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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Secret Service’s explanations for the security failures surrounding the assassination attempt against former President Donald Trump at a rally on Saturday aren’t adding up, according to security experts and former Secret Service agents.

Emerging details from official accounts and leaks to the media have raised serious questions about how a 20-year-old gunman was able to get within rifle range of Trump. Many key questions hinge on the responsibilities delegated to local police, who U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle confirmed during a Monday interview with ABC News were inside the building the shooter fired from, though nobody was stationed on the rooftop. 

Cheatle explained a decision was made not to put anybody on top of the building because the “sloped” roof made it unsafe, but security experts and former Secret Service agents who spoke with the Daily Caller News Foundation emphasized not having someone on the roof was a “big failure” and didn’t believe Cheatle’s explanation was sufficient.

“Let’s just say the local law enforcement officers [and] the Secret Service agree that it’s just not safe to keep someone up there for a couple of hours,” former Secret Service agent Anthony Cangelosi told the DCNF. “Then the question is, well, how do we maintain its integrity otherwise? It’s not like you just throw your hands up and say ‘can’t do that.’”

Cangelosi said there is no “justifiable reason” for failing to cover the roof, suggesting they should have found solutions like putting another platform up or getting an officer on a lift. 

Peter Yachmetz, retired FBI agent and principal security consultant at Yachmetz Consulting Group, pointed out that the shooter was moving around on the “unsafe” roof prior to the incident.

“The slope didn’t affect him,” Yachmetz told the DCNF.

Click here to read the tweet on X

Law enforcement reportedly spotted the shooter on the roof 30 minutes before shots were fired, WPXI reported Monday. After the incident, a witness described watching a man climbing onto the roof and trying to warn a police officer, claiming officials responded with confusion. 

“The reality is, regardless of the spin, that particular roof should have been under constant surveillance and or posted,” former secret service agent Tim Miller told the DCNF.

Click here to read the tweet on X

“In this particular instance, we did share support for that particular site and that the Secret Service was responsible for the inner perimeter,” Cheatle told ABC News Monday during an interview. “And then we sought assistance from our local counterparts for the outer perimeter. There was local police in that building — there was local police in the area that were responsible for the outer perimeter of the building.”

However, a local law enforcement official told The New York Times Tuesday that the local forces were in an adjacent building, not the one the shooter was firing from.

The discrepancies in their accounts only add to the uncertainties surrounding who was responsible.

CBS News reported Monday that there were three snipers stationed inside the building shooter Thomas Matthew Crooks fired from, citing a local law enforcement officer. One of the snipers saw Crooks looking through a rangefinder in the minutes before he fired and radioed command post, according to CBS News.

The Butler Township Police Department declined to confirm the report to the DCNF, stating that there is an ongoing investigation by the FBI.

Butler County Sheriff Michael Slupe declined to offer additional comments Tuesday, telling the DCNF he is “backing away from media requests for comment and opinions.”

“There are too many questions being posed that I do not have first hand knowledge of and too many fingers being pointed,” he said. “I am in charge of the Deputy Sheriffs and no other law enforcement agency. My Deputies performed their duties at their assigned areas and went above and beyond after the shooting started and ended in the their actions to help people and assist police in clearing the nearby buildings.”

Slupe previously confirmed to CNN that an armed Butler Township officer encountered Crooks before he shot at Trump, but retreated down the ladder after Crooks pointed his gun at him. He told KDKA-TV there was a security failure, but noted “there is not just one entity responsible.”

“The Secret Service plays a key role in protecting, in this case, former President Trump, but they don’t act alone,” he told the outlet. “The Secret Service receives support from local police departments.”

Click here to read the tweet on X

Pennsylvania State Police, however, did confirm they had no members “inside the building or staging in it.”

“The Pennsylvania State Police provided all resources that the United States Secret Service (USSS) requested for former President Trump’s rally in Butler on Saturday, July 13th, including approximately 30 to 40 troopers to assist with securing the inside perimeter,” Pennsylvania State Police Lieutenant Adam Reed told the DCNF. “Among PSP’s duties at the rally, the Department was not responsible for securing the building or property at AGR International.”

Reed said he could not say when an officer witnessed the shooter, as it was not a state trooper who saw him.

Click here to read the tweet on X

Former secret service agent Jeffrey James explained to the DCNF that protection “works in a series of concentric circles.” Typically, there is an inner circle of secret service agents, a second circle that mixes both agents and local law enforcement, and an outer ring that is largely state and local partners.

If the agent in charge of the site told a local law enforcement officer on the outer perimeter that the building is his responsibility, then anything that happens is on the officer.

“But if that agent didn’t find one of the local law enforcement partners and give very clear, direct directions…then it’s going to be the responsibility or the fault of that agent for not delegating that,” he told the DCNF.

It’s unclear what instructions the Secret Service gave to local law enforcement.

Butler County District Attorney Richard Goldinger told The Washington Post Tuesday that “Secret Service was in charge” and that “it was their responsibility to make sure that the venue and the surrounding area was secure.”

“For them to blame local law enforcement is them passing the blame when they hold the blame, in my opinion,” Goldinger told The Washington Post.

However, the Secret Service released a statement on Tuesday pushing back against assertions that they were blaming local law enforcement for the tragedy that unfolded on Saturday. “Any news suggesting the Secret Service is blaming local law enforcement for Saturday’s incident is simply not true,” the statement posted to the Secret Service’s X page said.

“I am having difficulty reconciling the answer the Director gave in her ABC interview with the official statement made on social media,” Patrick Yoes, national president of the Fraternal Order of Police, said in a press release on Tuesday. “Our goal is to provide whatever assistance the Secret Service needs to perform their mission and to do so with mutual respect, trust, and accuracy.”

A RealClearPolitics report suggested Sunday that resources were diverted away from Trump’s rally to an event where First Lady Jill Biden was speaking. Anthony Guglielmi, chief of communications for the United States Secret Service, denied this was the case.

Questions also remain about why Crooks was not taken out sooner. Cangelosi explained to the DCNF that counter-snipers can face challenges due to their distance from the target.

“With counter snipers, you’re usually so far away, it’s not usually clear whether an individual is an imminent threat, ” Cangelosi said. “It’s harder to discern. Once they discern whether that person is a threat to life or serious bodily injury, they can take the shot.”

Yachmetz questioned why drone coverage was not utilized.

“A drone strategically placed a few thousand feet above could have oversaw the entire venue,” he said.

“In my opinion, a detailed, in-depth very specific investigation must be conducted of all procedures [and] this entire matter by a non-biased outside investigative group (possibly of retired agents),” Yachmetz told the DCNF, emphasizing the investigation must not be “politically motivated.”

House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer announced Monday that Cheatle would testify at a committee hearing on July 22. President Joe Biden said Sunday that he directed an “independent review” of the events.

The FBI told the DCNF it has “nothing additional to provide at this time beyond previously-issued statements.” The Bureau said Monday that it gained access to Crooks’ phone and “has conducted nearly 100 interviews of law enforcement personnel, event attendees, and other witnesses.”

Trump suffered a wound to his ear, and two were killed, including Crooks and 50-year-old ex-volunteer fire chief, Corey Comperatore. Two other attendees were also wounded in the attack.

The Secret Service did not respond to a request for comment.

*

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.

Wallace White and Owen Klinsky contributed to this report. 

Featured image source

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Are mainstream Israeli media outlets now guilty of antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theories, or is it no longer an antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theory to say that this happened?

A new report from the Israeli outlet Haaretz titled “IDF Ordered Hannibal Directive on October 7 to Prevent Hamas Taking Soldiers Captive” confirms what independent outlets like The Grayzone and Electronic Intifada have been getting smeared as antisemitic conspiracy theorists for saying this entire time: that many of the Israeli deaths on October 7 were the result of an IDF policy of deliberately firing on their own people to prevent them from being taken hostage by Hamas.

Citing a “very senior IDF source,” Haaretz reports that Israeli troops responding to the Hamas attack were told “Not a single vehicle can return to Gaza,” and that “it was entirely clear what that message meant, and what the fate of some of the kidnapped people would be.”

This acknowledgement flies in the face of everything the imperial media and Western officials have been saying since October about these claims. Just last month State Department spokesman Matthew Miller acted as though journalist Sam Husseini was a raving lunatic for asking about the possible implementation of the Hannibal Directive on October 7. The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal notes that he was actually smeared as a “manipulator” by Haaretz itself back in November for his reporting on the evidence of IDF fire being behind many deaths during the attack.

So I guess at this point we need to ask, which is it? Are mainstream Israeli media outlets now guilty of antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theories, or is it no longer an antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theory to say that this happened?

*

A new report published in The Lancet medical journal titled “Counting the dead in Gaza: difficult but essential” highlights the fact that many times more people tend to be killed indirectly by things like starvation and disease as a result of recent conflicts than from direct military violence. The report says that as a “conservative” estimate of four such indirect deaths for every one direct death, a direct death count of 37,396 could wind up placing the actual total death count as a result of this onslaught at around 186,000. This would be about eight percent of the total population of Gaza.

The Lancet notes that the number of reported direct deaths is “likely an underestimate” since thousands of bodies remain uncounted beneath the rubble in Gaza, and since Israel has destroyed Gaza’s infrastructure for counting the dead. So the real number of direct deaths is almost certainly much higher than 37,396, which means the real number of indirect deaths which could be conservatively inferred from this number would sit well into the hundreds of thousands. 

And that’s just if the direct killing stopped today. The real death toll is only going up.

*

Foreign reporters now making their way into Rafah for the first time since the Israeli assault on the city began are now describing the place as a “flattened wasteland,” a “maze of rubble,” and “unrecognizable.” 

As Dr Assal Rad noted on Twitter, these reports come just days after the US State Department’s deputy spokesman Vedant Patel told the press “We continue to believe that any major military incursion into Rafah we would be opposed to, but yet, we have yet to see any kind of incursion to take place thus far.”

 

If a military operation which turns a city into a flattened, unrecognizable wasteland of rubble isn’t considered a “major military incursion”, I think it’s fair to say that nothing would be.

*

It’s so surreal how Americans watched undeniable evidence that the president doesn’t run America during the first presidential debate, and then went right back to arguing about who should be president as though this never happened.

I mean, they watched it happen. Right in front of their faces. They saw clear, unequivocal evidence that the person who’s supposedly calling the shots in their country has a brain which does not work, which means the shots are necessarily being called by someone else. And yet here they are, still arguing over who should be president as though they didn’t just see the very premise of this argument exposed as complete nonsense.

It’s like if a wife was talking to her husband, and then he told her “I’m not actually your husband, I’m a space alien,” and then he took off his mask and showed her his flying saucer, and then after he put his mask back on she asks him what he wants for dinner and reminds him they’re having drinks with the Millers on Friday.

Inside Joe Biden there are two wolves fighting: a deranged imperialist wolf who wants to commit genocide and start World War Three, and a demented incontinent wolf who just wants to be welcomed into the sweet embrace of death.

A liberal will tell you you’re crazy and unrealistic for saying revolution is the only path to meaningful change, and then say the only real path is to make sure their party never, ever loses an election in a system that’s arranged to ensure both parties lose half the time.

*

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.

Featured image source

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The US Air Force has been sending unmarked planes from Britain’s base on Cyprus to Israel since it began bombing Gaza, it can be revealed.

The planes are all C-295 and CN-235 aircraft, which are believed to be used by American special forces. 

Declassified has found 18 of these aircraft which have gone from the sprawling British air base on Cyprus, RAF Akrotiri, to Israel’s coastal city Tel Aviv since October 7.

Akrotiri is the key node in the international effort to arm and provide logistical support for Israel’s assault on Gaza.

Flight path of an unmarked US Air Force plane that flew from RAF Akrotiri to Tel Aviv on 26 June. (Screengrab: Radarbox)

But the UK government has always refused to divulge any information about US activities at Akrotiri, which is known to include transporting weapons to Israel.

Asked in May how many US Air Force (USAF) flights had taken off from the base since October 7, defence minister Leo Docherty said:

“The Ministry of Defence does not comment on the operations of our Allies.”

But Declassified discovered the unmarked planes that flew from Akrotiri to Israel from November to June have a serial number showing they are operated by the USAF. Most of these journeys had the flight number GONZO62.

Six more unmarked C-130 planes have gone from Akrotiri to Tel Aviv since the bombing of Gaza began, which are believed to be USAF, but it was not possible for Declassified to locate their operator.

The C-130 can carry 128 combat troops and almost 20 tonnes of cargo.

The new information could further implicate British ministers in war crimes in Gaza. In November 2023, a US military official revealed that American special forces were stationed in Israel and “actively helping the Israelis”.

A spokesperson for the UK Ministry of Defence would only tell Declassified:

“In response to the situation in Israel and Gaza, we are working with international partners to de-escalate the conflict, reinforce stability and support humanitarian efforts in the region. Any use of UK bases will be in line with these objectives.”

Fort Liberty

Most of the unmarked planes show that they were recently at Fayetteville, North Carolina, which is home to Fort Liberty, the largest US Army base by population with nearly 50,000 active-duty soldiers.

Formerly called Fort Bragg, it is home to the 1st Special Forces Command (Airborne) which “assigns, equips, trains, certifies, and validates [Army Special Operations Forces] Soldiers and units to conduct global operations”.

The Pentagon says this unit is “the most adaptable and capable enabling force in the United States military.”

The planes, the C-295 and CN-235, are produced by Airbus and believed to be used by 427th Special Operations Squadron which has been described as USAF’s “most secretive squadron” and is based at Fort Liberty.

After a reporter filed a Freedom of Information Act request, the Air Force told him the unit supports “training requirements…for infiltration and exfiltration” – a reference to the covert deployment and extraction of special forces behind enemy lines. 

The aircraft’s primary military roles include maritime patrol, surveillance, and air transport. It can carry 70 military personnel or 48 paratroopers.

In February 2023, an unmarked CN-235 went to eastern Europe to support President Joe Biden’s trip to Ukraine and Poland. 

This plane arrived at the USAF base in Britain, RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk on February 17, where it spent the night before leaving for Poland the following day. 

One journalist noted:

“Sporting a single-tone slate grey livery, this rare, secretive [Air Force Special Operations Command] aircraft wore no identifiable national markings, air arm/unit insignia or serial number details.”

But the serial number of the US plane at RAF Mildenhall was eventually located and is the same as the plane that has flown from Akrotiri to Israel five times since March, including as recently as June 26. 

Aerial view of Pope Airfield in Fayetteville, North Carolina, where records have placed the covert US Air Force planes. (Screengrab: Google Earth)

Aerial view of Pope Airfield in Fayetteville, North Carolina, where records have placed the covert US Air Force planes. (Screengrab: Google Earth)

Transport Flights

Declassified has also found 26 marked USAF planes have arrived at RAF Akrotiri since the bombing of Gaza began. These have included 16 huge C-17 military transport aircraft from US bases in Germany, Spain and Kuwait.

The C-17 is capable of transporting 134 personnel and many types of military equipment, including Abrams tanks and three Black Hawk helicopters. The US military notes that its role is to “rapidly project and sustain an effective combat force close to a potential battle area”.

Respected Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported in October 2023 that over 40 US transport aircraft had already flown to RAF Akrotiri carrying equipment, arms and forces. It is unclear where they got this figure from. 

Haaretz reported that the planes were loaded with cargo from strategic depots belonging to the US and NATO in Europe. Around half the US flights were said to be “delivering military aid”.

Declassified has found that during the six days from February 4 to 9 there was a flurry of USAF activity at RAF Akrotiri when six C-17s arrived from Ramstein air base in Germany. All soon returned to their bases.

On June 24, a US-operated C-17 was sent from RAF Akrotiri to Tel Aviv, before flying on to Ramstein. It is possible this plane was transferring weapons to Israel. 

USAF planes arriving at Akrotiri since October 7 have also included five C-130 planes coming from the US base Incirlik at Adana in Turkey. The UK government has refused to disclose what they had onboard.

The US Department of Defense did not respond to a request for comment.

*

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.

Matt Kennard is Head of Investigations at Declassified UK. He was a fellow and then director at the Centre for Investigative Journalism in London. Follow him on Twitter @kennardmatt

Featured image: Flight path of an unmarked US Air Force plane that flew from RAF Akrotiri to Tel Aviv on 26 June. (Screengrab: Radarbox)

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

It’s no secret that the Neo-Nazi junta and (for now) former president Donald Trump don’t exactly see eye to eye. However, as the latter’s chances for a second term are now going through the roof, it could be argued that the Kiev regime is in a quiet (or perhaps not so quiet) panic mode.

It should be noted that Trump certainly isn’t pro-Russian, as his staunch political opponents in both parties like to point out. However, he fully realizes that the puppet regime in Ukraine was installed by the exact same people who have been doing everything in their power to prevent him from winning the upcoming election. The latest evidence suggests that this also includes the recent assassination attempt. As I’ve argued already, foreign involvement in this is also quite probable.

Image: JD Vance (From the Public Domain)

Vance poses for a professional portrait in a suit and red tie. Behind him the flag of the U.S. is partly visible on his left and the flag of Ohio on the right.

And while this hypothesis may seem too farfetched, especially so soon after the assassination attempt, the Neo-Nazi junta’s desperation shouldn’t be taken lightly. Its frontman Volodymyr Zelensky has had a very rocky relationship with several of Trump’s closest associates, including his running mate, JD Vance.

Namely, in an interview he gave to CNN on the second anniversary of the special military operation (SMO), Zelensky didn’t have anything nice to say about Vance. In fact, the former comedian insisted that Vance, who served as a combat correspondent in the US Marine Corps, is “clueless” about the ongoing NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. It seems the fatigues Zelensky has been wearing since the SMO started gave him the illusion that he’s an actual military commander.

“I’m not sure he understands what’s going on here and we don’t need any rhetoric from people who are not deeply in the war,” Zelensky told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, adding: “To understand, he needs to come to the frontline to see what’s going on, to speak with the people … to understand.”

As an employee of CNN, the infamous neoliberal mouthpiece and the flagship of the mainstream propaganda machine, Collins essentially led Zelensky to criticize Vance, as he was one of the staunchest opponents of the $60 billion “aid” package that the United States provided to the Kiev regime in late April. Vance was certainly aware of the Neo-Nazi junta’s massive issues with endemic corruption, while also understanding that much of that money was also being funneled back into the US so that the no less corrupt Democrats could get their “fair share” of the spoils. In addition, Trump’s running mate also expressed the belief that the so-called “aid” wouldn’t change the real situation on the ground, a fact that Zelensky never takes too kindly and always insists that “Ukraine is winning”.

Zelensky certainly never dreamed that his comments on Vance could actually make the Kiev regime’s relations with Trump all the more sour, so he soon resorted to damage control after his closest henchmen panicked that tens of billions in US “aid” could soon dry out. The lavish lifestyle of the Neo-Nazi junta elite is quite expensive and includes high-level prostitutes, supercars, seaside resorts, villas and other perks of “freedom and democracy”. During a press briefing held on July 15, Zelensky insisted that he is “ready to work with Trump” if the latter is elected in November. Obviously, this was a last-ditch (albeit ill-timed) effort to make sure that the aforementioned American “aid” continues flowing into the coffers of the perpetually corrupt Kiev regime.

“If Mr. Donald Trump becomes a president, we will work. I am not afraid of this,” Zelensky stated, adding: “Most of the Democratic party supports Ukraine, [but] there are varying positions among Republicans, some of whom are more right-wing and radical. The Republican Party is different, but its majority supports Ukraine and the people of Ukraine. We have bipartisan support and we have strong relations with the US politicians representing the Republican Party.”

