American people. Iran, Russia, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Assad’s Syria, etc. all present no threat to the American homeland. However, now an al-Qaeda terrorist sits on the throne in Damascus, and Washington’s support for Tel Aviv’s genocide in Gaza has given him an endless supply of anti-American hatred.
*
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.
After combating terrorism and rebel groups for over twelve years, the former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad fled the capital of Damascus with his family on December 7, shortly before it fell to the rebels. The victorious insurgents are the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) organization along with an umbrella group called the Syrian National Army.
Craig Murray (former British ambassador to Uzbekistan), in a panel about “the end of pluralism in the Middle East”, described the “Syrian rebels” as “a tool of NATO, Israel and Turkey”. This is a complex description for a complex situation indeed. Of the three, many analysts are focusing on the Israeli and Turkish angle—not so much on the American angle, though.
To recap, since the 2011 terrorist attacks, Syria has counted on military aid from its allies Iran and Russia. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard, as well as the (Tehran-backed) Lebanese Hezbollah have in fact been the main anti-terrorist actors in the Levant, by deterring the expansion of terrorist group ISIS (Daesh) and thereby making the region safer for Christians and other minorities. Islamic Wahhabi/Salafi extremists were, after all, beheading some of them while kidnapping others and selling women as slaves.
The fact is that the rebels who have won in Syria now are not of a very different persuasion, and it is no wonder many are now concerned. Archbishop Ieronymos of Athens for one has urged the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs to aid the Christian population in Syria. He wrote:
“The advance of extremist armed groups and the capture of Aleppo threaten… the interfaith composition of the region’s population… there is now a looming danger of the complete eradication… of Greek Orthodoxy and Christianity from the wider region.”
Such concerns are well founded. One should bear in mind that (Saudi-born) Abu Mohammed al-Julani, the very leader of Turkish-backed HTS, the group who has captured Aleppo (Syria’s second largest city), joined Al-Qaeda in Iraq in 2003, later establishing its split branch in Syria, the so-called al-Nusra Front. This group, under al-Julani, cooperated with the infamous Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of Al-Qaeda’s split offshoot called “Islamic State in Iraq”, later known as ISIL (ISIS) or Daesh.
Al-Julani’s own later split from al-Qaeda and creation of the aforementioned HTS has been described as a merely “bid” to “stress his group’s national, as opposed to transnational, ambitions.” In other words, the group is just another re-branded offshoot of ISIS/Al-Qaeda. And those are the people who have now conquered Syria.
One might disapprove of Assad’s ruling but such a development can hardly be described by most as anything other than a disaster. Turkey (who aids the rebels) and Israel, as already mentioned, do benefit from this outcome, however, for their own reasons—and much is already being talked about that. But not so many analysts are highlighting the American role in all of it.
For example, the US-backed Syrian Free Army (a coalition which has taken control of Hom’s Palmyra district) announced that they are “open to friendship with everyone in the region – including Israel. We don’t have enemies other than the Assad regime, Hezbollah and Iran. What Israel did against Hezbollah in Lebanon helped us a great deal”–while claiming they are not allied with Turkey. The group, being increasingly dependent on Turkey, is a close ally of the United States, and was even hosted at the American military base at al-Tanf. Turkey, despite its differences with Washington is of course also, let us not forget it, a NATO member.
The future of Syria and the concerned parties is far from clear now, there being lots of room for infighting among the different rebel factions. Turkey, which has long occupied northern Syria, has taken advantage of the ceasefire in Lebanon to give the rebels the green-light for launching an offensive (with Iran weakened in Syria and Hezbollah cornered in Lebanon). However Turkish-American differences pertaining to the Kurdish question are to remain a focal point for tensions.
HTS is indeed Turkish-backed but, as mentioned, its roots can be traced to Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other such groups empowered by Washington’s policy. One should not forget the fact that there are still around 900 US troops in Syria (mostly in the northeast, near Turkish strongholds) which witnessed the rebel victory. This has led some analysts to comment that “whether the Pentagon wants to admit it or not”, these troops are “likely involved in the broader conflict unfolding there right now.”
Moreover, there is nothing new about the West praising and empowering brutal terrorism and radicals when such is deemed geopolitically convenient: if former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton under President Barack Obama had achieved her stated goals, Syria would be in a similar situation to Libya since 2011 – in Libya, coincidence or not, arms provided by the US to rebels there also “ended up” in ISIS hands, according to Amnesty reports.
Back to the Levant region, it is a well-established fact that Washington played a key role in the empowerment of ISIS (or Daesh) both in Syria and Iraq (as well as other brutal radicals), with the Pentagon and the CIA arming mostly foreign Islamic militias that ended up even fighting among themselves. This is consistent with American foreign policy elsewhere too. The infamous Clinton emails also show how the US was aware of their allies Qatar and Saudi Arabia supporting Daesh terror.
The White House National Security Council (NSC) spokesperson Sean Savett said in a recent statement that Washington “has nothing to do with this offensive.” Considering all of the above, one can certainly be justified in taking such statements with a grain of salt. For Washington, further destabilizing Syria might also serve the role of “countering” Russia in the region. The US has consistently aided, funded, armed and trained Fundamentalist rebels who operate in the Levant for over a decade and there is no reason to assume anything is different now with the newest developments.
Finally, still on the topic of the Christian minority, US foreign policy—for a variety of reasons—has actually often involved dividing or destabilizing Eastern Christian (both Orthodox and Miaphysitist) populations or sometimes even aiding or turning a blind eye to the ethnic-religious cleansing of such groups or of Christians in general in the Levant region, for that matter.
This is of course quite ironic for a country such as the US who often hails itself as “one nation under God” or as a “Christian nation”– this being the Republican party line at least. Trump for one has posted that “Syria is a mess, but is not our friend”.
*
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.
“For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.” -Hosea 8:7
The collapse of the Assad government in Syria is certain to be greeted with considerable satisfaction in Jerusalem and Washington. Both capitals of the Zionist Co-Dominium have long seen the Assads much as they did Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. All were obstacles to Israel’s designs in the region.
All three were also targets of that nefarious policy of “regime change” highlighted by in the US after 9/11, as were four other countries in the region. Now the last of the three has fallen, albeit much later than the mostly Jewish neoconservative “chicken hawks” (so called because all advocated war but very few ever served in uniform) had anticipated back in 2001.
So What Caused the Collapse?
Internal dynamics within Syria that played their part, to be sure, but I will focus here on the external factors. A major reason was the unrelenting pressure and considerable resources poured into the assorted militias and jihadists trying to overthrow Syria’s regime. Money talks, and it talked very loudly here. So did the frequent Israeli air and artillery strikes into Syria. Shielded by the US, Russian forces in Syria could do little for their ally.
Then, too, the numerically small but politically significant, open-ended US military presence on the ground in Syria had their own impact, so did the limited but strategically significant direct military attacks by the US and other NATO countries on Syrian government forces and installations. Image matters, and here it mattered greatly.
Syria’s Assad could never match that. Only Russia (to a very limited extent) and Iran (to a even lesser one) really did much of anything. But Russia is caught up with the Ukrainian “tar baby” and Iran is hedging its bets in anticipation of America’s own “regime change.” A scarcity of strong, reasonably reliable allies also counts, and it counted here, but not in a good way.
Second, Syria lost the information and propaganda war, in a very big and very decisive way. The Jewish-dominated media in the US and most of Europe made sure that virtually every claim, no matter how ludicrous, of the jihadists and other anti-government elements in Syria was treated as Gospel truth. Few in the legacy media disputed their assertions, although many did in the alternative media and on social media platforms.
It wasn’t enough. Israel can rip Gaza apart and kill tens of thousands of civilians, but any criticism of its very real war crimes is almost universally denounced in the media and Western capitals as “vicious antisemitism” that needs to be suppressed and punished. That criticism was nothing of the sort, but it demonstrates the exceptional degree of Jewish influence throughout the West. It also underscores the accuracy of the axiom that “truth is the first casualty of war,” at least whenever Israel or its interests are involved.
Third, it is worth noting that this event saw insurgent militias and local jihadists do to the Syrian government forces what the US-backed mujaheddin did to the Afghan government and their Soviet allies, and later the Taliban (the lineal operational descendants of the original mujaheddin) did to another Afghan government and its American patron. It seems that local governments have very great difficulty holding out against insurgents who have an external sanctuary, external assistance, or both.
In all three cases cited above, the insurgents had both. In Syria, the government forces had also to contend with direct military attacks by Israel, the US and other NATO countries. What made it harder for them was that they essentially fought these external forces with one hand firmly tied behind their backs.
Other than in defense, Syrian government forces could only engage in occasional artillery duels with the Israelis, but not respond to air attacks in kind. Nor could the Russians assist them, other than defensively. Any attempt to respond directly to US, Israeli or other attacks meant a direct confrontation with the US, Israel covered by its American puppet, or NATO. The Syrians could not do this alone, and Syria simply was not worth enough to Russia to risk that kind of engagement.
Reflections
It will take some time for the implications of all this to become clearer (perhaps “less murky” would be more accurate). I expect the current Syrian government officials and senior military commanders are wondering if they will still be alive next week. I am not a specialist on Syrian affairs, but the historical track record in these situations would not reassuring to them.
I expect, however, a major consideration on the part of the winners will be the role intended for them by their foreign patrons .Do we want the new Syrian government to be another Egypt, at least insofar as Israel is concerned? Or is it something else?
Whatever it is, insurgent forces – even heavily infiltrated ones – have shown themselves to be exceptionally difficult to predict or to control, or even to influence, once they are in power.. Recall that the people the US armed to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan morphed into a Taliban which employed some of those weapons and techniques to force yet another humiliating American debacle.
The Israeli experience with these things is even more problematic. I was told back in the 1980s by a senior Israeli officer that they had successfully infiltratedevery single Arab government and movement, relying principally on Sephardic Jews. So when Israel set up Hamas in the 1980s as a counter-weight to the PLO, I expect they thought they had made a good bargain. Yet it, too, changed over the years. Infiltrated or not, it has given Israel a more “interesting” time than it anticipated.
The case of ISIS and the Syrian jihadists is even more interesting. Now, “false flags” (attacking someone but making people believe someone else is doing it) is something of an Israeli specialty. The motto of Mossad, the best-known Israeli intelligence organization, is aptly “By Deception, Shall You Wage War.
Mossad it and its sister organizations have lived up to that motto since the founding of Israel. They have been aided worldwide by dual Israeli citizens, or Jews without Israeli citizenship, some Christian Zionists, and outright mercenaries.
Examples abound. Three of particular relevance to the US, for example, are the Lavon Affair in Egypt (1954), the attack on the USS Liberty (1967) and the 9/11 attacks (2001). Worth looking them up (do NOT trust either Wikipedia or Google search engine!), but here is a start on the last-named one.
The case of ISIS is even more intriguing. Supposedly a militant Islamic organization, it seems to have exceptionally great difficulty hitting Israeli or American targets anywhere in the world. This was a problem Osama bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda, with fewer assets, obviously did not share.
.
.
Despite the resources to field fleets of white Toyota pick-up trucks with heavy weapons in their beds and other paraphernalia, they found it an “almost” insurmountable challenge to strike what should be their own principal enemies. Curious, is it not? I wonder how many ISIS leaders have shared drinks with their Mossad and CIA contacts [their identity is never revealed]
Last are the Syrian jihadists, easily the most fascinating facet of the Syrian puzzle. We are told constantly that these people are Islamic fanatics who spend their nights dreaming of how to kill non-believers, and their days trying to do it (or is that backwards?). But apparently there are “good” jihadists and “bad” jihadists. The former are those who do the bidding of Western governments (including Israel) and attack Muslim countries. The latter are those that apparently do not.
Peering Ahead
It is hazardous at best to anticipate what will emerge in the aftermath of the Syrian government’s defeat. At a minimum, I would expect the new rulers to order the Russians out. Of course, the Russians may not go, just as the US ignored the demands of many weaker governments to leave. Imperial powers, even if weakening and in a chaotic world, are often like that.
We may learn a bit more about ISIS and these “good” jihadists in Syria. Precisely what will they do in power? Will they be like the Taliban in Afghanistan? If not, what would that say about their actual character and hat of their leaders? Thought-provoking times, at best.
What is clearer is that what happened in Syria will embolden the Israelis to deal with the Palestinians within and Lebanon and Hezbollah without, especially once Trump is President and recognizes Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Trump is even more beholden to Israel than most US presidents, and Israel will capitalize on it.
Moreover, with Assad’s Syria removed from the game, Iran will move to the regional front burner. No person in the US can now even be a serious candidate for President without being in Israel’s pocket, much less be elected to that office, but the two American political factions have different priorities.
What this means is that the Neo-conservatives stacking up in Trump’s administration are an odds-on certainty to see this as a golden opportunity to complete their 2001 agenda and neutralize Iran. Knowing them, they and Jewish money will push (perhaps I should say “nudge”) Trump to do one of three things: (1) support Israel in attacking Iran, (2) join Israel in doing that, or (3) attacking Iran without Israel.
.
.
The net effect is a far more dangerous 2025 than recent years have seen, and they have not been exactly a joy. We face civil upheaval at home and more war abroad, if Trump actually puts his agenda into effect. For Israel, Syria’s defeat and Trump’s presidency augur well on its march to a “Greater Israel.” For Palestinians. Lebanese and so many others in the reason, things have gone from bad to an almost unimaginably worse. For Americans, challenging times, indeed.
*
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.
Alan Ned Sabrosky (PhD, University of Michigan) is a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran. He served in Vietnam with the 1st Marine Division and is a graduate of the US Army War College. Dr. Sabrosky can be contacted at [email protected]
“Then I went and looked up the second study he quoted from January through March of 2020. That drug trial was for COVID-19 patients. They picked 52 patients from around the world and that study was sponsored by Gilead the maker of remdesivir. And what did they publish? 30% of everybody they treated for COVID-19 within nine days developed acute kidney failure and 10% of them had to have kidney transplants as a result.”
December 2024 is the fifth anniversary of the “nightmare pandemic” which would radically change our lives! [1]
A massive “blunder” that we weren’t ready for! The world was convinced to undertake extreme efforts to contain this “killer virus” in order to limit the carnage that would have resulted. With time, the rapid and capable work of scientists around the globe, working hand in glove with the technologically advanced systems in our friendly neighbourhood big pharmaceutical corporations managed to work up a new vaccine (!) dispatched in the nick of time to prevent people from succumbing to this tiny creature who does not care about our survival. [2]
And of course, our media were doing their best to scare the living hell out of us, and propagandize the untested vaccine – for our own good of course! [3]
There were clear casualties. But supposedly, the outcome would have been even worse if lockdowns, masking and vaccine mandates were not in place to control … I mean, to guide vast numbers of people in the service of the “scientific experts” in authority. [4]
Over time, a lot of people started complaining and then organizing protests against the World Health thugs who clothed themselves in white lab coats, and called such dissident thinkers “anti-vaxxers,” and “dis-informationists.” People who chose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine would face punishment in the form of not being allowed to enter restaurants, stadiums, museums, or any other public places … for the protection of the public.
(Even though vaccinated people are supposedly protected against COVID-19, how are they threatened by unvaccinated people?)
This website has supplied dozens, possibly hundreds of pages of articles and research that detail how the great trial of humanity we just experienced was more a massive psychological operation misleading the public, then the “Mother of all Flus.” But what interests us on this anniversary occasion is the unique elements of human nature combined with propaganda to advance a mass of people in an Elite direction – to Elite advantage.
The really scary thing to contemplate is that this process is a manifestation of totalitarianism, not unlike the forces that thrust the Nazis to power in Germany in just a few short years. Back then, people became convinced that Jews were a major threat. Today, “anti-vaxxers” have too much influence, and we must censor them… for the public good!
The divisions among the people may have subsided temporarily, but it seems unlikely that the process will not be used again. With these grim fates in store, we will give a platform to thinkers who are daring to ask skeptical questions of every effort to restrict freedoms in the name of saving the environment/human democracy/children’s health/etc.
On the Global Research News Hour, we will speak to each of the guest speakers at the recent Prepare to Stand event, held in Winnipeg on the 24th of September.
Speaker Dr. Bryan Ardis gives added insight into the deaths of so many starting with the death of his own father-in-law BEFORE THE COVID CRISIS STARTED. He will also mention the role of the drug Remdesivir which while a mysterious possible culprit in many deaths, medical authorities claim “COVID-19 killed him/her.”
Speaker Mattias Desmet is up next. A Professor of Clinical Psychology, he talk about “mass formation” which together with state propaganda generates totalitarian conditions and that the COVID-19 “pandemic” was the latest instance of this phenomenon and how we can avoid such states in the future.
Finally, we hear from James Ferguson, founder and head of Freedom Train International, about the work he and his colleagues are doing to counter the trends toward enhancement of globalist control in our lives today.
Dr. BryanArdisis a retired Chiropractor, Certified Acupuncturist and Nutritionist.and considered one of the most influential doctors in alternative medicine. Thanks to his new book, Moving Beyond the Covid-19 Lies: Restoring Health and Hope for Humanity, he is now a best-selling author.
Mattias Desmetis a Professor of Clinical Psychology, a Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist at Ghent University in Belgium and holds a masters degree in statistics and has published 126 articles in peer-reviewed journals.Professor Desmet began working on his theory of mass formationwell before the pandemic began, but during the pandemic he watched the phenomenon play out in real time. His new book, The Psychology of Totalitarianism, lays out what mass formation is, how it develops, how it leads to totalitarianism, and what we must do to change the conditions that makes these mass formation events possible.
James Ferguson is a former Parliamentary candidate with The Brexit Party Barnsley, a Businessman entrepreneur, and Founder of Freedom Train International.
Transcript of Dr. Bryan Ardis, September 24, 2024.
Global Researh: Could you talk about your basically what happened to your father-in-law and how you know the things that happened within the hospital that kind of drove you you know angry.
Bryan Ardis: Yeah very good question yeah it made me very angry. So in February of 2020 my 92 year old father-in-law walked into a hospital complaining of fever and a headache and within 10 days he was dead.
That was the real story and in the meantime he was diagnosed with the flu, pneumonia, acute kidney failure after being admitted. Each of those scenarios were actually published side effects of the drugs they chose to treat him for on day one and he actually I had them review with me on day five as he continued to get worse and worse every single day. He actually by day five was unconscious and in a coma and it was induced by the drugs that were shutting down his kidneys.
I asked the doctors to show me the medical reports from day one which would include what’s called a pathology test which is what infections may he have in his blood. So they’re looking for every bacterial infection, viral infection, and fungal infection actually and he was negative for all infections but they said to me and to him and to our family that he tested positive for the flu on day one only to find out he actually never tested positive for the flu on day one, two, three, four, five. They also told us on day two he tested positive for pneumonia.
He never did it.
GR: So there are standard tests to determine what what what is ailing in your system and they didn’t take any of those tests?
BA: No, they did the tests and they all came back negative. They then made up a diagnosis of the flu because they thought it was a I heard on day five when I said why did y’all tell us he tested positive for the flu when he didn’t, and the medical doctor said we guess his symptoms said he had the flu so we just assumed it was a false negative test and I said well I don’t care what the result of that test was, if you thought he had a virus looking at the IV stand he had a drug called vancomycin on the stand that was pumping into his veins every day since he walked in there and this made me very upset because vancomycin has published side-effects to cause death, to cause acute kidney failure, and to cause rapid pulmonary edema which is water accumulating in your lungs from your kidneys being shut down by the drug and that’s exactly what was being reported to us as a family one day after another for five straight days before I showed up.
GR: So that means basically it there is a place for it but maybe it should be like as a last resort or something but it seems like they’re using it a little bit more regularly.
BA: Absolutely, great point. So vancomycin and I asked the medical doctor why is he on that because that’s an antibiotic and antibiotics only treat infections so reporter when they said he must have a virus called the flu why would they pump him full of a drug that doesn’t treat viruses?
In fact I looked at the MD and I said why are you giving him an antibiotic you know on the CDC’s website right now it says if someone is diagnosed with a viral infection giving them antibiotics can make them worse? It is not warranted for viral infections!
So I actually demanded that the medical doctors take him off that drug, switch the drugs he was on and in four hours of working with the team and switching the medication protocols on day six he actually came back to life, lost 20 pounds of water weight, could breathe all on his own came off of a breathing apparatus within four hours. He’d been on for several days and he came back to life and was conscious for the first day and 48 hours.
And we were so thrilled when we got home the medical doctors and the administrators of that same hospital had met after hours and then told the nurse’s station to call my wife and tell them I was banned from the hospital and they would never talk to me again because I wasn’t a direct descendant of this guy my father-in-law and they would only talk to the family members. And if I came back up they’d kick me out with security.
Well the very next morning I went up there and they kicked me out with security and then put him back on the same hospital protocol for the false diagnosis of a flu that they had before I made the adjustments to help save his life. And when the hospital realized that I had actually exposed the liability to the harm they created in him with their hospital protocol, that included vancomycin. It was all they were going to do was to make sure that they continued that protocol until the very end so that they could not ever be exposed.
So they kicked me out knowing what I know and then went back on the original protocol and within two days he was dead.
GR: You consider taking some kind of a legal action when they they followed these procedures? It’s demonstrably flawed.
BA: 100% I did except my mother-in-law who was his wife absolutely believed everything the medical doctors told them. All of my wife’s family, not my wife but her older brother and older sister, all of them were in support of just listening to the medical doctors, trusting the establishment. And I was the retired chiropractor, so I looked at the family and said are you gonna trust the medical doctors or me who actually helped to bring him back to life yesterday? And they said we’re gonna we only can trust the medical doctors we don’t have any help professional experience so I was then kicked out by security.
GR: So I guess this caused you to go even deeper down this particular rabbit hole and find other sorts of flaws in the system, correct?
BA: Absolutely, but actually the next three months I was very depressed, very angry. I actually wanted every day I had to talk myself out of not going and hunting down a member of the medical staff’s family members and take them out so that those medical doctors nursing staff administrators could feel what me and my wife were feeling because they literally took someone from us who was not ready to die. He would still be here if they would have not continued those drugs that were a part of that protocol.
The hospital protocol was my problem they wouldn’t bend off of this protocol which was actually creating more harm than good because when we changed it he recovered within four hours. So for me for the next three months I was very lost I was actually building out my own case to take legal action and sue the hospital for medical malpractice.
This was in February of 2020. For the next three months I’m hearing whispers coming out of New York City that there’s this new respiratory virus called COVID-19 and there’s this epicenter in New York City that’s now it’s breached from China and reached American shores.
And I decided to go look up what were the medical professionals and press conferences and administrators of hospitals in New York, what were they saying about this COVID-19 infection as they were treating those patients. And what I did was listen to ten interviews that were only about a minute long on every platform you think of online. And what every single nurse, medical doctor, and administrator for every hospital said was this: we’ve never seen a respiratory virus ever do this before. From the moment we start treating COVID-19 sick patients, within 24 to 48 hours the virus goes from their lungs and shuts down their kidneys and they’re going into acute kidney failure within 24 hours. a large percentage of people.
And they said in every single interview we not only have a shortage of respirators and oxygen providing machines to people, breathing machines ,we actually need more dialysis machines for the kidney failure rates that we’re seeing. Now as I watch this I just had this experience three months earlier and I knew it wasn’t the virus they said my father-in-law had that was also a respiratory virus they called the flu.