We can only expect that such “damage control” just made things worse, as it’s quite clear who these “more right-wing and radical” Republicans are. Zelensky is certainly not referring to actual warmongers and war criminals such as Lindsey Graham, infamous for calls to “take Putin out” and the excitement that “the Russians are dying”, Michael McCaul who wants Americans to die for Taiwanese semiconductors or John Bolton, one of the worst warhawks in Washington DC who openly called for a coup in Russia. This is without even considering the fact that the frontman of a literal Neo-Nazi regime and a man who thinks Stepan Bandera is a “hero”, is suddenly so “worried” about “right-wing and radical” pro-Trump Republicans.

The obsessive panic about Trump and Vance can also be seen in the European Union, where senior officials are already preparing for doom and gloom scenarios of the Kiev regime’s total defeat at the hands of the advancing Russian military. Not to mention that many of them are convinced that they’ll also be forced to face Russia all by themselves, a daunting prospect given just how ineffective and weak the EU has become (if it’s ever been anything but). One unnamed official was quite direct and said that “this is a disaster for Ukraine”. Having to deal with Trump was “a major trouble already”, but it seems that Brussels is particularly afraid of Vance, as his appointment “raised further questions about a potential new administration’s commitment to Ukraine and the transatlantic alliance”.

Politico claims that “Vance has made his views on Ukraine clear”, because in 2022, he told Steve Bannon in an interview that “[he doesn’t] really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another”. In February 2024, Vance also refused to meet the Neo-Nazi junta’s delegation at the Munich Security Conference, telling Politico that “the US needed to reassess its support for Ukraine”. He also criticized the EU for its “dependence on the US for military spending”, particularly Germany, accusing it of “failing to meet the NATO defense spending target of 2% of GDP”. However, the Kiev regime officials believe something could be “worked out with Vance”. Maria Mezentseva, an MP from Zelensky’s party and deputy chairwoman of the EU integration committee, said Vance should be invited to Ukraine.

“I think we should bring him,” she told Semafor, adding: “That’s how we usually succeed to change someone’s mind.”

Mezentseva’s assessment may seem overoptimistic, but it’s not without reason, as it has indeed been the case that many who were previously skeptical about the Neo-Nazi junta ended up “changing their mind” after visiting the country.

Whether this was the result of some “monetary encouragement” or something else is unknown, but it obviously worked often enough to give the Kiev regime the said overconfidence. We don’t yet know much about Vance and his convictions to say with certainty whether he’d budge or not. However, we do know that Trump is unlikely to do so, particularly if the Neo-Nazi junta’s possible involvement in his assassination attempt is revealed. This perfectly explains the panic in both Kiev and Brussels, as well as the Deep State’s readiness to eliminate Trump. After all, he said he will “totally obliterate it”.

*

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.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

‘There was crazy hysteria, and decisions started being made without verified information’: Documents and testimonies obtained by Haaretz reveal the Hannibal operational order, which directs the use of force to prevent soldiers being taken into captivity, was employed at three army facilities infiltrated by Hamas, potentially endangering civilians as well

Gaza Division operations and airstrikes in the first hours of October 7 were based on limited information. The first long moments after the Hamas attack was launched were chaotic. Reports were coming in, with their significance not always clear. When their meaning was understood, it was realized that something horrific had taken place.

Communication networks could not keep up with the flow of information, as was the case for soldiers sending these reports. However, the message conveyed at 11:22 A.M. across the Gaza Division network was understood by everyone.

“Not a single vehicle can return to Gaza” was the order.

At this point, the IDF was not aware of the extent of kidnapping along the Gaza border, but it did know that many people were involved. Thus, it was entirely clear what that message meant, and what the fate of some of the kidnapped people would be.

This was not the first order given by the division with the intent of foiling kidnapping even at the expense of the lives of the kidnapped, a procedure known in the army as the “Hannibal procedure.”

Documents obtained by Haaretz, as well as testimonies of soldiers, mid-level and senior IDF officers, reveal a host of orders and procedures laid down by the Gaza Division, Southern Command and the IDF General Staff up to the afternoon hours of that day, showing how widespread this procedure was, from the first hours following the attack and at various points along the border.

Haaretz does not know whether or how many civilians and soldiers were hit due to these procedures, but the cumulative data indicates that many of the kidnapped people were at risk, exposed to Israeli gunfire, even if they were not the target.

At 6:43 A.M., at which time rocket barrages were launched at Israel and thousands of Hamas operatives were attacking army strongholds and the division’s observation and communications capabilities, the division’s commander Brig. Gen. Avi Rosenfeld declared that “the Philistines have invaded.”

This is the procedure when an enemy invades Israeli territory, upon which a division commander can assume extraordinary authority, including the employment of heavy fire inside Israeli territory, in order to block an enemy raid.

Click here to read the full article on Haaretz.

*

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. 

Featured image source

This interview was recorded a July 2, 2024. It was intended to be published prior to the NATO Summit. 

Due to temporary technical problems the programme was not recorded in the Lux Media Studio. Our thanks to Lux Media for their support. 

***

.

NATO is not an Alliance. It is an organisation under the command of the Pentagon, and its objective is the military control of Western and Eastern Europe.

US bases in the member countries of NATO serve to occupy these countries, by maintaining a permanent military presence which enables Washington to influence and control their policies and prevent genuine democratic choices. 

NATO is a war machine which works for the interests of the United States, with the complicity of the major European power groups, staining itself with crimes against humanity.

These wars are financed by the member countries, whose military budgets are increasing continually to the detriment of social expenditure, in order to support colossal military programmes like that of the US nuclear programme which costs 1,300 billion dollars.

To exit the war system which is  exposing us to increasing dangers, we must leave NATO, affirming our rights as sovereign and neutral States.

In this way, it becomes possible to contribute to the dismantling of NATO and all other military alliances, to the reconfiguration of the structures of the whole European region, to the formation of a multipolar world where the aspirations of the People for liberty and social justice may be realised.

We propose the creation of a NATO EXIT International Front in all NATO member countries , by building an organisational network at a basic level strong enough to support the very difficult struggle we must face in order to attain this objective, which is vital for our future.

Excerpts from the Florence Declaration. Florence, April 7, 2019

 

US Secret Service Director Cheatle’s Statement Regarding Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump. Analysis

By John Leake, July 17, 2024

The barn roofs are higher than the roof of the building from which Crooks fired. That at least one of the counter-snipers could see him is evidenced by the fact that the counter-sniper ultimately shot Crooks in the head.

Video: At NATO Summit, Biden Introduces Zelensky as Putin. Gets “His Countries Mixed Up”, “Political Plagiarism” and More…

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 17, 2024

What would happen if Biden were to get his targeted  countries or his weapons systems mixed up. Biden’s mental acuity cannot be categorized as “fraudulent”. What is deceitful and fraudulent is the outright conduct of “political plagiarism” (1988). 

‘Brain Dead’ and Dangerous, NATO Proceeds

By Patrick Lawrence, July 18, 2024

It is now five years since Emmanuel Macron, in one of those blunt outbursts for which he is known, told The Economist, in a reference to the collective West, “What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO.” The French president thereupon shocked officials across the Continent.

Are You Gloating at the American Political “Turbulence” or Ashamed? The Various Coups and Assassinations in the Global South

By Rima Najjar, July 17, 2024

The United States, often through the CIA, has been involved in various coups and assassinations in the Global South. These actions have had profound and lasting impacts on the region.

Why Does Zelensky Suddenly Want Russia at the Next ‘Peace Summit’?

By Drago Bosnic, July 17, 2024

With everything set up for a major escalation, the last thing one would expect is to see Zelensky suggest that Russia should be invited to the next “peace summit”. The news about it went under the radar because everyone’s focus was on the assassination attempt on Donald Trump, but at a press conference in Kiev, Zelensky did exactly that, leaving many confused and dumbfounded.

Dutton’s Quixotic Proposal: Nuclear Lunacy Down Under

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, July 18, 2024

Needing to find some electoral distraction to improve the Liberal-National coalition’s chances of returning to office, Dutton has literally identified a nuclear option. Certainly, it is mischievous, throwing those wishing to invest in the problematic Australian energy market into a state of confusion. The business of renewables, as with any investment, is bound to also be shaken.

American Democracy’s Theater of the Absurd

By Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null, July 17, 2024

Since the end of the Cold War and the Clinton administration coming to power in 1992, the United States has undergone a systemic decay in its political body. Policies increasingly favor the interests of an oligarchic and powerful elite more often than not at the expense of the public.

‘Brain Dead’ and Dangerous, NATO Proceeds

July 18th, 2024 by Patrick Lawrence

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

It is now five years since Emmanuel Macron, in one of those blunt outbursts for which he is known, told The Economist, in a reference to the collective West, “What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO.” The French president thereupon shocked officials across the Continent. “That is not my point of view,” Angela Merkel responded augustly. “I don’t think that such sweeping judgments are necessary.” Heiko Maas, the German chancellor’s foreign minister, added imaginatively, “I do not believe NATO is brain dead.”

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) celebrated its 75th anniversary last week, 32 presidents and prime ministers assembling in the same Washington auditorium where earlier leaders, 12 of them then, signed its founding treaty on April 4, 1949. Joe Biden presided over the anniversary proceedings, of course. And with this in mind, let us credit the French leader for his prescience in diagnosing the condition of NATO’s cerebral matter. As Joe Lauria put it in a Consortium News commentary at the summit’s conclusion last Thursday, this is an organization whose members are collectively losing their minds. 

It is important to understand what Macron did and did not mean with this remark. He was not, as might be easily misinterpreted, declaring the North Atlantic Treaty Organization purposeless or obsolete: That was Donald Trump’s line, and Trump was then three years into his presidency. Macron, indeed, was reacting to Trump’s complaints about the alliance as a budgetary sinkhole and his, Trump’s, consequent failure to point the other members in the imperium’s desired direction, as all American presidents had since NATO’s launch as the Atlantic world’s premier Cold War military institution. 

undefined

For the first time, a photo at the Washington summit captures all 32 NATO member states’ delegation groups together (9th of July 2024) (From the Public Domain)

Specific to the occasion of his interview with The Economist, Macron was unhappy about the mess then unfolding in northern Syria. Some readers may recall it: Trump had ordered American troops withdrawn—albeit an order diplomats, Army officers, and spooks soon subverted—and Turkey, a NATO member, had immediately piled in to attack Kurdish militias based in the region.

“You have no coordination whatsoever of strategic decision-making between the United States and its NATO allies. None,” Macron told The Economist. “You have an uncoordinated aggressive action by another NATO ally, Turkey, in an area where our interests are at stake. There has been no NATO planning, nor any coordination.’’

And then the French leader’s punchline:

“We should reassess the reality of what NATO is in light of the commitment of the United States.’’

Macron’s “brain dead” remark was not the thought of any kind of peacenik, then. The man who now advocates sending French troops into Ukraine is a committed militarist. What interests me about Macron’s apparently bold utterances, again and again, are the contradictions you find in them. In this case, he was angry at Donald Trump for failing to let the Europeans pretend they had a say in alliance policy while taking the occasion to assert his then-new, now-familiar call for Europe to cultivate its  “strategic autonomy.”

This is the kind of thing—the self-doubt, the smoldering resentments, the fraying unity—that prompted President Biden to make revitalizing NATO a priority when he took office three and some years ago.

“Who’s going to be able to hold NATO together like me?” was prominent among his boasts in his July 5 interview with ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos. “You’re going to have now the NATO conference here in the United States next week. Come listen. See what they say.”

The anniversary summit has come and gone. And two realities are now upon us. The other alliance leaders in attendance didn’t say anything of consequence—not a single statement of note. It was boilerplate and pabulum, start to finish. Two, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is nicely reunited—“Together Again,” as the old Buck Owens song goes—but there can be no doubting now that it is brain dead. 

Here is something frightening to consider. This is Larry Johnson’s take on the question that occupied minds during the July 9–11 gathering. Johnson, who now commentates regularly, is a former CIA officer and also served previously in the State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism. Don’t let the vulgar imagery throw you; it is indicative of the prevailing mood: 

“The hot political event this year is the NATO Summit in Washington. All Western world leaders showed up, not to discuss NATO’s future, but to see if Joe Biden survives the meetings without dumping a load in his Depends or keeling over dead. Sort of the same reason people attend a car race—i.e., they are waiting for the crash. Nothing like a fiery car wreck to get the adrenaline pumping.”

We need to think about what it means when NATO members meet and what is on their minds are not the various crises into which they have led the world over the past many years but whether the man whose authority lies effectively beyond question will manage to deliver an address coherently. We can laugh at President Biden’s public displays of ineptitude, and there were some of these, per usual, as he addressed the summit and then gave a press conference afterward. But I didn’t say funny: I said frightening. And this is what NATO has become during Biden’s three and a half years as the alliance’s de facto commander-in-chief. 

Image: President Joe Biden shakes hands with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during the NATO Summit in Washington, D.C., July 11, 2024 (From the Public Domain)

undefined

Yes, Biden introduced Volodymyr Zelensky to the summit as “President Putin.” Yes, he confused his vice-president with the nonexistent “Vice-President Trump.” But it seems time now to look beyond ridicule. It is certainly time for the mainstream media to cut out the everybody-makes-mistakes nonsense. Biden has made himself a sad figure these past few weeks, a character reading a little out of Shakespeare and a little out of Sophocles. But the NATO summit faces us with the bitter reality that Joe Biden has become, above all, dangerous. Is there another way to think about a man listing into senility while directing an inordinately powerful military alliance whose members know how to defer and follow but do not know how to think? 

I was struck last week by the sparsity of the coverage American media dedicated to the summit. Some stories on Biden making it to the end of his presentations—the summit address, the presser that followed—without blowing it too badly. Markedly fewer given to the substance of the gathering. It seemed to me a tacit suggestion that nothing new was said or determined during the July 9–11 sessions. It was simply more of the same, and more of the same does not make good copy in the news biz. 

Let us consider what the same comes to, and then what it means that more of the same is on the way. To preview my conclusions, NATO has just committed the West’s post-democracies to an era of institutionalized war, global violence, and disorder—this with, by design, no plan to end it.

The same threat of annihilation familiar to those who recall the Cold War will prevail once again. Spending on armaments will take automatic priority over the well-being of the societies paying for this profligacy. Russia and China will be normalized as permanent enemies. The West’s estrangement from the non–West will be an established fact of life. The Deep State, an entrenched trans–Atlantic phenomenon now, will ally with liberal authoritarian elites to enforce this regime and suppress all those who question or challenge it. 

There is no overstatement here. This is precisely the project America’s neoconservative cliques outlined when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and a decade of American triumphalism ensued. You will find all of this in the subtext of Biden’s keynote address as the 75th events opened. The remarkable thing now is the degree of denial required of NATO’s leaders as they profess adherence to this agenda in a world radically transformed in the ensuing three decades. 

After praising the “remarkable progress” of European members that are spending ever more on weaponry—what a terrific thing—Biden went straight into the proxy war the alliance wages in Ukraine against the Russian Federation. Among his various assertions:

“Ukraine can and will stop Putin,” “Make no mistake, Russia is failing in this war,” “We’ve built a global coalition to stand with Ukraine.” “An overwhelming bipartisan majority of Americans understand that NATO makes us all safer.” And then one of my favorites, a recurring theme and a real Bidenism: “And Putin wants nothing less—nothing less than Ukraine’s total subjugation. And we know Putin will not stop at Ukraine.”

The high officials listening greeted all of these statements with enthusiasm. None of them bears even a remote relationship with the truth. In an interview with Andrew Napolitano taped for Judging Freedom, conducted after the summit ended July 11, John Mearsheimer, the foreign policy scholar, called Biden’s speech “poppycock, full of deluded statements.” But exactly. Reading the transcript of these remarks, all the intervals of applause noted in brackets, NATO seemed to me too Soviet for words at this point. I thought of those Cold War Life magazine photos of the Russian Duma when votes were taken, all hands raised uniformly in assent. 

This is the trans-Atlantic alliance as it has become. It operates on the basis of fantastic conjurings, and no member questions them. You have read absolutely no mainstream media challenging these silly fabrications and none analyzing NATO’s purpose or policies with any seriousness. This is what I mean by frightening. This is what makes NATO as it is now dangerous. Its stated purpose makes no sense and its unstated purpose is as noted above. 

And here is the diabolic truth it is important not to miss: Biden and everyone in his summit audience knows Ukraine is losing its war, knows Moscow has no designs on Europe, knows there is no “global coalition” standing with the alliance. These are simple facts beyond dispute, matters of record. But Biden’s speech was not meant for the other leaders present and the other leaders present did not applaud for Biden: Biden’s true audience was the public in the trans–Atlantic post-democracies, and the applause he received amounted to their instructions in the necessity to approve. 

NATO summits as performance, as exercises in mass propaganda conducted entirely in the open: I confess I cannot fully register the implications of an organization as powerful as the Atlantic alliance operating this emptily and cynically. NATO has a purpose all right, but its political figureheads, generals, and bureaucrats must make one up for public consumption, its actual purpose—global dominance at whatever cost—being too objectionable to profess.  

As to more of the same, the anniversary summit appears to mark a turn in the eastern alliance toward complete abandonment of the pretense of NATO as a defensive organization in favor of increasingly aggressive, provocative postures. Antony Blinken, speaking in the course of the proceedings, termed the thought of Ukraine’s membership in the alliance “inevitable and irreversible,” awaiting the Kiev regime across “a well-lit bridge.” I read this two ways. One, Biden and his policy cliques are doing what they can, which is limited, to reassure Ukraine in anticipation of a possible Trump victory in November. 

Two and closer to the ground, as Kiev continues to lose on the battlefield, NATO now intends to signal that settlement talks are out of the question and the alliance will plunge deeper into the morass however deep the morass eventually proves. To wit: John Helmer, a long-serving and highly reliable Moscow correspondent who now publishes Dances with Bears, reported last week,

American, British, and Canadian troops in NATO’s forward bases in Poland, Latvia, and Lithuania are being told to prepare for deployment to the Ukraine next year. They are also being warned to expect to fight under heavy Russian artillery, missile, guided bomb, and drone strikes.

Note the nations from which these troops will be dispatched to the Ukrainian front. They are all former Soviet satellites nursing quite understandable but lethally unbalanced cases of anti–Russian paranoia. This is how aggression is sometimes engendered in the long-term war against Russia. Ukraine relies on the same visceral anti–Russian animus by way of the neo–Nazi units that lead its military. 

“And here with us—and here with us today are countries from the Indo–Pacific region,” Biden said midway in his address. “They’re here because they have a stake in our success and we have a stake in theirs.” I do not like this remark one bit. I read it as a barely veiled confirmation of a swell of hints and innuendo last year to the effect that NATO intends to expand its purview to East Asia, so following the U.S. in its gradually escalating confrontation with China. 

undefined

The NATO Summit at the Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C., July 11, 2024 (From the Public Domain)

As if on cue, Jens Stoltenberg, NATO’s outgoing sec-gen, subsequently launched into an utterly inappropriate attack on China for “oppressing its own people,” for “crushing democratic voices,” for “more assertive behavior in the South China Sea,” for “threatening neighbors, threatening Taiwan,” and so on down the list of complaints Blinken and the Biden regime’s policy cliques favor when addressing the Chinese. 

NATO in Asia is now to be taken with the utmost seriousness. It is NATO now and the NATO to come—brain dead NATO, NATO everywhere with no legitimate business anywhere. Shortly after Stoltenberg delivered himself of his preposterous tirade, Biden hung the Presidential Medal of Freedom around his neck.

*

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.

Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune, is a media critic, essayist, author and lecturer. His new book, Journalists and Their Shadows, is out now from Clarity Press. His website is Patrick Lawrence. Support his work via his Patreon site

Featured image: 2024 Washington summit logo (Licensed under Fair Use)

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine was linked to significantly higher mortality rates than the Pfizer vaccines, based on a preliminary analysis of individual health data for the Czech Republic. Scientists call for more research.

The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine was linked to significantly higher mortality rates than the Pfizer vaccines, based on a preliminary analysis of individual health data for the Czech Republic.

Steve Kirsch, executive director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, with support from pathologist Clare Craig conducted a vaccine brand comparison by analyzing record-level, or individualized data, for the Czech Republic’s over 10 million people.

Kirsch obtained the data through a Freedom of Information Act request by a Czech citizen.

The data on vaccinated people included vaccine manufacturer, vaccination date, and the lot number and code for each person.

Kirsch was able to analyze people’s medical records over time, tracking which people received one, two or three doses of a vaccine by a given manufacturer, and whether they died within the following year.

He calculated and compared the overall mortality rate in the Moderna group with the Pfizer group and found that at all ages, there were more deaths in the Moderna group.

He also found that the difference in death rates was statistically significant across every age group studied. However, the percentage increase in risk increased as people got younger. His analysis covered people in their mid-40s through late 90s, according to his graphs.

Kirsch reported, for example, that people ages 46-69 who received two doses of Moderna’s vaccine had over a 50% higher risk of death within one year compared with those who received two Pfizer shots.

He also wrote that the data show the Pfizer vaccine is “also completely unsuitable for public use,” but there was not enough data to determine its link to all-cause mortality.

“Unless the drug makers can explain to the world how this new data from the Czech Republic actually proves that all their vaccines are equally safe, the Pfizer, Moderna, Jannsen, and AstraZenecavaccines should be immediately halted as too unsafe to use,” Kirsch wrote.

Critics: More Research Needed, But Preliminary Analysis ‘Valuable’

Kirsch’s analysis was not formally written up or peer-reviewed. However, he included a critique by University of Pennsylvania biostatistician Jeffrey Morris, Ph.D., whom Kirsch asked to comment.

Morris said the analysis did not account for possible confounding variables.

Kirsch countered that there was no confounding factor that could explain the difference and challenged researchers or governments to explain.

Denis Rancourt, Ph.D., all-cause mortality researcher and former physics professor at the University of Ottawa in Canada, who has done extensive country-by-country analyses of the link between vaccine rollouts and all-cause mortality also told The Defender there were systematic limitations to Kirsch’s analysis.

For example, he said, the Czech Republic had major spikes in excess mortality over time during the COVID-19 period, a lot of which were unrelated to the vaccines because they happened in complex ways before the vaccination campaigns.

This suggests there are other mechanisms of mortality — like COVID-19 treatment protocols, lockdowns or other issues, Rancourt said.

There is also variability in how different manufacturer’s vaccines were rolled out. For example, one manufacturer’s vaccine may have been rolled out earlier versus later during a spike in an all-cause mortality wave related to several different factors. In Kirsch’s analysis, that death would be attributed to a vaccine, even though it may have been caused by factors unrelated to the vaccine.

According to Rancourt, there is a significant temporal element that Kirsch’s analysis doesn’t accounted for. At what point during an all-cause mortality wave people are vaccinated and when they die, and when and how rapidly vaccines from a particular manufacturer are rolled out must all be taken into account in a proper analysis.

“One must do a full temporal analysis to control for this systematic error,” Rancourt said. “This was not done.”

However, he also said Kirsch’s analysis is “very useful and important data.” Despite his methodological critiques, Rancourt said. “I think it’s highly valid what [Kirsch] is doing. He’s done a first analysis that shows a result that is worth looking into.”

Kirsch called the Czech government data “the mother lode.” “We have never had data like this before,” he said and shared comments from other researchers who also commented on the value of the data.

“The patient-level data from the Czech Republic is astonishing and very disturbing,” Dr. Paul Marik said.

“I am amazed that it took the authorities four years to release individual-level data,” data scientist Tomas Fürst, Ph.D., from the Czech Republic told Kirsch. “If we had this type of data earlier, we would have been able to avoid the biggest mistakes of the pandemic response. All governments should immediately release this data.”

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., research scientist for Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender, “One of the most important takeaways from this research is that we are seeing important signals in the data about a very serious safety issue and we need more data to investigate it further.”

“But we don’t have that data — governments do and they ought to release it for analysis,” he said.

Debating Potential Biases and Alternative Explanations

Kirsch did his analysis based on the assumption that Pfizer was harmless so that it could therefore act as a placebo group, Craig explained on her Substack.

“It is an excellent placebo group because confounders around health and socioeconomic variables are accounted for because the brands were distributed randomly,” she said.

Kirsch addressed several counter-arguments, or what he called “attack vectors” through which critics might attack his findings.

The most plausible counter-explanation, he said, would be that there was a vaccine distribution bias where Moderna and other vaccines were given exclusively to people with high comorbidities.

However, he said there was no evidence that Moderna was given to people at higher risk of death or that there were any criteria for vaccinating people with one vaccine or the other. Therefore, he said, it could be assumed the vaccines were assigned by convenience, “removing the majority of biases.”

Craig agreed, “Unless someone can provide compelling evidence of Moderna having been given to those more likely to die in every age group and throughout the time period then this is compelling evidence that it was more deadly,” she wrote.

However, Rancourt noted that vaccines are not rolled out randomly. “Different manufacturers get rolled out at different times and are even used for different groups of people,” he said. “So there is no reason to assume that the two manufacturers were proportionally rolled out synchronously.”

Instead, the differences in the rollouts should be accounted for in the analysis.

Kirsch also said the differences couldn’t be explained by vaccine efficacy, because the COVID-19 fatality rates were quite low.

The findings also demonstrate “biological plausibility,” Kirsch wrote, because both vaccines have the same mRNA active ingredient, the doses are significantly different. Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot contains 30 micrograms per dose and Moderna’s contains 100 micrograms per dose.

Other Research Showed Similar Findings

Kirsch noted that his findings concord with other research into this issue.

The Fraiman paper, which re-analyzed the Phase 3 Pfizer and Moderna trials, found Moderna’s vaccine similarly had a 50% higher rate of serious adverse events of special interest than Pfizer

Kirsch also pointed readers to a different analysis he did of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which found that Moderna caused 30% more deaths per dose than Pfizer.

Rancourt said Kirsch’s findings reported today also showed agreement with an analysis Rancourt did with Joseph Hickey, Ph.D., of the VAERS database.

In that paper, they also found that fatal vaccine toxicity varied by manufacturer, with Janssen’s shot being the most fatal, followed by Moderna’s and then Pfizer’s. The paper included details about toxicity, dose number and manufacturer.

*

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.

Brenda Baletti, Ph.D., is a senior reporter for The Defender. She wrote and taught about capitalism and politics for 10 years in the writing program at Duke University. She holds a Ph.D. in human geography from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a master’s from the University of Texas at Austin.

Featured image is from CHD


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

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

Puzzling Features of Crooks Crime Scene

July 18th, 2024 by John Leake

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The following still images from aerial video footage of the dead would-be assassin on the rooftop strike me as puzzling.

 

Note the large flow of blood downslope of his body in the following closeup. The position of his body marks the position at which he was shot in the head.

 

I initially wondered if the photo was taken after law officers checked Crooks’s body to make sure he was dead, then separated the weapon from his body, and then left the scene. Perhaps initial responders were told to leave the roof to minimize contamination of the crime scene, and to wait in the parking lot below for the coroner and crime scene investigators to arrive.

However, I still believe it is worth trying to ascertain if it was Crooks who tossed the weapon far to his left after he finished shooting. It appears that the weapon’s magazine is still seated in the weapon. Did the responders check to make sure the chamber and magazine were empty, and then reinsert the magazine?

The position of Crooks’s body—a few feet below the roof’s ridge—suggest that he was trying to crawl in reverse, back down the roof, but was unable to keep his head low enough to avoid getting shot by a counter-sniper.

I wonder if he believed—or was led to believe—that if he made a show of tossing his rifle far to the side, the counter-snipers would refrain from shooting him to preserve him as a witness.

Obviously, the time to shoot Crooks was the second he aimed his weapon from the roof’s ridge, not after he’d finished shooting and was crawling in retreat back down the roof’s slope.

*

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.

All images in this article are from CD

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Over the last couple of days the news cycle has been overwhelmingly dominated by a sniper’s attempted assassination of Donald Trump at a large campaign rally in western Pennsylvania, with the presidential candidate fortunate enough to escape with only a minor wound to his ear.

Image is by Evan Vucci / Licensed under Fair Use

The photo of the former president holding his arm high even while streaks of blood trickled down his face has become an iconic global image somewhat recalling the historic scene of six U.S. marines raising the American flag on Iwo Jima, and it fully solidified his front-runner status. Within a day or two, billionaire hedge-fund manager Bill Ackman endorsed Trump as did industrialist Elon Musk, the wealthiest man in the world, with the latter promising to contribute a mammoth $45 million per month to a pro-Trump political committee.

Meanwhile, the ongoing efforts of various influential Democrats to pressure President Joseph Biden into dropping out of the race on grounds of mental incapacity completely vanished from the news, swamped by the dramatic account of Trump’s narrow escape from death. With the media no longer focusing on Biden’s problems, the chances that the DNC might be able to replace him with a stronger candidate may have been lost, further increasing Trump’s odds of regaining the White House this November.

I’ve only casually followed the story of this attempted assassination without spending much time investigating the details of the incident or the considerable number of conflicting theories floating around on the Internet. But various people have asked me for my opinion, so I might as well provide it, though my views should not be accorded any more weight than they deserve, especially since I lack any military expertise.

According to the media accounts, a young 20-year-old gunman named Thomas Matthew Crooks was somehow able to enter the vicinity of the Trump rally armed with an AR-15 rifle. He set himself up on the rooftop of a nearby building and fired several shots, one of which wounded Trump in the ear while another killed a bystander in the crowd, after which he himself was shot dead by counter-sniper fire from security personnel.

Allowing an armed gunman such an opportunity to potentially kill a leading presidential candidate obviously involved extremely serious lapses in security by the Secret Service agents guarding Trump and this has naturally provoked widespread suspicions that some sort of plot had been responsible. There have also been claims circulating on social media that bystanders noticed the gunman and alerted authorities, but instead of ordering the sniper shot or at least securing the candidate and taking him to safety, the security personnel waited until the prospective assassin had fired his potentially fatal shots before taking any action.

At the very least this is obviously a huge black-eye for our Secret Service and the other police agencies that were on the scene, supposedly protecting Trump.

Given the extremely strong emotions that Trump arouses in both his supporters and his opponents, it’s hardly surprising that this very strange and suspicious official story quickly inspired numerous conspiratorial narratives, which have widely circulated among both Trump-backers and Trump-haters.

For more than eight years, most American elites have expressed a seething hatred of Trump, doing everything they could to frustrate his presidency, ensure his defeat in 2020, and then prevent him from regaining the White House in 2024. Soon after a mob of outraged Trumpists stormed the DC Capitol on January 7, 2021, I published an article pointing to the overwhelming evidence that the American media and our Internet giants, assisted by numerous dishonest former intelligence officers, had combined to steal the 2020 election from Donald Trump: American Pravda: Our Disputed Election.

Last year I discussed the extraordinary efforts of those same biased media outlets to hide the massive corruption scandal engulfing Joseph Biden and his family, doing so both prior to the 2020 vote and now leading up to the 2024 election.

More recently as Trump’s efforts to regain the presidency moved forward, his bitter Democratic enemies launched a series of outrageous political prosecutions hoping that felony convictions and possible imprisonment would destroy Trump’s popularity with voters. But instead Trump’s polling numbers continued to rise, and his Republican renomination became assured.

Having failed at every step to block Trump’s rise, his political enemies were left with few available options. Their dilemma eventually led Tucker Carlson to publicly speculate that they would finally conclude that orchestrating Trump’s assassination was their best chance of preventing his triumphant return to the White House.

So now with Trump leading in the polls and the desperate Democrats fearful that Biden would be no match for him in November, a sniper was allowed surprisingly easy access to the candidate at a rally, and if the trajectory of the bullet he fired had been an inch or two different, Trump could easily have been killed. Under these circumstances, only the most oblivious would fail to be highly suspicious of what happened.

Did Trump’s bitter enemies conspire to have him killed by an assassin’s bullet, as had happened more than half-century ago to President John F. Kennedy and his younger brother Robert? While that is certainly possible, unless much stronger evidence emerges, I will remain extremely skeptical.

Assassinating a former president who is leading in the current polls is a very serious undertaking, and Trump’s lucky survival has drastically strengthened the support he enjoys both from the voters and from the billionaire donor class while his security will also surely be massively increased. I think it quite unlikely that any future sniper will have as easy a time gaining access to him at a rally or anywhere else. As Emerson said, “When you strike at a king, you must kill him.”

So if Trump’s enemies had decided to have him killed, I doubt they would have selected an untrained 20-year-old nursing home worker as their assassin, a choice that resulted in the failure that occurred. Surely a far more professional sniper would have been employed, a sniper who never would have missed his target. Arranging for the Secret Service agents and the local police to stand down and provide an opening entailed enormous political risks, and what good would that do if the gunman selected couldn’t shoot straight? If any powerful organization or individual had been behind the assassination plot, Trump would be dead and Americans would be arguing about a successful rather than a botched assassination.

The dozens of security personnel who left Trump vulnerable are now being denounced as grossly negligent in the media, and if any of them had been given suspicious orders responsible for that debacle, they will surely soon come forward and defend themselves by explaining what had happened and implicating those responsible. If none of them do so, then the likelihood of any anti-Trump plot begins to dissipate, and the explanation of sheer incompetence becomes the most plausible theory.

One claim I’ve seen is that the gunman was wearing some sort of military-themed shirt and casually carrying his rifle in plain sight, leading most onlookers to assume that he was a member of one of the various different organizations tasked with ensuring Trump’s safety. This seems like exactly the sort of stupid bureaucratic mistake that can easily occur when multiple government agencies are involved in a common project.

Meanwhile, some anti-Trump circles have naturally promoted their own contrary conspiracy theories. They have suggested that the attack was a daring false-flag operation organized by Trump or his close allies, intended to only slightly wound the candidate and thereby greatly bolster his political campaign, just as has now happened.

However, I think this scenario is even less plausible than the other one. Once again, we must realize that the shooter selected for this dangerously lethal operation was an untrained 20-year-old firing from a distance of 400 feet, a sniper who hit Trump’s ear rather than his head. Thus, any such plan to boost Trump could very easily have ended up killing him instead, and it’s difficult to believe that any rational Trump supporter would have taken such a gigantic risk.

Perhaps some of these conspiracy advocates believe that the wound itself was somehow faked, and that all the Secret Service agents who saw the injury at close range and hustled Trump away were conspirators in the plot. But lacking any evidence, these sorts of theories grow ever more complex and unlikely.

My own reconstruction of what happened is different and much simpler.

When I first heard that Trump had survived an attempted assassination, my surprise was not that it had occurred but that there hadn’t already been a dozen or more previous attacks. I doubt that any political figure in modern American history has ever been so massively demonized by our mainstream media as Donald J. Trump during the last eight or nine years. He’s been vilified as a fascist, a Hitler, a traitor, a Russian stooge, a rapist, a racist, a swindler. Trump was endlessly portrayed as a fiend absolutely determined to destroy American freedom and democracy, someone who represented our country’s deadliest human enemy.

Our media creates our reality and for most of the last decade, hundreds of millions of Americans have been completely blanketed by these unrelenting waves of ferocious anti-Trump propaganda, so surely many thousands of them would have been unbalanced enough to consider saving our country by taking the law into their own hands and patriotically risking their own lives to eliminate that deadly human menace. The media had spent all these years painting a very bright target on Trump’s back, and I’ve been astonished that until a couple of days ago no American had yet taken aim at it.

Consider an analogous case from a few years ago. For many years, anti-immigration activists loudly proclaimed that our country was being “invaded” by hordes of hostile Mexican immigrants. Therefore, I was hardly too surprised that in 2019 a very patriotic but somewhat dim-witted 21-year-old named Patrick Wood Crusius took that heated political rhetoric a little too literally and decided to shoot as many of those foreign invaders as he could, killing a couple of dozen Hispanics at a Walmart store in El Paso, Texas. I strongly suspect that the young gunman who tried to kill Trump acted out of roughly similar motives.

Finally, I was generally pleased to see that Trump named Sen. J.D. Vance as his running mate. Although I’m not exactly thrilled with many of Vance’s positions, notably his extremely aggressive rhetoric regarding Iran and the Middle East, he seemed like the least bad choice among the several names under consideration, and we have to settle for what we can get.

Back in January 2013, Prof. Amy Chua and others had invited me to the Yale Law School to give a talk on my Meritocracy analysis of elite university admissions, and Vance, then using his previous name of Hamel, had been the young law school student who met me when I arrived and guided me around. Now, less than a dozen years later, he’s certainly come up a great deal in the world, being on the verge of becoming one of the youngest vice presidents in our national history, someone just a heartbeat away from sitting in the Oval Office. It’s very nice to know that he’s fully aware of some of the highly-controversial matters of great importance to our national future.

*

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.

Dutton’s Quixotic Proposal: Nuclear Lunacy Down Under

July 18th, 2024 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Scroll down for the complete text of U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle statement 

***

U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle issued a statement in which she asserted the following:

Secret Service personnel on the ground moved quickly during the incident, with our counter sniper team neutralizing the shooter and our agents implementing protective measures to ensure the safety of former president Donald Trump. 

The “counter sniper team” consisted of the riflemen posted on the two barns (with white roofs) behind the stage. With that in mind, consider the following photograph.

From their vantage point on the barn roofs, the counter snipers could plainly see that there were NO SENTRIES on the building to the north. They could also see the bystanders on the ground to the left of the building, frantically gesturing towards the roof for minutes prior to Crooks reaching the ridge and firing the shots.

The barn roofs are higher than the roof of the building from which Crooks fired. That at least one of the counter-snipers could see him is evidenced by the fact that the counter-sniper ultimately shot Crooks in the head.

There is simply no exculpatory explanation for this incident. Obviously, not a single sentry was posted on the building. Note the higher building just behind and slightly to the left of the building from which Crooks fired. This was a painfully obvious location to post a sentry who could have secured the rooftops and observe the event from a perfect vantage point.

Cheatle has zero credibility. The totality of circumstances indicates that security was deliberately withdrawn from the building, thereby granting a would-be assassin easy access to its rooftop with a clear line of sight to the stage on which Trump spoke.

It will be interesting to see if the local police remain silent or if media outlets like CNN continue to quote unnamed “law enforcement” sources making dubious statements that raise more questions than they answer.

I suspect that local law enforcement officials have been given the strong impression that this is a matter for federal agents, meaning there is nothing to be gained by discussing it with the media.


Statement From U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle

I would like to start by extending my deepest condolences to the family and friends of Corey Comperatore, who was killed during the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump’s life in Butler, Pennsylvania, Saturday, as well as those who were injured during this senseless act of violence.

Secret Service personnel on the ground moved quickly during the incident, with our counter sniper team neutralizing the shooter and our agents implementing protective measures to ensure the safety of former president Donald Trump. 

Since the shooting, I have been in constant contact with Secret Service personnel in Pennsylvania who worked to maintain the integrity of the crime scene until the FBI assumed its role as the lead investigating agency into the assassination attempt. I have also been coordinating with the protective detail for former President Trump and have briefed President Biden on the details of the incident.  

The Secret Service is working with all involved Federal, state and local agencies to understand what happened, how it happened, and how we can prevent an incident like this from ever taking place again. We understand the importance of the independent review announced by President Biden yesterday and will participate fully. We will also work with the appropriate Congressional committees on any oversight action.