GR: So you’re saying that all of these people seem to develop the same kinds of symptoms as your father did before this mysterious virus had reached the shore.
BA: Exactly right! So what did happen to my father-in-law is now being reported it’s occurring to everybody in the COVID-19 hospitals except what we’re watching on the news is body bags being thrown into tractor trailers as if it’s just some massive horrific infection spreading through this area.
Well my problem was is I wanted to know well what’s the hospital protocol they’re using for COVID because in my situation, for my father-in-law, it was a drug called vancomycin that’s published to cause acute kidney failure in 24 hours. And that’s exactly what happened him. So that’s why we got him off that drug only for the hospital put him back on that drug that led to his demise.
So I thought they must be giving every COVID-19 patient vancomycin like they did my father-in-law. So I went to look up what’s the hospital protocol. I figured it would be on the CDC’s website because it’s called the Center for Disease Control, so I figured there’s a disease called COVID. Surely they have a hospital protocol. And on their website they actually stated in May of 2020: “we don’t have a protocol for treating COVID-19. It is found, (that hospital protocol) on the NIH’s website.” And here’s the link.
So I clicked it went to the National Institutes of Health’s website and I read a three paragraph memo from a guy named Dr. Anthony Fauci. And what this memo says is is there’s only one drug that can be used to treat COVID-19 infected Americans and that drug is not FDA approved. It is an experimental drug called remdesivir, and I’d never heard of this drug but now I know it’s not vancomycin right this is all I learned.
But there were two studies after Anthony Fauci’s quote that remdesivir is safe and effective. He says “it was found safe and effective in two trials, a trial in 2019 against Ebola virus and in 2020 from January to March of 2020 a study done with COVID-19 patients. So I clicked the links to the first study on Ebola in Africa that lasted a year that trial and as I read the paper took me about 15 minutes to get through the paper, I realized Anthony Fauci was lying about remdesivir being proven safe and effective against Ebola.
Imagine my shock to read that that drug killed more people in that trial than Ebola kills and it was the only drug that did that out of four experimental drugs.
So there are four drugs:= remdesivir, Zmapp, MAb114 and a drug called regeneron. So it was three monoclonal antibodies and one antiviral called remdesivir. Remdesivir killed 53% of all people they gave it to and it was suspended from the trial six months in because it was too deadly and too toxic and then the authors of the study wrote we notified the funders of this study that that drug would no longer continue in this trial it’s killing more Africans than anybody else.
So I looked up who funded that study and imagine my shock to see that it’s Dr. Anthony Fauci’s department at the NIH. So the year prior he knew it was the most deadly drug and was found to be the most toxic and deadly least safe, least effective but in May of 2020 less than a year later he’s gonna say to the world, and America that this drug was proven safe and effective against Ebola when it wasn’t.
Then I went and looked up the second study he quoted from January through March of 2020. That drug trial was for COVID-19 patients. They picked 52 patients from around the world and that study was sponsored by Gilead the maker of remdesivir. And what did they publish? 30% of everybody they treated for COVID-19 within nine days developed acute kidney failure and 10% of them had to have kidney transplants as a result.
GR: So all of these people essentially died as a result of medical malpractice where Anthony Fauci’s claim of his drug being the cure was actually getting a worse result it was it says are you you’re basically alleging that it was iatrogenesis that killed all those people not the virus which presently doesn’t exist.
BA: 100% and then I found that the Centers for Medicare Medicaid Services which in America is overseeing the insurance for the elderly who are retired over that 60 years old. So it’s called CMS.gov. If you go on CMS.gov starting in May of 2020 our Medicare government agency instilled a 20% add-on bonus for all hospitals if they treated any American older than 60 years old with remdesivir and would tell them that they tested positive for COVID-19.
They did not say we’ll give you 20% add on bonus if you just use the drug, they said we’ll give you a 20% add-on bonus for the whole hospital stay for every COVID-19 American older than sixty years old if you’ll just pump them full of this deadly drug called remdesivir, which I coined for all audiences around the world to be able to remember when they hear this drug they’ve never heard of before.
I coined the phrase “run death is near.” When you hear something that rhymes with “run death is near” that’s the drug I’m talking about. You say no, and so the world needs to know right now that remdesivir is the generic name of the drug. It actually has a brand name and it’s called Veklery – V-E-K-L-U-R-Y. And if you look up the Nordic language, that’s an actual word, you know what Vekleri means historically in the Nordic language? It’s a term that means “chooser of the slain.” Isn’t that interesting?
GR: So I guess in a minute left I mean could you just explain what, how are people supposed to navigate this medical world where you have all of these institutions sort of hobbled by the the presence of Anthony Fauci and everything that he set up. What are we supposed to do is just ignore the hospitals altogether and then meet with you know a local shaman or something like that. How are we supposed to navigate this difficult path?
BA: For all people that are concerned about their health and were afraid during COVID that they might they might in fact get an infection they’re being told there they could possibly get and that their life could be threatened by that infection, every single one of those people from now on you should know that the only reputable aspect of health care modern-day health care is actually trauma and emergency care.
So if you’ve got an injury or an accident or you’ve had a heart attack you need to go to the hospital. Outside of that, there is no benefit to medicine. So you do not need a shaman what you need to start doing is researching on your own how it is that God designed the human body to protect itself from all infections and poisons. And the best way you do that is you start studying how did God design the body and then start studying herbs, minerals, vitamins how does that support our entire body.
In fact all of us here in Canada, in America you’ve all heard of the periodic table of elements? You all memorized it in science classes and biology probably? That periodic table of elements your science teacher would have told you these are the basic building blocks for your life and every living organism on this planet.
You know what’s interesting about that list? When you hear the word “supplement,” what people are talking about are called minerals. And you know what minerals are? All the things you see on the periodic table of elements. So you’ll see salt is a mineral. Calcium is a mineral. Magnesium is a mineral. Did you know that heart attacks and strokes are caused by a magnesium deficiency? Did you know that immune suppression if you can’t fight off infections on your own is a selenium deficiency and that’s on the periodic table of elements. Do you know what’s not on the periodic table of elements? Advil. Tylenol. Vaccines. mRNA technology. Those things are not on the periodic table of elements.
God designed the human body to fight off infections using minerals. It’s designed to heal itself from injury and harm and infections if you just feed the body what it needs. So if you reduce the amount of artificial processed foods that you’re consuming, reduce the amount of sugar which is refined carbohydrates, this is not a joke I’ve educated this people for years, the less sugar you put in the body, the boosting of your immune system occurs. Sugar is an immune suppressant it shuts off your bone marrows production of all the white blood cells that protect you from every virus bacteria fungus and parasite on earth. So if you just limit taking in things into your body, or on your body, or injected into your body that suppress the immune system, your body’s adequately equipped to handle any infection.
In fact every cell in your body called T-cells, neutrophils, B cells, macrophages these are your immune cells God put inside of us. They are already known to kill every cancer cell known to man. That I actually show audiences our own cells grab HIV infected cells by the handfuls. They will grab four at once and dissolve all of them eat them. Your body has this incredible ability to defend itself as long as we get out of our own way.
So exercise, getting sunlight, making sure you’re sweating three or four times a week because the skin is the largest detoxing organ of the body. Make sure you’re pooping every day, make sure you’re eating every day. One of the greatest ways to boost the immune system and most people don’t even know this is to not eat and that’s called intermittent fasting or water fasting. It is already proven you can actually repair any tissue in the human body faster if you stop putting fuel in the body your body has to break down and then it can reserve all its energy to heal the other tissues in your body.
The programme is also broadcast weekly (Monday, 1-2pm ET) by the Progressive Radio Network in the US.
The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.caormer Parliamentary candidate with The Brexit Party Barnsley. Businessman entrepreneur. Founder of Freedom Train International.
Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, today’s de facto ruler of Damascus, has an eloquent history: he began his jihadist militancy in al-Qaeda’s ranks as an associate of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the “caliph” who founded ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, in 2013. In 2011, during the preparatory phase, al-Baghdadi sent him to Syria with large sums of money for the creation of the al-Nusra Front, a formally autonomous faction but in reality, part of the Islamic State.
The al-Jolani faction has been involved in the US-NATO operation to destroy the Syrian state since its inception. One of the reasons for this operation is the fact that in July 2011 Syria, Iran and Iraq signed an agreement for a pipeline that would connect Iran’s South Pars field, the largest in the world, to Syria and then to the Mediterranean and Europe. This would create an alternative energy corridor to those through Turkey and other routes controlled by US and European companies.
The covert war in Syria begins with a series of terrorist attacks, mainly in Damascus and Aleppo.Hundreds of elite British SAS specialists operate in Syria alongside US and French units. The operation is commanded from NATO ships in the Turkish port of Alexandretta. The strike force consists of an army of Islamic groups from Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, Libya and other countries.
The weapons arrive via an international network organised by the CIA, which supplies them to groups infiltrated into Syria, who have already been trained in camps set up on Turkish and Jordanian territory. The operation was directed from the advanced headquarters of the US Central Command at the Al Udeid airbase in Qatar. At this point, in 2015, Moscow decided to intervene directly in support of the Syrian army, at the request of Damascus. The intervention, carried out with air power, showed that the US-led “anti-ISIS coalition” was pretending to fight ISIS. In just over two years, the Russian-Syrian coalition has liberated about three-quarters of the country’s territory that had fallen into the hands of ISIS and other US-backed movements.
In 2016, al-Jolani formally severed ties with al-Qaeda and renamed the group Jabhat Fatah al-Sham, and later in 2017 Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS).
Under Jolani, HTS became the dominant force in Idlib, the largest ‘rebel’ stronghold in Northwestern Syria. With the support of Turkey in particular, al-Jolani’s faction is in preparation for a year-long operation in Syria. It is being armed through clandestine channels and trained by the Khimik special forces of Ukrainian intelligence.
After entering Syria on 8 November, al-Jolani’s armed Islamist faction advanced rapidly and captured Damascus on 7 December.
The Syrian army put up no significant resistance, a symptom of internal disintegration, as evidenced by the fact that while President Assad was given asylum in Russia, the Syrian embassy staff in Moscow hoisted the flag of the Islamist “rebels” who had just taken Damascus.
While the USA confirms that it is in contact with the “rebels” through Turkey, Israel seizes another piece of Syrian territory in the Golan Heights and carries out hundreds of so-called “defensive” air strikes against Syrian ports and airports. The seizure of Syria by these forces is a major blow both to Iran, which sees its front of resistance to the Israeli offensive in the Middle East, supported by the USA, NATO and the EU, weakened, and to Russia, which will almost certainly lose access to the Syrian port of Tartus, the only berth for its military ships in the Mediterranean, and risks the slowing down or interruption of the north-south transport corridor through the Middle East that allows it to bypass the blockade in the West.
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.
[This was first published by GR on August 12, 2013.]
***
The Korean war never really ended, of course. It was just put on hold. The war itself lasted three years from 1950 to 1953, with both sides — the ROK in the south backed primarily by the US, and the DPRK in the North with significant military support from communist China — storming across the 38th parallel dividing north and south, only to be beaten back after vicious fighting.
The armistice bringing an end to open hostilities between the combatants was signed on July 27, 1953 by US Army Lieutenant General William Harrison, Jr. and North Korean General Nam Il. It established the 38th parallel, originally created as the demarcation line between the US-occupied South and the Soviet-occupied North during the post-war US military command of Korea, as the official border between the North and South. It established a 2.5 mile wide buffer zone, known as the Demilitarized Zone or DMZ, which to this day remains the most heavily defended border in the world. And it committed both sides to pursuing negotiations in expectation of a peace treaty to formally end the war.
And yet even now, 60 years after the war concluded, no such peace treaty has been signed. Over 28,000 US troops are still deployed in South Korea, ready to resume combat with North Korea. And the Korean nation remains divided along an arbitrary line on a map, splitting families from their ancestral homelands and creating yet another rift in a nation that has been conquered, ruled, occupied and divided throughout much of its history.
On the surface, the casual observer of Korea could be forgiven for forgetting that the nation is still at war. The South has been utterly transformed since the days of the fighting, with the impressive skyline of modern-day Seoul reflecting the country’s modern, high-tech economy. Even the DMZ has been tamed and gentrified, with souvenir shops and tourist attractions mingling seamlessly with military personnel whose presence at times seems more ceremonial than operational.
But beneath that surface remains the deep, lingering scars of a nation divided against itself, and the memories of a bitter, brutal war. Now, 60 years after the signing of the armistice, Korean peace activists are working harder than ever to confront the myths that have propped up and maintained this state of war, spearheading an effort to finally bring real peace to the Korean peninsula.
One such initiative was a recent international symposium which brought together peace activists, scholars, journalists and concerned citizens to events in Seoul, Pyongyang and Tokyo, all with the aim of confronting the enabling myths of the Korean war and working toward a peace treaty. The symposium took place around the 60th anniversary of the armistice and included the participation of Unified Progressive Party leader Jung Hee Lee and the Korean Alliance for Progressive Movements, as well as scholars like Professor Michel Chossudovsky of the Centre for Research on Globalization, Professor Kiyul Chung of Tsinghua University in Beijing, journalist Xiong Lei of CCTV in China, activist Brian Becker of the ANSWER Coalition in Washington, and former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark.
Some of the myths that this symposium worked to deconstruct included the fundamental myth of the legitimacy of the war itself. The war effort in the South has long been characterized as a UN-led effort taking place under a United Nations Command that was authorized by UN Security Council Resolution 83. The legitimacy of this resolution has been challenged on several levels. In direct violation of Article 32 of the UN Charter, North Korea was not invited to participate in the Security Council deliberations on the dispute. The conflict was beyond the scope of UN action, as the North-South border skirmishes that drew UN attention was a civil war, and thus an internal matter beyond the mandate of UN intervention. And the Soviet Union boycotted the Security Council resolution, invalidating the action in the eyes of many legal scholars.
Even more fundamentally, the UN never in fact established a formal United Nations Command for the fighting. Security Council resolution 83 merely called on member states to provide assistance to the South Koreans, but the so-called UN Command was always primarily a US military effort, a point conceded by former UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali.
The nuclear threat to the Korean peninsula was also a topic of discussion. Completely counter to the western narrative, however, which posits North Korea’s estimated six to eight nuclear devices and lack of intercontinental delivery system as some sort of existential threat to the United States, attendees stressed that the real nuclear threat is and always has come from Washington.
Given these facts, and given its history of scuttling attempts at serious peace negotiations, consensus at the symposium emerged around the notion that Washington and its 28,000 in country troops is the single greatest impediment to peace on the Korean peninsula.
As part of the events marking the 60th anniversary of the armistice, the symposium mounted a protest at the doorstep of the Demilitarized Zone, including speeches from a range of international speakers, and a march and rally outside the Yongsan US Army Garrison in central Seoul. The days events culminated in a candlelight vigil that drew 20,000 people out to Seoul Plaza for an overwhelming display of solidarity amongst Koreans truly interested in peace and reunification.
As this anniversary passes and another year without peace in Korea is added to the calendar, the Korean people increasingly take up the mantle of beginning the process of healing by themselves. It will be a long and difficult road, complicated by interference from all of the outside parties with a stake in using the Korean war as an excuse to militarize the region, but for this very reason it is important that peace is not delayed any longer. The people of Korea, the people of the Asia-Pacific, and indeed the people of the world, can’t wait any longer.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Tedros “is at it again”. OnAugust 14, 2024, the WHO Director General called for A SECOND mpox virus Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).
The justification is an alleged “major outbreak” of mpox in the Democratic Republic of the Congo DRC), which according to the WHO has spread to neighbouring countries.
What is now at stake are TWO Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEIC), respectively in July 2022 and August 2024. Both of these PHEIC are based on Fake Data.
The August 2024 PHEIC has acknowledged and incorporated the thrust of the statement of Director General of the WHO Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus’ formulated on July 23, 2022. Tedros’ historic statement points to:
“an outbreak that is concentrated among men who have sex with men” (MSM)
Whereas the August 14, 2024 PHEIC pertains to the Alleged spread of mpox in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and neighbouring countries, the emergency mpox vaccine measures envisaged by Western governments pertain to the Male Sex Male Group. In the UK, the vaccine program is intended solely for the Male Sex Male (MSM) group.
“Vaccinations for mpox – previously known as monkeypox – are currently available in the UK in London and Manchester, with two groups eligible for the jab according to the NHS.
The first is men who are gay, bisexual, or have sex with other men, and who have multiple partners, participate in group sex, or attend sex-on-premises venues.
The second is staff who work at sex-on-premises venues.”
For an updated analysis focussing on the August 14, 2024 Monkeypox Crisis which consists of a decision by the WHO Director General Dr. Tedros’ to call for A Second PHEIC
(article below)
Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, August 22, 2024
(August 1, 2022, one small change [. ] made to this article)
Something weird is happening at WHO headquarters in Geneva. On Saturday, July 23, 2022, WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus held a press conference in which he declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) pertaining to the monkeypox virus.
Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, took this decision unilaterally against a majority vote of the Second Meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) Emergency Committee (9 against, 6 in favor) held on Thursday, 21 July 2022, in Geneva (from 12:00 noon to 19:00pm Geneva Time CEST), two days prior to Dr. Tedros’s Press Conference which was held on Saturday, 23 July 2022:
Did Tedros have the support of his colleagues? Is he in conflict of interest? According to Bloomberg:
“The declaration from Tedros … underscores divisions within the organization over the severity of the threat. The pathogen typically causes flu-like symptoms, followed by a rash that often starts on the face and spreads down the belly. (Bloomberg, emphasis added)
What Bloomberg failed to mention is Dr. Tedros’s Bombshell Statement:
“An outbreak that is concentrated among men who have sex with men”:
“Although I [Tedros] am declaring a public health emergency of international concern, for the moment this is an outbreak that is concentrated among men who have sex with men, especially those with multiple sexual partners.
That means that this is an outbreak that can be stopped with the right strategies in the right groups.
It’s therefore essential that all countries work closely with communities of men who have sex with men, to design and deliver effective information and services, and to adopt measures that protect the health, human rights and dignity of affected communities.
Stigma and discrimination can be as dangerous as any virus.
In addition to our recommendations to countries, I am also calling on civil society organizations, including those with experience in working with people living with HIV, to work with us on fighting stigma and discrimination.
(emphasis added)
Where is the science? What are the implications?
Bear in mind that this was a personalized decision by Dr. Tedros, in defiance of the IHR Committee’ Decision NOT to implement a PHEIC on behalf of 194 member states of the WHO.
Does the above statement constitute an encroachment of the fundamental rights of the LGBT Community which is currently the object of the emergency measures? In the words of the IHR Emergency Committee report cited below: “interventions [are] targeted to this segment of the population [LGBT].”
The calling of a PHEIC has already opened up a Pandora’s box.
Video: Michel Chossudovsky and Peter Koenig on the WHO Monkeypox Agenda
With thanks to Stephen Frost, Webinar presentation, recorded on August 2, 2022
***
Before proceeding with a careful review of the WHO report, a few words on the “unspoken history” of this unfolding monkeypox pandemic
Brief Timeline (2017-2022)
February 2017: Bill Gates’s warning of bioterrorism involving a “synthetic version of the smallpox virus” (Munich Security Conference, February 2017)
December 2020: The Expert Planning of A Tabletop Simulation of a Monkeypox Virus Pandemic by the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), a nonprofit organization, founded by former U.S. Sen. Sam Nunn and philanthropist billionaire Ted Turner.
March 2021: The NTI Table Top Simulation which portrays a “fictional exercise scenario of a deadly, global pandemic involving an unusual strain of monkeypox virus” (Munich Security Conference, March 2021)
May 5, 2022: Beginning of the alleged “real time outbreak”. First monkeypox reported by the U.K. to the WHO.
May 15, 2022: Marks the commencement of the monkeypox epidemic in the NTI “Simulated Scenario” (presented to the Munich Security Conference in March 2021), leading up to January 2023 (83 countries affected) with 70 million confirmed cases and 1.3 million deaths. (See below)
July 23, 2022: The WHO Director-General Dr.Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesuslaunches a Worldwide Monkeypox Health Emergency (PHEIC)
For further details on the Timeline and Simulated Scenario see:
The Questionable 99% “Estimate”. The Emergency Committee Meeting, July 21, 2022 in Geneva
There is a long history of viral transmission pertaining to the monkeypox pathogen going back to the 1950s. The man to man transmission (MSM) is not corroborated by peer reviewed reports published prior to the May 2022 outbreak.
The report provides details on the thrust of the WHO Director-General’s decision to launch a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), focussing on the incidence of the monkeypox virus on “bisexual, gay and men who have sex with men”. Of significance, the members of this Committee (21 July 2022) turned down Dr. Tedros proposal to launch the PHEIC.
Below are selected and summarized quotations of a rather long document. Read carefully (the meeting in Geneva lasted for five hours):
“The majority of reported cases of monkeypox currently are in males, and most of these cases occur among males who identified themselves as gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM), in urban areas, and are clustered in social and sexual networks.
There has also been a significant rise in the number of cases in countries in West and Central Africa, with an apparent difference in the demographic profile maintained than that observed in Europe and the Americas, with more women and children amongst the cases.
The genome sequence of the virus obtained in several countries shows some divergence from the West African clade.
Representatives of Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada and Nigeria updated the Committee (in this order) on the epidemiological situation in their countries and their current response efforts. With the exception of Nigeria, the remaining four countries reported that 99% of cases were occurring in MSM, and mainly among those with multiple partners.
[The statements were not based statistical evidence. The 99% was a “political endorsement” by the representatives from Spain, UK, US, Canada. The 99% MSM is Fake. This sentence was added to the article on August 22, 2024]
The vaccine strategy is targeted and aims to interrupt transmission through post-exposure prophylaxis and pre-exposure prophylaxis among MSM at highest risk.
In the United States, cases of monkeypox are widely distributed across the country, although most cases are concentrated in three large cities. While a few cases have occurred in children and a pregnant woman, 99% are related to male-to-male sexual contact.
In Canada, 99% of cases have occurred among MSM, and the country is taking a broad approach to pre-exposure prophylaxis, given the challenges with contact tracing; and is strongly focused on engagement with community-led organizations supporting key affected populations groups.
Nigeria recorded a little over 800 cases of monkeypox between September 2017 and 10 July 2022 and has seen at 3% case fatality ratio among confirmed cases. Cases are predominantly in men aged 31 to 40 years; there was no evidence of sexual transmission presented. The highest number of annually reported cases since 2017 has been observed in 2022.”
“The moral duty to deploy all means and tools available to respond to the event, as highlighted by leaders of the LGBTI+ communities from several countries, bearing in mind that the community currently most affected outside Africa is the same initially reported to be affected in the early stages of HIV/AIDS pandemic;
The vast majority of cases are observed among MSM with multiple partners, and, despite the operational challenges, there is the opportunity to stop ongoing transmission with interventions targeted to this segment of the population. Cases observed beyond this population group, including among health workers are, to date, limited; …”
(emphasis added)
Fake Science: Flawed PCR Test “Detects” Monkeypox Virus
The WHO document does not provide relevant sources (pertaining to scientific analysis) nor the data on the alleged monkeypox “confirmed cases”.
What the WHO confirms is that the flawed RT-PCR test was the basis of monkeypox data collection and tabulation (since early May) (see below).