The incident in Pennsylvania has understandably led to questions about potential updates or changes to the security for the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee. The U.S. Secret Service, in conjunction with our Federal, state and local law enforcement and public safety partners, designs operational security plans for National Special Security Events (NSSE) to be dynamic in order to respond to a kinetic security environment and the most up-to-date intelligence from our partners.

I am confident in the security plan our Secret Service RNC coordinator and our partners have put in place, which we have reviewed and strengthened in the wake of Saturday’s shooting. The security plans for National Special Security Events are designed to be flexible. As the conventions progress, and in accordance with the direction of the President, the Secret Service will continuously adapt our operations as necessary in order to ensure the highest level of safety and security for convention attendees, volunteers and the City of Milwaukee. In addition to the additional security enhancements we provided former President Trump’s detail in June, we have also implemented changes to his security detail since Saturday to ensure his continued protection for the convention and the remainder of the campaign. 

The Secret Service is tasked with the tremendous responsibility of protecting the current and former leaders of our democracy. It is a responsibility that I take incredibly seriously, and I am committed to fulfilling that mission. 

*

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.

Featured image is from the Public Domain

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

 

 

Global Research: 

Zelensky Now Wants Russia because Donald Trump has formulated a Peace Plan which obliges the Kiev regime to enter into peace negotiations with Russia

Trump’s national security advisory team has prepared a balanced plan.

if the Kiev regime does not enter into peace talks with Moscow, the U.S. would (under a Trump presidency) immediately suspend the flow of US weapons to Ukraine:

“Under the plan drawn up by [General Keith] Kellogg and Fred Fleitz, who both served as chiefs of staff in Trump’s National Security Council during his 2017-2021 presidency, there would be a ceasefire based on prevailing battle lines during peace talks, Fleitz said.

This plan has been endorsed by Donald Trump.  Moreover Trump has also confirmed:

“that if reelected, he would swiftly bring an end to the war in Ukraine by speaking with Putin.

“I will have that war settled between Putin and Zelensky as president-elect before I take office on January 20.

I’ll have that war settled,” Trump said on June 27 during a debate with Biden, adding

“I’ll get it settled fast, before I take office.” (Quoted by Newsweek)

 

Michel Chossudovsky, July 18,2024

Incisive analysis by Drago Bosnic:

***

Understanding the Kiev regime’s political decisions can be quite challenging, partially because those decisions are actually made in Washington DC. However, there are moments when understanding the darkest corners of quantum mechanics is far easier than figuring out what exactly the Neo-Nazi junta wants. Just last month, the political West and its puppets in Kiev openly talked about conducting large-scale terrorist attacks all across Russia, including against public schools. These threats were soon followed by real acts of blatant terrorism, with missile strikes on crowded beaches in Sevastopol and an attempt to start religious unrest in Russia through the use of Islamic radicals who brutally murdered both civilians (including an Orthodox Christian priest) and local law enforcement in the southern republic of Dagestan.

The combined death toll of these terrorist attacks was approximately 30 people. The death of a single person to terrorists is most certainly an immeasurable loss, much less 30, but this was still far from the much deadlier Crocus City Hall massacre, also conducted by Islamic radicals who were sent by the SBU/GUR and their NATO handlers. Moscow’s retribution was swift, with hypersonic missiles raining down on both the Neo-Nazi junta’s intelligence services HQs and later NATO personnel fantasizing about setting up so-called “no-fly zones” over Western Ukraine. The situation on the frontlines also kept deteriorating as the Kiev regime forces continued suffering heavy losses in both manpower and equipment, while Russian long-range weapons rained down on various military targets across the NATO-occupied country.

One such large-scale strike was used to stage a false flag in Kiev, where a children’s hospital was hit by a US-made SAM (surface-to-air missile) which then suddenly “transformed” into a “Russian Kh-101 long-range cruise missile”. This was a perfectly timed PR “victory” for Zelensky as he was heading to Washington DC for a NATO summit. The Neo-Nazi junta frontman used the usual buzzwords, “condemning Russian terrorists for attacks on kids”. Interestingly, he failed to explain how it was possible for the Kremlin to accomplish this when the Kiev regime forces regularly “shoot down” 300% of all Russian missiles, including hypersonic ones. And to say nothing of the usual trope about Moscow perpetually “running out of missiles”, but also “using them against children” and “residential areas”.

This was followed by yet another pompous announcement of a new counteroffensive that’s supposed to “turn the tide” and drive out the “evil Russians”. Thus, with everything set up for a major escalation, the last thing one would expect is to see Zelensky suggest that Russia should be invited to the next “peace summit”. The news about it went under the radar because everyone’s focus was on the assassination attempt on Donald Trump, but at a press conference in Kiev, Zelensky did exactly that, leaving many confused and dumbfounded.

“I believe that Russian representatives should be at the second summit,” he stated on July 15, adding that “preparatory work for another summit is underway”.

This is the first time in well over two years that the Neo-Nazi junta hinted that it’s ready for direct “peace talks”. Previously, Zelensky was vehemently opposed to even basic contact with the Kremlin as long as President Vladimir Putin is in power. Thus, the previous “peace summits” were not much more than glorified fairs aimed at creating the narrative that “the world supports Ukraine”. Seeing through this, China refused to participate, leaving the summit nothing more than a NATO echo chamber of endless praise for the political West’s “values” and its non-existent “moral high ground”, based entirely on a fantasy world that exists only in the numerous outlets of the mainstream propaganda machine. Thus, the latest offer seems quite unusual (if not even outright strange), particularly considering the timing and other factors.

It still remains unclear what the endgame is, especially because Zelensky is yet to reveal whether the laughable “peace formula” is still his “red line”. If that’s the case, then he’s just wasting his breath, as Moscow has already flatly refused to even consider such demands, which is perfectly understandable and expected given the fact that the “plan” boils down to Russia’s capitulation. What’s more, getting even China onboard is highly unlikely if the political West continues down the path of perpetual escalation. Interestingly, at least one prominent analyst already predicted that Zelensky will sue for peace several weeks ago, albeit through third parties. However, although the idea of peace is certainly a welcome one, the motivation behind such initiatives needs to be carefully analyzed, especially when dealing with the political West.

With the Kremlin conducting a massive program of remilitarization, including a large-scale reshuffling in the Ministry of Defense, and also (re)building old geopolitical alliances, the Kiev regime is increasingly isolated geopolitically and even militarily. NATO cannot produce as many weapons as the Neo-Nazi junta says it needs, while Moscow made sure it has reliable allies with a massive stockpile of conventional weapons, particularly long-range missiles and artillery. In the meantime, the political West is backing off in the Black Sea after the Russian military sent a very clear message about what will happen to NATO ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets aiding terrorist attacks within Russia. On the other hand, even American citizens are sick and tired of others wasting their money and resources.

At this moment, Americans are more likely to go against their own government rather than any other foreign adversary. A similar (if not worse) sentiment is felt all across the G7, which Zelensky openly blames for his troops’ inefficiency. This is without even considering the fact that the Russian military is regularly hunting down the best NATO gear, further exacerbating the Kiev regime’s already precarious position (which is one of the reasons why its neighbors are also heavily militarized). The crisis of America’s political system is also causing side effects that are highly negative for the Neo-Nazi junta, particularly if Trump (if elected) tries to use the attempt on his life as a viable exit strategy for the United States. And last (but not least), the chances of Russia accepting such a deal are slim to none, as the Kremlin has zero reasons to trust NATO/the Kiev regime.

*

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.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from the Public Domain

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Parking his van in Deby, the town of the Trump rally – close, but not right up to, because it was full of visitors’ cars.

Strange that he even could get one of the last parking spots – because other visitors had reported they had to park far away.

On foot, he carried a ladder (I believe 5 foot) which he had bought at Home Depot that same Saturday morning and brought with him in his van. Also on foot, he openly carried the AR-15-style rifle of his father’s with plenty of ammunition. He had just bought 50 rounds of ammunition extra. Yeah, when on a picnic, you sometimes buy some necessities in the last minute.

Perhaps whistling a joyful tune, he met a police officer on his way, and then continued. Several witnesses saw him walking, carrying his rifle. It was a nice morning.

Arriving at the scene, he put his ladder up on the wall of factory building and climbs up to the roof of the factory building, only 140m from Trump. A police officer noted the ladder, climbed it too, but just as the officer was trying to crawl up on the roof, he pointed his rifle at the police officer and told him to get lost – which the officer duly did and nothing else happened.

All the officer could report was to have been threatened with a rifle by a man moving into position from where he could get a clean shot at Trump – no need for fuzz from the police. Fuzz came, however, soon after as lots of bystanders saw him crawling on the roof with his rifling, approaching the middle point of the roof from where there was full sight to Trump. He didn’t care, and proceeded undisturbed as if he had some kind of “deal” with higher powers, either divine powers or deep state powers.

A law enforcement counter-sharpshooter positioned behind Trump followed it all. The law enforcement sharpshooter posted on social media, that the sharpshooter had him on his scope at least 3 minutes before he fired on Trump, but that orders were not to shoot before the assassin shot. Meanwhile, Trump was speaking joyfully, no need to disturb Trump either to get Trump away from the scene at least until the situation was resolved.

Why?

The 20-year old had registered early as a Republican voter – but on 20 January 2021, on the exact day of President Biden’s inauguration, he sent a highly symbolic $ 15 to a Democratic “action group” – clearly indicating that he was against Trump and (at least morally) supported others who were against Trump. This seems clearly motivated by the 6 January 2021 incident just two weeks earlier.

A loner, somewhat bullied by others, but having intelligence and empathy. Good with computers. High school degree. Worked like his parents in social care, giving meals to the elderly. Never anything to report on. Didn’t try to shoot anyone he knew, or to shoot “as many as possible”. If he had any personal thirst a kind of revenge on his local community, it looks rather like becoming a local hero who saved the USA from Trump.

Timing is notable: This event happened exactly as nothing else can stop Trump from becoming the next President, except death or injury. All Democratic efforts to defame Trump, to ruin Trump, to make Trump a felon have failed. All chances of Biden winning a victory in the last minute have also evaporated, as this happened. Even Biden himself and the Democratic party have in a sense sunk into the ground and evaporated.

Either … or…

Either this guy was extremely naïve, and just plain lucky he got so far. Wandering around in the open with a ladder and a rifle, ignoring all witnesses incl. bypassing police, climbing roof in full daylight with lots of bystanders to reach Trump. Fools are sometimes lucky – they do things nobody thought possible, and because nobody thought it possible, they might get far.

Or this guy achieved some kind of contact in the deep state and was carefully selected as a “sleeper agent”, so to be activated by the deep state when all other means to stop Trump had been exhausted. This would explain why no social contacts have been registered. The deep state doesn’t leave traces.

The Secret Service team close around Trump are loyal to the task. They have worked with Trump since 2016, and they have extremely close personal relationships together, knowing each other’s family etc. But leadership on the scene was criminally bad. Bad planning. Lack of coordination. Procedures not okay. Priority number one is to secure the protectee before any injury happens. As somebody said: “Maximum attention on securing the Protectee”. But while Trump was speaking, Secret Service people ran behind Trump with weapons unholstered – nobody caring to secure Trump’s immediate safety before Trump was already hit just millimeters from his skull. Awful and disgraceful.

Less than mediocre. Who said that the USSS – the Secret Service – were the best in the world?

The top of Secret Service is guilty. Criminal neglect as a minimum comes to mind. Or whatever your instincts believe. Info has circulated, that the Director of Secret Service had reduced Trump’s security level on request from President Biden, making Trump more vulnerable assassination. Anyway, don’t expect an “independent” FBI investigation to find anything similar to the Truth. But will a Congressional investigation get any further? So far, Congressional investigations have a history of superficiality, parody, drama, and personal profiling – but not of digging into the dark stuff.

*

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.

Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the Public Domain

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

On July 13, at a rally near Butler in Pennsylvania, former American president Donald Trump narrowly escaped death after he was grazed by a bullet fired by 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks. He fired at least eight rounds from an AR-15-style rifle from the roof of a nearby building outside the rally venue. Several people were wounded, at least one of which subsequently died. The surreal scenes left the audience dumbfounded, with panic ensuing only after the shooter was neutralized. In the last two days, there’s been a lot of speculation about what really happened, ranging from assumptions that it was staged to the Secret Service’s incompetence and even possible complicity. Albeit the latter might seem far too extreme, there’s actual footage of civilians seeing Crooks on the roof from which he took the shot and warning police and security that he’s there.

Shockingly enough, the crowd’s warnings were heeded only after Crooks started shooting. For some reason, the two Counter Sniper teams that were supposed to prevent situations like this failed to do their job, killing Crooks after he took eight shots from a regular rifle. According to an analysis, as well as Trump’s own statement, the only reason he’s alive is because he turned his head slightly to the right to read a chart on illegal immigrants.

However, despite the sheer luck Trump had, this opens up numerous questions about the warmongering elites in Washington DC and their highly likely (if not guaranteed) involvement in the assassination attempt. It should be noted that Trump himself is not exactly the “Second Coming of Christ”, as many believe, simply because it’s extremely difficult (if not impossible) for a single person to change the foreign policy of the United States.

In fact, although Trump has repeatedly warned about this, he didn’t really end Washington DC’s aggression against the world. He surely hasn’t started any new wars, which is commendable, but he also didn’t end those that the US was already involved in and he never conducted the dismantling of the unchecked power of the Military Industrial Complex, despite promises to do so.

Thus, he’s not exactly the “candidate of peace” that he’s usually portrayed as in most anti-establishment media. However, Trump is definitely the next best thing and precisely this is completely unacceptable to the war criminals and plutocrats in Washington DC. This is particularly true when it comes to prolonging the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. Trump has always been against any major US involvement in Ukraine, thinking it was imprudent to “poke the Bear”.

He regularly criticizes the European Union, particularly France and its President Emmanuel Macron, for their suicidal anti-Russian policies in Ukraine, cautioning Paris not to get directly involved. Expectedly, these warnings fell on deaf ears. Apart from realpolitik, Trump has both personal and geopolitical reasons to end American and NATO involvement in Ukraine. Namely, the increasingly unpopular Democrats have been using the unfortunate country as a way to funnel taxpayers’ money back into the US and then their own pockets. This was particularly apparent after the special military operation (SMO) started, with dozens and later hundreds of billions sent through various means (including cryptocurrency) right into the coffers of the DNC and its top leadership. Cutting this flow would’ve made sure that the Democrats run out of their primary source of income.

The DNC-controlled Senate was perfectly aware of this and tried passing laws that would make it an impeachable offense to even try to cut the so-called “Ukraine aid”. All this suggests that the corrupt federal institutions have always been resolutely anti-Trump. This power struggle revealed many uncomfortable truths about the failures of the system in the US, showing that the much-touted “democracy” in America is nothing but a laughable myth. The anti-Trump policies then degenerated not only into so-called “lawfare”, but also reached the point of jeopardizing the territorial integrity of the US, as some “blue” states started banning Trump’s candidacy, with several other “red” states threatening to reciprocate by banning Biden. The double standards of the mainstream propaganda machine were also quite obvious during the several show trial cases launched against Trump.

However, all this only backfired, boosting his popularity and making his opponents more desperate than ever.

The list of those who oppose (although intense hatred is a far more suitable term) Trump is quite long and includes many foreign actors, particularly those with deep ties to the corrupt US federal institutions. One of those is certainly the Neo-Nazi junta.

The Ukrainegate revealed the extent of hostility between Trump and the Kiev regime, with the latter even targeting prominent American journalists who were seen as pro-Trump. Given just how desperate the Neo-Nazi junta is to survive, it’s only a matter of time before speculation about their possible involvement in Trump’s assassination attempt surfaces. The former president himself certainly holds a lot of grudge against the Kiev regime because of all this, as well as the fact that it’s such a burden.

Thus, at some point, Trump might actually say (provided he wins the election) that the Neo-Nazi junta was involved in his assassination attempt.

Agencies such as the infamous CIA-ized SBU and GUR certainly have the capacity to aid in planning and executing such operations. Not to mention they have a clear motive, as they depend entirely on the “aid” he wants to cut. There’s no proof they took part in this, but it’s a possibility that certainly shouldn’t be rejected. However, regardless of whether there has been any involvement on their part, this could give Trump a perfect excuse to cut further financial and military support by saying that “we tried to help, but they tried to kill me”. And given his rather simplified vocabulary (or lack of eloquence, some would say), that might actually be the way he says it. In doing so, Trump would essentially hit at least three birds with one stone.

First, he would get rid of a massive financial burden, while also saving billions that could be used elsewhere.

Second, Trump would kill the largest source of funding for his DNC opponents.

And last but not least, this would give him a unique opportunity for a guaranteed exit strategy that would be far better for America than something along the lines of the humiliating defeat it suffered in Afghanistan, just much worse and more consequential in the long term.

And indeed, if we look at the current situation on the battlefield, the US/NATO prospects in Ukraine look rather grim. The only way to prevent the Kiev regime’s total defeat and collapse is to get directly involved. However, apart from Trump not being willing to do so for personal reasons, geopolitically and militarily speaking, the US (and by extension NATO) is simply unprepared for such a war. Despite years of preparations and decades of militarism, the political West simply has no firepower needed to defeat Russia. Worse yet, America’s sinking strategic capabilities suggest that it’s simply incapable of matching Moscow’s increasingly powerful strategic arsenal, the world’s No. 1 in virtually every category (destructive power, range, means of delivery, etc). More importantly for the planet, the side effect of the combination of these factors could also be the much-needed de-escalation.

*

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.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

American Democracy’s Theater of the Absurd

July 17th, 2024 by Richard Gale

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Since the end of the Cold War and the Clinton administration coming to power in 1992, the United States has undergone a systemic decay in its political body. Policies increasingly favor the interests of an oligarchic and powerful elite more often than not at the expense of the public. The rise of ultra-liberal policies to create a secular society built upon an amoral technocratic paradigm, which includes the current “woke” movement, critical race theory (CRT), and diversity, inclusion, and equity (DIE) requirements, have further intensified societal divisions and tribal factions at odds with traditional conservative and family values.

The media, which once served as a pillar of democracy, is today nothing but a tool for social and political manipulation. Since the 1990s, media conglomerates have consolidated power, aligning themselves with either of the two party political ideologies and agendas. This alignment has led to biased reporting and the amplification of divisive rhetoric. The rise of cable news networks such as Fox News and MSNBC has contributed to a polarized media landscape where the public is presented with only one-sided partisan perspectives. This polarization is then further extended to social media platforms, where algorithms prioritize sensational and divisive content, further entrenching cultural divides. As George Orwell famously remarked, “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.”

Deliberate government tactics to keep the population divided has destroyed social coherence, the sense of unity and shared purpose within a society. Such tactics succeed by keeping people mentally distracted. This strategy of “divide and conquer” ensures that the public remains distracted and disorganized, preventing a unified challenge to the status quo. Identity politics, for instance, has been leveraged to create and exacerbate social divisions. 

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself,” wrote essayist H.L. Mencken in the early 20th century. “Almost inevitably, he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, and intolerable.”

Mencken’s quote underscores the consequence of a corrupt political system that fosters division only to maintain control. By encouraging cultural fragmentation, those in power divert attention from their failings and prevent unified opposition.

A clear example of this tactic is seen in the handling of racial and ethnic tensions. Political leaders exploit these tensions to rally their base, diverting attention from broader systemic issues such as economic inequality, corporate corruption and federal agency capture. The government’s response to movements like Black Lives Matter is mixed, with some politicians using the movement to stoke fears, race baiting, among certain demographics while failing to address the root causes of racial injustice.

The deliberate use of social issues to create division is not new. As Niccolò Machiavelli observed,

“The wise ruler, whenever he can, will subdue the people by force or by fraud.”