On June 6, 2022, barely two weeks before Dr. Tedros’s Press announcement, the CDC issued the following advisory:
“This [RT-PCR] assay detects DNA at varying concentrations, providing a qualitative result of either positive, negative, or inconclusive in the identification of Monkeypox virus infections.” (CDC)
It sounds contradictory: on December 31, 2021, the CDC declared that the PCR test was invalid pertaining to SARS-CoV-2 (unauthorized by the FDA). According to the CDC advisory (acknowledging the failures of the RT-PCR test):
“CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza”.
Let’s not get things mixed up: Versatility of the RT-PCR test. “Anything Goes”.
If you test RT-PCR positive for COVID-19, it may be “mistakenly” tabulated as a “positive” Monkeypox virus infection. How convenient. The PCR positives are then assigned to the monkeypox (“confirmed cases”).
SARS-CoV-2, Influenza, Corona common cold, and now the monkeypox. The PCR test is also being applied to detect the “dangerous” COVID Omicron variants and the BA4 and BA5 sub-variants.
The WHO Report: Invalid Results Derived from Biased Sample?
Were random sample surveys undertaken which corroborate “man to man” (MSM) transmission as outlined by Dr. Tedros in his Press Conference on July 23, 2022? Were women and children included in a random sample procedure?
How is it that MSM male to male sexual transmission is “99% of the cases” in the US, UK, Spain and Canada, while in Nigeria among 800 cases recorded over a five year period, there was not a single case of MSM sexual transmission?
The answer is obvious: the Nigerian data was recorded based on a medical diagnosis of patients over a five year period, whereas the figures pertaining to the US, UK, Canada, Spain were most probably derived from a biased sample, confirmed by a totally invalid PCR Test.
Confirmed in the report: “The 99% of the confirmed cases” were also based on statements by the representatives of those four countries at the IHR Emergency Committee Meeting. Dr. Demetre Daskalakis of the CDC (US) and Dr. Theresa Tam of Health Canada (both advisors to the IHR Committee) were present (see list of members).
Similarly, the report admits that in West and Central Africa there were “more women and children amongst the cases”, whereas as in Europe and North America, the confirmed cases are almost exclusively MSM men.
The report also refers to a monkeypox vaccine specifically for “men who have sex with men, especially those with multiple sexual partners.”
Were these 99% MSM confirmed cases the object of a medical diagnosis, i.e. flu-like symptoms, rashes on the face and the body? Or was it just a PCR test and a biased sample?
The statements in this report are not corroborated. The WHO does not outline its methodology.
From a scientific and statistical standpoint, it does not make sense.
What is the intent?
“Pandemic Preparedness”?
A fear campaign which targets the LGBT community, creating social divisions?
A monkeypox vaccine is already in the pipeline. Governments had already placed orders for the delivery of smallpox vaccines effective against monkeypox.
On May 18, 2022, less than two weeks following the announcement by the WHO, the US government had already signed a contract with Bavaria Nordic consisting of an order of “millions of doses of a vaccine that protects against the virus” (Forbes).
The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) Article First Published on Thursday, 21st of July
An important article entitled Monkeypox Virus Infection in Humans across 16 Countries — April-June 2022 was released on Thursday 21st, 2022.
The NEJM study wascoordinated by the Share HIV research team at the University of London. No doubt, the NEJM article (published on July 21st) was made available to the WHO as well as to members of the NIH Emergency Committee who were meeting on that same day.
The methodology applied by the Share Group appears to be similar to that of the WHO. The empirical results (confirmed cases) of a biased sample are: “98% of the persons with infection were gay or bisexual men, 75% were White”, using the RT-PCR test applied to the monkeypox virus.
Most of the patients in the “sample” already had a record of HIV and/or sexually transmitted infections (STI). We are not dealing with a random sample.
The authors refer to a “convenience sample” whereby data is collected in collaboration with 43 participating entities in 16 countries most of which are involved in the treatment and research in HIV and sexually transmitted diseases.
Designated patients were recruited for the “sample”, a large percentage of whom already had HIV and/or STI, etc.
We report 528 infections diagnosed between April 27 and June 24, 2022, at 43 sites in 16 countries. Overall, 98% of the persons with infection were gay or bisexual men, 75% were White, and 41% had human immunodeficiency virus infection; the median age was 38 years. Transmission was suspected to have occurred through sexual activity in 95% of the persons with infection. (emphasis added)
The designated patients were submitted to take:
“a laboratory-confirmed monkeypox virus infection defined by a positive result on monkeypox virus polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) assay in a specimen from any anatomical site”.
It’s “a biased sample” using an invalid test (aka RT-PCR).
Most of the patients who tested positive in the “PCR monkeypox assay were ALREADY de facto HIV and/or STI cases, leading to the “corroborating” FALSE statement pari passu that monkeypox is a sexually transmitted disease.
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, che di fatto detiene oggi il potere a Damasco, ha una storia eloquente: inizia la sua militanza jihadista nelle file al-Qaeda quale collaboratore di Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, il “califfo” che nel 2013 fonda l’ISIS, lo “Stato Islamico dell’Iraq e della Siria”. Nel 2011, durante la fase preparatoria, al-Baghdadi lo invia in Siria con grossi fondi per creare il Fronte al-Nusra, fazione formalmente autonoma ma in realtà appartenente allo Stato Islamico. La fazione di al-Jolani partecipa fin dalla sua nascita all’operazione USA-NATO per demolire lo Stato Siriano. Una delle ragioni di tale operazione è il fatto che Siria, Iran e Iraq avevano firmato nel luglio 2011 un accordo per un gasdotto che avrebbe dovuto collegare il giacimento iraniano di South Pars, il maggiore del mondo, alla Siria e quindi al Mediterraneo e all’Europa, creando un corridoio energetico alternativo a quelli attraverso la Turchia e altri percorsi, controllati dalle compagnie statunitensi ed europee.
La guerra coperta in Siria inizia con una serie di attentati terroristici, effettuati soprattutto a Damasco ed Aleppo. Centinata di specialisti delle forze d’élite britanniche SAS operano in Siria, insieme a unità statunitensi e francesi. Il comando delle operazioni è a bordo di navi NATO nel porto di Alessandretta in Turchia. La forza d’urto è costituita da una armata di gruppi islamici provenienti da Afghanistan, Bosnia, Cecenia, Libia e altri paesi. Le armi arrivano attraverso una rete internazionale organizzata dalla CIA, che le fornisce ai gruppi infiltrati in Siria, già addestrati in campi allestiti in territorio turco e giordano. L’operazione viene diretta dal quartier generale avanzato del Comando Centrale USA nella base aerea qatariana di Al Udeid. A questo punto Mosca decide nel 2015, su richiesta di Damasco, di intervenire direttamente a sostegno dell’esercito siriano. L’intervento, effettuato con forze aeree, dimostra che la “Coalizione anti-ISIS»” a guida USA faceva finta di combattere l’ISIS. In poco più di due anni la coalizione russo-siriana libera circa i tre quarti del territorio nazionale, caduti in mano all’ISIS e altri movimenti sostenuti dagli USA.
Nel 2016 al-Jolani interrompe formalmente i legami con al-Qaeda, ribattezzando il gruppo come Jabhat Fatah al-Sham e successivamente come Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) nel 2017. Sotto Jolani, l’HTS diventa la forza dominante a Idlib, la più grande roccaforte dei “ribelli” nel Nord-Ovest della Siria. Sostenuta in particolare dalla Turchia, la fazione di al-Jolani si prepara per un anno all’operazione in Siria. Viene a tale scopo armata attraverso canali segreti e addestrata dalle forze speciali Khimik dell’Intelligence Ucraina. Penetrata in Siria l’8 novembre, la fazione armata islamista di al-Jolani avanza rapidamente conquistando Damasco il 7 dicembre. L’esercito siriano non oppone alcuna significativa resistenza, sintomo di una disgregazione interna comprovata dal fatto che, mentre il presidente Assad riceve asilo in Russia, il personale dell’Ambasciata siriana a Mosca issa la bandiera dei “ribelli” islamisti che hanno appena conquistato Damasco.
Mentre gli Stati Uniti confermano di essere in contatto con i “ribelli “attraverso la Turchia, Israele si impadronisce di un altro pezzo di territorio siriano sulle Alture del Golan ed effettua centinaia di attacchi aerei, definiti “difensivi”, contro porti e aeroporti siriani. La conquista della Siria da parte di queste forze costituisce un duro colpo sia per l’Iran, che vede indebolirsi il fronte di resistenza all’offensiva israeliana in Medioriente sostenuta da USA, NATO e UE, sia per la Russia che quasi sicuramente perde l’accesso al porto siriano di Tartus, unico attracco per le sue navi militari nel Mediterraneo, e rischia il rallentamento o l’interruzione del Corridoio di Trasporto Nord-Sud che, attraverso il Medioriente , le permette di aggirare il blocco a Ovest.
This carefully researched article by Mahdi Nazemroayawas first published by Global Research 13 years ago in November 2011
**
The name “Arab Spring” is a catch phrase concocted in distant offices in Washington, London, Paris, and Brussels by individuals and groups who, other than having some superficial knowledge of the region, know very little about the Arabs. What is unfolding amongst the Arab peoples is naturally a mixed package. Insurgency is part of this package as is opportunism. Where there is revolution, there is always counter-revolution.
The upheavals in the Arab World are not an Arab “awakening” either; such a term implies that the Arabs have always been sleeping while dictatorship and injustice has been surrounding them.
In reality the Arab World, which is part of the broader Turko-Arabo-Iranic World, has been filled with frequent revolts that have been put down by the Arab dictators in coordination with countries like the United States, Britain, and France. It has been the interference of these powers that has always acted as a counter-balance to democracy and it will continue to do so.
Divide and Conquer: How the First “Arab Spring” was Manipulated
The plans for reconfiguring the Middle East started several years before the First World War. It was during the First World War, however, that the manifestation of these colonial designs could visibly be seen with the “Great Arab Revolt” against the Ottoman Empire.
Despite the fact that the British, French, and Italians were colonial powers which had prevented the Arabs from enjoying any freedom in countries like Algeria, Libya, Egypt, and Sudan, these colonial powers managed to portray themselves as the friends and allies of Arab liberation.
During the “Great Arab Revolt” the British and the French actually used the Arabs as foot soldiers against the Ottomans to further their own geo-political schemes. The secret Sykes–Picot Agreement between London and Paris is a case in point. France and Britain merely managed to use and manipulate the Arabs by selling them the idea of Arab liberation from the so-called “repression” of the Ottomans.
In reality, the Ottoman Empire was a multi-ethnic empire. It gave local and cultural autonomy to all its peoples, but was manipulated into the direction of becoming a Turkish entity.
Even the Armenian Genocide that would ensue in Ottoman Anatolia has to be analyzed in the same context as the contemporary targeting of Christians in Iraq as part of a sectarian scheme unleashed by external actors to divide the Ottoman Empire, Anatolia, and the citizens of the Ottoman Empire.
After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, it was London and Paris which denied freedom to the Arabs, while sowing the seeds of discord amongst the Arab peoples. Local corrupt Arab leaders were also partners in the project and many of them were all too happy to become clients of Britain and France. In the same sense, the “Arab Spring” is being manipulated today. The U.S., Britain, France, and others are now working with the help of corrupt Arab leaders and figures to restructure the Arab World and Africa.
The Yinon Plan: Order from Chaos…
The Yinon Plan, which is a continuation of British stratagem in the Middle East, is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.
Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge from an Arab state. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one for Shiite Muslims and the other for Sunni Muslims. The first step towards establishing this was a war between Iraq and Iran, which the Yinon Plan discusses.
The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, which the Biden Plan also calls for, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The partitioning of Iran, Turkey, Somalia, and Pakistan also all fall into line with these views. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.
Securing the Realm: Redefining the Arab World…
Although tweaked, the Yinon Plan is in motion and coming to life under the “Clean Break.” This is through a policy document written in 1996 by Richard Perle and the Study Group on “A New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000” for Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel at the time.
Perle was a former Pentagon under-secretary for Roland Reagan at the time and later a U.S. military advisor to George W. Bush Jr. and the White House.
Aside from Perle, the rest of the members of the Study Group on “A New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000” consisted of James Colbert (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs), Charles Fairbanks Jr. (Johns Hopkins University), Douglas Feith (Feith and Zell Associates), Robert Loewenberg (Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies), Jonathan Torop (The Washington Institute for Near East Policy), David Wurmser (Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies), and Meyrav Wurmser (Johns Hopkins University).
A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm is the full name of this 1996 Israel policy paper.
In many regards, the U.S. is executing the objectives outlined in Tel Aviv’s 1996 policy paper to secure the “realm.” Moreover, the term “realm” implies the strategic mentality of the authors.
A realm refers to either the territory ruled by a monarch or the territories that fall under a monarch’s reign, but are not physically under their control and have vassals running them. In this context, the word realm is being used to denote the Middle East as the kingdom of Tel Aviv. The fact that Perle, someone who has essentially been a career Pentagon official, helped author the Israeli paper also makes one ask if the conceptualized sovereign of the realm is either Israel, the United States, or both?
Securing the Realm: The Israeli Blueprints to Destabilize Damascus
The 1996 Israeli document calls for “rolling back Syria” sometime around the year 2000 or afterward by pushing the Syrians out of Lebanon and destabilizing the Syrian Arab Republic with the help of Jordan and Turkey. This has respectively taken place in 2005 and 2011.
The 1996 document states:
“Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions.” [1]
As a first step towards creating an Israeli-dominated “New Middle East” and encircling Syria, the 1996 document calls for removing President Saddam Hussein from power in Baghdad and even alludes to the balkanization of Iraq and forging a strategic regional alliance against Damascus that includes a Sunni Muslim “Central Iraq.” The authors write:
“But Syria enters this conflict with potential weaknesses: Damascus is too preoccupied with dealing with the threatened new regional equation to permit distractions of the Lebanese flank. And Damascus fears that the ‘natural axis’ with Israel on one side, central Iraq and Turkey on the other, and Jordan, in the center would squeeze and detach Syria from the Saudi Peninsula.
For Syria, this could be the prelude to a redrawing of the map of the Middle East which would threaten Syria’s territorial integrity.” [2]
Perle and the Study Group on “A New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000” also call for driving the Syrians out of Lebanon and destabilizing Syria by using Lebanese opposition figures.
The document states:
“[Israel must divert] Syria’s attention by using Lebanese opposition elements to destabilize Syrian control of Lebanon.” [3] This is what would happen in 2005 after the Hariri Assassination that helped launch the so-called “Cedar Revolution” and create the vehemently anti-Syrian March 14 Alliance controlled by the corrupt Said Hariri.
The document also calls for Tel Aviv to “take [the] opportunity to remind the world of the nature of the Syrian regime.” [4]
This clearly falls into the Israeli strategy of demonizing its opponents through using public relations (PR) campaigns. In 2009, Israeli news media openly admitted that Tel Aviv through its embassies and diplomatic missions had launched a global campaign to discredit the Iranian presidential elections before they even took place through a media campaign and organizing protests in front of Iranian embassies. [5]
The document also mentions something that resembles what is currently going on in Syria. It states:
“Most important, it is understandable that Israel has an interest supporting diplomatically, militarily and operationally Turkey’s and Jordan’s actions against Syria, such as securing tribal alliances with Arab tribes that cross into Syrian territory and are hostile to the Syrian ruling elite.” [6]
With the 2011 upheaval in Syria, the movement of insurgents and the smuggling of weapons through the Jordanian and Turkish borders has become a major problem for Damascus.
In this context, it is no surprise that Arial Sharon and Israel told Washington to attack Syria, Libya, and Iran after the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. [7] Finally, it is worth knowing that the Israeli document also advocated for pre-emptive war to shape Israel’s geo-strategic environment and to carve out the “New Middle East.” [8] This is a policy that the U.S. would also adopt in 2001.
The Eradication of the Christian Communities of the Middle East
It is no coincidence that Egyptian Christians were attacked at the same time as the South Sudan Referendum and before the crisis in Libya.
Nor is it a coincidence that Iraqi Christians, one of the world’s oldest Christian communities, have been forced into exile, leaving their ancestral homelands in Iraq.
Coinciding with the exodus of Iraqi Christians, which occurred under the watchful eyes of U.S. and British military forces, the neighbourhoods in Baghdad became sectarian as Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims were forced by violence and death squads to form sectarian enclaves. This is all tied to the Yinon Plan and the reconfiguration of the region as part of a broader objective.
In Iran, the Israelis have been trying in vain to get the Iranian Jewish community to leave.
Iran’s Jewish population is actually the second largest in the Middle East and arguably the oldest undisturbed Jewish community in the world.
Iranian Jews view themselves as Iranians who are tied to Iran as their homeland, just like Muslim and Christian Iranians, and for them the concept that they need to relocate to Israel because they are Jewish is ridiculous.
In Lebanon, Israel has been working to exacerbate sectarian tensions between the various Christian and Muslim factions as well as the Druze.
Lebanon is a springboard into Syria and the division of Lebanon into several states is also seen as a means for balkanizing Syria into several smaller sectarian Arab states.
The objectives of the Yinon Plan are to divide Lebanon and Syria into several states on the basis of religious and sectarian identities for Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims, Christians, and the Druze. There could also be objectives for a Christian exodus in Syria too.
The new head of the Maronite Catholic Syriac Church of Antioch, the largest of the autonomous Eastern Catholic Churches, has expressed his fears about a purging of Arab Christians in the Levant and Middle East.
Patriarch Mar Beshara Boutros Al-Rahi and many other Christian leaders in Lebanon and Syria are afraid of a Muslim Brotherhood takeover in Syria. Like Iraq, mysterious groups are now attacking the Christian communities in Syria. The leaders of the Christian Eastern Orthodox Church, including the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem, have also all publicly expressed their grave concerns. Aside from the Christian Arabs, these fears are also shared by the Assyrian and Armenian communities, which are mostly Christian.
Sheikh Al-Rahi was recently in Paris where he met President Nicolas Sarkozy. It is reported that the Maronite Patriarch and Sarkozy had disagreements about Syria, which prompted Sarkozy to say that the Syrian regime will collapse. Patriarch Al-Rahi’s position was that Syria should be left alone and allowed to reform.
The Maronite Patriarch also told Sarkozy that Israel needed to be dealt with as a threat if France legitimately wanted Hezbollah to disarm.
Because of his position in France, Al-Rahi was instantly thanked by the Christian and Muslim religious leaders of the Syrian Arab Republic who visited him in Lebanon.
Hezbollah and its political allies in Lebanon, which includes most the Christian parliamentarians in the Lebanese Parliament, also lauded the Maronite Patriarch who later went on a tour to South Lebanon.
Sheikh Al-Rahi is now being politically attacked by the Hariri-led March 14 Alliance, because of his stance on Hezbollah and his refusal to support the toppling of the Syrian regime. A conference of Christian figures is actually being planned by Hariri to oppose Patriarch Al-Rahi and the stance of the Maronite Church. Since Al-Rahi announced his position, the Tahrir Party, which is active in both Lebanon and Syria, has also started targeting him with criticism. It has also been reported that high-ranking U.S. officials have also cancelled their meetings with the Maronite Patriarch as a sign of their displeasure about his positions on Hezbollah and Syria.
The Hariri-led March 14 Alliance in Lebanon, which has always been a popular minority (even when it was a parliamentary majority), has been working hand-in-hand with the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the groups using violence and terrorism in Syria. The Muslim Brotherhood and other so-called Salafist groups from Syria have been coordinating and holding secret talks with Hariri and the Christian political parties in the March 14 Alliance. This is why Hariri and his allies have turned on Cardinal Al-Rahi. It was also Hariri and the March 14 Alliance that brought Fatah Al-Islam into Lebanon and have now helped some of its members escape to go and fight in Syria.
There are unknown snippers who are targeting Syrian civilians and the Syrian Army with a view of causing chaos and internal fighting. The Christian communities in Syria are also being targeted by unknown groups. It is very likely that the attackers are a coalition of U.S., French, Jordanian, Israeli, Turkish, Saudi, and Khalij (Gulf) Arab forces working with some Syrians on the inside.
A Christian exodus is being planned for the Middle East by Washington, Tel Aviv, and Brussels. It has been reported that Sheikh Al-Rahi was told in Paris by President Nicolas Sarkozy that the Christian communities of the Levant and Middle East can resettle in the European Union. This is no gracious offer.
It is a slap in the face by the same powers that have deliberately created the conditions to eradicate the ancient Christian communities of the Middle East. The aim appears to be either the resettling of the Christian communities outside of the region or demarcate them into enclaves. Both could be objectives.
This project is meant to delineate the Arab nations along the lines of being exclusively Muslim nations and falls into accordance with both the Yinon Plan and the geo-political objectives of the U.S. to control Eurasia. A major war may be its outcome. Arab Christians now have a lot in common with black-skinned Arabs.
Re-Dividing Africa: The Yinon Plan is very Much Alive and at Work…
In regards to Africa, Tel Aviv sees securing Africa as part of its broader periphery. This broader or so-called “new periphery” became a basis of geo-strategy for Tel Aviv after 1979 when the “old periphery” against the Arabs that included Iran, which was one of Israel’s closest allies during the Pahlavi period, buckled and collapsed with the 1979 Iranian Revolution. In this context, Israel’s “new periphery” was conceptualized with the inclusion of countries like Ethiopia, Uganda, and Kenya against the Arab states and the Islamic Republic of Iran. This is why Israel has been so deeply involved in the balkanization of Sudan.
In the same context as the sectarian divisions in the Middle East, the Israelis have outlined plans to reconfigure Africa. The Yinon Plan seeks to delineate Africa on the basis of three facets: (1) ethno-linguistics; (2) skin-colour; and, finally, (3) religion. To secure the realm, it also so happens that the the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS), the Israeli think-tank that included Perle, also pushed for the creating of the Pentagon’s U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM).
An attempt to separate the merging point of an Arab and African identity is underway. It seeks to draw dividing lines in Africa between a so-called “Black Africa” and a supposedly “non-Black” North Africa. This is part of a scheme to create a schism in Africa between what are assumed to be “Arabs” and so-called “Blacks.”
This objective is why the ridiculous identity of an “African South Sudan” and an “Arab North Sudan” have been nurtured and promoted. This is also why black-skinned Libyans have been targeted in a campaign to “colour cleanse” Libya. The Arab identity in North Africa is being de-linked from its African identity. Simultaneously there is an attempt to eradicate the large populations of “black-skinned Arabs” so that there is a clear delineation between “Black Africa” and a new “non-Black” North Africa, which will be turned into a fighting ground between the remaining “non-Black” Berbers and Arabs.
In the same context, tensions are being fomented between Muslims and Christians in Africa, in such places as Sudan and Nigeria, to further create lines and fracture points. The fuelling of these divisions on the basis of skin-colour, religion, ethnicity, and language is intended to fuel disassociation and disunity in Africa. This is all part of a broader African strategy of cutting North Africa off from the rest of the African continent.
Preparing the Chessboard for the “Clash of Civilizations”
It is at this point that all the pieces have to be put together and the dots have to be connected.
The chessboard is being staged for a “Clash of Civilizations” and all the chess pieces are being put into place.
The Arab World is in the process of being cordoned off and sharp delineation lines are being created.