By keeping the population focused on cultural and social battles, the government can operate without substantial public scrutiny or opposition. Power then resorts to manipulation and coercion to maintain control and stability. Particularly in our post-9/11 era, this Machiavellian principle is evident in the draconian policies and practices designed to maintain control over the populace. These measures, masquerading as the need for national security, reflect the use of both force and fraud to subdue and manipulate public sentiment.

The Patriot Act significantly expanded the government’s surveillance capabilities. The Act allowed for the indefinite detention of immigrants, expanded the powers of law enforcement agencies to search personal records without a court order, and increased the ability to monitor phone and email communications. It facilitated government intrusion into the private lives of every American. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) further threatened and undermined constitutional protections and civil liberties including indefinite detention of American citizens without trial. The revelations by Edward Snowden in 2013 highlighted the extent of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance programs, which included the bulk collection of phone metadata and internet communications of millions of Americans. This extensive surveillance infrastructure represents a clear example of subduing the populace by fraud. 

In addition, the rise of digital platforms and social media has introduced new avenues for both surveillance and censorship. Governments and private companies have increasingly collaborated to monitor and control online content, often under the guise of combating misinformation and maintaining public order. This intersection of public and private surveillance mechanisms creates an environment where dissent and alternative viewpoints can be easily suppressed, further aligning with Machiavelli’s notion of subduing the populace by fraudulent means.

The impact of government policies favoring the elite is most acutely felt by the underprivileged and poor. According to a joint investigation conducted by Princeton and Northwestern universities, economic policies since the Clinton administration have prioritized the interests of Wall street and the multinational behemoths of defense, pharmaceutical, chemical and energy industries, leading to increased income inequality and reduced social mobility. The welfare reforms of the 1990s, for instance, aimed to reduce dependency on government assistance have accomplished the opposite by increasing hardships for many vulnerable populations.

The deregulation of financial markets, which culminated in the 2008 financial crisis, tossed the citizens of Main Street into the gutter. Washington’s incompetence led to a housing market collapse, widespread unemployment, and a severe recession. While large financial institutions received substantial bailouts, many ordinary Americans faced foreclosure, unemployment, and financial ruin. As Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz noted,

“The gap between what our economic and political systems were supposed to deliver — rising living standards for most citizens — and what they actually delivered became intolerable.”

That is exactly what is happening today, and worse. 

The regulatory capture by private corporate interests over government agencies has further exacerbated social and economic inequalities. Regulatory bodies that are supposed to protect public welfare are now fully co-opted by the industries they regulate. This is especially true of the pharmaceutical industrial complex’s domination of the FDA and CDC. The approval of opioid medications, heavily influenced by pharmaceutical lobbying, has led to an opioid epidemic that has devastated communities across the country. Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, aggressively marketed the drug while downplaying its addictive potential, leading to widespread addiction and overdose deaths. And for years the legislators and officials in our compromised duopoly did nothing. 

Similarly, the revolving door between Wall Street and government agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) undermines regulatory oversight. Former executives from major financial institutions take key regulatory positions, ensuring that policies remain favorable to their former employers. 

The suppression of fundamental democratic principles by those in power is a significant consequence of systemic decay. Voter suppression, gerrymandering, and the disproportionate influence of money in politics undermine fair representation and accountability. These actions prevent the public from exercising their democratic rights and perpetuate the control of a minority elite. The disenfranchisement of marginalized communities through restrictive voting laws is a prime example. Measures such as voter ID laws, purging voter rolls, and limiting early voting disproportionately affect low-income and minority voters. These tactics ensure that the political power remains concentrated among those who support the elite’s agenda.

The influence of money in politics further exacerbates this issue. The landmark Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in 2010 allowed for unlimited corporate spending in elections, amplifying the political power of wealthy individuals and corporations. This decision has led to an influx of “dark money” in politics, where the interests of the few outweigh the needs of the many.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt warned,

“The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself.”

Seventy years later money in politics has broken the very fabric of democracy, creating an oligarchic regime that enslaves the public.

All of this has enormous psychological consequences because someone must be blamed for this decay and rot in Washington. One acknowledged way to relieve stress is to act out, and often with vitriolic aggression. The emergence of ultra-liberal policies regarding race, the “woke” movement, and the emphasis on critical race theory (CRT), and diversity, inclusion, and equity (DIE) mandates in public spaces and institutions have intensified societal divisions. These policies, while aimed at addressing historical injustices and promoting inclusivity, have accomplished the opposite and sparked equally aggressive backlashes from conservative and traditional value-based communities.

Critical race theory, which examines the intersection of race and law and its impact on racial inequality, has arisen out of nowhere as a flashpoint in American politics. Proponents argue that CRT provides a necessary framework for understanding systemic racism and advocating for social justice; however, CRT’s critics contend that it promotes a divisive view of society, pitting racial groups against one another and undermining the notion of a shared national identity.

The implementation of diversity, inclusion, and equity mandates in workplaces and educational institutions, although perhaps originally with good intentions, has shown itself to be exceedingly undemocratic, unconstitutional, and coercive and counterproductive. Such policies prioritize identity over merit and foster a culture of victimhood and entitlement. This perception is fuelling resentment and polarization, further fracturing social cohesion.

The “woke” movement, purported to represent heightened awareness of social injustices and advocacy for marginalized groups, has likewise accomplished the opposite by increasing societal antagonism. John Stuart Mill observed,

“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that.”

Woke’s militant and uncompromising approach alienates individuals who feel their values and beliefs are under attack. This alienation is exacerbated by the woke and radicalized LGBTQ+ movements to label dissenting opinions as inherently racist, extremist and even fascist. Consequently all openings for dialogue and constructive debate are stifled. The vilification of opposing views has created an environment where ideological entrenchment and hostility thrive. But this dynamic only benefits those in power by diverting attention from the more dire systemic issues and prevents the formation of a unified front against political corruption and the elite’s dominance over our lives.

Looking back, when did this rot and decay across America take hold? We would argue that it was during the Clinton years that Washington’s draconian policies, either intentional or naïve, had the most profound and far-reaching effects on the nation’s culture, social coherence, and welfare for the underprivileged and poor. Machiavelli’s observation that a wise ruler will subdue the people by force or by fraud remains highly relevant in the context of modern governance. The policies and practices implemented in the US, including the repeal of Glass-Steagall, the Patriot Act, the NDAA, and extensive surveillance measures, illustrate how our government has used both coercion and manipulation to maintain control. These measures have destroyed our civil liberties and democratic principles. As history and contemporary events demonstrate, the balance between security and liberty is delicate, and the government’s use of force and fraud to maintain power is now the greatest enemy to democratic ideals.

*

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.

Richard Gale is the Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the biotechnology and genomic industries.

Dr. Gary Null is host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on alternative and nutritional health and a multi-award-winning documentary film director, including his recent Last Call to Tomorrow.

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Featured image is from Vox

Video: Detailed Analysis of Trump Assassination Attempt

By Dr. Peter McCullough and John Leake, July 16, 2024

The incident on July 13 in Butler, Pennsylvania is the first time a would-be assassin has shot at a U.S. president or presidential candidate since John Hinckley shot President Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981. As such, it is the first assassination attempt in our era in which most citizens are carrying cell phones equipped with video cameras.

Why Russia Will Defeat NATO in Ukraine

By Mike Whitney, July 17, 2024

NATO’s three-day summit in Washington DC achieved the objective for which it was designed, to create a public forum in which all 32 members of the Alliance could express their unanimous support for upcoming attacks on the Russian Federation.

Palestine Solidarity Reaches Unprecedented Heights

By Abayomi Azikiwe, July 17, 2024

The war in Palestine and throughout the regions mentioned did not begin less than one year ago, it has a history of more than a century which some aspects were outlined in the pamphlet “Zionism: The Myths, the Lies, the Crimes”.

COVID Vaccines Linked to Increase in All-cause Mortality, Italian Study Shows

By Dr. Suzanne Burdick, July 17, 2024

A team of Italian researchers verified what they called “the real impact of the vaccination campaign” by comparing the risk of all-cause death among vaccinated and unvaccinated residents of the Italian province of Pescara.

Venezuela to Face Serious Challenges with Unknown Retired Professor Leading the Polls

By Uriel Araujo, July 17, 2024

With the Venezuelan presidential election coming up on July 28, retired diplomat Edmundo González is reported to be leading the polls, even though the former ambassador was unknown to the majority of the population up to a few months ago and never sought elected office.

170 Years of U.S. Aggression Against Nicaragua

By Rick Sterling, July 16, 2024

In this article, I will review the different types of aggression used by Washington against Nicaragua. This is not ancient history; the interference continues to today. The methods change but the purpose remains the same: to subjugate nominally independent countries and use them in the interests of US corporations, elites and government. When nations resist domination and insist on independence, the US goal becomes to prevent them from succeeding. 

Occupied Palestine: The Old Evil. Chris Hedges

By Chris Hedges, July 16, 2024

The Palestinians want their land back. Then they will talk of peace. The Israelis want peace, but demand Palestinian land. And that, in three short sentences, is the intractable nature of this conflict.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Indonesia’s traditional foreign policy is a careful balance between the United States and China, one that Washington seeks to unsettle without respecting the Southeast Asian country’s historical non-alignment stance. Indonesia aims to uphold its strategic independence while promoting regional stability and prosperity, but this is also being challenged by Washington’s growing militancy against China in the Asia-Pacific region.

Despite China and the US accusing each other of military maneuvers that fuel tensions in the Asia-Pacific region, Indonesia holds major military exercises with the US but maintains China as its main economic partner. This is in the hope of offsetting the risk of pivoting too much towards one great power, especially as both desperately vie for influence in a country with three major maritime chokepoints — the Malacca, Lombok, and Sumba Straits.

The 2023 Super Garuda Shield exercise involved 1,900 Indonesian military personnel, 2,100 from the US, and 1,000 more from Australia, Japan, and Singapore, and “strengthens the US-Indonesian bilateral relationship,” according to US Maj. General Jered P. Helwig. This was the largest such exercise involving Indonesian and US troops.

Although the US will once again participate in the 2024 Super Garuda Shield, Indonesian military spokesman Major General Nugraha Gumilar stressed that the exercise has no intention of consolidating military power against certain countries and reaffirmed that Indonesia is a non-aligned country in terms of regional security, adding that there is defence cooperation with China in military education and officer’s student exchange.

“We have Chinese military officers joining the Indonesian military’s Staff and Command School and the Indonesian Army’s Staff and Command School,” he said.

At the same time, a 2017 United States National Defense University assessment found that Indonesia was among China’s top ten military diplomatic partners from 2003 to 2016. 

Decisionmakers in Jakarta have successfully maintained a balanced policy, but Washington is actively challenging this. Washington seeks to exploit differences Southeast Asian countries have with each other and China because of territorial disputes over the South China Sea and leverages this to turn countries against Beijing.

One example is Indonesian Trade Minister Zulifi Hasan’s announcement in June of the introduction of import duties on Chinese goods to mitigate the effects of the US-China trade war.

“The United States wants to impose a 200% tariff on imported ceramics or clothing. We can also do this to ensure that our small businesses and industries survive and thrive,” the minister said.

Washington’s trade war has led to an oversupply of goods in China’s domestic markets, forcing the redirection of commodity flows to other foreign markets, particularly Indonesia, which threatens Indonesian producers. Recall that in May 2024, the trade confrontation between the US and China reached a new level after US President Joe Biden introduced protective tariffs on a wide range of Chinese goods, which has clearly hurt Indonesia despite its balanced policies.

Yet, even manipulative tactics like this to unsettle Jakarta-Beijing relations cannot work. Indonesia’s president-elect Prabowo Subianto, who will take office on October 20, travelled to Beijing on April 1 at the invitation of Chinese President Xi Jinping, just some weeks after securing the presidency, signaling his intent to continue Indonesia’s cooperation with China. 

Continued cooperation with Beijing will be lucrative and beneficial for Indonesia, which already has 71 China-funded projects underway, the same number of projects as Pakistan and second only to Cambodia’s 82.  Indonesia–China trade reached over $149 billion in 2022, a 19.8% increase year-on-year, and China’s $8.2 billion was the second-largest source of investment in Indonesia. China pledged an additional $44.89 billion to Indonesia in July 2023 and a further $21.7 billion two months later.

In this way, although the US is seemingly a more important military partner for Indonesia than China, the  country’s main trading partner is clearly China. Nonetheless, the US has caused minor damage in Indonesia-China ties through its trade war, but this is only a hiccup in the grander scheme of trade relations and investments, which are only set to increase year on year.

Given that Donald Trump is expected to enter the White House in January 2025, tensions between Washington and Beijing will heighten further than what Biden took it, and Indonesia, as a country that sees a huge portion of world trade passing through its waters, will become a key battleground for influence. However, it is likely that the status quo in Jakarta-Washington and Jakarta-Beijing ties will continue when Subianto becomes president later this year since he has given no indication of moving away from Indonesia’s traditionally non-aligned position.

*

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.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

CNN just reported the following:

In the 48 hours before he opened fire on former President Donald Trump, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks made a series of stops in and around his suburban Pittsburgh hometown.

On Friday, he went to a shooting range where he was a member, and practiced firing, a law enforcement official told CNN. The next morning, Crooks went to a Home Depot, where he bought a five-foot ladder, and a gun store, where he purchased 50 rounds of ammunition, the official said.

Then, Crooks drove his Hyundai Sonata about an hour north, joining thousands of people from around the region who flocked to Trump’s rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. He parked the car outside the rally, with an improvised explosive device hidden in the trunk that was wired to a transmitter he carried, the official said. Then, investigators believe, he used his newly-bought ladder to scale a nearby building, and opened fire on the former president.

IF this is true, it is yet another glaring indication that security was simply pulled from the building located about 130 yards north of where Trump was scheduled to speak.

Naturally the notion of Crooks toting a ladder up to the building without being observed and stopped seems beyond belief. The CNN report mentions nothing about a roof rack on his car, and even a telescoping ladder probably wouldn’t fit in a Hyundai Sonata.

An alternative theory is that the alleged “law enforcement” official quoted by CNN is misdirection—that is, that in fact it was conveyed to Crooks that the ladder would already be in place upon his arrival. Given that the building was the most logical place to post police sentries, one wonders if the ladder was originally erected for police officers who then—for some reason—left their post and left the ladder in place.

IF Crooks brought the ladder with him, he must have visited the building in advance to ascertain the roof height and a favorable place to erect the ladder (on a section of wall conveniently obscured by a cluster of ornamental cypress trees).

The following image is a still from a video taken from a helicopter after Crooks was shot in the head by a counter-sniper.

 

 

The top arrow points to his body. Just below it is his rifle lying a few feet from him. The arrow to the right points to his backpack. The far right arrow points to a ladder. Note the large flow of blood downslope of his body in the following closeup.

 

The aerial video appears to have been taken before any law enforcement officers made it onto the roof. I initially wondered if it was taken right after an officer checked Crooks’s body to make sure he was dead, then separated the weapon from his body, and then (for some reason) left the scene.

However, the totality of elements displayed in the photograph indicates that the most likely explanation is that—AFTER Crooks fired the shots—he tossed the weapon to his left and was trying to crawl backwards to return to the ladder when he was shot in the head.

Note there is no way he could have rested his rifle on the ridge to fire at Trump without being seen by the counter-snipers, who were standing on a higher elevation on the barn roof. In order to retreat hastily back down the slope, Crooks must have failed to keep his head sufficiently low to evade the counter-sniper’s shot.

*

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. 

All images in this article are from CD unless otherwise stated

Palestine Solidarity Reaches Unprecedented Heights

July 17th, 2024 by Abayomi Azikiwe

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Note: These remarks were delivered at a public forum on the history and current situation in Palestine and West Asia. The pamphlet entitled “Zionism: the Myths, the Lies, the Crimes” was recently published by fighting-words.net. This pamphlet is based on a series of classes delivered by Abayomi Azikiwe and David Sole during 2009 and 2013 in Detroit. The forum on July 15 reviewed some of the points raised in the pamphlet as well as an update on developments in Palestine and West Asia since the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Flood on October 7, 2023. Yvonne Jones, an organizer for the Moratorium NOW! Coalition, chaired the forum.


It is important to review the recent developments in the Gaza Strip, Palestine as a whole and the entire West Asia and North Africa regions in the aftermath of the events of October 7.

The war in Palestine and throughout the regions mentioned did not begin less than one year ago, it has a history of more than a century which some aspects were outlined in the pamphlet “Zionism: The Myths, the Lies, the Crimes”.

Having said this, it is essential to understanding the recent phase of the genocidal war that this settler-colonial history has only further confirmed the arguments put forward in the publication. Immediately after the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Flood, the United States government and its imperialist allies sought to provide not only a rationale for an escalation in attacks upon the Palestinian people these states transferred weapons to the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to injure, displace and kill even more inhabitants of the Gaza Strip.

Hamas, the Resistance movement which has the largest presence in Gaza as the administrative apparatus, has controlled the enclave since 2007.  During that year the Israeli regime ordered the evacuation of the settler-colonial enclaves into the other areas of historical Palestine.

However, this purported withdrawal did not bring peace and stability to Gaza and the West Bank. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) continued their periodic bombing operations and targeted assassinations.

Hamas, through its military wing known as the Al-Qassam Brigades, maintained their right to launch armed attacks on the settler-colonial outposts in other areas of the country. Hamas are not the only resistance organizations which have a presence in Gaza. Reports since the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Flood indicate that at least nine different brigades are involved in the military campaign against the IDF. Another important organization is the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and its military wing known as the Al-Quds Brigades.

Other resistance formations include:

  • the Popular Resistance Committees with its armed wing known as Al-Nasser Saled ad-Din Brigades;
  • Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) whose military structure is called Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades;
  • Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine—General Command (PFLP-GC) with the military wing known as Jihad Jibril Brigades;
  • Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine whose armed forces are the National Resistance Brigades or the Omar al-Qassem Brigades;
  • Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, which could be the military wing of Fatah in Gaza; and
  • Abd al-Qadar al-Husseini Brigade, also said to be an armed unit of Fatah; and
  • the Palestinian Mujahideen Movement. 

With the existence of these organizations on the ground in Gaza it is not surprising that the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) have not been able to subdue the people. The ongoing resistance is remarkable considering the large-scale assault on the Gaza Strip where nearly 39,000 people have been killed, most of whom are women, children, seniors and the infirm. In addition, nearly 90,000 have been wounded and injured. Gaza’s population of 2.3 million remain displaced and imperiled.

The lack of food, clean water, fuel, medical facilities, medicines and other essentials of life is undoubtedly contributing to the toll of those suffering from illnesses and dying daily. Gaza has been described as the largest openair prison in the world even prior to the events of October 7. Since the latest phase of the war, the conditions have worsened as the IDF blocks much needed humanitarian assistance from entering the enclave. The incessant bombing and shelling combined with the enhanced blockade has prompted billions of people around the world describing the role of the settler-colonial regime in Tel Aviv as genocidal.

International Solidarity Has Further Exposed Zionism as an Imperialist Project

Emerging from the horrors of the last nine months has been the mobilization of the largest solidarity movement internationally. Demonstrations erupted in various geo-political regions around the world. In areas close to Palestine in states such as Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq, Yemen, Iran, etc., millions took to the streets in condemnation of the Israeli Apartheid regime.

In neighboring Lebanon, the Hezbollah resistance movement has opened another front against Tel Aviv. The Israeli government has relocated hundreds of thousands of its people from the border areas with southern Lebanon.

Resistance forces in Iraq, Syria and Yemen have engaged in military strikes against the State of Israel. Yemen has gone further than any other states by imposing a blockade on vessels conducting trade with the Zionist regime utilizing the Red Sea.

A report from The Cradle published on July 15 emphasized:

“The Armed Forces of Yemen’s Sanaa government, aligned with the Ansarallah resistance movement, announced on 14 July an operation against an Israeli ship in the Gulf of Aden and an attack targeting Israel’s southern port city of Eilat, known in Arabic as Umm al-Rashrash. Sanaa’s forces said the operations were a ‘response to the Al-Mawasi massacre in Khan Yunis, which was committed by the Israeli enemy [on Saturday].’ At least 90 Palestinian civilians were killed in the massacre in southern Gaza. ‘The naval forces, the unmanned air force, and the missile force of the Yemeni armed forces carried out a joint operation targeting the Israeli ship (MSC UNIFIC) in the Gulf of Aden, with a number of ballistic missiles and drones,’ Yemeni army spokesman Yahya al-Saree said in a statement on Sunday. ‘The Air Force launched a number of drones targeting a number of military targets of the Israeli enemy in the Umm al-Rashrash area, south of occupied Palestine. The operation achieved its goals successfully,’ Saree added.” 

In Europe millions more have staged mass demonstrations and other acts of solidarity. In some European states such as France and Germany, solidarity activists defied bans on Palestinian support work as they marched in the central business districts of imperialist capitals such London, Paris and Berlin. (See this)

On the African continent there is much solidarity with the plight of the Palestinians. In the Republic of South Africa, the African National Congress government and the recently established Government of National Unity (GNU), have continued their solidarity. In December, the South African government filed a lawsuit against the State of Israel charging the apartheid regime of violating the Genocide Convention.

In January, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the charges brought by the South African government claiming genocide were plausible. A series of measures were ordered to be implemented by Tel Aviv, yet there has been no change in its military policy.

Solidarity in the U.S. Impacts Presidential Politics

The U.S. administration of President Joe Biden rejected the lawsuit filed by Pretoria saying the legal action had no merit. Biden has continued the decades-long subsidization of settler-colonial rule in Palestine. He is the only U.S. president who has traveled to Tel Aviv during a period of active combat operations.

Biden proposed to Congress and won additional funds to intensify the wars in Palestine and Ukraine. Funds were allocated also to contain China and enhance the militarization of the Southern border.

In the U.S., demonstrations erupted in cities in various regions of the country. Many of these manifestations were initiated and led by Palestinians, Arab and Muslim Americans. In addition, people from other nationalities and oppressed nations joined the Palestine solidarity struggle demanding an immediate ceasefire and the halting of all assistance from the U.S. to Tel Aviv.

African American progressives and several religious entities opposed Biden’s unconditional support for the Zionist state. In the Detroit metropolitan area where the largest concentration of Arab and Muslim Americans live several African American church leaders joined with other clergymen in a Michigan Task Force for Palestine.

The Listen to Michigan campaign led the electoral movement against the foreign policy of the Biden administration in Palestine. Organized in a matter of weeks, the coalition pointed to another form of solidarity during a national election year.

A description of the Listen to Michigan coalition taken from its website says:

“Michigan voters sent Biden a strong message during the Democratic primary that he can count us out for genocide. More than 100,000 multiracial, multi-faith, and anti-war Democrats voted ‘uncommitted,’ in strong opposition to Biden’s funding of war and genocide in Gaza. The very next day, a co-chair for Biden’s re-election bid told NPR that our ‘message has been received.’ What began as a grassroots movement in Michigan swiftly captured the nation’s attention. Our message spread to various Super Tuesday states, inspiring communities from coast to coast to stand up and make their voices heard at the ballot box. These primaries are an early litmus test for how much Biden’s stance on Gaza could hurt his reelection bid; the threat to Biden’s reelection isn’t that anti-war Democrats will vote for Trump, it’s that they won’t vote at all.” 

Later the establishment of encampments on college and university campuses opened a new chapter in the Palestine solidarity movement. These encampments demanded full disclosure and divestment of all holdings held by higher educational institutions in the State of Israel and those who conduct business with the settler-colonial regime.

These encampments often referred to as “Free Universities for Gaza” were met with state-sanctioned repression. Students, staff and professors working in the Palestine solidarity struggle were subjected to threats from university administrators to terminate them.

As the impact of the encampments spread far and wide, many campus administrators ordered police to remove the demonstrators. Over 3,000 students, professors and community activists were arrested and charged with felonies and misdemeanors. In these evictions, police and vigilantes physically attacked the solidarity activists.

In order to justify these repressive acts, the Palestine solidarity activists were slandered as posing a threat to Jewish students and faculty. They were falsely accused of creating a public health and security threat to the campuses.

President Biden along with leading Republican and Democratic politicians echoed these same sentiments labeling the movement organizers as being antisemitic. However, these encampments and building occupations contributed immensely to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign which has existed for several years.

Despite the favored foreign policy status of Tel Aviv, events over the last nine months have illustrated the strength of independent politics. Therefore, we must move forward in our solidarity efforts until the people are liberated in a unified Palestinian state.

*

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.

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

All images in this article are from the author

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

With the Venezuelan presidential election coming up on July 28, retired diplomat Edmundo González is reported to be leading the polls, even though the former ambassador was unknown to the majority of the population up to a few months ago and never sought elected office. By his own admission, he had “absolutely no plans to be a presidential candidate… much less to be president” until April this year when he was invited by the Venezuelan opposition to be their presidential candidate after the authorities prevented both María Corina Machado, the former candidate, and her stopgap from running.

The whole issue about María Corina Machado’s would-be candidacy is controversial. It is worth highlighting that by the end of March this year there were no less than 11 opposition candidates in Venezuela – albeit the country is often described as dictatorship. Each and every one of those was able to register as candidates without issues, Machado being the only one refused.

It would be fair to describe Machado as an extremist: for example, she took part in the Pedro Carmona’s 2002 attempted military coup, signing the infamous Carmona Decree. Carmona was a business leader (president of the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers of Commerce), who acted as de facto president of Venezuela for just one day. During his brief rule, both the Supreme Court and the National Assembly were dissolved, with the Constitution being declared void. There were various arbitrary detentions, including that of then president Hugo Chavez, Maduro’s predecessor. With the support of crowds of demonstrators and the military, Chavez was then restored to office. Carmona is also known to have defended sanctions against his own people.

Last week, the Venezuelan government arrested some people involved in Machado’s campaign (including her campaign manager), under the accusation of having taken part in a violent plot. Considering their record, such accusations should be taken seriously, albeit one is tempted to quickly denounce them as political persecution and nothing else.

Machado in fact faces a 15-year disqualification for her involvement in the whole Juan Guiado’s affair. Her alternate, Corina Yoris (a little known academic who has never held public administration positions) was similarly unable to register due to technicalities. Namely, Yoris own political party was an unregistered one (all she had to do was to find a registered political party and join it).

Then, without many alternatives, the little known academic and retired diplomat Edmundo González Urrutia was named as a kind of temporary replacement. And now he seems to be leading the polls.

In 2021, after the Juan Guaido’s imbroglio, the Venezuelan opposition itself recognized President Nicolas Maduro’s government, as I wrote at the time – although it oscillates between participating in elections and boycotting them. For years, the South American nation has been facing heavier US sanctions and falling oil prices, which contributed to an oil production collapse, export revenue being the cornerstone of the Venezuelan economy. On top of that, Washington plus several European governments blocked Maduro’s government’s access to over $7 billion of state funds held overseas. It did bring about a national catastrophe. In a bizarre situation, control of the nation’s bank accounts (frozen by the US) is given to the opposition, without accountability – unsurprisingly, corruption charges against opposition leaders abound since at least 2019.

Image: Hugo Chavez (Source: CADTM)

Some context is needed. Hugo Chavez, whether one likes him or not, was indeed a very popular president in his country and, contrary to what many believe in the West, he and his Bolivarian Revolution did bring about a number of social advances, pertaining to education, inequality, health and income. Even the 2010 OAS report which denounces Venezuela’s human rights standards acknowledges that “in terms of economic, social, and cultural rights, the IACHR recognizes the State’s achievements with regard to the progressive observance of these rights, including, most notably, the eradication of illiteracy, the reduction of poverty, and the increase in access by the most vulnerable sectors to basic services such as health care.”

According to the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), poverty rates fell from 49.4% in 1999 to 23.9% in 2012, this being the largest success in poverty reduction among 11 countries in the region. All of this explains the long-lasting cult of Hugo Chavez to this day among sectors of the population. However, the country has been facing serial economic problems for a while, and Maduro’s popularity is clearly declining for a number of reasons.

Besides the aforementioned economic and humanitarian catastrophe, geopolitically-wise, the country faces challenges pertaining to the oil discoveries in Guyana and Suriname, amid the Washington-Beijing trade war. The geopolitical dispute between these two superpowers actually goes beyond trade, encompassing the diplomatic and military realms. The specter of a US intervention still haunts the region, with rising tensions involving Colombia. Venezuela largely counts on both Iran and, indirectly, on China, to counter American sanctions and to project its oil market share. It would not be reasonable to expect the current Venezuelan opposition to have the diplomatic wisdom to pursue a pragmatic foreign policy, given their ideological profile and lack of experience.

Venezuela faces many problems which also include bad policy choices, mismanagement and issues involving freedoms, with a PSUV (the hegemonic party) in crisis. It cannot live on Chavez’s nostalgia forever. One however would be mistaken to assume that the Venezuelan opposition today represented by the likes of María Corina Machado and Juan Guaidó are some sort of “democratic” alternative. They are not and their records speak otherwise. They are part of a violent radicalized minority heavily funded by the US without training in politics or public policy.

There are indeed cultural and social reasons beyond the phenomenon of newcomer Edmundo González leading the polls – if the group behind takes over Venezuelans could face problems similar to the ones one can see today in Argentina, with Javier Milei. And this could have serious impacts on the continent.

*

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.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Uriel Araujo is a researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

A team of Italian researchers verified what they called “the real impact of the vaccination campaign” by comparing the risk of all-cause death among vaccinated and unvaccinated residents of the Italian province of Pescara.

COVID-19 vaccines were linked to an increase in all-cause mortality in a new peer-reviewed study that analyzed data from the Italian National Healthcare System.

Based on their analysis, a team of Italian researchers verified what they called “the real impact of the vaccination campaign” by comparing the risk of all-cause death among vaccinated and unvaccinated residents of the Italian province of Pescara.

In their univariate analysis, the researchers found the risk of all-cause death to be over 20% higher for those vaccinated with two or more doses of the COVID-19 vaccine compared to the unvaccinated.

In contrast, prior research done in the same region suggested those with three or four doses had a lower risk of all-cause death.

“We also found a slight but statistically significant loss of life expectancy for those vaccinated with 2 or 3/4 doses,” they said in the report, which they published June 30 in Microorganisms.

Dr. Peter McCullough told The Defender,

“These findings call for an immediate halt of COVID-19 vaccination across the globe and a thorough investigation of what went wrong during the COVID-19 vaccine campaign.”

McCullough wrote on Substack that the paper’s main point is that

“COVID-19 vaccination did not ‘save lives’ as so many in Washington have proclaimed without evidence.”

Alberto Donzelli, one of the Italian study’s authors, told The Defender the study is “an important advance” because it looks at all-cause mortality broken down by vaccination status, and accounts for confounding variables that may have affected earlier reports on COVID-19 vaccination and all-cause mortality.

Very few studies in the world have successfully done that, he said.

McCullough also told The Defender the study’s findings are “cohesive” with those of a recent German study — currently available as a preprint —  which found COVID-19 vaccination was linked to increased all-cause death in 16 German states.

Researchers Undertake Study to Correct for Bias

For their study, Donzelli and his co-authors used the same data analyzed by other researchers in an earlier Italian study on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness.

The earlier study — which followed up with people two years after the start of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign — found that those who received one or two doses had a significantly higher risk of all-cause death, while those who received three or more vaccine doses had a lower risk of death.

However, these results were likely distorted due to “immortal time bias,” Donzelli and his co-authors said.

Immortal time bias is a common study design flaw that can throw off statistical estimations between an exposure (such as a COVID-19 shot) and an outcome (such as an increased risk of death), according to the University of Oxford’s Catalogue of Bias.

Donzelli said the bias “afflicts most observational studies on mortality from COVID-19.” So he and his co-authors took the necessary steps to correct for the bias and reanalyzed the same data.

They looked at vaccination records from Jan. 1, 2021, through Dec. 31, 2022, for people ages 10 and up.

They also looked at follow-up data collected from Jan. 1, 2021, through Feb. 15, 2023, for these people, as long as they hadn’t tested positive for COVID-19 on the date of the follow-up.

They also looked at other variables, such as pathologies other than COVID-19, that may have affected people’s health.

“The results are startling,” wrote McCullough, after doing calculations using the report’s data. “COVID-19 specific deaths were not reduced with vaccination, however there was a U-shaped trend of note when COVID-19 deaths were adjusted per 1000 population: unvaccinated 1.98/1000, one dose 0.27/1000, two doses 1.08/1000, and 3/4 doses 3.5/1000.”

Additionally, Donzelli and his co-authors in their multivariate analysis found that those who received one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine had a hazard risk ratio — which is a statistical estimate of risk — of 2.4 for all-cause mortality, meaning they were much more likely to die compared to the unvaccinated.

“Those vaccinated with two doses showed an almost double hazard ratio of death: 1.98,” Donzelli pointed out.

These numbers are significantly worse than what was reported in the original study that hadn’t corrected for the immortal time bias, he said. Correcting for that bias changed the results for those who were vaccinated with three or more doses, too.

The original study authors had claimed that being vaccinated three or more times reduced the risk of mortality more than four-fold. Based on his and his co-authors corrected analysis, Donzelli called the claim “implausible.”

He said of the multivariate analysis,

“Those vaccinated with three or more doses turned out to die at the same rate as the unvaccinated.”

However, taken together with univariate analyses and life expectancy estimates, all COVID-19 vaccine dosing regimens show an overall increase in all-cause mortality.

CDC: COVID Shots ‘Save Lives’

The Defender asked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) if it planned to modify its statement that “COVID-19 vaccines save lives” in light of the study’s findings.

A CDC spokesperson told The Defender that the CDC “does not comment on findings or claims by individuals or organizations outside of CDC.” The spokesperson declined to provide studies or data supporting the agency’s claim that the vaccines save lives.

“CDC research has continuously found that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective,” the spokesperson said.

UPDATE: This article was updated to state the researchers found the risk of all-cause death to be over 20% higher for those vaccinated with two or more doses of the COVID-19 vaccine compared to the unvaccinated.

*

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.

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa.

Featured image is from CHD


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

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

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.

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

First published on May 24, 2024, Revised on June 19, 2024

***

Introduction

There is a complex history behind Israel’s October 2023 plan to “Wipe Gaza off the Map”. It’s an ongoing genocide, an absolute slaughter, coupled with atrocities:

It’s a criminal undertaking based on Israel’s doctrine of “Justified Vengeance” which was first formulated in 2001.

The “Justified Vengeance” doctrine propounds in no uncertain terms that Palestine (despite its limited military capabilities) is “the Aggressor” and that “Israel has the right to defend itself” which since October 7, 2023 consists in the conduct of a carefully planned genocide against the People of Palestine. 

Paul Larudee begs the question: 

“Is there a point at which the genocide in Gaza becomes egregious enough to provoke other countries to directly intervene in the Gaza Strip to prevent further genocide? 

Can Israel exterminate the entire population without anyone stopping them?”

The answer to that question is provided by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the form of the most despicable set of accusations directed against Palestinians who are the victims of  “An Act of Genocide” instigated by Israel with the unbending support of most Western governments. 

 

False Flag. “Palestine Attacks Israel” 

Below is the statement of the ICC Prosecutor and King’s Counsel Karim A.A. Khan which accuses Palestine of committing crimes against humanity as well as war crimes, while carefully ignoring the evidence pertaining to Israel’s “false flag” operation which has resulted quite “deliberately” on the part of Netanyahu government in the deaths of innocent Israeli civilians.

 “A false flag” in relation to Israel constitutes a carefully planned Israeli-US intelligence operation which results in the deaths of innocent Israeli civilians.  In turn, Israel will place the blame on the State of Palestine, with view to justifying “A State of Readiness for War” against the Gaza Strip. 

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance.  The October 7, 2023 “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” was not a “surprise attack”.  

It was a False Flag operation carried out by a “faction” (intelligence assets) within Hamas, in close liaison with Mossad and U.S. intelligence. 

The false flag logic –which has resulted in Israeli casualties–, has provided Israel with a justification to undertake a genocide against Palestinians.

On that same day of October 7, 2023 Netanyahu launched a military operation against the Gaza Strip entitled “State of Readiness For War”.  

Had  “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” been a “surprise attack” as parroted by the media, Netanyahu’s “State of Readiness For War” could not have been carried out (at short notice) on that same day, namely October 7, 2023. 

Palestinian Children: The Victims of Israeli atrocities

Aseel, a six-year-old Palestinian girl, being treated at Gaza's European Hospital after losing her eye in an Israeli air strike

 

It Was Not a “Surprise Attack”

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance.  The October 7, 2023 “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” was not a “surprise attack”.  It was a False Flag operation carried out by a “faction” (intelligence assets) within Hamas, in close liaison with Mossad and U.S. intelligence. 

According to Dr. Philip Giraldi, a renowned analyst and former CIA official:

As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles.

In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case. (October 8, 2023)

According to  Efrat Fenigson, former IDF intelligence official (published on October 7, 2023)

There’s no way Israel did not know of what’s coming.

How come border crossings were wide open?

Something is VERY WRONG HERE, something is very strange, this chain of events is very unusual and not typical for the Israeli defense system.

To me this surprise attack seems like a planned operation. On all fronts. 


The Features of the Gaza Fence largely confirm the above statements by Giraldi and Fenigson:

According to Israel’s defence ministry “the barrier includes hundreds of cameras, radars and other sensors, it spans 65km

The ministry said the project’s “smart fence” is more than six metres high and its maritime barrier includes means to detect infiltration by sea and a remote-controlled weapons system.

File:Barrier against tunnels along the Israel-Gaza Strip border 2019. II.jpg

See also the following article:

Section Commander of the Gaza Fence: “The obstacle is built so that even a fox cannot pass it”. They Let It Happen. The Hamas Attack Was Allowed to Close the Book on Palestine.

By. Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, General Herzl Halevi, and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 9, 2023


MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY – MIDDLE EAST WAR: A FALSE FLAG LEADING TO MORE FALSE FLAGS?

 


“False Flag” in Support of “Israel’s Act of Genocide”

It should be understood that the implementation of the False Flag was carefully coordinated with Israel’s “Act of Genocide” directed against the People of Palestine.

On that same day of October 7, 2023 Netanyahu launched a military operation against the Gaza Strip entitled “State of Readiness For War”.  

Had  “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” been a “surprise attack” as parroted by the media, Netanyahu’s “State of Readiness For War”could not have been carried out (at short notice) on that same day, namely October 7, 2023.

There is A Long History of Israeli False Flags

The late  Prof Tanya Reinhart confirmed the formulation in 1997 of a False Flag Agenda entitled “The Green Light to Terror” which consisted in promoting (engineering) suicide attacks against Israeli civilians, citing “the Bloodshed as a Justification” to wage war on Palestine:

“…This is the “green light to terror” theme which the Military Intelligence (Ama”n) has been promoting since 1997, when its anti-Oslo line was consolidated. This theme was since repeated again and again by military circles, and eventually became the mantra of Israeli propaganda… (See Chossudovsky, October 23, 2023)

There is continuity: Israel’s Military Intelligence remains in charge of implementing false flag operations coupled with “Acts of Genocide” directed against Palestine.


For details and analysis on False Flags, See:

Is the Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”? They Let It Happen? Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”?