These lines of delineation are replacing the seamless lines of transition between different ethno-linguistic, skin-colour, and religious groups.
Under this scheme, there can no longer be a melding transition between societies and countries. This is why the Christians in the Middle East and North Africa, such as the Copts, are being targeted. This is also why black-skinned Arabs and black-skinned Berbers, as well as other North African population groups which are black-skinned, are facing genocide in North Africa.
After Iraq and Egypt, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and the Syrian Arab Republic are both important points of regional destabilization in North Africa and Southeast Asia respectively. What happens in Libya will have rippling effects on Africa, as what happens in Syria will have rippling effects on Southeast Asia and beyond. Both Iraq and Egypt, in connection with what the Yinon Plan states, have acted as primers for the destabilization of both these Arab states.
What is being staged is the creation of an exclusively “Muslim Middle East” area (excluding Israel) that will be in turmoil over Shiite-Sunni fighting. A similar scenario is being staged for a “non-Black North Africa” area which will be characterized by a confrontation between Arabs and Berber. At the same time, under the “Clash of Civilizations” model, the Middle East and North Africa are slated to simultaneously be in conflict with the so-called “West” and “Black Africa.”
This is why both Nicolas Sarzoky, in France, and David Cameron, in Britain, made back-to-back declarations during the start of the conflict in Libya that multiculturalism is dead in their respective Western European societies. [9] Real multiculturalism threatens the legitimacy of the NATO war agenda. It also constitutes an obstacle to the implementation of the “Clash of Civilizations” which constitutes the cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy.
In this regard, Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. National Security Advisor, explains why multiculturalism is a threat to Washington and its allies:
“[A]s America becomes an increasingly multicultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues [e.g., war with the Arab World, China, Iran, or Russia and the former Soviet Union], except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.
Such a consensus generally existed throughout World War II and even during the Cold War [and exists now because of the ‘Global War on Terror’].” [10]
Brzezinski’s next sentence is the qualifier of why populations would oppose or support wars:
“[The consensus] was rooted, however, not only in deeply shared democratic values, which the public sensed were being threatened, but also in a cultural and ethnic affinity for the predominantly European victims of hostile totalitarianisms.” [11]
Risking being redundant, it has to be mentioned again that it is precisely with the intention of breaking these cultural affinities between the Middle East-North Africa (MENA) region and the so-called “Western World” and sub-Saharan Africa that Christians and black-skinned peoples are being targeted.
Ethnocentrism and Ideology: Justifying Today’s “Just Wars”
In the past, the colonial powers of Western Europe would indoctrinate their people. Their objective was to acquire popular support for colonial conquest. This took the form of spreading Christianity and promoting Christian values with the support of armed merchants and colonial armies.
At the same time, racist ideologies were put forth. The people whose lands were colonized were portrayed as “sub-human,” inferior, or soulless. Finally, the “White Man’s burden” of taking on a mission of civilizing the so-called “uncivilized peoples of the world” was used. This cohesive ideological framework was used to portray colonialism as a “just cause.” The latter in turn was used to provide legitimacy to the waging of “just wars” as a means to conquering and “civilizing” foreign lands.
Today, the imperialist designs of the United States, Britain, France, and Germany have not changed. What has changed is the pretext and justification for waging their neo-colonial wars of conquest. During the colonial period, the narratives and justifications for waging war were accepted by public opinion in the colonizing countries, such as Britain and France. Today’s “just wars” and “just causes” are now being conducted under the banners of women’s rights, human rights, humanitarianism, and democracy.
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is an award-winning writer from Ottawa, Canada. He is a Sociologist and Research Associate at the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal.
He was a witness to the “Arab Spring” in action in North Africa. While on the ground in Libya during the NATO bombing campaign he was Special Correspondent for the syndicated investigative KPFA program Flashpoints, which is aired from Berkeley, California.
NOTES
[1] Richard Perle et al., A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (Washington, D.C. and Tel Aviv: Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies), 1996. [2] Ibid. [3] Ibid. [4] Ibid. [5] Barak Ravid, “Israeli diplomats told to take offensive in PR war against Iran,” Haaretz, June 1, 2009. [6] Perle et al., Clean Break, op. cit. [7] Aluf Benn, “Sharon says U.S. should also disarm Iran, Libya and Syria,” Haaretz, September 30, 2009. [8] Richard Perle et al., Clean Break, op. cit. [9] Robert Marquand, “Why Europe is turning away from multiculturalism,” Christian Science Monitor, March 4, 2011. [10] Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (New York: Basic Books October 1997), p.211. [11] Ibid.
“Dangerous Times”: South Korean Defense Minister Just Nearly Caused Nuclear War
AI Translation into Korean.
Scroll down
“위험한 시대”: 한국 국방부 장관이 핵전쟁을 일으킬 뻔했다
한국어로의 AI 번역.
아래로 스크롤
To say that we live in dangerous times would be a gross understatement. The political West’s quest for global destabilization dominates its decision-making to the point of absurdity. However, the consequences of such actions are as serious as they could possibly be. The fate of the world hangs in the balance and even the most trivial event could plunge us all into the abyss. One would expect global leaders to be extra careful during such times, but it seems many of them are more careless than ever before. The recent political crisis and unrest in South Korea were largely sidelined by the ongoing events in Ukraine, Syria and elsewhere, but it seems they could’ve been just as consequential (if not more).
The current government has been escalating tensions not only with both of its neighbors, but also Russia. This is 100% in line with Washington DC’s policies, which explains its support for Yoon. Expectedly, South Koreans weren’t exactly thrilled with this turn of events, resulting in massive protests. Yoon narrowly dodged an impeachment after MPs from his People Power Party boycotted the vote in the National Assembly, but still got a travel ban from the Ministry of Justice. In the following days, there was a string of arrests, including of now former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun,who even tried to commit suicide while in custody, which is hardly surprising, considering what he tried to do.
Needless to say, risking possible war with a nuclear-armed North Korea in order to stay in power is beyond idiotic. However, that’s precisely what Yoon and his associates did, while the US saw it as an opportunity to ensure South Korea stays firmly in its orbit. Not to mention the added “benefit” of a possible war with Pyongyang, which is the wet dream of every warmonger, war criminal, kleptocrat and plutocrat in Washington DC. The plan to escalate tensions in East Asia might’ve been uncovered, but the situation remains volatile. The opposition announced it will go ahead with the second impeachment vote, but it needs a two-thirds majority to pass it. At the moment, they control 192 of the National Assembly’s 300 seats.
Technically speaking, Yoon is safe, as the opposition would need another eight votes held by MPs from the president’s People Power Party. However, it seems the party itself sees Yoon as a political liability, as its chairman Han Dong-hun said he’d support the vote. Although Yoon’s supporters within the party didn’t take this too kindly, especially after Han told them that the president’s remarks were “a confession of rebellion” (for which he was insulted and told to “shut up”), he might convince eight MPs to vote for the impeachment. Perhaps Han himself has certain political ambitions and Yoon is simply in the way. Still, the biggest issue is how constant instability in the political West is now becoming a security hazard.
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.
This article was originally published on InfoBrics.
Award winning author Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a research associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)
“위험한 시대”: 한국 국방부 장관이 핵전쟁을 일으킬 뻔했다
by
Drago Bosnic
AI Translation
한국어로의 AI 번역.
***
우리가 위험한 시대에 살고 있다고 말하는 것은 엄청난 과소평가일 것입니다 . 정치적 서구의 세계적 불안정화에 대한 추구는 터무니없는 지경 까지 의사 결정을 지배합니다 . 그러나 그러한 행동의 결과는 가능한 한 심각합니다. 세계의 운명이 균형을 이루고 있으며 가장 사소한 사건조차도 우리 모두를 심연에 빠뜨릴 수 있습니다. 그러한 시기에 세계 지도자들이 특별히 조심할 것으로 기대되지만 그들 중 많은 사람들이 그 어느 때보다 더 부주의한 것 같습니다. 최근 한국의 정치적 위기와 불안은 우크라이나, 시리아 및 기타 지역에서 진행 중인 사건으로 인해 대체로 무시되었지만 그보다 더 중대한 결과를 초래할 수 있었던 것 같습니다.
윤석열 대통령이 12월 3일에 선포한 계엄령은 시리아 정부의 사실상 동시적이고 충격적으로 빠른 붕괴만큼이나 신비롭고 예상치 못한 것이었습니다 . 더욱 이상한 것은 민주당의 그의 정치적 반대자들이 “북한에 동조”하고 “반란을 선동하는 반국가 활동을 지원한다”는 비난이었습니다. 윤은 계엄령이 “이런 뻔뻔한 친북 반국가 세력을 근절하기 위한 필요한 조치”라고 주장했습니다. 야당이 국회를 장악하는 것은 현직 대통령에게 중요한 문제이므로 , 그는 야당이 국회에 접근하는 것을 막으려고 했습니다. 윤이 선포한 계엄령은 그러한 행동에 대한 법적 근거를 갖기 위한 시도일 뿐이었습니다.
즉, 김용현은 북한의 공격을 유발하기 위해 평양에 무인기 무리를 발사하라고 명령했습니다. 윤 대통령은 이를 구실로 계엄령을 선포할 예정이었습니다 . 불명예스러운 국방장관이 스스로의 의지로 이를 행한 것이 아니라는 것은 분명합니다. 더 나쁜 것은 미국이 윤에게 북한 , 심지어 중국과의 긴장을 고조시키기 위해 작전을 시작하라고 명령했을 가능성이 매우 높다는 것입니다. 현직 대통령은 이제 또 다른 탄핵 투표(내일 예정)에 직면해 있습니다. 그는 권력을 유지하기 위해 치열하게 싸우겠다고 약속했는데 , 이는 미국의 지지를 보여주는 또 다른 지표이며, 전 국방장관의 역할은 또한 미국이 공모했다는 가장 설득력 있는 주장 중 하나입니다.
말할 것도 없이, 핵무장한 북한 과 전쟁을 일으킬 위험을 무릅쓰고 권력을 유지하는 것은 어리석은 짓을 넘어선 일입니다. 그러나 윤과 그의 동료들은 정확히 그렇게 했고, 미국은 그것을 한국이 자국 궤도에 굳건히 머물 수 있는 기회로 보았습니다. 워싱턴 DC에 있는 모든 호전적인 사람, 전범자, 횡령꾼, 부자들의 꿈인 평양과의 전쟁 가능성에 따른 “이점”은 말할 것도 없습니다 . 동아시아의 긴장을 고조시키려는 계획은 발각되었을지 모르지만, 상황은 여전히 불안정합니다. 야당은 2차 탄핵 투표를 진행하겠다고 발표했지만 , 통과시키려면 3분의 2의 다수가 필요합니다. 현재 그들은 국회 300석 중 192석을 장악하고 있습니다.
기술적으로 말하면, 윤은 안전합니다.야당은 대통령의 국민의힘 당 소속 의원이 보유한 8표를 더 필요로 하기 때문입니다.그러나 당 자체는 윤을 정치적 부담으로 보는 듯합니다. 한동훈 대표가 투표를 지지하겠다고 말했기 때문입니다.당내 윤의 지지자들은 이를 그다지 호의적으로 받아들이지 않았지만, 특히 한동훈이 대통령의 발언이 “반항의 고백”이라고 말한 후(그에 대해 모욕을 당하고 “닥쳐라”고 들었습니다) 8명의 의원이 탄핵에 찬성표를 던지도록 설득할 수도 있습니다.아마도 한동훈 자신이 어떤 정치적 야망을 가지고 있고 윤이 그저 방해가 되고 있을 것입니다.그래도 가장 큰 문제는 서방의 정치적 불안정성이 이제 어떻게 안보적 위험이 되고 있는가 하는 것입니다 .
Incoming US President Donald Trump is obsessed with imposing tariffs, believing this will resurrect the ailing economy. However, Trump faces the challenge that his reckless tariffs policy will only strengthen efforts to replace the US dollar as the global reserve currency, especially fearing a BRICS currency.
The latest report is that Israel has carried out 480 air strikes on territory of the former Syria and Israeli troops are moving deeper into the country. Netanyahu claims credit for Syria’s overthrow which he said is “a historic day in the history of the Middle East.” It certainly opens up the Middle East to Greater Israel.
Donald Trump’s defense secretary appointee Pete Hegseth is not only a “war hawk,” he is a “Third Temple cultist” who “wants war with Iran and Russia.” Hegseth says he is a Christian who believes Jesus will “return” once the “Third Temple” is built where the Dome of the Rock, also called the Al-Aqsa mosque compound, now sits on the Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem.
In this video interview, Prof. Michel Chossudovsky discusses with Drago Bosnic the history of the war in Syria. The video has the option of sub-titles in the following languages: English, French, Arabic, Farsi, Spanish, Turkish and Russian.
Yet another African state has broken its military agreements with the former colonial power of France. Chad, an oil-rich country bordering West and North Africa, has been a longtime ally of Paris plagued by decades of instability due to factional and regional disputes.
President-elect Donald Trump has made the news stating that Ukraine lost around 400,000 soldiers and “many more civilians” in its ongoing conflict with Russia since 2022. Posting on the Truth Social platform, he stated, on December 9, that this is “a war that should never have started, and could go on forever.”
The Biden administration has quietly extended a controversial “emergency declaration” under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act until December 31, 2029.
The Japan-ROK-U.S. Summit: Destructive Trilateral Military Alliance. “Expressway to the East-West War”
by Joseph Chung
일본- 한국 -미국 정상회담: 파괴적인 3자 군사 동맹. “동서 전쟁으로 가는 고속도로”
조셉 정에 의해
Was South Korea’s President Yoon’s Martial Law Proposal Intent Upon the Formulation of a US-ROK Combined Military Agenda?
by Michel Chossudovsky
한국 윤 대통령의 계엄령 제안은 미국-한국 통합 군사 의제 수립을 위한 것이었는가?
Michel Chossudovsky에 의해
한국어로의 AI 번역.
아래로 스크롤
AI Translation into Korean.
Scroll down
This Article by the late Prof. Joseph Chung published by Global Research in September 2023, provides a profile of South Korea’s U.S sponsored President Yoon Suk-yeol who proposed the adoption of Martial Law.
Prof. Chung warned us more than a year ago regarding the formation of a trilateral military Alliance between the U.S. the Republic of Korea and Japan, which was completed on November 15, 2024
On 3 December 2024, President Yoon Suk Yeol, declared martial law in a TV address. He accused the opposition of the Democratic Party, of “conducting “anti-state activities” and collaborating with “North Korean communists”.
Was there was an unspoken military agenda behind his Martial Law proposal, which was rejected by the people of South Korea.
There is a longstanding agreement with the US entitled the ROK-US Combined Forces Command (CFC): All deployments of South Korean forces against North Korea, China or Russia would be undertaken jointly with the U.S., including its 22,000+ US forces stationed in South Korea as well as U.S. troops which are dispatched to the ROK.
Is there evidence that the U.S was behind President Yoon Suk Yeol imposition of Martial Law? Was the latter considered as a preamble to a subsequent joint deployment of US and Korean forces under the ROK/US CFC
What is unfolding is a Trilateral Military Alliance requiring the integration of the ROK/US Combined Forces Command with the US/Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security> This Trilateral Military Alliance has been the object of negotiation in the course of the last 15 months.
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol (left), U.S. President Joe Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Kishida Fumio at Camp David on August 18, 2023
South Korea’s President Yoon Suk Yeol‘s survived an impeachment vote on the 7th of December.
Tens of thousands of people joined in protestoutside the ROK National Assembly (parliament building) calling for his impeachment or dismissal.
Candlelight protest rally outside the National Assembly Building, in Seoul, South Korea, on 04 December, 2024.
I should mention that Professor Chung’s analysis was published at the very outset of the trilateral project in September 2023. It is also worth noting that Martial Law was put forth by ROK President Yoon Suk Yeol barely three weeks following the completion of the Trilateral “rule based” Alliance between the U.S., the ROK and Japan.
We, the leaders of Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the United States, … remain steadfast in our support for a free and open rules-based international order. The actions that we take together will continue to bolster regional and global peace and security well into the future. …
,
During the past 15 months, we have constructed a trilateral partnership that is built to last. Today, we announce the establishment of the Trilateral Secretariat responsible for coordinating and implementing our shared commitments. …
,
Our trilateral defense engagements are expanding to annual Chiefs of Defense and ministerial meetings that build upon existing senior-level policy consultations, information sharing, trilateral exercises, and defense exchanges. Japan, the ROK, and the United States are promoting trilateral interoperability by sharing data in real time about ballistic missile launches by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and by working to strengthen our ballistic missile defense capabilities. President Biden reiterates that the U.S. commitments to the defense of the ROK and Japan are ironclad and reaffirms the U.S. commitment to strengthen extended deterrence cooperation through the ROK-U.S. and Japan-U.S. alliances. ….
,
We reaffirm our commitment to the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, ….
,
We concur on the need for trilateral collaboration on technology security, standards, and trusted ecosystems, and we commit to develop a trilateral framework to further advance our next generation critical and emerging technology cooperation. We hail the successful launch of the Trilateral Technology Leaders Training Program, which has served to train and connect policymakers focusing on semiconductors, artificial intelligence (AI), quantum technology, digital economy, biotechnology, cybersecurity, energy, and space. In addition, Japan, the ROK, and the United States are working to accelerate the development of a trusted AI ecosystem across our three countries.
,
Our cooperation has soared to new heights in every corner of our governments, and we have created a brighter, safer, and more prosperous future for our people. We are proud of the partnership we have built and believe that the Japan-ROK-U.S. relationship will be a ballast of peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific for years to come.
emphasis added
Michel Chossudovsky, December 5, 2024
The Japan-ROK-U.S. Summit
Destructive Trilateral Military Alliance.
“Expressway to the East-West War”
by
Professor Joseph Chung
September 2023
I am writing this paper to warn the world about the destructive impact of the trilateral military alliance that will not only kill South Korean democracy, security and economy but also widens the expressway to the East-West war.
This trilateral summit was a summit of three dangerous men.
The President of U.S. Joe Biden has pathological obsession to kill Asia led by China.
The Prime Minister of Japan, Fumio Kishida has the dangerously outdated dream of conquering again Asia starting with Korea and restoring the past years’ imperial power and glory of Japan.
The President of South Korea, Yoon Suk-yeol is idiotic and cowardly enough to sell his country for his own protection from angry South Koreas and the vengeful North Koreans.
The trilateral summit was a summit of three leaders who do not have the necessary condition for being leader, namely, the love for the people. Biden is indifferent to ordinary Americans’ suffering. Kishida despises ordinary Japanese people. Yoon hates ordinary Korean people.
The trilateral summit was a summit of the most unpopular global leaders. According to Global Leader Approval Rating Tractor (August 16-22, 2023). The approval rates were: Biden (40%), Kishida (23%), Yoon (22%). Yoon was just before the most unpopular Petr Fiala of Czech Republic (21%).
By the way, Biden’s approval rate after two-year presidency is the lowest in comparison with other presidents’ corresponding approval rates.
What happened at the summits is a story of how two seasoned diplomats have mercilessly exploited an idiotic and stupid man in order to promote their interests, especially, their personal political and other interests.
It is a story of a wrong man (Yoon Suk-yeol) who appeared at wrong time to do wrong things.
This paper offers the story of why and how Yoon Suk-yeol offered South Korea to powerful U.S. and cunning Japan.
This summit is a cursed summit, for two reasons:
First, it will destroy South Korea
Second, it will lead to the Mutual Destructive War (MDW) of the West’s crusade war against the East
This paper discusses the following issues:
Historical context of Yoon’s anti-Korea behaviour
Yoon’s anti-Korea diplomacy
Impact of Yoon’s anti-Korea diplomacy
***
Historical Context of Yoon’s Anti-Korea Behaviour
To understand Yoon’s anti-Korea behaviour, we need to know more about the fatal fight between the pro-Japan conservative South Korea (PJCSK) and the liberal nationalist South Korea (LNSK).
Yoon Suk Yeol leaving the People Power Party (PPP) headquarters shortly after joining the party on 30 July 2021 (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)
The PJCSK was formed during the Japanese colonial era (1910-1945). Korea was annexed to Japan in 1910 due to the treason of pro-Japan politicians led by the traitor, Lee Wan Yong.
This group collaborated with colonial Japan in the stealing of Korea’s assets, in capturing more than 200,000 young girls to be sent to the Japanese military comfort women camp, in mobilizing about 800,000 Korean workers to work as salves in Japanese mines and factories, in forcing Koreans to give up their Korean family name and pick up a Japanese name and other treasonable activities designed to oppress and exploit Koreans.
Thus, the PJCSK were “traitors” who betrayed Korea.
You may ask me why I call the PJCSK as pro-Japan and conservative.
They identified themselves more with Japan than with Korea. Moreover, they were and are more interested in promoting Japan’s interests than protecting Korea’s interests. So, they were and are pro-Japan.
They did every illegal and immoral activity to conserve their wealth which was and is largely stolen. So they were and are conservative.
Their conservatism has little to do with the conservation of some noble values. This fact may be applied to many countries throughout the world.
The present PJCSK is composed of the traitors and their descendents. It is represented by the People Power Party (PPP) which is the linear descendent of the Republican Party created in 1963 by General Park Chung-hee with USD 66 million given by Kishi Nobuske who was the key aid of Tojo Hidekki, Japan’s prime minister during the Pacific War.
The opposing political force in South Korea is the liberal nationalist South Korea (LNSK) represented by the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK). The leader of the DPK is Lee Jae-myung.
The PJCSK represents about 30% of the South Korean population, while non-PJCSK population represents 70% led by the LNSK group.
I may add here that, in a way, the post-WWII political history of South Korea has been the history of PJCSK-LNSK battle.
After WWII, the leaders of the PJCSK (traitors) were supposed to be punished even liquidated. In fact, the LNSK made a list of these traitors, but the list was confiscated by the pro-Japan police.
Furthermore, the American military government (1945-1948) and the rotten government of Syngman Rhee (1948-1960) appointed the traitors to key positions of the government.
There were a series of large-scale protests movements against the American military government and Rhee’s government resulting in massacre of several hundreds of thousands of civilians by the American CIC (Counter Intelligence Corps) and Rhee’s terrorist youth gangs and the police.
The traitors’ big headache was the survival and the protection of their privileges and wealth obtained illegally and immorally.
To do that, they had to keep control the South Korean people through the perpetual government. But, they knew that they could never get the power through democratic way. Only way was the dictatorship.
As a matter of fact, South Korea was oppressed and exploited by the merciless and criminal military dictatorship for 25 years from 1962 to 1987. General, Park Chung-hee ruled from 1962 to 1979, while General Chun Doo-hwan ruled from 1980 to 1987.
After 1987, General Rho Tae-woo governed South Korea from 1987 to 1993 followed by Kim Yong-sam from 1993 to 1998. During this 10-year period, the PJCSK continued to strengthen their power through well organized system of the embezzlement of tax payers’ money.
In 1998, something happened. Kim Dae-jung was elected as president of South Korea. Kim was the leader of the LNSK. Kim’s victory was the results of the LNSk’s sustained fight against the PJCSK. Kim’s victory was also the results of his remarkable plans of handling of the foreign currency crisis of 1997 caused by the corruption of the traitors.
Kim’s government (1998-2003) was succeeded by the government of Rho Moo-hyun (2003-2008). Kim and Rho, leaders of the LNSK, did two things which alarmed the PJCSK.