By Philip Giraldi and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 24, 2024

See also: 

Netanyahu’s “False Flag” Is a “Copy and Paste”: The Pentagon’s Secret “Operation Northwoods”(1962) Directed Against Cuba. “Casualty Lists Would Cause a Helpful Wave of Indignation”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 19, 2024

Video: The Mystery of Israel. “Reveals Something So Evil”

By David John Sorensen, June 21, 2024
 

“Israel is the Victim of Palestinian Aggression”. The International Criminal Court (ICC) Accuses Palestine

In a bitter irony, the ICC Prosecutor’s accusations against Palestine –which include alleged acts of “Extermination”, “Murder” and “Torture” contends that the State of Israel rather than Palestine is the victim of Genocide: 

According to the ICC Statement, Palestine’s “Act of Aggression” against Israel consists in:

  • Extermination as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(b) of the Rome Statute;
  • Murder as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(a), and as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
  • Taking hostages as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(iii);
  • Rape and other acts of sexual violence as crimes against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(g), and also as war crimes pursuant to article 8(2)(e)(vi) in the context of captivity;
  • Torture as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(f), and also as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity;
  • Other inhumane acts as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(l)(k), in the context of captivity;
  • Cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity; and
  • Outrages upon personal dignity as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(ii), in the context of captivity.

What  these insidious legal statements imply is that the ICC has de facto given “its stamp of approval” to Israel’s “Justified Vengeance” against the People of Palestine, which is currently ongoing. The atrocities committed against Palestinians are beyond description:

”burnt alive after Israeli forces bombed tents” 

Accusations against Hamas

‘Inasmuch as the issue of the False Flag (despite extensive evidence) has been casually dismissed by the ICC, as well as by Western governments and the media:

The accusations against Hamas are meaningless. They should be withdrawn.

The ICC has also denied Palestine’s Right to Resist Israeli Occupation” under the Fourth Protocol of the Geneva Convention.

International law is unambiguous in its endorsement of “armed struggle” for peoples who seek self-determination under “colonial and foreign domination.”

United Nations resolution 37/43, dated 3 December 1982, “reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.” Palestine Chronicle (emphasis added)

The Endgame is the Exclusion of Palestinians from their Homeland

The Lie has become the Truth

Amply documented Israel is involved in acts of “Extermination” against Palestinians.

Yet it is Israel which is described by the ICC as the “Victim of Palestinian Aggression.” 

Genocide and False Flags

While the ICC fails to acknowledge the conduct of a “False Flag”, numerous documents, witnesses and statements, confirm Israel’s False Flag initiative.

In a bitter irony, the False Flag Attack Strategy had been acknowledged by Netanyahu in consultation with the Likud Party. It comes from the Horse’s Mouth:

“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)

Moreover, “Transferring Money by the Netanyahu government to Hamas intelligence assets” was confirmed in a Times of Israel October 8, 2023 Report:

“Hamas was treated as a partner to the detriment of the Palestinian Authority to prevent Abbas from moving towards creating a Palestinian State.

Hamas was promoted from a terrorist group to an organization with which Israel conducted negotiations through Egypt, and which was allowed to receive suitcases containing millions of dollars from Qatar through the Gaza crossings.” (emphasis added)

The False Flag operation was used to justify the conduct of a carefully planned “Genocide”.

The Evidence

There are numerous government documents which describe in detail the planning and conduct of the genocide.

What we have on record (which is the object of our analysis) is:

 An official  memorandum –released and declassified (made public) on October 13, 2023– by Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence, which confirms Israel’s planning of a Genocide against the People of Palestine.

This intelligence memorandum was prepared well in advance of October 7, 2023.

It was available to the ICC Team.

The thrust of the document describes what is currently unfolding, namely the Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland.

This is Israel’s Plan (Before our Very Eyes)

“The forcible and permanent transfer of the Gaza Strip’s 2.2 million Palestinian residents to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula”.

It’s a longstanding and carefully prepared initiative by Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence, which was declassified on October 13, 2023, namely one week after the commencement of the invasion of the Gaza Strip.

Concurrently, Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence was responsible for the implementation of the False Flag.

 

The endgame is the exclusion of Palestinians from their homeland.

We are dealing with an absurd “upside down rhetoric” “Mundus inversus” on the part of the ICC Prosecutor. 

The Lie has become the Truth

Amply documented Israel is involved in acts of “Extermination” against Palestinians. Yet it is Israel which is described by the ICC as the “Victim of Palestinian Aggression.” 

The Lie Prevails. International Law is Criminalized

The actual conduct of the genocide against Palestine —confirmed by numerous official Israeli documents to which the ICC had access– are casually ignored by the ICC Prosecutor.

I have reviewed the official ICC statement. There is not a single reference to the word “genocide”. 

What we have on record (which is the object of our analysis) is:

 An official  memorandum –released and declassified (made public) on October 13, 2023– by Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence,

the memorandum confirms Israel’s planning of a Genocide against the People of Palestine.

This intelligence memorandum was prepared well in advance of October 7, 2023. The thrust of the document describes what is currently unfolding, namely the Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland: 

“The forcible and permanent transfer of the Gaza Strip’s 2.2 million Palestinian residents to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula”.

Ask the ICC Prosecutor Karim A. A. Khan: What is the significance of this document? 

Option. C. The Evacuation of the Civilian Population from Gaza to the Sinai

click here or below to access complete document (10 pages)

 

For further details and analysis see: “Wiping Gaza Off the Map”: Israel’s “Secret” Intelligence Memorandum “Option C” by Michel Chossudovsky

 

The Option C Blueprint: A Criminal Endeavour

The Option C  which was declassified, is the Blueprint of Israel’s War against Palestine (among many classified intelligence documents), the underlying intent of which is to:

Destroy Palestine as a Nation State and Exclude Palestinians from their Homeland.

The Overthrow of Hamas is contemplated, which if carried out would no doubt result in the implementation of the three ICC Hamas Arrest Warrants.

Option C. calls for:

“The Evacuation of the civilian population from Gaza to Sinai”

See details below from the original document (emphasis added)

Israel is to act to evacuate the civilian population to Sinai. In the first stage, tent cities will be established in the area of Sinai.

The next stage includes the establishment of a humanitarian zone to assist the civilian population of Gaza and the construction of cities in a resettled area in northern Sinai.

A sterile zone of several kilometers should be created within Egypt, and the return of the population to activities/residences near the border with Israel should not be allowed.

In addition, a security perimeter should be established in our [Israel’s] territory near the border with Egypt. (Option C)

There are various military and operational dimensions which are currently being implemented.

Whereas the killings, destruction and the engineered famine are not acknowledged in the official government document, they are an integral part of the Option C. Agenda:

Hunger is a creeper. People will survive for months on their bodily reserves and on the little food they can scrape together.

But suddenly, people get under the absolute minimum in bodily assets and mass deaths will start on an industrial scale.

Once erupted, hunger and disease deaths will be enormous.

Holocaust – death brought by Israel on civilians on industrial scale will erupt, if this is not reversed NOW. (Karsten Riise)

With regard to propaganda, lobbying and public relations, the focus is on:

harnessing the support of the United States and additional pro-Israeli countries for the endeavor”. (Text of Option C)

The role of Egypt in Option C is of course crucial:

Egypt has an obligation under international law to allow the passage of the  population.

Israel must act to promote a broad diplomatic initiative aimed at countries that will support assisting the displaced population and agree to absorb them as refugees.(Option C)

Solidarity with Palestine

It is important as part of the Palestine solidarity movement that Option C be fully understood. It is a criminal endeavor. It is part of Israel’s “Act of Genocide”.

The State of Israel is in blatant violation of the Genocide Convention. And so is the ICC prosecutor. 

For further details and analysis: click here to access complete Option C document (10 pages).

See also:  “Wiping Gaza Off the Map”: Israel’s “Secret” Intelligence Memorandum “Option C” by Michel Chossudovsky

The ICC Prosecutor is a “Double Speak”. 

We are dealing with an absurd “upside down rhetoric” “Mundus inversus” on the part of the ICC Prosecutor.

While the ICC Prosecutor accuses Palestine, he rightfully acknowledges the crimes committed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, specifically with regard to the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare.

This issue is fundamental. Starvation in the Gaza Strip is ongoing. It’s a crime against humanity. It’s Genocide.

For nearly 8 months, Israel still chokes off nearly all food and other vital supplies to Gaza.

Gaza needs 500 trucks of supply every day, and near-nothing is coming through.

The US pier supplies 25-50 trucks per day, and everything else is closed.

With irregular intervals, reports have come the past months, but never about more than some 100 or 150 trucks on a few days.

Reports about starvation are made public, and this is obviously getting worse. (Karsten Riise, communication to the author)

Hungry displaced Gazans in Rafah await soup

ICC Prosecutor Karim A. A. Khan’s presentation is cautious.

He essentially contends that “crimes have been committed by both sides” while intimating that “The Fourth Military Power” on the Planet, “Has a Right to Defend Itself” (in the words of Joe Biden on October 7).

 

The False Flag which constitutes a crime against humanity, is not addressed by the ICC, nor is the issue of the Genocide against the People of Palestine.

The document (above) confirms the State of Israel’s prior intent to implement genocide against the people of Palestine in violation of the Genocide Convention.

ICC Prosecutor Karim A..A. Khan does not want to be accused of “double standards”. 

Netanyahu and Gallant are “The Fall Guys”  

ICC prosecutor Karim Khan KC issued a statement [on May 20] proposing that arrest warrants are issued for Mr Netanyahu, Israel’s defence minister Yoav Gallant, Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed al-Masri, Hamas’s military chief, and Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas’s political leader. (Independent)

Karim Khan’s allegations directed against Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant which are fully corroborated, coupled with arrest warrants, are intent to:

—reach out and mislead the anti-Zionist peace movement,

—provide a sense of (fake) “legitimacy” to the ICC’s far-reaching accusations against Palestine (“extermination and murder”).

— Dispel the existence of a False Flag. Deny Israeli civilian casualties linked to the “False Flag”

—provide a “human face” to Karim Khan KC

Nowhere in the ICC Prosecutor’s report is the issue of “Israel’s genocide directed against the People of Palestine” mentioned.

In this regard, the Arrest Warrants directed by the ICC against the three Hamas leaders serve to:

  1. Side Track” the Strategic Role of the “False Flag Operation
  2. Refute the very existence of a Genocide,
  3. Endorse Israel’s “Act of Self Defense” against Palestine.

In regards to the arrest warrants directed against Netanyahu and Gallant, it is highly unlikely that they will be carried out.

(Netanyahu already has a criminal record. In November 2019, he was officially “indicted for breach of trust, accepting bribes, and fraud”)

Of relevance, the CIA has been operating in the background in collaboration with Israeli intelligence.

There are unspoken strategic objectives.

In mid-May 2024, CIA Director Bill Burns was in Cairo for negotiations behind closed doors with both Israeli and Hamas officials, regarding a possible ceasefire.

The three arrest warrants directed against the leaders of Hamas are intended to “confirm” that the alleged October 7, 2023 Act of “Aggression” against Israel was NOT (despite the evidence) part of a “False Flag” (i.e. inside intelligence op. carefully coordinated by Israeli and U.S. intelligence).

The ICC Arrest Warrants directed against Netanyahu and Gallant (which will never be carried out), serve the useful purpose of placing the blame while at the same time deflecting our understanding as to who from a strategic standpoint is behind the conduct of the Genocide directed against the People of Palestine. 

What this does is to distract public opinion. It misleads the peace movement. It creates divisions within the solidarity movement with Palestine.

Big Money Economic Interests

Bear in mind there are powerful economic interests which are supportive of the Genocide.

They have their eyes on Gaza’s Multibillion Offshore Maritime Gas Reserves.

Video: “Wiping Gaza Off The Map”: Big Money Agenda. Confiscating Palestine’s Maritime Natural Gas Reserves

By Felicity Arbuthnot and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 23, 2024

Anglo-America Controls both the ICC and the IJC 

The ICC Arrest Warrants directed against Netanyahu and Gallant (which will never be carried out), serve the useful purpose of placing the blame while at the same time deflecting our understanding as to who from a strategic standpoint is behind the conduct of the Genocide directed against the People of Palestine. 

What this does is to distract public opinion. It misleads the peace movement. It creates divisions within the solidarity movement with Palestine. 

I should mention that the False Flag issue –which constitutes a crime against humanity on the part of Israel and the U.S.– has been casually ignored both by the International Court of Justice (IJC) (Chief Justice Donahue, former adviser to Hillary Clinton). (January 2024)

And now by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on behalf of His Majesty’s Prosecutor, K.C. (King’s Counsel). 

In this regard, the Arrest Warrants directed against the three Hamas leaders serve not only to Side Track the Role of the “False Flag Operation“, but also to endorse the legitimacy of the Genocide which is portrayed as an Act of Self Defense by Israel.

It is worth noting that the conduct of False Flag Attacks have been endorsed by Netanyahu: 

“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)

The U.N based judicial system is composed of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC), both of which have deliberately ignored the issue of Genocide against Palestine.  What is at stake is the outright criminalization of the UN judicial system.

The ICC Prosecutor Makes No Reference to “Genocide”

Despite the evidence, the ICC Prosecutor fails to acknowledge that Israel is conducting a Genocide. 

The word Genocide is NOT mentioned in his statement. 

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide is not mentioned. 

His statements point to the criminalization of the ICC. 

What is the Truth, What is the Lie? 

The Truth is that “Extermination” and “Murder” are being conducted by Israel, specifically targeting children (click here to access the video, requires Facebook)

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, May 24, 2024


 

Statement of ICC Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan KC:

Applications for arrest warrants

in the situation in the State of Palestine

link to the ICC

20 May 2024

 

Today I am filing applications for warrants of arrest before Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court in the Situation in the State of Palestine.

.

.

On the basis of evidence collected and examined by my Office, I have reasonable grounds to believe that Yahya SINWAR (Head of the Islamic Resistance Movement (“Hamas”) in the Gaza Strip), Mohammed Diab Ibrahim AL-MASRI, more commonly known as DEIF (Commander-in-Chief of the military wing of Hamas, known as the Al-Qassam Brigades), and Ismail HANIYEH (Head of Hamas Political Bureau) bear criminal responsibility for the following war crimes and crimes against humanity committed on the territory of Israel and the State of Palestine (in the Gaza strip) from at least 7 October 2023: 

  • Extermination as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(b) of the Rome Statute;
  • Murder as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(a), and as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
  • Taking hostages as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(iii);
  • Rape and other acts of sexual violence as crimes against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(g), and also as war crimes pursuant to article 8(2)(e)(vi) in the context of captivity;
  • Torture as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(f), and also as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity;
  • Other inhumane acts as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(l)(k), in the context of captivity;
  • Cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity; and
  • Outrages upon personal dignity as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(ii), in the context of captivity.

My Office submits that the war crimes alleged in these applications were committed in the context of an international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine, and a non-international armed conflict between Israel and Hamas running in parallel. We submit that the crimes against humanity charged were part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Israel by Hamas and other armed groups pursuant to organisational policies. Some of these crimes, in our assessment, continue to this day.

My Office submits there are reasonable grounds to believe that SINWAR, DEIF and HANIYEH are criminally responsible for the killing of hundreds of Israeli civilians in attacks perpetrated by Hamas (in particular its military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades) and other armed groups on 7 October 2023 and the taking of at least 245 hostages. As part of our investigations, my Office has interviewed victims and survivors, including former hostages and eyewitnesses from six major attack locations: Kfar Aza; Holit; the location of the Supernova Music Festival; Be’eri; Nir Oz; and Nahal Oz. The investigation also relies on evidence such as CCTV footage, authenticated audio, photo and video material, statements by Hamas members including the alleged perpetrators named above, and expert evidence.

It is the view of my Office that these individuals planned and instigated the commission of crimes on 7 October 2023, and have through their own actions, including personal visits to hostages shortly after their kidnapping, acknowledged their responsibility for those crimes. We submit that these crimes could not have been committed without their actions. They are charged both as co-perpetrators and as superiors pursuant to Articles 25 and 28 of the Rome Statute.

During my own visit to Kibbutz Be’eri and Kibbutz Kfar Aza, as well as to the site of Supernova Music Festival in Re’im, I saw the devastating scenes of these attacks and the profound impact of the unconscionable crimes charged in the applications filed today. Speaking with survivors, I heard how the love within a family, the deepest bonds between a parent and a child, were contorted to inflict unfathomable pain through calculated cruelty and extreme callousness. These acts demand accountability.

My Office also submits there are reasonable grounds to believe that hostages taken from Israel have been kept in inhumane conditions, and that some have been subject to sexual violence, including rape, while being held in captivity. We have reached that conclusion based on medical records, contemporaneous video and documentary evidence, and interviews with victims and survivors. My Office also continues to investigate reports of sexual violence committed on 7 October.

I wish to express my gratitude to the survivors, and the families of victims of the 7 October attacks, for their courage in coming forward to provide their accounts to my Office. We remain focused on further deepening our investigations of all crimes committed as part of these attacks and will continue to work with all partners to ensure that justice is delivered.

I again reiterate my call for the immediate release of all hostages taken from Israel and for their safe return to their families. This is a fundamental requirement of international humanitarian law.

Benjamin Netanyahu, Yoav Gallant

On the basis of evidence collected and examined by my Office, I have reasonable grounds to believe that Benjamin NETANYAHU, the Prime Minister of Israel, and Yoav GALLANT, the Minister of Defence of Israel, bear criminal responsibility for  the following war crimes and crimes against humanity committed on the territory of the State of Palestine (in the Gaza strip) from at least 8 October 2023:

  • Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Statute;
  • Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health contrary to article 8(2)(a)(iii), or cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
  • Wilful killing contrary to article 8(2)(a)(i), or Murder as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
  • Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime contrary to articles 8(2)(b)(i), or 8(2)(e)(i);
  • Extermination and/or murder contrary to articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(a), including in the context of deaths caused by starvation, as a crime against humanity;
  • Persecution as a crime against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(h);
  • Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(k).

My Office submits that the war crimes alleged in these applications were committed in the context of an international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine, and a non-international armed conflict between Israel and Hamas (together with other Palestinian Armed Groups) running in parallel.

We submit that the crimes against humanity charged were committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against the Palestinian civilian population pursuant to State policy. These crimes, in our assessment, continue to this day.

Click here to read the full text.

*

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.

Featured image is from the ICC

Why Russia Will Defeat NATO in Ukraine

July 17th, 2024 by Mike Whitney

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

NATO’s three-day summit in Washington DC achieved the objective for which it was designed, to create a public forum in which all 32 members of the Alliance could express their unanimous support for upcoming attacks on the Russian Federation. That was the real purpose of the confab. The managers of the event, sought a dramatic display of unity to justify future hostilities with Moscow and to reduce the possibility that any one person would be held responsible for starting World War 3.

The summit was followed by the release of a formal Declaration which strongly suggests that the decision to go war has already been made. As many people know, NATO has green-lighted a policy that allows the firing of missiles at targets inside Russian territory. This policy will also apply to the numerous NATO F-16s that will be deployed to Ukraine sometime in the near future. (F-16s can carry nuclear missiles) Despite overwhelming support for these policies among the members, we must not forget that these are blatant acts of aggression that are forbidden under international law. No amount of public relations hoopla can conceal the fact that NATO is on-track to commit the “supreme crime”.

It’s worth noting, that NATO intends to take a more active role in the conduct of the war. According to National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, the Alliance plans to formally establish a NATO office inside Ukraine that will be used to oversee military operations. In short, the managers of the conflict no longer have any interest in concealing their involvement. This is now a NATO operation. Here’s an excerpt from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:

This NATO office will accompany the creation of a NATO command to oversee the war in Ukraine, transitioning the provision of weapons and logistical oversight from an ad hoc group led by the United States to the NATO alliance itself.