One was the increase allocation of tax payers’ money for the welfare of all the citizens. This meant less money to be stolen by the traitors.
The other was something which threatened the future of the PJCSK, because Kim and Rho were able to produce the North-South peace process.
They also produced North-South joint statements for peaceful unification and economic cooperation. Kim Dae-jung produced it on the 15th of June 2000; Rho Moo-hyun produced it on October 4, 2007.
It must be pointed out that the peaceful unification of Korea means, as far as the PJCSK was concerned, not only the marginalization of the PJCSK community but also harsh punishment of the traitors by North Koreans.
The peace process and the North-South economic cooperation have resulted in the weakening of the PJCSK’s political and economic position.
However, the PJCSK was not idle. It fought back. In 2008, Lee Mung-bak became president of South Korea (2008-2013). Lee was notorious for his cunning methods of killing adversaries and enriching the corruption culture community of the PJCSK.
He forced Rho Moo-hyun to kill himself through the manufactured bribe scandal of Mrs. Rho.
However, the vision and the spirit of Rho are still alive and they remain the source of the courage and the determination of LNSK to get rid of the traitors.
Lee Myung-bak would have embezzles billions of dollars through the “4-Rivers Project” and the “Natural Resources Diplomacy.”
Lee was succeeded by Park Geun-hye, daughter of General Park Chung-hee (2013-2017).She was not qualified to run a government. But she was picked to enrich the PJCSK.
However, what was a historical irony was the fact that their complicity to enrich the PJCSK with stolen money has resulted in the further loss of PJCSK’s legitimacy and credibility.
Thus, the force and the credibility of the PJCSK which began to fall due to the ten-year governing by the LNSK under Kim Dae-jung and Rho Moo-hyun has been further damaged by the corruption and the abuse of power by Lee Mung-bak and Park Geun-hye.
Then, in 2017, Moon Jae-in came along and became president after the 8-month long Candle-Light Revolution carried out by 27,000,000 South Koreans.
Moon hit hard the PJCSK through the social and economic reforms, the promotion of PMEs along with the war against the corruption culture of the PJCSK.
I may point out here that the power of the LNSK has been attributable to a series of mass protest demonstrations leading to the ruin of PJCSK presidents and the LNSK’s access to power.
Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in, Panmunjom Declaration (2018)
The following is the list of massive protest demonstrations by the LNSK and the punishment of the six PJCSK presidents:
April 19, 1960: The Student Revolution forcing President Rhee Syngman to flee after being accused for corruption and abuse of power.
October 16 1979:the BUMA Protest leading to the assassination of President Park Chung-hee for corruption and abuse of power.
May 18, 1980:the Kwangju Democratic Movement leading to the imprisonment of Presidents Chun Doo-hwan and Rho Tae-woo for treason (Chun), corruption and abuse of power.
June10, 1987:the Democratic Movement leading to the amendment of the Constitution leading o the formation of civil government.
2016-2017:the Candle-light Revolution resulting in the imprisonment of Presidents Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye for corruption, abuse of power and incompetence de govern (Park).
Thus, none of the six presidents of the PJCSK has ended his or her presidency in honourable way.
This shows how deeply the PJCSK has been corrupted on the one hand, and, on the other, how hard the LNSK has fought back risking the lives of its members.
This is what has made the PJCSK panicky and made it to do everything possible to take back the power.
The PJCSK was searching for the possible presidential candidate who could restore the PJCSK’s power, privileges and wealth. They picked Yoon Suk-yeol.
As I mentioned several times in my previous Global Research articles, Yoon has none of the qualities to become president.
On the other hand, he has one quality useful for the PJCSK — he has the desire and means to kill the enemies of the PJCSK which may threaten the vested interests of the corrupted PJCSK.
He has been a prosecutor all his professional life capturing, sending innocent people to prison and even destroying the entire family of those who are suspected to be against the interests of the PJCSK.
Despite the absence of presidential qualities, the PJCSK chose Yoon as their presidential candidate at the 2022 election.
Once elected, the first priority of Yoon Suk-yeol was the destruction of the LNSK on the one hand and, on the other, the survival of the PJCSK allowing the recovery of its wealth and the privilege. To do so, Yoon applied the following measures.
The destruction of the trace of the DPK by imprisoning the all of the key former aids of the Moon Jae-in government.
The killing of possible leaders of the LNSK trough fabricated scandals, usually sex scandals or bribes scandals.
The mobilization of the media, the prosecutor office and the police to do politically assassinate the leader of the opposition party, Lee Jae-myung.
The nomination of prosecutors to most of the major minister jobs and deputy minister positions in order to create the prosecutor dictatorship.
In fact, South Korea is now run by prosecutors who are absolutely ignorant about running a government.
The imposition of extreme form of neo-liberal economic system by facilitating the PJCSK’s embezzlement of public funds, by making the Chaebols richer and more powerful and by preventing job creation through the prevention of SME expansion.
Yoon has been deploying every possible means to destroy the LNSK. But, he still feels unsecure and seeks protectors, which are Japan and the U.S.
Now, we will see below how Yoon has been trying to destroy South Korea through dangerous and criminal diplomacy in complicity with Kishida and Biden.
Yoon’s Anti-Korea Diplomacy
Diplomacy with Japan
The relation between PJCSK and Japan has always been the master-servant relations. In fact, the PJCSK has been Japan’s neo-colony, ever since 1945, in the sense that the PJCSK has been promoting the economic, political and ideological interests of Japan and those of the PJCSK at the expense of the interests of the LNSK.
What is amazing is this. The PJCSK thinks that its fate depends on the destiny of Japan, because the PJCSK was co-offender of war crimes committed during the Japanese colonial era (1910-1945).
The PJCSK thinks that Korea is an extension of Japan. It may even wish for Korea’s annexation to Japan 2.0.
This may sound absurd. Is it? It happened before in 1910 because of the traitor Lee Wan Yong. Many think that Yoon Suk-yeol is the reincarnation of Lee Wan Yong.
Yoon’s diplomacy with Kishida has produced two results which are catastrophic to Korea.
One was the justification of Japanese colonialism and the other was the promotion of the Japanese interests at the expense of Korea’s interests.
Justification of Japanese colonialism
Yoon supports the Japanese arguments that the Japanese colonialism was beneficial to Korea, that Korea was annexed, because of Korea’s incapacity to govern Korea, that the crime of the sex slavery of the 200,000 comfort women never happened, that the labour slavery of 800,000 Korean workers never took place.
Yoon did not protest when Kishida hinted that Dokdo/Takeshima Island was Japanese territory. The issue of Dokto /Takeshima Island can provoke ROK-Japan war.
Japan does not like to pay compensation to the Korean workers who were exploited by the Japanese firms as salves. The Supreme Court of Korea ordered the guilty Japanese firms to pay the compensation. Japanese firms refused to pay. Stupid Yoon has asked the Korean firms that have nothing to do with labour slavery to pay it.
Promotion of Japanese Interest at the expense of Korea’s interests
South Korean GDP per capita has been catching up rapidly the Japanese GDP per capita. In 2004, Japan’s per capita GNP (nominal) was USD 38,307 as against USD 16,283 for South Korea. Thus, the ROK’s per capita GDP was mere 43% of the Japanese per capita GDP.
Now in 2023, the Japanese per capita GDP is USD 35,400 as against USD 34,967 for South Korea. Thus, in 2023, the South Korea’s per capita GDP is 96.5% of the Japanese per capita GDP.
Moreover, if we compare the two countries’ per capita GDP (PPP), Korean per capita GDP (PPP) is USD 56,693 as against USD 51,800 for Japan. Thus, South Korean per capita GDP (PPP) is 9% higher than the Japanese per capita GDP (PPP). By the way, PPP stands for purchasing power parity.
Yoon has applied every possible measure to sow down the ROK’s GDP growth so that the Korean economy stops being competitive with the Japanese economy.
Yoon has adopted the extreme form of neo-liberal economic policy by favouring large corporations at the expense of the welfare of the people. This policy leads to the fall of the GDP growth due to falling domestic demand resulting from skewed income distribution in favour of the PJCSK and Japan which dislikes fast growth of ROK’s GDP.
Japan does not like the competitive South Korean small and medium enterprises (SMEs) which provide chemical products needed for the production of semi-conductors. Therefore, Yoon cut subsidies usually given to Korean SMEs and brought in Japanese SMEs to South Korea.
Yoon does not care much about the falling Korean exports to China which is attributable to ROK’s joining the American war camp preparing the war against China. The reason is that Japan will fill the trade vacuum left by South Korea.
Yoon’s diplomacy with Biden
Yoon’s diplomacy with Biden has resulted in the de fact trilateral military alliance.
Image: Yoon with President Biden in the Oval Office, April 2023. (Licensed under the Public Domain)
The joint statement said: “If one member country is attacked, it is considered as attack to all the three countries.” [Is this not “a copy and paste” of Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty] It means, in fact, the trilateral military alliance.
Moreover, the military alliance will be institutionalized. This means that even if the government changes in the countries, the alliance will be made to stay through every possible mean including, most likely, cyber manipulation of the election results and even covert operation to destroy government which tries to break the military alliance.
In the trilateral military alliance, the whole strategy of the alliance will be determined by Washington; Japanese army will have the task of the field command; South Korean army will do all the dirty works.
The trilateral military alliance is more than welcome by Washington.
It has been long time since Washington wanted the trilateral military alliance needed to preserve its global hegemony and to eliminate those countries which may challenge America’s hegemony such as China and Russia.
True, Washington has the AUKUS and QUAD. But, the AUKUS is not strong enough. The UK is far away from Asia, Australia a small military power. The QUAD is not reliable, because India is not a sure military ally.
Therefore, Washington’s is more than happy to have the ROK army in its war camp. Remember, the ROK army had, in 2021, 500,000 regular soldiers 3,100,000 reserves giving a powerful military might.
ROK army is now the 6th most powerful army in the world in fire power. The Japanese military is the 8th most powerful military.
The country that gained most from the three summits is surely Washington. I am sure that the American pro-war community (APWC) is very happy, because the trilateral military alliance increases the probability of shooting Sino-American war.
Therefore, the defence budget will rise substantially. It will make the APWC richer.
But, this will reduce the resources needed to solve internal problems including the infrastructure decaying, widening income gap, street violence, the jobless, the homeless.
Impact of Yoon’s Anti-Korea Diplomacy
The impacts of Yoon’s diplomacy may be grouped into two sets of impacts: economic impacts and security impacts.
Economic Impacts
The economy of South Korea has been declining ever since Yoon Suk-yeol took over the power in 2022. The rate of GDP growth has been continuously downward adjustment and the 2023 projection is not far from 1.0% even lower than the Japanese GDP growth rate (2%).
The slowing down of GDP growth is due to several factors: pro-PJCSK economic policy; pro-Japan economic policy and the weaponization of trade.
The Pro-PJCSK economic policy Yoon’s economic policy has been designed to maximize the wealth of the PJCSK at the expense of the income of the ordinary South Koreans. Yoon cut down corporate tax, increased subsidies to large corporations, cut subsidies to SMEs and cut down welfare expenditures. This has resulted in falling domestic demand inviting slower GDP growth.
The pro-Japan economic policy: The objective of Yoon’s pro-Japan economic policy consists in making the ROK economy more dependent on the Japanese economy. To do this, Yoon has begun to discourage the domestic production of major high-value added intermediate materials needed for the production of high-tech goods including semi-conductors.
The weaponization of trade and investments: Under the system of military alliance, the trade becomes highly strategic and selective determined by Washington. ROK is no longer free in selecting trade partners and the choice trade goods.
Similarly, international investments become strategic and selective determined by Washington. The ROK companies are no longer free in selecting out-going and incoming investing countries and investing fields.
The combination of the above three sets of policies can lead to the long-run stagnation of the South Korean economy.
Security Impacts
The security impact of the trilateral military alliance includes these impacts:
Rapid increase of the number of enemies and loss of ROK’s international markets,
The loss of credibility of South Korea’s foreign relations,
The increasing danger of the Korean War 2.0,
The danger of forming the trilateral military alliance among North Korea, China and Russia,
The increasing danger of Japan’s holy war 2.0.
Increasing number of enemies and loss of ROK’s international markets: South Korea has no enemies so far. It is true that North Korea has been regarded as enemy, but most of South Koreans regard North Koreans as brother and sisters. The PJCSK and the U.S consider North Korea as enemy either for the maintenance of power or weapon sales.
ROK’s joining the trilateral military alliance has made all the American enemies and all the Japanese enemies South Korea enemies including of course China, Russia and North Korea, let alone American enemies in the Middle East, Africa and the South America.
It is just horrible to imagine the impact of these enemies on ROK’s trade. Remember this. In South Korea, the two-way trade represent as much as 100% of its GDP.
The Loss of credibility of South Korea’s foreign relations: Under President Moon Jae-in (2017-2022), South Korea’s foreign relations received credibility and respect throughout the world due to the fact that Washington’s interference was relatively weak. President Moon had the courage and the wisdom to develop more autonomous foreign relations. But under the trilateral military alliance, Seoul’s autonomous foreign relations become much more difficult.
Increasing danger of Korean war 2.0: The trilateral military alliance increases the danger of the second Korean War. Ever since Yoon took the power, he has been provoking North Korea in words and in actions. He mentioned his intention of undertaking the pre-emptive attack in addition to expanding scale of the ROK-US-Japan military exercises.
North Korea is angry and has been increasing the frequency and destructive power missile tests. Kim Yo-jong, second in command in North Korea said about Yoon Suk-yeol: “I don’t like him as human being.”
What is scaring is the possibility of Yoon’s provocation of North Korea with small scale military attack in order to increase his falling approval rate knowing well that this can lead to the Korean War 2.0.
The danger of forming the trilateral military alliance among North Korea, China and Russia (NKCR): The Japan-ROK-U.S. military alliance (JKORUS) can accelerate the formation of NKCR which can lead to the exclusion of South Korea from the Eurasian economic block.
The future of the ROK economy will be determined by its integration into the Eurasian economic bloc not the Indo-Pacific economic bloc. Hence the JKORUS can be a fatal factor of long-run stagnation of the ROK economy.
The increasing danger of the Japan’s Holy War 2.0:
There are several signs of the feasibility of Japan’s ambition to dominate Asia and restore the Great Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (GACPS)
Yoon’s defence of the Japanese colonialism: Japanese colonialism was beneficial to Korea; the crime of comfort women never took place, the slavery of Korea workers never happened.
The Japanese elite group is composed of the descendents of the elite group of former imperial Japan who ruled Asia. This group is represented by the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) led by the Kishi Nobuske-Shinzo Abe line of political and business leaders whom I call as the Neo-Meiji-Reformation Group (NMRG).
The existence of powerful pro-war think tank, the Japan Conference
The creation of pro-war social climate: return of Shintoism and Bushido
The persistence of Japanese complex of racial superiority of the elite group over Koreans and Chinese and the missionary conviction to enlighten Asians.
The Japanese racial superiority complex and the mission to rule Korea and China had its origin in the famous speech of Fukizawa Yukichi, founder of Keio University, “Good-by Asia” of 1885.
The persistent campaign to amend Article 9 of the 1948 Peace Constitution
The 2015 law allowing Japan to join the war to help ally
The plan of doubling Japanese defence budget in five years
The trilateral military alliance allowing Japanese to find excuse to intervene in Korean military conflict.
The trilateral military alliance allow Japan to use ROK military in Japan’s Asia conquest.
The possibility of the existence of the Biden-Kishida Agrementof 2023 similar to the Katsura-Taft Agreement of 1905 allowing Japan to annex Korea and letting the U.S to colonize the Philippines.
Already in South Korea, opinion makers are talking about the revival of the Japanese colonial government in Seoul.
It is now common belief that Yoon wants the revival of Japanese colonialism in Korea in order to protect himself and the PJCSK so that himself and members of the PJCSK can feel security and enjoy the wealth stolen from Koreans just like Lee wan Wong and has gang did under Japanese colonial rule of Korea from 1910 to 1945.
Conclusion
My first conclusion is that the tragic and catastrophic destruction of a country (South Korea) has happened due to the choice of a wrong leader whose actions are only for the protection of the stolen wealth and power for the PJCSK. The wrong leader is Yoon Suk-yeol.
Yoon knows nothing about economics, politics and diplomacy. He has spent all his professional life by arresting and imprisoning those who were critical about the corrupted culture of the PJCSK.
His policy decisions are affected by Shaman. His mother-in-law is in prison for frauds, bribes, blackmailing and other crimes. His wife has committed so many crimes deserving a very long imprisonment. But she is still free because of the corrupted prosecutors.
Yoon is a psychopath and has absolute worship for the strong. Biden is the strong; Japan is the strong. That is why he worships Biden and Kishida.
Let me repeat this. Yoon is coward who is afraid of Koreans and seeks refuge in Japan-dominated Korea. In other words, he wishes for the return of Japanese colonial power to Korea in which he may feel secure and in which he can exploit Koreans to become richer, more powerful and more comfortable just like Lee Wan-yong , the traitor, did in 1910.
My second conclusion is about Kishida and Biden. These two leaders know who and what Yoon is and, nonetheless, lured him to sign the cursed trilateral military alliance.
I am just wondering how far Biden and Kishida can go in using stupid Yoon to destroy South Korea. Don’t they have any sense of guilt? One would expect a little decency and compassion, if they are really world leaders.
Besides, South Korea is an ally of Japan and the U.S. Is it ethical to treat an ally in this way?
My third conclusion is about the anti-humanity behaviour of Biden and Kishida.
Biden is obsessed by the idea of destroying Asia led by China.
Kishida is infatuated with the imperialist dream of conquering again Korea and Asia.
The sad thing is that Biden’s obsession and Kishida’s dream will lead to global East-West war in which nobody is winner.
It will speed up the end of the humanity which has already started because of human greed, perpetual wars and man’s savage and irrational handling of the God-given nature.
I hope that the leadership in South Korea will change soon so that the dangerous military alliance can be broken. The mass movement for Yoon’s impeachment is getting strength. Bonne chance to the impeachment fight!
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Joseph H. Chung is professor of economics at the University of Quebec in Montreal (UQAM) and member of the Research Center on Integration and Globalization (CEIM-UQAM).
He is Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
글로벌 리서치에서 2023년 9월에 발행한 고(故) 조셉 정 교수의 이 기사는 계엄령 제정을 제안한 미국의 후원을 받은 대한민국의 윤석열 대통령 에 대한 프로필을 제공합니다 .
정 교수는 1년 전 미국, 한국, 일본 3국 군사 동맹의 형성에 대해 경고했는데, 이는 2024년 11월 15일에 완료되었습니다.
2024년 12월 3일 윤석열 대통령은 TV 연설에서 계엄령을 선포했습니다. 그는 민주당의 야당이 “반국가 활동”을 하고 “북한 공산주의자들과 협력”하고 있다고 비난했습니다.
그의 계엄령 제안 뒤에는 암묵적인 군사적 의도가 있었고, 한국 국민들은 이를 거부했습니다.
미국과는 ROK-US Combined Forces Command (CFC) 라는 오랜 협정이 있습니다 . 북한, 중국, 러시아에 대한 한국군의 모든 배치는 미국과 공동으로 수행되며, 여기에는 한국에 주둔하는 22,000명이 넘는 미군과 ROK에 파견되는 미군도 포함됩니다.
윤석열 대통령 의 계엄령 선포 배후에 미국이 있었다는 증거가 있는가 ? 후자는 ROK/US CFC 하에서 미군과 한국군의 후속 합동 배치에 대한 서문으로 간주되었는가?
현재 전개되고 있는 것은 한국/미 연합군사령부와 미/일 상호협력 및 안보조약의 통합을 요구하는 3국 군사 동맹 입니다 . 이 3국 군사 동맹은 지난 15개월 동안 협상의 대상이 되어 왔습니다.
2023년 8월 18일 캠프데이비드에서 윤석열 대통령 (왼쪽), 조 바이든 미국 대통령, 기시다 후미오 일본 총리
윤석열 대통령 은 12월 7일 탄핵 투표에서 살아남았습니다.
수만 명의 사람들이 대한민국 국회의사당 밖에서 그의 탄핵이나 해임을 요구하는 시위에 참여했습니다.
정 교수의 분석은 2023년 9월 3자 프로젝트가 시작될 당시에 발표되었다는 점을 언급해야겠습니다. 또한, 윤석열 대한민국 대통령이 미국, 한국, 일본 간의 3자 “규칙 기반” 동맹이 완료된 지 불과 3주 만에 계엄령을 발의했다는 점도 주목할 만합니다.
일본, 대한민국(ROK), 미국의 지도자인 우리는 자유롭고 개방적인 규칙 기반 국제 질서에 대한 지지를 확고히 유지합니다. 우리가 함께 취하는 조치는 앞으로도 지역 및 세계 평화와 안보를 강화하는 데 도움이 될 것입니다. …
,
지난 15개월 동안 우리는 지속 가능한 3자 파트너십을 구축했습니다 . 오늘, 우리는 공동의 공약을 조정하고 이행하는 책임을 맡는 3자 사무국을 설립한다고 발표합니다. …
,
우리의 3자 방위 협력은 기존의 고위 정책 협의, 정보 공유, 3자 훈련, 방위 교류를 기반으로 하는 연례 국방장관 회의와 장관 회의로 확대되고 있습니다. 일본, 한국, 미국은 조선민주주의 인민공화국(DPRK)의 탄도 미사일 발사에 대한 실시간 데이터를 공유하고 탄도 미사일 방어 능력을 강화하기 위해 노력함으로써 3자 상호 운용성을 증진하고 있습니다. 바이든 대통령 은 한국과 일본의 방위에 대한 미국의 공약은 철통같다고 거듭 강조하며, 한국-미국 및 일본-미국 동맹을 통해 확장 억제 협력을 강화하겠다는 미국의 공약을 재확인합니다. ….
,
우리는 한반도의 완전한 비핵화에 대한 우리의 공약을 재확인합니다 .
,
우리는 기술 보안, 표준 및 신뢰할 수 있는 생태계에 대한 3자 협력의 필요성에 동의하며 , 차세대 중요하고 떠오르는 기술 협력을 더욱 발전시키기 위한 3자 프레임워크를 개발하기로 약속합니다. 우리는 반도체, 인공지능(AI), 양자 기술, 디지털 경제, 생명공학, 사이버 보안, 에너지 및 우주에 초점을 맞춘 정책 입안자들을 교육하고 연결하는 데 도움이 된 3자 기술 리더 교육 프로그램의 성공적인 출범을 환영합니다. 또한 일본, 한국, 미국은 3개국에서 신뢰할 수 있는 AI 생태계 개발을 가속화하기 위해 노력하고 있습니다 .
,
우리의 협력은 우리 정부의 모든 구석에서 새로운 높이로 치솟았고, 우리는 우리 국민을 위해 더 밝고, 더 안전하고, 더 번영하는 미래를 만들었습니다. 우리는 우리가 구축한 파트너십을 자랑스러워하며, 일본-한국-미국 관계가 앞으로 수년간 인도-태평양에서 평화와 안정의 밸러스트가 될 것이라고 믿습니다.
강조 추가됨
Michel Chossudovsky , 2024년 12월 5일
일-한-미 정상회담
파괴적인 3국 군사 동맹.
“동서전쟁으로 가는 고속도로”
~에 의해
조셉 정 교수
2023년 9월
저는 3국 군사 동맹이 한국의 민주주의, 안보, 경제를 파괴할 뿐만 아니라 동서 전쟁으로 가는 고속도로를 넓힐 파괴적인 영향에 대해 세계에 경고하기 위해 이 글을 쓰고 있습니다.
이 3국 정상회담은 위험한 세 남자 의 정상회담이었습니다 .
미국 대통령 조 바이든은 중국이 주도하는 아시아를 죽이려는 병적인 강박관념을 가지고 있습니다.
일본의 총리 기 시다 후미오는 한국을 시작으로 아시아를 다시 정복하고 일본의 지난 제국적 권력과 영광을 회복하겠다는 위험할 정도로 시대에 뒤떨어진 꿈을 품고 있습니다.
윤석열 대통령은 분노한 남한과 복수심 에 불타는 북한으로부터 자신을 보호하기 위해 나라를 팔아치울 만큼 어리석고 비겁합니다.
3국 정상회담은 지도자가 되기 위한 필수 조건인 국민에 대한 사랑이 없는 3명의 지도자의 정상회담이었습니다 . 바이든은 평범한 미국인의 고통에 무관심합니다. 기시다는 평범한 일본인을 경멸합니다. 윤은 평범한 한국 사람을 미워합니다.
3국 정상회담은 가장 인기 없는 세계 지도자 들의 정상회담이었습니다 . Global Leader Approval Rating Tractor(2023년 8월 16일-22일)에 따르면, 지지율은 다음과 같습니다: Biden(40%), Kishida(23%), Yoon(22%). Yoon은 체코 공화국의 가장 인기 없는 Petr Fiala(21%) 바로 앞이었습니다.
그런데 바이든 대통령의 2년 임기 지지율은 다른 대통령들의 동일 임기 지지율과 비교했을 때 가장 낮습니다.
정상회담에서 일어난 일은 두 명의 노련한 외교관이 어떻게 어리석고 멍청한 남자를 무자비하게 이용해 자신의 이익, 특히 개인적인 정치적 이익과 다른 이익을 추구했는지에 대한 이야기입니다.
잘못된 시간에 나타나 잘못된 일을 저지른 잘못된 남자 (윤석열) 의 이야기입니다 .
이 논문은 윤석열이 왜 그리고 어떻게 해서 강력한 미국과 교활한 일본에 한국을 제안하게 되었는지 에 대한 이야기를 담고 있다 .
이 정상회담은 두 가지 이유로 저주받은 정상회담 입니다.
첫째, 한국을 파괴할 것이다
둘째, 서방의 십자군 전쟁이 동방에 대한 상호 파괴 전쟁(MDW)으로 이어질 것입니다.
본 논문에서는 다음과 같은 문제를 논의합니다.
윤씨의 반한 행동의 역사적 맥락
윤의 반한외교
윤의 반한 외교의 영향
***
윤씨의 반한 행동의 역사적 맥락
윤의 반한 행태를 이해하려면 친일 보수 성향의 한국(PJCSK)과 자유주의 민족주의 성향의 한국(LNSK) 간의 치명적 싸움에 대해 더 알아야 합니다.
윤석열이 2021년 7월 30일 국민의힘(PPP)에 입당하고 얼마 지나지 않아 당 본사를 떠나는 모습(CC BY 4.0 라이선스)
PJCSK는 일제 강점기(1910-1945)에 결성되었습니다. 한국은 1910년 반역자 이완용이 이끈 친일 정치인들의 반역으로 일본에 합병되었습니다 .
이 집단은 식민지 일본에 협력하여 한국의 자산을 약탈하고 , 20만 명이 넘는 어린 소녀들을 납치해 일본군 위안부 수용소로 보내고, 약 80만 명의 한국인 노동자를 동원해 일본 광산과 공장에서 연금술사로 일하게 하고, 한국인들에게 한국 성을 버리고 일본 이름을 쓰도록 강요하는 등 한국인을 억압하고 착취하기 위한 반역 행위를 저질렀습니다.
따라서 PJCSK는 한국을 배신한 ‘반역자’ 였다.
왜 제가 PJCSK를 친일 , 보수파 라고 부르는지 궁금할 겁니다 .
그들은 한국보다 일본과 더 동일시했습니다. 게다가 그들은 한국의 이익을 보호하는 것보다 일본의 이익을 증진하는 데 더 관심이 있었습니다. 그래서 그들은 친일이었고 친일 입니다 .
그들은 그들의 재산을 보존하기 위해 모든 불법적이고 부도덕한 활동을 했고 , 그 재산은 대부분 도난당했고 지금도 도난당하고 있습니다. 그래서 그들은 보수적이었고 보수적입니다.
그들의 보수주의는 일부 고귀한 가치의 보존과는 거의 관련이 없습니다. 이 사실은 전 세계 많은 국가에 적용될 수 있습니다.
현재의 PJCSK는 반역자와 그 후손들로 구성되어 있습니다 . 이는 1963년 박정희 장군이 태평양 전쟁 당시 일본 총리 도조 히데키 의 핵심 보좌관이었던 기시 노부스케가 6,600만 달러를 기부하여 만든 공화당의 직계 후손인 People Power Party(PPP) 로 대표됩니다 .
남한의 반대 정치 세력은 민주당(DPK)이 대표하는 자유주의 민족주의 남한(LNSK)입니다. DPK의 지도자는 이재명입니다.
PJCSK는 남한 인구의 약 30%를 차지하는 반면, 비PJCSK 인구는 LNSK 그룹을 중심으로 70%를 차지합니다.
여기에 덧붙여 말하자면, 어떤 면에서는 2차 세계대전 이후의 남한의 정치사가 PJCSK와 LNSK의 전투의 역사였다고 말할 수 있겠습니다.
2차 세계 대전 이후, PJCSK(반역자)의 지도자들은 처벌을 받거나 심지어 숙청당해야 했습니다. 사실, LNSK는 이 반역자들의 명단을 작성했지만, 그 명단은 친일 경찰에 의해 압수되었습니다.
더욱이 미군정(1945~1948)과 부패한 이승만 정권 (1948~1960)은 반역자들을 정부의 주요 요직에 등용했습니다.
미국 군사 정부와 이승만 정부에 반대하는 대규모 시위 운동이 잇따라 일어났고, 미군 CIC(방첩대)와 이승만의 테러 청소년 조직 및 경찰에 의해 수십만 명의 민간인이 학살당했습니다.
반역자들의 가장 큰 골칫거리는 불법적이고 부도덕하게 얻은 특권과 부를 보존하고 보호하는 것이었습니다.
그러기 위해 그들은 영구정부를 통해 남한 국민을 통제해야 했습니다. 하지만 그들은 민주적 방법으로는 결코 권력을 얻을 수 없다는 것을 알고 있었습니다. 유일한 방법은 독재였습니다.
사실, 남한은 1962년부터 1987년까지 25년 동안 무자비하고 범죄적인 군사 독재 정권에 의해 억압과 착취를 당했습니다. 박정희 장군은 1962년부터 1979년까지 통치했고, 전두환 장군은 1980년부터 1987년까지 통치했습니다.
1987년 이후, 1987년부터 1993년까지 노태우 장군이 대한민국을 통치하였고, 1993년부터 1998년까지는 김영삼이 대한민국 을 통치했습니다 . 이 10년 동안 PJCSK는 납세자 돈을 횡령하는 조직적인 시스템을 통해 권력을 계속 강화했습니다.
1998년에 무슨 일이 일어났습니다. 김대중이 남한 대통령으로 선출되었습니다. 김은 LNSK의 지도자였습니다. 김의 승리는 LNSK가 PJCSK에 맞서 지속적으로 싸운 결과였습니다. 김의 승리는 또한 반역자들의 부패로 인해 발생한 1997년 외환 위기를 처리하려는 그의 놀라운 계획의 결과이기도 했습니다.
김씨 정부(1998-2003)는 노무현 정부 (2003-2008)로 이어졌습니다. LNSK의 지도자인 김씨와 노씨는 PJCSK를 놀라게 한 두 가지 일을 했습니다.
하나는 모든 시민의 복지를 위해 납세자의 돈을 더 많이 할당하는 것이었습니다. 이것은 반역자들이 훔칠 돈이 줄었다는 것을 의미했습니다.
다른 하나는 PJCSK의 미래를 위협하는 것이었습니다. 김정은과 노무현이 남북 평화 프로세스를 만들어낼 수 있었기 때문입니다.
그들은 또한 평화적 통일과 경제 협력을 위한 남북 공동 성명을 작성했습니다. 김대중은 2000년 6월 15일에 작성했고, 노무현은 2007년 10월 4일에 작성했습니다.
PJCSK의 관점에서 볼 때, 한국의 평화적 통일은 PJCSK 공동체의 소외뿐만 아니라 북한에 의한 반역자에 대한 엄중한 처벌도 의미한다는 점을 지적해야 합니다.
평화 프로세스와 남북 경제 협력으로 인해 PJCSK의 정치적, 경제적 지위가 약화되었습니다.
하지만 PJCSK는 가만히 있지 않았습니다. 반격했습니다. 2008년 이문박이 대한민국의 대통령이 되었습니다(2008-2013). 이문박은 적대자들을 죽이고 PJCSK의 부패 문화 커뮤니티를 부유하게 만드는 교활한 방법으로 악명을 떨쳤습니다.
그는 노무현 전 대통령의 뇌물수수 사건을 통해 노무현 대통령 을 자살로 몰아넣었다.
하지만 로의 비전과 정신은 여전히 살아있으며, 이는 LNSK가 배신자들을 제거하려는 용기와 결의의 원천으로 남아 있습니다.
이명박은 ‘ 4대강 사업’ 과 ‘자원외교’ 를 통해 수십억 달러를 횡령했을 것이다 .
이 대통령은 박정희 장군 (2013-2017) 의 딸인 박근혜 에게 자리를 물려주었습니다 . 그녀는 정부를 운영할 자격이 없었습니다. 하지만 그녀는 PJCSK를 부유하게 하기 위해 선택되었습니다.
그러나 역사적으로 아이러니한 점은 그들이 훔친 돈으로 PJCSK를 부유하게 만드는 데 공모한 결과 PJCSK의 정통성과 신뢰성이 더욱 상실되었다는 사실입니다.
이처럼 김대중, 노무현 정부 시절 LNSK의 10년 집권으로 인해 쇠퇴하기 시작한 PJCSK의 힘과 신뢰도는 이명박 , 박근혜 의 부패와 권력남용으로 인해 더욱 훼손되었다 .
그러다가 2017년에 문재인이 등장 하여 2,700만 명의 국민이 참여한 8개월간의 촛불 혁명 끝에 대통령이 되었습니다.
문 대통령은 사회 및 경제 개혁, PME 승진, PJCSK의 부패 문화와의 전쟁을 통해 PJCSK를 강타했습니다.
여기서 지적하고 싶은 것은 LNSK의 권력은 일련의 대규모 시위로 인해 PJCSK 대통령들이 몰락하고 LNSK가 권력을 잡을 수 없게 된 데 기인한다는 것입니다.
김정은과 문재인, 판문점 선언(2018)
다음은 LNSK가 벌인 대규모 시위와 PJCSK 대표 6명에 대한 처벌 목록입니다.
1960년 4월 19일 : 학생 혁명으로 이승만 대통령은 부패와 권력 남용 혐의로 기소되어 도망가야 했다.
1979년 10월 16일: 박정희 대통령이 부패와 권력 남용으로 암살당하게 된 BUMA 시위 .
1980년 5월 18일: 광주 민주화 운동 으로 전두환 대통령 과 노태우 대통령이 반역 (전), 부패, 권력남용 혐의로 투옥됨 .
1987년 6월 10일: 민주주의 운동이 시작되어 헌법 개정으로 이어지고 시민 정부가 수립되었습니다.
2016-2017년: 촛불 혁명으로 이명박 대통령과 박근혜 대통령이 부패, 권력남용, 무능한 통치로 인해 투옥되었습니다 (박 대통령).
그러므로, PJCSK의 6명의 대통령 중 누구도 명예로운 방식으로 대통령 임기를 마치지 못했습니다.
이는 한편으로는 PJCSK가 얼마나 깊이 부패했는지 를 보여주고, 다른 한편으로는 LNSK가 구성원들의 생명을 걸고 얼마나 맹렬히 저항했는지를 보여줍니다.
이것이 PJCSK를 당황 하게 만들고 권력을 되찾기 위해 가능한 모든 것을 하게 만든 것입니다.
PJCSK는 PJCSK의 권력, 특권, 부를 회복할 수 있는 대선 후보를 찾고 있었습니다. 그들은 윤석열을 선택했습니다.
제가 이전 글로벌 리서치 기사에서 여러 번 언급했듯이, 윤씨는 대통령이 될 만한 자질이 전혀 없습니다.
반면에 그는 PJCSK에 유용한 한 가지 특성을 갖고 있다. 즉, 그는 PJCSK의 기득권을 위협할 수 있는 PJCSK의 적을 죽이려는 욕망과 수단을 갖고 있다는 것이다.
그는 평생 검사로 일하며 무고한 사람들을 체포해 감옥에 보내고, 심지어 PJCSK의 이익에 반하는 것으로 의심되는 사람들의 가족 전체를 파괴하기도 했습니다.
대통령으로서의 자질이 부족함에도 불구하고 PJCSK는 윤씨를 2022년 대선의 대통령 후보로 선택했습니다.
윤석열이 당선되자 그의 최우선 과제는 한편으로는 LNSK를 파괴하는 것이었고, 다른 한편으로는 PJCSK를 생존시켜 부와 특권을 회복하는 것이었습니다. 이를 위해 윤석열은 다음과 같은 조치를 취했습니다.
문재인 정부 의 핵심 측근들을 모두 투옥하여 민주당의 흔적을 파괴합니다 .
LNSK의 잠재적 지도자들을 살해한 것은 조작된 스캔들, 대개 성 스캔들이나 뇌물 스캔들을 통해서였다.
야당 대표 이재명을 정치적으로 암살하기 위해 언론, 검찰, 경찰을 동원한 사건입니다 .
검찰 독재를 만들기 위해 대부분의 주요 장관직과 차관보직에 검사를 임명했습니다 .
사실, 대한민국은 지금 정부 운영에 대해 전혀 모르는 검찰에 의해 운영되고 있습니다.
PJCSK가 공적자금을 횡령하도록 돕고, 재벌을 더욱 부유하고 강력하게 만들며, 중소기업 확장을 방해하여 일자리 창출을 방해함으로써 극단적인 형태의 신자유주의 경제 시스템을 강요합니다.
윤은 LNSK를 파괴하기 위해 가능한 모든 수단을 동원해 왔습니다. 하지만 그는 여전히 불안함을 느끼고 일본과 미국이라는 보호자를 찾습니다.
이제 윤씨가 기시다와 바이든과 공모하여 위험하고 범죄적인 외교를 통해 한국을 파괴하려고 어떻게 노력했는지 살펴보겠습니다.
윤의 반한외교
일본과의 외교
PJCSK와 일본의 관계는 항상 주인-종 관계였습니다. 사실, PJCSK는 1945년 이래로 일본의 신식민지였습니다. PJCSK가 LNSK의 이익을 희생하여 일본의 경제적, 정치적, 이념적 이익과 PJCSK의 이익을 증진해 왔다는 의미에서입니다.
놀라운 것은 이것입니다. PJCSK는 일본의 운명에 자신의 운명이 달려 있다고 생각합니다. 왜냐하면 PJCSK는 일본 식민지 시대(1910-1945)에 저지른 전쟁 범죄의 공범 이었기 때문입니다.
PJCSK는 한국이 일본의 연장선이라고 생각합니다. 심지어 한국이 일본에 합병되기를 바랄 수도 있습니다 2.0.
터무니없는 소리로 들릴지도 모릅니다. 맞나요? 1910년에 반역자 이완용 때문에 이런 일이 있었습니다. 많은 사람들이 윤석열 이 이완용 의 환생이라고 생각합니다.
윤의 기시다와의 외교는 한국에 재앙을 초래하는 두 가지 결과를 낳았다.
하나는 일본의 식민지 지배를 정당화하는 것이고 , 다른 하나는 한국의 이익을 희생하고 일본의 이익을 증진시키는 것입니다.
일본 식민지주의의 정당성
윤은 일본의 식민지 지배가 한국에 이로웠다는 주장, 한국이 통치할 능력이 없어 합병되었다는 주장, 20만 명의 위안부를 성노예로 삼은 범죄는 전혀 일어나지 않았다는 주장, 80만 명의 한국인 노동자를 노동 노예로 삼은 범죄는 전혀 일어나지 않았다는 주장을 뒷받침합니다.
윤은 기시다가 독도/다케시마 섬이 일본 영토라고 암시했을 때 항의하지 않았다. 독도/다케시마 섬 문제는 한일 전쟁을 유발할 수 있다.
일본은 일본 기업이 노예로 착취한 한국 노동자에게 배상금을 지불하는 것을 좋아하지 않습니다. 한국 대법원은 유죄 판결을 받은 일본 기업에 배상금을 지불하라고 명령했습니다. 일본 기업은 지불을 거부했습니다. 멍청한 윤은 노동 노예와 아무런 관련이 없는 한국 기업에 지불하라고 요구했습니다.
한국의 이익을 희생하고 일본의 이익을 증진시키는 것
한국의 1인당 GDP는 일본의 1인당 GDP를 빠르게 따라잡고 있습니다. 2004년 일본의 1인당 GNP(명목)는 38,307달러였고, 한국의 16,283달러에 비하면 43%에 불과했습니다. 따라서 한국의 1인당 GDP는 일본의 1인당 GDP의 43%에 불과했습니다.
현재 2023년 일본의 1인당 GDP는 35,400달러이고, 한국의 1인당 GDP는 34,967달러입니다. 따라서 2023년 한국의 1인당 GDP는 일본의 1인당 GDP의 96.5%입니다.
게다가 두 나라의 1인당 GDP(PPP)를 비교하면 한국의 1인당 GDP(PPP)는 56,693달러인 반면 일본의 1인당 GDP(PPP)는 51,800달러입니다. 따라서 한국의 1인당 GDP(PPP)는 일본의 1인당 GDP(PPP)보다 9% 더 높습니다 . 그런데 PPP는 구매력 평가를 뜻합니다.
윤은 한국 경제가 일본 경제와의 경쟁에서 이길 수 없도록 한국의 GDP 성장을 억제하기 위해 가능한 모든 조치를 취했습니다.
윤은 국민의 복지를 희생하고 대기업을 우대하는 극단적인 형태의 신자유주의 경제 정책을 채택했습니다. 이 정책은 PJCSK와 ROK의 GDP가 빠르게 성장하는 것을 싫어하는 일본에 유리한 왜곡된 소득 분배로 인해 국내 수요가 감소하여 GDP 성장이 감소하게 됩니다.
일본은 반도체 생산에 필요한 화학 제품을 공급하는 경쟁적인 한국 중소기업(SME)을 좋아하지 않습니다. 따라서 윤은 한국 중소기업에 일반적으로 지급되는 보조금을 삭감하고 일본 중소기업을 한국으로 데려왔습니다.
윤은 한국이 중국과의 전쟁을 준비하는 미국의 전쟁 캠프에 가담한 데 기인한 중국에 대한 한국의 수출 감소에 대해 크게 신경 쓰지 않는다. 그 이유는 일본이 한국이 남긴 무역 공백을 메울 것이기 때문이다.
윤의 바이든 외교
윤의 바이든과의 외교는 사실상의 3자 군사동맹으로 이어졌습니다.
이미지: 2023년 4월 타원형 사무실에서 바이든 대통령과 함께 있는 윤. (공공 도메인에 따라 라이센스됨)
공동성명은 “한 회원국이 공격을 받으면 3국 모두에 대한 공격으로 간주된다”고 밝혔다.[대서양 조약 5조를 “복사해서 붙여넣은 것”이 아닌가] 사실상 3국 군사 동맹을 뜻한다.
더욱이 군사 동맹은 제도화될 것입니다. 즉, 국가 정부가 바뀌더라도 가능한 모든 수단을 통해 동맹이 유지될 것입니다. 여기에는 선거 결과에 대한 사이버 조작과 군사 동맹을 깨려는 정부를 파괴하기 위한 비밀 작전이 포함될 가능성이 높습니다.
3국 군사 동맹에서 동맹의 전반적인 전략은 워싱턴이 결정하고, 일본군은 현장 지휘권을 맡으며, 한국군은 모든 더러운 일을 맡게 됩니다.
워싱턴은 3국 군사 동맹을 매우 환영했다.
워싱턴은 세계적 패권을 유지하고 중국과 러시아 등 미국의 패권에 도전할 수 있는 국가들을 제거하기 위해 필요한 3국 군사 동맹을 오랫동안 원치 않았습니다.
사실, 워싱턴에는 AUKUS와 QUAD가 있습니다. 하지만 AUKUS는 충분히 강하지 않습니다. 영국은 아시아에서 멀리 떨어져 있고, 호주는 군사력이 약합니다. QUAD는 신뢰할 수 없습니다. 인도는 확실한 군사 동맹이 아니기 때문입니다.
따라서 워싱턴은 ROK 군대가 전쟁 캠프에 있는 것을 매우 기쁘게 생각합니다. 기억하세요, ROK 군대는 2021년에 정규군 50만 명, 예비군 310만 명으로 강력한 군사력을 제공했습니다.
한국군은 현재 화력 면에서 세계 6위의 군대입니다. 일본군은 8위의 군대입니다.
세 정상회담에서 가장 많은 이익을 얻은 나라는 분명 워싱턴입니다. 저는 미국의 전쟁 지지 커뮤니티(APWC)가 매우 기뻐할 것이라고 확신합니다. 3국 군사 동맹이 중미 전쟁의 가능성을 높이기 때문입니다.
따라서 방위 예산이 상당히 증가할 것입니다. APWC가 더 부유해질 것입니다.
하지만 이렇게 되면 인프라 노후화, 소득격차 확대, 거리 폭력, 실업, 노숙자 등 내부 문제를 해결하는 데 필요한 자원이 줄어들 것입니다.
윤의 반한 외교의 영향
윤의 외교가 미친 영향은 경제적 영향과 안보적 영향이라는 두 가지로 나눌 수 있다.
경제적 영향
윤석열이 2022년 집권한 이후 대한민국의 경제는 계속 하락하고 있습니다. GDP 성장률은 지속적으로 하향 조정되어 왔으며 2023년 전망은 일본 GDP 성장률(2%)보다 낮은 1.0%에 크게 못 미칩니다.
GDP 성장 둔화는 여러 가지 요인에 기인합니다. 친PJCSK 경제 정책, 친일 경제 정책, 무역의 무기화 등이 있습니다.
친-PJCSK 경제 정책 윤의 경제 정책은 일반 남한 국민의 소득을 희생하여 PJCSK의 부를 극대화하도록 설계되었습니다. 윤은 법인세를 인하하고 대기업에 대한 보조금을 늘리고 중소기업에 대한 보조금을 삭감하고 복지 지출을 줄였습니다. 이로 인해 국내 수요가 감소하여 GDP 성장이 더디게 되었습니다.
친일 경제 정책: 윤의 친일 경제 정책의 목적은 한국 경제를 일본 경제에 더 의존하게 만드는 것입니다. 이를 위해 윤은 반도체를 포함한 하이테크 제품 생산에 필요한 주요 고부가가치 중간재의 국내 생산을 억제하기 시작했습니다.
무역 및 투자의 무기화: 군사 동맹 체제 하에서 무역은 워싱턴에 의해 결정되는 매우 전략적이고 선택적이 됩니다. ROK는 더 이상 무역 파트너와 무역 상품의 선택에서 자유롭지 않습니다.
마찬가지로 국제 투자는 워싱턴에 의해 결정되는 전략적이고 선택적이 됩니다. ROK 회사는 더 이상 나가는 투자 국가와 들어오는 투자 국가 및 투자 분야를 자유롭게 선택할 수 없습니다.
위의 세 가지 정책이 결합되면 한국 경제의 장기적 침체로 이어질 수 있습니다.
보안 영향
3국 군사 동맹의 안보적 영향은 다음과 같습니다.
적군의 급증과 대한민국의 국제시장의 상실,
한국의 외교 신뢰도 하락,
한국전쟁의 위험성이 높아지고 있습니다. 2.0
북한, 중국, 러시아 3자 군사동맹 형성의 위험성
일본의 성전 2.0의 위험성이 커지고 있습니다.
적의 증가와 ROK의 국제 시장 상실: 한국은 지금까지 적이 없습니다. 북한이 적이라고 여겨진 것은 사실이지만, 대부분의 한국인은 북한을 형제 자매로 여깁니다. PJCSK와 미국은 북한을 권력 유지나 무기 판매를 위해 적이라고 여깁니다.
대한민국이 3국 군사 동맹에 가입함으로써 미국의 모든 적이 됐고, 일본의 모든 적, 즉 중국, 러시아, 북한은 물론 남한의 적이 됐으며, 중동, 아프리카, 남미의 미국은 더더욱 적이 됐다.
이런 적들이 ROK의 무역에 미치는 영향을 상상하는 것은 정말 끔찍합니다. 기억하세요. 한국에서 양방향 무역은 GDP의 100%에 달합니다.
한국의 외교 신뢰도 하락 : 문재인 대통령 (2017-2022) 집권 당시, 워싱턴의 간섭이 상대적으로 약해지면서 한국의 외교는 전 세계적으로 신뢰와 존경을 받았습니다. 문 대통령은 더 자주적인 외교 관계를 발전시킬 용기와 지혜를 가졌습니다. 하지만 3국 군사 동맹 하에서 서울의 자주적인 외교 관계는 훨씬 더 어려워졌습니다.
한국전쟁 2.0의 위험 증가: 3국 군사 동맹은 2차 한국전쟁의 위험을 증가시킨다. 윤이 집권한 이래로 그는 말과 행동으로 북한을 도발하고 있다. 그는 한미일 군사 훈련의 규모 확대 외에도 선제 공격을 감행할 의향을 언급했다.
북한은 분노하며 미사일 시험의 빈도와 파괴력을 높이고 있다. 북한의 2인자인 김여정은 윤석열 에 대해 “인간으로서 그를 좋아하지 않는다”고 말했다.
무서운 것은 윤 총재가 자신의 지지율 하락을 막기 위해 소규모 군사 공격으로 북한을 도발할 가능성이 있다는 것입니다. 윤 총재는 이것이 한국전쟁 2.0으로 이어질 수 있음을 잘 알고 있습니다.
북한, 중국, 러시아 3자 군사 동맹(NKCR) 형성의 위험성: 일본-한국-미국 군사 동맹(JKORUS)은 NKCR 형성을 가속화할 수 있으며, 이는 한국이 유라시아 경제권에서 배제되는 결과를 초래할 수 있습니다.
ROK 경제의 미래는 인도-태평양 경제권이 아닌 유라시아 경제권으로의 통합에 따라 결정될 것입니다. 따라서 JKORUS는 ROK 경제의 장기적 침체의 치명적 요인이 될 수 있습니다.
일본의 성전 2.0의 위험성이 증가하다:
일본의 아시아 지배와 대아공영권(GACPS) 회복 야망이 실현 가능하다는 징후가 여러 가지 있습니다.
윤의 일본 식민지주의 옹호: 일본의 식민지주의는 한국에 유익했다. 위안부 범죄는 결코 일어나지 않았고, 한국 노동자들의 노예제도는 결코 일어나지 않았다.
일본의 엘리트 집단은 아시아를 통치했던 전 제국 일본의 엘리트 집단의 후손들로 구성되어 있습니다. 이 집단은 제가 네오메이지 개혁 그룹(NMRG)이라고 부르는 기시 노부스케-신조 아베 계열의 정치 및 사업 리더가 이끄는 자유민주당(LDP)으로 대표됩니다.
강력한 친전 싱크탱크인 일본회의 의 존재
전쟁을 지지하는 사회적 풍토의 형성: 신토교와 무사도의 부활
엘리트 집단이 한국인과 중국인에 비해 인종적으로 우월하다는 일본적 콤플렉스가 지속되었고, 아시아인을 계몽하려는 선교사적 확신이 강해졌습니다.
일본의 민족적 우월감과 조선과 중국을 지배하려는 사명은 1885년 게이오 대학 창립자 후 키자와 유키치 의 유명한 연설 “안녕, 아시아” 에서 유래되었습니다.
1948년 평화헌법 제9조 개정을 위한 끈질긴 캠페인
일본이 동맹국을 돕기 위해 전쟁에 참여할 수 있도록 허용하는 2015년 법률
일본 방위예산 5년 내 2배로 늘리는 계획
3국 군사 동맹으로 인해 일본은 한국 군사 갈등에 개입할 명분을 찾을 수 있었다.
3국 군사 동맹으로 일본은 한국군을 이용해 아시아 정복에 나설 수 있게 됐다.
1905년의 가쓰라-태프트 협정 과 유사한 , 일본이 한국을 합병하고 미국이 필리핀을 식민지화하는 것을 허용한 바이든 -기시다 협정이 2023년에 체결될 가능성이 있다 .
이미 한국에서는 여론 주도층에서 서울에 일본 식민지 정부가 부활했다는 이야기가 나오고 있습니다.
윤이 자신과 PJCSK를 보호하기 위해 한국에서 일본의 식민지 지배가 부활하기를 원한다는 믿음이 널리 퍼져 있다. 그렇게 하면 자신과 PJCSK 구성원들이 안전함을 느끼고 1910년부터 1945년까지 일본의 한국 식민지 지배를 받던 리완 웡 과 그의 무리가 그랬던 것처럼 한국인들에게서 약탈한 부를 누릴 수 있을 것이다.
결론
제가 내린 첫 번째 결론 은 한 나라(남한)의 비극적이고 파국적인 파괴는 PJCSK의 훔친 부와 권력을 보호하기 위한 행동만을 하는 잘못된 지도자의 선택으로 인해 발생했다는 것입니다. 잘못된 지도자는 윤석열 입니다 .
윤은 경제, 정치, 외교에 대해 아무것도 모른다. 그는 PJCSK의 부패한 문화에 대해 비판적인 사람들을 체포하고 투옥하는 데 평생을 바쳤다.
그의 정책 결정은 샤먼 의 영향을 받습니다 . 그의 시어머니는 사기, 뇌물, 협박 및 기타 범죄로 감옥에 있습니다. 그의 아내는 매우 긴 징역형을 받을 만한 많은 범죄를 저질렀습니다. 하지만 그녀는 부패한 검찰 때문에 여전히 자유롭습니다.
윤은 사이코패스이고 강자에 대한 절대적인 숭배를 가지고 있습니다. 바이든은 강자입니다. 일본은 강자입니다. 그래서 그는 바이든과 키시다를 숭배합니다.
다시 한번 말씀드리겠습니다. 윤은 한국인을 두려워하고 일본이 지배하는 한국에서 피난처를 찾는 겁쟁이입니다. 다시 말해서, 그는 일본 식민지 권력이 한국으로 돌아와서 자신이 안전하다고 느낄 수 있고, 1910년 반역자 이완용이 그랬던 것처럼 한국인을 착취하여 더 부유하고, 더 강력하고, 더 편안해질 수 있기를 바랍니다 .
두 번째 결론은 기시다와 바이든에 대한 것입니다. 이 두 지도자는 윤이 누구이고 무엇인지 알고 있지만, 그럼에도 불구하고 그를 유혹하여 저주받은 3자 군사 동맹에 서명하게 했습니다.
바이든과 키시다가 멍청한 윤을 이용해 한국을 파괴하는 데 얼마나 멀리까지 갈 수 있을지 궁금할 뿐입니다. 죄책감이 전혀 없는 걸까요? 그들이 진짜 세계 지도자라면 약간의 예의와 연민을 기대할 수 있을 겁니다.
게다가 한국은 일본과 미국의 동맹국인데, 동맹국을 이런 식으로 대하는 게 윤리적인가요?
세 번째 결론은 바이든과 기시다의 반인도적 행동에 대한 것입니다.
바이든은 중국이 주도하는 아시아 파괴라는 아이디어에 사로잡혀 있습니다.
기시다는 한국과 아시아를 다시 정복하려는 제국주의적 꿈에 푹 빠져 있었습니다.
슬픈 것은 바이든의 집착과 기시다의 꿈이 누구도 승자가 없는 세계적인 동서 전쟁으로 이어질 것이라는 것입니다.
인간의 탐욕, 끊임없는 전쟁, 인간이 신이 부여한 자연을 야만적이고 비이성적으로 다루는 방식으로 인해 이미 시작된 인류의 종말이 더욱 앞당겨질 것입니다.
남한의 지도부가 곧 바뀌어 위험한 군사 동맹이 깨질 수 있기를 바랍니다. 윤 탄핵을 위한 대중 운동이 힘을 얻고 있습니다. 탄핵 투쟁에 보네 찬스를 주세요!
*
독자 여러분께: 위의 공유 버튼을 클릭해 주세요. Instagram과 Twitter에서 저희를 팔로우하고 Telegram 채널을 구독하세요. Global Research 기사를 자유롭게 리포스트하고 널리 공유하세요.
조셉 H. 정 박사 는 몬트리올 퀘벡 대학교(UQAM)의 경제학 교수이자 통합 및 세계화 연구 센터(CEIM-UQAM)의 회원입니다.
The latest report is that Israel has carried out 480 air strikes on territory of the former Syria and Israeli troops are moving deeper into the country. Netanyahu claims credit for Syria’s overthrow which he said is “a historic day in the history of the Middle East.” It certainly opens up the Middle East to Greater Israel.
Israel said that Syria’s fall has isolated and weakened Iran’s position and now is the time for Israel to strike Iran’snuclear facilities. See this.
The NATO secretary-general has instructed NATO members to cut spending on social services and divert the money to military spending.Security matters more than social welfare , said the secretary-general, and Europe must prepare to defend itself from aggressive Russia. Of course, it is Russia that is failing to defend herself and her allies from the aggressive West.
The Russian foreign ministry again declared Ukrainian membership in NATO to be unacceptable, but Russia has given no indication of what it can do to block it.
President-elect Trump has criticized the Biden regime for the major escalation of firing missiles into Russia. But the policy of softening up Russia for negotiations is likely to continue under Trump. Now that the Russian, Iranian, and Chinese governments have demonstrated that they are unable to act even in their own interests, it will be difficult for Trump to slow the momentum toward wider war.
Russia is negotiating with HTS, the latest name for the terrorists used by the US and Israel to overthrow Syria, for the protection of the Russian military bases in Syria.Mikhail Bogdanov, Russia’s deputy foreign minister, said the Russian forces will play an important role in the fight against terrorism.Apparently, Bogdanov doesn’t realize that it is the terrorist regime from whom he is asking protection for Russians.It seems that HTS is both the “Syrian democratic opposition” and “the terrorists.” In liberating Syria they were the democratic opposition. Now that they have Syria they are terrorists, Israel’s war with which covers Israel’s annexation of Syria into Greater Israel.
Peter Ford, the former British ambassador to Syria, said that the West intends a “master-client relationship” with those who “yesterday were al-Qaeda and ISIS,” but today are the Syrian democratic opposition.
“For Western powers, the optics of doing business with gangs and warlords designated as terrorist groups presents a problem. This can be got round, however, by pretending to have a ‘transition.’”
I have been wondering where tiny Israel would find the manpower to occupy Syria, Lebanon, and Greater Israel.It looks like they are going to use the Arabs themselves, the Shia to occupy the Sunni or vice versa.
Things change fast. It was only five days ago that Russian foreign minister Lavrov was warning of the HTS terrorists and declared Russia will oppose attempts by the militants to alter the situation on the ground in Syria. Clearly, the Russian foreign ministry had no idea that Syria was disintegrating while Lavrov was speaking. Now Syria is in the hands of the HTS terrorists/democratic opposition. The Astana agreement that Russia supported repeated the utter folly of the Minsk Agreement and destroyed Syria. Disdaining force, Russia called for “restraint.”Russia and Iran restrained, but not their enemies, or is it their “partners”?
“We are absolutely convinced of the inadmissibility of using terrorists like Hayat Tahrir al-Sham to achieve geopolitical goals, as is happening now with the organization of this offensive from the Idlib de-escalation zone,” Lavrov explained during a session at the Doha Forum (source: Sputnik).
Perhaps Lavrov has forgot that the Idlib de-escalation zone is a produce of Russia’s Astana agreement.
Iran’s leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, reports that Syria’s disappearance was orchestrated in the Zionist command rooms of the United States and the Israeli Zionist regime. He did not explain why Iran stood aside and accepted the destruction of its ally and buffer and route to the resupply of Hezbollah, the only force preventing Israel’s occupation of Lebanon.
Were Syria’s allies, Iran and Russia, unaware of the plot?Why did Khamenei join Putin in sitting on their butts while Washington and Israel overthrew their ally and handed them a dramatic strategic defeat.Now all they can do is to complain.But they never blame themselves.
My conclusion has been that neither Russia nor Iran has an intelligence service. Iran relies on God, and the Russian government relies on a 19th century gentleman’s diplomacy that exists today only in the heads of Putin and Lavrov.To such people it is important not to give offense, so they are incapable of acting. Strategic vision is far beyond their capability.This makes them sitting ducks. However, John Helmer reports that Russian intelligence was fully aware of what was afoot, and Putin prevented the Russian military from defending Syria. See this.
John Helmer reporting from Moscow supports my conclusion that Putin’s unwillingness to use force has discredited Russia as the leader of an alternative world to the Western-dominated one:
Having opposed but obeyed Putin’s orders forbidding them to fire on Israeli aircraft attacking Syria, or on Turkish ground operations in and around Idlib, Moscow sources believe the General Staff have now told Putin much more than the refrain, he’s heard many times before, “We told you so”. This time the General Staff assessment of the invasion of Syria, refusal of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) to fight, and the replacement of the Assad regime in Damascus is that grave damage has been done to the protective alliances which Russia has been promoting in Africa, the Americas, China, and North Korea.
“We just have to accept that Iran and Russia have been comprehensively defeated in their non-fight, “a well-informed Moscow source says. “It is the worst defeat of Russia by the Turks in history. If Putin goes on now to make significant concessions in an Istanbul II negotiation with [President Donald] Trump, that will be the cherry on top of the Turkish halva. We are thinking this; no one is saying it. In the end, a defeat of Ukraine is all we care about. If Putin fails to deliver that, then he has a much bigger problem than the one he has just retreated from. Yes, this is a huge dishonour for us, but nothing is served by talking of it. Still, the situation can be redeemed in the Ukraine. This means the complete and comprehensive defeat of the enemy there.”
A non-Russian military source says the Russians he knows are “in denial. The Turks can now say we have them where we want them. This means the Israelis and the Americans can say the same. That means leverage above and beyond the Levant, in Africa, Asia and no less in Ukraine. What do the Russians have to offer their African or Asian friends now? Do they say — we’ll be there for you, of course, until the end – we mean your end. Of course, when the going gets tough, and potentially that means fighting the Americans or one of its proxy armies, the Russians now show they will blame their unwillingness to fight on their friends’ refusal to do what the Russians advise; their military incompetence; their corruption; or their racial inferiority compared to Russians.”
Amazing that Putin enables the neoconservatives’ discrediting of him.With the Washington/Israeli victory in Syria, less attention will be paid to anything Putin says. See this.
In this very important statement, John Helmer describes Putin’s acceptance of the partition of Syria by Israel, Turkey, and Washington.
*
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.
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.
The NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict is the first true major modern war of this century. The United States launched numerous invasions against the world in the last 80 years, but it was virtually always against largely helpless opponents. The only exception to this was Vietnam, which had the support of a number of allies, particularly the former Soviet Union. After losing upwards of 13,000 aircraft, the US-led invasion was soundly defeated, as such massive losses nullified its main military doctrine – air superiority. Ever since, Washington DC has made sure to attack only countries that were isolated, surrounded by enemies/US proxies, economically weakened and internally destabilized. This hyena-style approach greatly enhanced the political West’s brutal aggression against the entire world.
The NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict is very different. The Russians never wanted escalation, as evidenced by their attempts to maintain peace and end the war through negotiations and agreements. This includes not just Minsk I and II, but also those after the special military operation (SMO) started, which the political West sabotaged. The limited scope of the SMO then degenerated into a massive attrition war, as planned by NATO which hoped to use its ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets to tip the scale in the Neo-Nazi junta’s favor. However, even though Moscow uses only a portion of its military (5-20%, according to varying estimates), it still maintains a massive advantage in artillery, airpower and long-range strike systems, particularly hypersonic.
The only exception to this is unmanned warfare, which gives the Kiev regime an important asymmetric capability that somewhat levels the playing field. FPV drones are particularly potent, especially when combined with NATO’s ISR. The Kremlin responded with an increased use of its world-class electronic warfare (EW) systems, which is still the most effective way of neutralizing various types of drones. However, their sheer numbers (on both sides) make them some of the most dangerous weapons for regular soldiers, whether used for direct attacks or as force multipliers. Namely, using them for tactical ISR means that even older artillery pieces (designed primarily to offer an increased volume of firepower) effectively become deadly high-precision platforms that can largely replace expensive guided munitions.
The exorbitant costs of manufacturing, operating and using Western-made weapons (which are mostly overhyped) means that drones are particularly important for the Neo-Nazi junta forces, both in terms of tactical (and even operational) battle performance and cost-effectiveness. However, it seems this is about to change – thanks to the Kiev regime’s overlords, no less. Namely, the political West’s aggression against the world is now threatening to disrupt the Neo-Nazi junta’s unmanned warfare capabilities. The primary issue lies in the fact that China is now responding to America’s sanctions and trade war by placing export restrictions on various goods and commodities that are critical in the production of civilian unmanned systems that the Kiev regime modifies for war.
Part of Beijing’s retaliatory measures include restrictions on the export of key components vital in the production of drones (particularly FPV ones). According to Bloomberg, “manufacturers in China recently began limiting sales to the US and Europe of key components used to build unmanned aerial vehicles, according to multiple people with knowledge of the developments, who asked not to be identified discussing sensitive information”. The report also adds that “the moves are a prelude to broader export restrictions on drone parts that Western officials expect Beijing to enforce in the new year” and that “those rules could take the form of license approvals based on the intended use of the components or softer requirements for Chinese companies to notify the government of their shipment plans”.
Sources quoted by Bloomberg also stated that “Chinese producers of motors, batteries and flight controllers have capped the quantities they deliver or stopped shipments altogether”. These measures will limit the political West’s ability to supply civilian drones to the Neo-Nazi junta forces, which is a major hit for their already diminished combat effectiveness. It should be noted that this will also affect NATO’s ability to wage a total war on Russia, as these components are also used in manufacturing drones that terrorize civilian infrastructure in Western Russia (oil and gas depots, ports, gas stations, residential areas, etc). It will also diminish the Kiev regime’s ability to aid various terrorist groups, particularly in Syria, where its drone operators participated in the latest escalation.
This demonstrates the political West’s inability to comprehend the complexities of the modern world, as attempts to compartmentalize the benefits and consequences of its global aggression remain futile. The US, EU/NATO and other vassals and satellite states expect the world to just sit and watch while they use the benefits of a globalized economy to hurt those who actually produce something and whose economies aren’t based on imaginary entities (such as paper money backed by thin air). As the world’s largest production economy, China’s importance simply cannot be overstated. Beijing produces everything from toothpicks to spacecraft, which turned it into the world’s largest real economy (GDP PPP, gross domestic product, purchasing power parity) a decade ago.
The news about China’s retaliatory actions certainly comes as an unpleasant surprise for NATO’s favorite Neo-Nazi puppets. They’ll now have to find other ways to acquire components for their asymmetric drone strategy, although it’s virtually a given that their ability to launch saturation attacks on Russian positions will be greatly diminished, as it’s quite clear that nobody on the planet can match China’s production volumes.
*
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.
Incoming US President Donald Trump is obsessed with imposing tariffs, believing this will resurrect the ailing economy. However, Trump faces the challenge that his reckless tariffs policy will only strengthen efforts to replace the US dollar as the global reserve currency, especially fearing a BRICS currency.
In a Truth Social post on November 30, Trump said:
“We require a commitment from these Countries that they will neither create a new BRICS Currency, nor back any other Currency to replace the mighty US Dollar or, they will face 100% Tariffs, and should expect to say goodbye to selling into the wonderful US Economy.”
The president-elect’s threat to impose 100% tariffs on the BRICS+ countries that try to replace the dollar as the global reserve currency is excessively bombastic. Not only does it sound sterile, but worse, it would mean the geoeconomic and commercial suicide of the US since today, the BRICS+ have surpassed the G7 of which the US is a member.
Today, the G7’s GDP has fallen substantially behind, with 30% of the global GDP measured in Purchasing Power Parity. Even when measuring the combined economies of all 32 NATO members, accounting for 30.7% of the global GDP, it pales compared to the BRICS+ 35%.
In terms of population, BRICS+ – including its five new members Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Ethiopia – make up 45.3% of the world’s population, compared to 10% for the G7, while NATO represents about 973 million people.
It is clear that, up to this point, just by analyzing the hard geoeconomic data of NATO and its G7 allies, both have been significantly surpassed by the BRICS+, both in terms of GDP and population scale, not to mention their prodigious technological advances, from hypersonic missiles to military artificial intelligence.
The only three strengths left to the US today are the terrifying control of its pernicious global propaganda, its lead in quantum computing, and, above all, the omnipotent dollar, which has already begun to be undermined by the BRICS+. It is noteworthy that at the 16th BRICS+ Summit in Kazan in October, Russia and China opted for gradual de-dollarization.
The nervousness of the outgoing Biden administration’s financial authorities became evident when Brent Neiman, assistant to the US Treasury Secretary, warned on November 19 of “potential risks to international financial stability and economic security from any cross-border payments systems that fail to adhere to standards aimed at minimizing illicit activity,” in an obscene allusion to the BRICS+ communiqué of October 22 that called for a cross-border payments system to bypass Western platforms.
Two days later, on November 21, the State Department announced new Treasury sanctions against all Russian banks and Russia’s financial message transfer system to prevent Moscow from using the global financial system. The combined effect of both punitive measures in the US led to a sharp devaluation of the Russian currency, which reached 114 rubles per dollar, primarily due to sanctions against Gazprombank, its third largest bank.
This whole series of suffocating geofinancial measures seem more like the death throes of a dollar-centrism that is gradually fading away on the horizon of the advent of the new world order, multipolar, polycentric, ecumenical and civilizing.
At the BRIC Summit in October, Russian President Vladimir Putin highlighted how “weaponizing” the dollar was a “big mistake.”
“It’s not us who refuse to use the dollar,” Putin said at the time. “But if they don’t let us work, what can we do? We are forced to search for alternatives.”
Moscow started creating a new payment system as an alternative to the global bank messaging network SWIFT and to help facilitate trade with partners after becoming the most sanctioned country in the world.
According to the IMF, the US dollar accounts for about 58% of the world’s foreign exchange reserves, and major commodities like oil are still primarily bought and sold using dollars. However, the dollar’s dominance is threatened by BRICS’ growing share of GDP and the alliance’s intent to trade in non-dollar currencies, with India and China playing an important role.
Due to this evident threat to US economic dominance, BRICS members are still moving towards de-dollarization, but without bravado, hoping not to antagonize Trump.
South Africa was the first BRICS nation to respond to Trump’s threat, wasting no time issuing an official response the following day, denying that BRICS is planning to create a new currency. This was followed by India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar saying on December 6, “Right now, there is no proposal to have a BRICS currency.”
In reality, though, India, for example, has been a great facilitator of trade in national currencies away from the US dollar. Although a BRICS currency is realistically nowhere near realization, the trend of trading in national currencies and not the US dollar will accelerate, and no threat or tariff from Trump can stop this.
*
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.
Foreign policy lies prevail. The same neocons “are at it again.” “We must bomb Iran”. Preemptive nukes.
Reminder to the crusading Armageddonists ….. “Thou shalt not kill.” —Exodus 20: 1
.
.
Trump’s Nomination of Pete Hegseth to lead the Pentagon
by Michel Chossudovsky
There are indications that Christian Zionism prevails in the corridors of the State Department and the Pentagon. This is not a recent phenomenon. (See Felicity Arbuthnot below)
Donald Trump’s defense secretary appointee Pete Hegseth is not only a “war hawk,” he is a “Third Temple cultist” who “wants war with Iran and Russia.”
Hegseth says he is a Christian who believes Jesus will “return” once the “Third Temple” is built where the Dome of the Rock, also called the Al-Aqsa mosque compound, now sits on the Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem. (See Global Research)
“Pete Hegseth, Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense has also sparked controversy among the military.
.
The 44-year-old Fox News host and Army National Guard who will be heading the Pentagon has been described by Paul Rieckhoff (founder of Independent Veterans of America) as “the least qualified nominee for SecDef in American history.” (Uriel Araujo, Global Research)
Perhaps the most demented of [Trump’s appointees] is also the individual in the most potentially threatening position, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.Hegseth is a journalist with FOX news with one observer noting that he has never managed any organization larger than his three wives and five children prior to his upgrade to the $1 trillion budgeted 2.9 million Pentagon employees. Even by Christian Zionist standards, he might well be considered to be an extremist.”
“An excerpt from Hegseth’s book,American Crusade, Our Fight to Stay Free (2020) states:
“Simply put: if you don’t understand why Israel matters and why it is so central to the story of Western civilization — with America being its greatest manifestation — then you don’t live in history.“America’s story is inextricably linked to Judeo-Christian history and the modern state of Israel.
“You can love America without loving Israel but that tells me your knowledge of the Bible and Western civilization is woefully incomplete. …
“If you love America, you should love Israel. We share history, we share faith, and we share freedom. We love free people, free expression, and free markets.”
Trump’s boss of the Pentagon is committed to the “Cult of the Three Temples. There is no firm evidence that Trump’s Secretary of Defense is committed to using nukes within the context of Armageddon Theology as defined in the Book of Revelations
Armageddon Theology and the Risk of Global War: The Limits of Religious Tolerance in the Nuclear Age
“Millions of Americans, primarily premillennialist fundamentalist Christians, believe that God has foreordained a global nuclear war as the precursor to the Second Coming of Christ.
Apocalyptic religious beliefs would be of less consequence were it not for the fact that after being given computer warning of an apparent nuclear attack, U.S. personnel in the midst of the electronic loop have just a few minutes to decide whether or not to launch missiles in retaliation.
For the sake of global safety, American psychologists and psychiatrists, under the auspices of the PRP, should be engaged in screening out personnel who are convinced that a nuclear attack against Russia would accord with God’s will.
Below is an excerpt from a 2007 article by award winning veteran war correspondent Felicity Arbuthnot. Is the use of nuclear weapons entrenched in the Cult of Three Temples?
Michel Chossudovsky, December 12, 2024
***
Are There Armageddonists in the Corridors of the U.S. State Department?
By Felicity Arbuthnot
Here is a story told to me by Dr.Bernard Lown, one of the co-founders of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) during the Reagan era. http://www.ippnw.org
Lown worked closely with another eminent fellow cardiac surgeon, the (then) USSR’s Yevgeny Chazov. Since physicians know no borders, they had formed a friendship, then a movement, which bridged the cold war, the Reagan “Evil Empire” (re. the Soviet Union) nonsense and within two years, had doctors and surgeons from eighty two countries spreading the word, that even cardiac arrest paled against nuclear war.
In 1995, IPPNW collectively won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Bernard Lown and Yevgeny Chazov committed to abolishing Nuclear
War May their Legacy Prevail
The U.S. State Department and the Book of Revelations
Since Lown travelled, lecturing, to the USSR frequently and had built trust over many years at all levels, the US State Department asked if he would engage in some unofficial diplomacy.
Relations between the two countries were far worse than most realised.
After one such visit to Moscow, I met Bernard Lown in Paris. We sat in dappled Spring sun, at a pavement breakfast café – fresh squeezed orange, coffee, croissants:
“I came back two days ago [from Moscow] and went to talk (at the State Department) of the concerns in Moscow.
Afterwards, a senior official – a household name (which he declined to divulge) walked me to the exit. As we neared the exit, he put his arm round my shoulders: ‘Don’t worry, Professor Lown, if there is a nuclear war, we will be the first ones to rise up and meet Jesus in the sky.’” Lown, used to the vagaries of the unwell, responded: “Tell me, does anyone else in this building feel as you do?”
We are featuring this video interview. with the option of sub-titles in the following languages: English, French, Arabic, Farsi, Spanish, Turkish and Russian
O governo legítimo de Bashar Al Assad caiu e a República Árabe Síria já não existe. A vitória dos terroristas pró-Turquia contra as tropas governamentais trouxe uma série de preocupações, uma vez que agora o povo sírio está refém da ação de uma junta extremista, que põe em perigo as minorias religiosas locais, como os cristãos, os alauítas e os xiitas.
Apesar de ter resistido durante mais de treze anos a uma intensa guerra civil financiada por agentes estrangeiros, Bashar Al Assad não conseguiu neutralizar a recente revolta promovida pelo grupo terrorista Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). Desta vez, Bashar pôde contar com a ajuda dos seus principais aliados tradicionais – o Hezbollah, apoiado pelo Irã, e a Federação Russa. Com a guerra entre Israel e o Hezbollah, os combatentes xiitas não tinham recursos humanos e materiais suficientes para fornecer apoio a tempo de salvar a Síria. Da mesma forma, Moscou está ocupado com a sua operação militar especial na Ucrânia e não está em posição de dar prioridade às questões do Oriente Médio no seu planejamento estratégico.
A atual situação frágil da Síria tem sido bem compreendida e avaliada pelos seus inimigos geopolíticos, especialmente pela Turquia. O primeiro-ministro turco, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, tem tentado derrubar o governo sírio há anos, como parte do seu projeto para expandir a influência turca em todo o espaço pós-otomano. Ele viu o momento atual como verdadeiramente favorável aos seus planos, uma vez que os aliados da Síria não seriam capazes de ajudá-la com a mesma intensidade como fizeram nos anos anteriores.
As milícias islâmicas radicais sempre foram o principal instrumento de guerra da Turquia contra a Síria. O HTS de hoje é apenas uma “nova versão” da antiga Frente Al Nusra, uma afiliada síria da Al Qaeda que opera na região em comunicação direta com Ancara. O governo turco instrumentaliza estas milícias islâmicas extremistas, unindo nas suas fileiras militantes “turcófilos” de várias regiões da Ásia, incluindo separatistas chechenos, centro-asiáticos e uigures de Xinjiang. Embora a propaganda ocidental tente retratar os “rebeldes sírios” como “combatentes pela liberdade” nativos interessados em “democratizar” o país, na prática o HTS é composto por terroristas radicais de várias regiões da Ásia cujo único objectivo é defender os interesses turcos na Síria. sem qualquer preocupação com o que é melhor para a população local.
Desde a captura de Damasco, têm sido vistos vídeos na internet mostrando cenas de execuções em massa, tortura de civis e vários outros crimes de guerra. Tais práticas tornaram-se comuns entre militantes salafistas em diversas regiões do mundo, especialmente na Síria, onde tanto a Al Qaeda como o ISIS – muitos dos quais antigos membros aderiram ao HTS – tornaram-se famosos por publicar vídeos deles próprios assassinando civis considerados “infiéis”.
A situação na Síria é particularmente preocupante para algumas minorias religiosas, como os cristãos e os muçulmanos não sunitas. Estes grupos religiosos são especialmente odiados pelos militantes Wahhabi e são alvos prioritários das políticas de perseguição implementadas pelo “governo” ilegítimo do HTS. As regiões de Latakia e Tartus, onde os alauítas e os cristãos têm uma forte presença, têm sido um importante foco de resistência contra o HTS. Estas regiões são também onde estão localizadas as bases militares russas na Síria, o que traz alguma esperança à resistência – que obviamente não pode contar com qualquer apoio ocidental, uma vez que a retórica “cristã” dos políticos neoconservadores ocidentais é absolutamente hipócrita, tendo muitos americanos e europeus direitistas comemorado a vitória do HTS.
Uma esperança dos cristãos, alauitas e xiitas é estabelecer comunidades políticas autônomas, separando-se efetivamente do governo pró-turco controlado pela junta. Além disso, os militantes turcófílicos continuam a entrar em conflito com as milícias separatistas curdas, que são apoiadas pelos EUA. Na prática, a Síria pós-Bashar provavelmente se tornará uma espécie de “Estado falido”, com diferentes facções políticas controlando partes do seu território e mantendo constantes hostilidades.
Erdogan continuará a expandir a sua geopolítica neo-otomana, mas terá dificuldade em lidar com uma Síria fragmentada e tensa. Além disso, Israel está a aproveitar o momento para expandir as suas áreas de controle nas Colinas de Golã, o que torna ainda mais difícil manter qualquer arquitetura de segurança sólida na região.
Com o fim do governo Assad, já não existe qualquer possibilidade de unificar a Síria como um Estado político secular e multiétnico. A Síria encontra-se agora numa situação semelhante à da Líbia pós-Gaddafi, estando dividida em diferentes porções territoriais e unidades políticas autônomas. Este é o resultado da ação desestabilizadora promovida conjuntamente por Ancara e os seus apoiadores em solo sírio.
From cyberwar to proxy war to covert war, the global long war against humanity threatens to become a full-fledged theatre war and even nuclear war.
Today Michel Chossudovsky joins us to discuss the struggle against this total warfare and the propagandists who enable it.
“The “globalization of war” is a hegemonic project. Major military and covert intelligence operations are being undertaken simultaneously in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia and the Far East. The U.S. military agenda combines both major theater operations as well as covert actions geared towards destabilizing sovereign state.”
The United States and its allies have launched a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity. U.S. and NATO forces have been deployed in Eastern Europe including Ukraine. U.S. military intervention under a humanitarian mandate is proceeding in sub-Saharan Africa. The U.S. and its allies are threatening China under President Obama’s “Pivot to Asia”.
In turn, military maneuvers are being conducted at Russia’s doorstep which could potentially lead to escalation.
The U.S. airstrikes initiated in September 2014 directed against Iraq and Syria under the pretext of going after the Islamic State are part of a scenario of military escalation extending from North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean to Central and South Asia.
TRANSCRIPT (Excerpt)
CHOSSUDOVSKY: Now all those things, all those dimensions – the economic, the social, the military dimensions – coalesce and are sustained by an extensive apparatus of media propaganda. I’m referring to the mainstream media, the corporate media, which sustains the lies and ultimately controls what people think.
And this I would say is an inquisitorial environment. It’s much more devastating than the Spanish Inquisition. The Spanish Inquisition was also based on a Big Lie, and it lasted for three or four hundred years.
But we are dealing with a media apparatus which turns realities upside down, presents the western quest, and military adventure, as a peace-making undertaking, which lies with regard to the casualties of war, which presents the war criminals as protagonists of human rights, and so on, so forth.
And that, in itself, is the pinnacle of this system. Without the mainstream media, and war propaganda, this New World Order agenda doesn’t have a leg to stand on. In other words, without these media lies, the military agenda, the economic agenda would collapse like a deck of cards. And that is why it is absolutely fundamental that within the realm of independent media, and alternative media, we wage a war against the mainstream media. In other words, it’s a war of ideas. It is an obligation on our part to support the truth, and to use truth, as a means, as a weapon, to undermine the legitimacy of this global economic and military agenda which is destroying humanity.
It is global war, it is total war, and it is destruction. And it has a logic, and it’s part of global capitalism.But at this stage it is not a struggle against socialism, but it is a struggle against national capitalism. In other words, it is the global capitalist elites, mainly Anglo-American, dominated by Wall Street and the city of London, the large financial centers, against competing capitalist powers, which, we might name them: Russia, China – China’s not a communist country, China is a capitalist country, in fact a very advanced capitalist country, and so is Iran.
So that essentially, what this war involves is world domination, it’s the establishment of a global economic and political system whereby countries worldwide would be subordinated to these global corporations, and where national sovereignty under national capitalism would be undermined. And the trade and investment agreements which are being negotiated behind closed doors are part of this agenda. They’re part of this agenda, and in effect they are the end game of this agenda, whereby global corporations undermine and destroy national and regional corporations – in other words, bankruptcy of the entire landscape – and impose a global economic agenda throughout the world.
CORBETT: Well the battle between oligarchs for global control I think is nothing new to human history but the technologies that are available to actually accomplish that goal really does make this a much more important and decisive battle than it has ever been before. So that is exactly, and precisely, why it is so important that in the alternative media we do battle against these forces, and that’s of course what you’re doing at globalresearch.ca. We will direct people once again to your recent book on the Globalization of War, which of course will be linked up in the show notes for this interview as well.
Michel Chossudovsky, I think we’ll have to continue this conversation by looking at various aspects of this global warfare, but we’ll leave it there for today. Thank you very much for joining us on the program.
CHOSSUDOVSKY: Delighted to be on the program
The Globalization of War is undoubtedly one of the most important books on the contemporary global situation produced in recent years.
In his latest masterpiece, Professor Michel Chossudovsky shows how the various conflicts we are witnessing today in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq and Palestine are in fact inter-linked and inter-locked through a single-minded agenda in pursuit of global hegemony helmed by the United States and buttressed by its allies in the West and in other regions of the world. Dr Chandra Muzaffar, President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST)
The Biden administration has quietly extended a controversial “emergency declaration” under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act until December 31, 2029.
“Secretary Becerra signed the 12th amendment to the declaration under the PREP Act for COVID-19 Medical Countermeasures. The Secretary issues this amendment pursuant to section 319F–3 of the Public Health Service Act to extend the duration of the Declaration to December 31, 2029, and to republish the Declaration in full,” according to the announcement.
The timing? Conveniently, it ensures that Big Pharma and mRNA vaccine makers remain shielded from liability throughout President Trump’s second term and beyond.
According to the Federal Registrar Notice reviewed by The Gateway Pundit:
“I am now amending section XII of the Declaration to extend the time period of PREP Act coverage through December 31, 2029. COVID-19 continues to present a credible risk of a future public health emergency.
COVID-19 continues to cause significant serious illness, morbidity, and mortality during outbreaks. The risk of domestic cases is high due to ongoing outbreaks that continue domestically and internationally in the year since the PHE for COVID-19 ended.
Development of and stockpiling vaccines, therapeutics, devices, and diagnostics for COVID-19 continues to be needed for U.S. preparedness against the credible threat of a public health emergency due to outbreaks of COVID-19.
Continued coverage under the PREP Act, as provided in this Declaration, is intended to prepare for and mitigate the credible risk presented by COVID-19.”
While the Biden administration insists the extension is a precaution for “future public health emergencies,” critics argue it reeks of cronyism and corruption, benefiting pharmaceutical giants while sidelining the American public’s growing concerns about vaccine injuries and accountability.
The PREP Act provides sweeping liability immunity for vaccine manufacturers and distributors, effectively preventing lawsuits except in cases of “willful misconduct.”
By extending this declaration, Biden’s Health and Human Services Department locks in protections for companies producing COVID-19 vaccines, ensuring their profits remain unscathed regardless of adverse effects or public outcry.
“Covered Persons who are afforded liability immunity under this Declaration are ‘‘manufacturers,’’ ‘‘distributors,’’ ‘‘program planners,’’ ‘‘qualified persons,’’ and their officials, agents, and employees, as those terms are defined in the PREP Act, and the United States.
‘‘Order’’ as used herein and in guidance issued by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health means a provider medication order, which includes prescribing of vaccines, or a laboratory order, which includes prescribing laboratory orders, if required.
“Qualified person” includes (A) a licensed health professional or other individual who is authorized to prescribe, administer, or dispense such countermeasures under the law of the State in which the countermeasure was prescribed, administered, or dispensed.”
The declaration provides immunity from liability for claims:
of loss caused, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from administration or use of countermeasures to diseases, threats and conditions
determined by the Secretary to constitute a present, or credible risk of a future public health emergency
to entities and individuals involved in the development, manufacture, testing, distribution, administration, and use of such countermeasures.
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.
Jim Hᴏft is the founder and editor of The Gateway Pundit, one of the top conservative news outlets in America. Jim was awarded the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award in 2013 and is the proud recipient of the Breitbart Award for Excellence in Online Journalism from the Americans for Prosperity Foundation in May 2016. You can email Jim Hᴏft here, and read more of Jim Hᴏft’s articles here.
The Biden regime’s discussion of “preemptive” pardons for Tony Fauci, Adam Schiff, and Liz Cheney is the Biden regime’s admission that these people have committed felonies in their efforts to destroy Donald Trump and that Fauci by lying about the safety and protection of the Covid “vaccine” is liable for mass murder and health damage to millions of people worldwide. He is also liable for funding illegal biowarfare research in both US and Chinese laboratories.
In effect, the preemptive pardons would be convictions that escape punishment.
Normally, a pardon from a president or governor comes after a conviction and often only after the sentence is served.Traditionally pardons have not been given in advance of indictment.In the case of Biden’s pardon of Hunter, the pardon was preemptive as it included a ten-year period and not just the gun and IRS convictions but also all the crimes, evidence for which the laptop provided, that the FBI failed to investigate.
What the discussion should be about is why is it more important to get Trump, while protecting Biden, than it is to obey the law? Once ideology enters politics, law no longer holds, because ideologues have agendas that are contrary to law and to the Constitution. There are many problems with Republicans, but Democrats have become an ideological party. Democrats are champions of open borders and the blurring of distinction between citizens and immigrant-invaders.They are champions of normalizing sexual perversions. They are champions ofraising children independently of parental control.Democrats oppose the First, Second, and Fourteenth Amendments. Their ideology replaces free speech with indoctrination and controlled narratives. Their ideology violates the 14th Amendment by granting privileges to people of color, sexual perverts, and preferred genders. This is all said to be necessary to combat “white supremacy.” Pedophiles have been renamed “minor attracted persons.” Democrat ideology requires the exploiter–the racist whites– to be displaced from positions of influence and power and turned into second class persons.
This Democrat agendais what the non-woke portion of the American people, not much more than half of the population, objected to and in protest elected Donald Trump President three times.
In the latter part of my various careers when I undertook to explain reality to Americans and interested foreigners, I have been non-partisan. I have done my best to hold accountable Republican administrations as well as Democrat administrations.
In my book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions, published 24years ago, which Milton Friedman said was “A devastating indictment or our current system of justice,” I demonstrated that we were losing justice to the subservience of law to political agendas.In Alan Dershowitz’s review of my book, he wrote:
“The Tyranny of Good Intentions is a bold defense of our fundamental freedoms.It demonstrates that government oppression is not a right-left issue, but rather a universal evil that should be resisted by all free people. It [my book] demonstrates why conservatives and liberals who despise tyranny must unite against statists of both the right and the left who falsely believe that partisan ends justify depravations of liberty.”
It is very costly to go against both parties as it leaves one without support.My supporters are the rare independent thinkers. If they cease to support this website, it will cease to exist. The consequences extend beyond me into the existence of truth. There are not many voices. There is no money in telling the truth.There are immensely powerful lobbies serving ideological and economic interests that drown out the voices of truth.
It never pays to serve truth. I serve it because of the way I was raised. People are no longer raised that way.So truth faces extinction.
*
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.
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.
age: (Afganistan, famine)
February 2017: Bill Gates’s warning of bioterrorism involving a “synthetic version of the smallpox virus” (
Moon hit hard the PJCSK through the social and economic reforms, the promotion of PMEs along with the war against the corruption culture of the PJCSK.
Perhaps the most demented of [Trump’s appointees] is also the individual in the most potentially threatening position, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.Hegseth is a journalist with FOX news with one observer noting that he has never managed any organization larger than his three wives and five children prior to his upgrade to the $1 trillion budgeted 2.9 million Pentagon employees. Even by Christian Zionist standards, he might well be considered to be an extremist.”
Since Lown travelled, lecturing, to the USSR frequently and had built trust over many years at all levels, the US State Department asked if he would engage in some unofficial diplomacy.
Thirteen Years Ago: The US-NATO-Israel Sponsored Al Qaeda Insurgency in Syria
“Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East
For Bibi, the Road to Tehran Goes Through Damascus. Mike Whitney
Is World War III About to Start or Has It Already?
Assad Is Out, Woke Al-Qaeda Is In
Who the Hell Is In Charge Here? If Trump Submits to Israeli Control Just as Biden Did, We Need a Revolution
Video: Pentagon “War Games”. Ruebek and Churya Attack America
Romania – Coup d’État Instigated by the EU? “Europe is on A Fast Descent into Darkness”,… “A Pact with the Devil”. Peter Koenig
Black Flag Over Damascus. Mike Whitney
Undeclared US-NATO-Israel War of Aggression against Syria: “Al Qaeda Terrorism” to Wage a Coup d’Etat against an Elected Secular Government
The Geopolitics of Elite Insanity: Teetering on the Brink of Armageddon, The Danger of Nuclear War
Video: Silver Bullet. “They Want One World Government”. Dr. Mike Yeadon
“Theater Iran Near Term” (TIRANNT). The Ongoing Planning of War against Iran
There Never Was a “New Corona Virus”, There Never Was a Pandemic
Video: A Brief History of the War on Syria. James Corbett
Syria: Can Turkey be Trusted?
One Reason Why Consuming Animal Fats Is Vital
The Covid Vaxx Jab-Pushing Government of Danielle Smith in Alberta. Anthony J. Hall
Does Russia Have an Intelligence Service? Paul C. Roberts