Sullivan’s remarks outlined the main agenda items of the three-day summit in Washington, which is expected to signal a major escalation of the conflict with Russia in Ukraine and plans to significantly increase NATO’s capabilities to fight a full-scale war throughout Europe….

He said the summit will also announce “a new NATO military command in Germany led by a three-star general that will launch a training, equipping, and force development program for Ukrainian troops….”

The creation of a NATO office in Kiev and the reorganization of weapons provision, training and military logistics under a direct NATO command marks the end of any pretense that the conflict in Ukraine is not a war between NATO and Russia. It marks a dangerous new phase in the war, raising the prospect of a major escalation. Washington summit will announce plans to set up NATO office inside Ukraine, WSWS

Add all of this to the fact that the Summit Declaration posits that Ukraine is now on an “irreversible” path to NATO membership, and it becomes clear that every effort is being made to provoke Moscow.

Not surprisingly, Russia was thoroughly demonized in the Declaration which follows the familiar pattern we have seen with other enemies of Washington including Saddam, Qaddafi and Assad. Here’s a brief summary of “evil” Russia directly from the text:

Russia remains the most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security…

Russia bears sole responsibility for its war of aggression against Ukraine, a blatant violation of international law, including the UN Charter.

There can be no impunity for Russian forces’ and officials’ abuses and violations of human rights, war crimes, and other violations of international law.

Russia is responsible for the deaths of thousands of civilians and has caused extensive damage to civilian infrastructure.

We condemn in the strongest possible terms Russia’s horrific attacks on the Ukrainian people, including on hospitals, on 8 July…

We are determined to constrain and contest Russia’s aggressive actions and to counter its ability to conduct destabilizing activities towards NATO and Allies… Washington Summit Declaration, NATO

Washington’s ferocious repudiation of Russia leaves no doubt as to where all this is heading. It’s headed for war.

The authors of this declaration were reiterating the views of the billionaire elites who are determined to roll-back Russia’s battlefield gains, topple the political leaders in Moscow, and splinter the country into smaller, more-manageable statlets. Russia represents the most formidable obstacle to Washington’s overall geopolitical strategy of projecting power into Asia, encircling China, and establishing itself as the preeminent power in the world’s most prosperous region. These strategic objectives are invariably omitted in the media’s coverage, but they are the underlying factors that shape events. Here’s Biden:

In Europe, Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine continues. And Putin wants nothing less than Ukraine’s total subjugation; to end Ukraine’s democracy; to destroy Ukraine’s culture; and to wipe Ukraine off the map.

And we know Putin won’t stop at Ukraine. But make no mistake, Ukraine can and will stop Putin — (applause) — especially with our full, collective support. And they have our full support. “Ukraine can and will stop Putin.” The White House

It’s all nonsense, but it helps to build the case for war which is Biden’s obvious intention. (Here’s John Mearsheimer’s response to Biden’s claim that Putin wants to conquer Europe. You Tube; :30 second mark)

The truth is that the war was triggered by NATO enlargement, an inconvenient fact that NATO chairman Jens Stoltenberg has admitted on numerous occasions. Some readers might also recall that—during the peace negotiations between Kiev and Moscow in April 2022—Russia’s primary demand was that Ukraine reject NATO membership and declare permanent neutrality. Zelensky agreed to those terms which, in effect, prove that Putin’s action was linked to NATO expansion. There is virtually no proof that Putin wants to conquer Europe. None. Putin simply wants Ukraine to honor its treaty obligations regarding neutrality. Check out this excerpt by Ted Snider at Antiwar.com:

Ukraine.. promised to stay out of NATO. Its non-alignment was enshrined in the foundational documents of the independent state of Ukraine.

Article IX of the 1990 Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine states that Ukraine “solemnly declares its intention of becoming a permanently neutral state that does not participate in military blocs.” That promise was repeated in Ukraine’s 1996 Constitution, which committed Ukraine to neutrality and prohibited it from joining any military alliance. But in 2019, President Petro Poroshenko amended the Ukrainian Constitution, committing Ukraine to the “strategic course” of NATO and EU membership.

Given NATO’s past behavior, this was viewed as a direct threat by Russia. When asked in 2023 if Russia still recognizes the sovereignty of Ukraine, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov answered, “We recognized the sovereignty of Ukraine back in 1991 on the basis of the Declaration of Independence, which Ukraine adopted when it withdrew from the Soviet Union… One of the main points for [Russia] in the declaration was that Ukraine would be a non-bloc non-alliance country; it would not join any military alliances… In that version, on those conditions, we support Ukraine’s territorial integrity.” NATO’s 75th Anniversary: The Broken Promises That Led to War, Antiwar.com

The issue, of course, could have been resolved long ago if Washington had acted in good faith, but Washington has not acted in good faith. In fact, Washington is still determined to inflict a “strategic defeat” on Russia in order to implement its “pivot to Asia” strategy to ensure its future as the world’s only unchallenged superpower. These goals cannot be achieved without escalation, confrontation and a full-blown war. The NATO summit is merely a prelude to a broader and more violent conflict between the nuclear superpowers.

The question we should being asking ourselves is whether NATO can actually win a war with Russia. Can it?

The answer is “No”, it cannot.

Why?

Here’s how military analyst Will Schryver answers that question:

I have done my research — for years, dating back long before 2022…. I repeatedly warned that it (Ukraine) was a war the US/NATO could never win….There is a VAST difference between the “on paper” strength of NATO (including the US) and their actual war-fighting capability. The US could not assemble, equip, field, and sustain even 250k combat effectives in eastern Europe, and any attempt to do so would necessitate the evacuation of every major US base on the planet. The US/NATO not only could not win a war against Russia, but they would be eviscerated in the attempt.

Alerted by the US/NATO destruction of Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Libya, the Russians have spent the past 25 years — and particularly the past two years — engaged in a massive and exceedingly impressive military build up and modernization in preparation for an eventual war against the US/NATO. In the past 2+ years, t hey have methodically destroyed Ukraine’s three successive proxy armies with one arm tied behind their back. Their force generation, combat training, and military industrial production far exceed the entire NATO bloc combined. I appreciate the degree to which military analytical tourists like yourself have been thoroughly propagandized by Hollywood fantasies and the western state-controlled media, but wars are not fought and won by imaginary narratives and flashy superheroes. They are won by raw firepower — a metric by which the tripartite alliance of Russia, China, and Iran now possess supremacy over their hubris-drunken enemies in the rapidly eroding American Empire. There is only one sane option at this point: relinquish empire and make peace with the resurgent civilizational powers of the earth. Otherwise much of modern human civilization itself is at risk of being destroyed, and it will take centuries to recover. Ukraine Can’t Win, Will Schryver, Twitter

There’s also the niggling issue of “magazine depth” which refers to the stockpiles of weaponry and munitions required to outlast and eventually defeat the enemy. Here’s Schryver again:

There is no doubt Israel (just like its great benefactor, the United States) is, in the context of a “big war”, capable of executing several damaging strikes against a potential peer or near-peer adversary. But, throughout the imperial domain, there are fatal weaknesses that exist right now, and which cannot be turned into strengths at any point in the near- or medium-term. The first is what military types call “magazine depth”: munitions stockpiles sufficient to offensively overwhelm, defensively defeat, and strategically outlast the enemy. Neither the United States, nor any of its largely impotent client nations, possess “magazine depth” sufficient to prosecute anything more than a relatively brief campaign against their potential peer adversaries: Russia, China, Iran — and all or any of their lesser-power partners. Magazine Depth, Will Schryver, Twitter

What Schryver is saying is as profound as it is alarming. The United States and NATO will not prevail in a war with Russia because they do not have the industrial capacity, the force generation, the combat training, the magazine depth or the overall firepower of Russia. By every metric, they are the inferior fighting force. Additionally, Russia has already killed or captured hundreds of thousands of the “the best-trained and best-equipped soldiers in the Ukrainian army”. That army has already been effectively annihilated. The troops in the trenches today are poorly trained, unskilled, low-morale rookies who are being slaughtered by the thousands. Does anyone seriously believe that NATO involvement can turn this train around and secure a victory? Here’s more from Schryver:

The Russians have demonstrated that they can routinely shoot down ANY species of strike missile the US/NATO can field against them — not all of them all of the time, but most of them most of the time. And they get better and better at it as time goes on.

Indeed, over the past few months it is increasingly becoming “all of them most of the time”…. As Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported earlier this week:

“We are using air defence systems in a comprehensive manner during the special military operation. This significantly improved their responsiveness and strike range. Over the last six months, we have shot down 1,062 of NATO’s HIMARS rockets, short-range and cruise missiles, and guided bombs.”

No other military on the planet has previously attested this level of capability. The US does not have it, and is at least a decade away from developing it….

The current front-line inventory of US tactical ballistic missiles and sea- and air-launched cruise missiles would present no greater technical challenge for Russian air defenses than what they have already seen and defeated in the Ukraine War. The significance of this battlefield development defies exaggeration. It alters the war-fighting calculus that has been assumed for many decades. Empty Quiver, Will Schryver, Twitter

Some readers may find it hard to believe that NATO would rush into a war without thoroughly researching its prospects for success. But that is precisely what’s happening here. Blustery Uncle Sam foolishly believes that he will win as soon as he “throws its hat in the ring. He can’t accept that the scales are tipped in Russia’s favor and that his entry into the war will be met with a thunderous response. But that is the reality he faces. Here’s Schryver one last time:

NATO would face enormous problems of coordination, doctrine and force generation, even if it could agree an objective. Its troops are not trained for this kind of war and have never operated together…..

(they) would be hard-pressed to field a force more powerful than the reported nine Brigades trained and equipped by the West for the Great Offensive of 2023, which just bounced off the Russian forces without achieving anything of note….

The US has no ground combat units in Europe remotely suited to high-intensity land warfare…. Given enough time, money, political will and organization, most things are possible. But there is no chance… of NATO assembling a force which would constitute anything more than a nuisance to the Russians, while putting many lives in danger…… NATO’s Phantom Armies, Will Schryver, Substack

I am convinced that there is a delusional element within the foreign policy establishment that have convinced themselves that NATO will defeat Russia if they face each other on a battlefield in Ukraine. Schryver’s analysis helps to show why that’s not going to happen.

*

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.

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 TUR

Guess Who Are the Real Protagonists of Anti-Semitism

July 16th, 2024 by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

We are witnessing accusations of anti-semitism, in colleges and universities, coupled with police intervention, arrests, prison sentences, for all those who act in solidarity with the people of Palestine.

But there something very fishy going on. 

While Western governments are actively repressing the protest movements against Israel’s act of genocide, —with mass arrests on charges of antisemitism—, those same governments are supporting Ukraine’s Nazi movement which actively participated and collaborated with Nazi Germany in the genocide directed against the Jewish population of Ukraine during World War II


Update. The French Elections. “The Left” Supports the Nazi Regime in Kiev?

Ironically, the only party firmly committed to suspending military aid to the Nazi Kiev regime is Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) which is tagged by people  on the Left as fascist and anti-semitic.

Meanwhile, according to the Kiev Post, Ukraine is rejoicing.

Several of France’s  leftist parties which are part of the NFP socialist coalition are firmly supportive of Ukraine’s Nazi regime.

A message to my friends on the Left: How is it that people who are committed to social democracy and socialism are endorsing a Neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine? 

The World is Upside Down.

The Left is misinformed. Supporting the Nazis in Ukraine, serves the interests of the Global Financial Establishment and the hegemonic interests of the US.

C’est Le Monde à l’Envers 

M. C., July 9, 2024


The following image is revealing, from Left to Right: the Blue NATO flag, the Azov Battalion’s Wolfangel SS of the Third Reich and Hitler’s Nazi Swastika (red and white background) are displayed, which points to collaboration between NATO and the Neo-Nazi regime. 

Western countries have been financing the Nazi Summer Camps 

Ukraine’s “Neo-Nazi Summer Camp”. Military Training for Young Children, Para-military Recruits

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 13, 2024

A Head of State sponsored by the CIA

Video: A Jewish-Russian Proxy President: Zelensky Transformed into a Neo-Nazi.

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and Silview Media, June 15,  2024

According to NATO: “the war started in 2014

The Smoking Gun: Who Started the War? Was it Russia or Was it US-NATO? NATO Confirms that the Ukraine “War Started in 2014”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 29, 2024

 

 


How Zionism Feeds Antisemitism | The Nation

Sounds contradictory?

My question is: Who are the Anti-Semites? The answer is obvious.

Our Western governments (including the majority of NATO member states), which are generously financing the Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev.  

From a legal standpoint, this is a criminal act on the part of our governments, which should be opposed by a vast social movement in all NATO member-states.  

The dominant Nazi faction within the Kiev government regime (which is supported by our governments) exerts its power within the realm of intelligence, internal affairs, national security and the military.

Amply documented, the 2014 US-sponsored EuroMaidan Coup d’Etat was carried out with the support of these two Nazi factions: Svoboda and Right Sektor headed by Dmytro Yarosh, which have committed countless atrocities directed against Ukraine’s Jewish community.

Dmytro Yarosh (Centre) EuroMaidan Coup d’Etat

Andriy Parubiy founded in 1991 the Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda [Freedom]), together with Oleh Tyahnybok. Parubiy was subsequently appointed Chairman of Ukraine’s Parliament (Verkhovna Rada).

According to Andriy Parubiy: Adolf Hitler was “the torchbearer of democracy”. 

“I’m a major supporter of direct democracy,… By the way, I tell you that the biggest man, who practised a direct democracy, was Adolf Aloizovich [Hitler]”. (Quoted by South Front)

 

 

Remember Victoria Nuland of F**k the EU Fame

The US Congress, Canada’s Parliament, the British Parliament, the European Parliament, have invited and praised M. Parubiy.

 

Parubiy with Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland (Obama Adminstration)

Here is Victoria Nuland with the leader of the Svoboda Nazi Party, Tyannybok.

 

Tyannybok (leader of Neo-Nazi Svoboda Party (left), Yatseniuk (right)

The Holocaust in Ukraine

With the formation of a new government composed of NeoNazis,  the Jewish community in Kiev is threatened.  This community is described as “one of the most vibrant Jewish communities in the world, with dozens of active Jewish organizations and institutions”.

A significant part of this community is made up of family members of holocaust survivors.

“Three million Ukrainians were murdered by the Nazis during their occupation of Ukraine, including 900,000 Jews.” (indybay.org, January 29, 2014).

Ukraine’s Nazi movement collaborated with Nazi Germany in the early 1940s. The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) participated in the killings of Ukraine’s Jewish Population.

The map below is the territory under Nazi Germany occupation (recorded in 1942) extending from Galicia to Kiev and Odessa.

It indicates cities with Jewish ghettoes, as well as the locations of major massacres.

According to the WW II Holocaust Museum:

“Before World War II, the 1.5 million Jews living in the Soviet republic of Ukraine constituted the largest Jewish population within the Soviet Union, and one of the largest Jewish populations in Europe. … The number of Jews in the Ukrainian Soviet Republic (UkrSSR) rose to 2.45 million people [from 1939-1941]”

Amply documented the OUN-B and its National Insurgent Army (UPA) were actively involved in the massacres of Jews, Poles, Communists and Roma in major cities including Odessa and Kiev.

At the outset of Operation Barbarossa, (June, 22 1941) in coordination with the death squads (Einsatzgruppen) of Nazi Germany, members of the OUN-B were instrumental in the killings in the City of Lviv, Western region of Galicia, resulting in the massacre and deportation of more than 100,000 Jews:

The Lviv pogroms were the consecutive pogroms and massacres of Jews in June and July 1941 in the city of Lwów. (Lviv, Lvov) in German-occupied Eastern Poland/Western Ukraine (now Lviv, Ukraine). The massacres were perpetrated by Ukrainian nationalists (specifically, the OUN), German death squads (Einsatzgruppen), and urban population from 30 June to 2 July [1941].”

The members of OUN-B actively collaborated with the Wehrmacht’s occupation forces (1941-1944).

In Ukraine: “..up to a million Jews were murdered by Einsatzgruppen units, Police battalions, Wehrmacht troops and local Nazi collaborators” (emphasis added)

On September, 1 1941, the Nazi-sponsored Ukrainian newspaper Volhyn wrote, in an article titled Let’s Conquer the City, namely Lviv:

“All elements that reside in our land, whether they are Jews or Poles, must be eradicated.

We are at this very moment resolving the Jewish question, and this resolution is part of the plan for the Reich’s total reorganization of Europe.

The empty space that will be created, must immediately and irrevocably be filled by the real owners and masters of this land, the Ukrainian people”. (Emphasis added)

The map below is the territory under Nazi Germany occupation (1942) extending from Galicia to Kiev and Odessa.

It indicates cities with Jewish ghettoes, the locations of major massacres.

In this regard, the Janowska concentration camp was established in the outskirts of Lviv in September 1941.

Lviv had a Jewish population of 160,000. The Janowska camp combined “elements of labor, transit, and extermination”.

“By the time Soviet forces reached Lviv on 21 July 1944, less than 1 per cent of Lviv’s Jews had survived the occupation.“ (Emphasis added)

“By the time Soviet forces reached Lviv on 21 July 1944, less than 1 per cent of Lviv’s Jews had survived the occupation.“  (Emphasis added)

What this means is that our governments —which claim to be firmly committed to social democracy– are actively supporting and financing the Neo-Nazi Kiev regime. 

 

Specifically, the German penal code prohibits “The Denial of the Holocaust” as well as the “dissemination of Nazi propaganda”.

We are dealing with something far more serious than Nazi “hate speech”, namely the relationship of the German Government with the Kiev regime’s Nazi Movement.

Our governments, including the totality of NATO member states have been instructed by Washington to SUPPORT and SPONSOR Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi regime, which came to power in 2014. in the wake of a US sponsored coup d’Etat.


For more analysis on the Holocaust in Ukraine, see:

Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi Government Is Supported by the International Community. Adolph Hitler is “The Torchbearer of Democracy” in Ukraine

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 21, 2024


NAZISM = ANTI-SEMITISM 

WESTERN GOVERNMENTS WHICH SUPPORT THE NEO-NAZI KIEV REGIME ARE ANTI-SEMITIC 

 

There can be no peace when elected governments are supporting Ukraine’s NAZI Movement.

There can be no peace when US-NATO are actively supporting and financing Neo-Nazism in Ukraine.

NATO = NAZISM 

There can be NO PEACE when the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Summit (scheduled for 9-11 July 2024) has already announced its unbending support for the Kiev Nazi regime.  

NATO is the protagonist of fraud and crimes against humanity.

NATO’S MANDATE IS TO SUPPORT NAZISM AND ANTI-SEMITISM.

ABOLISH NATO, NATO-EXIT.

NO NATO, NO WAR.

For more details see:

Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi Government Is Supported by the International Community. Adolph Hitler is “The Torchbearer of Democracy” in Ukraine

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 21, 2024

*

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.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Evee Gayle Clobes had her 6-month checkup and scheduled immunizations a day and a half before she passed and was found to be in perfect health, as she was her whole life.

She was giggling, eating solids, and telling me “no” just the night before her passing.

Image

PRELIMINARY autopsy results have been INCONCLUSIVE, the medical examiner stated that no abnormalities were found, no visible reason to the doctor as to why she passed.

She did state that they are running tests to determine if vaccinations were the cause. I do not know what tests exactly yet, but she did agree it was of concern.

Please share Evee’s story.

*

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.

Our thanks to Dr. William Makis for bringing this to our attention.

Ataque a Trump prova que EUA estão à beira da guerra civil.

July 16th, 2024 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

A recente tentativa de assassinato do ex-presidente Donald Trump chocou o mundo. Os EUA, um país que se descreve como defensor da democracia, da liberdade e dos direitos humanos, estão a tornar-se uma nação instável, perigosa e caótica. As tentativas de assassinato contra candidatos presidenciais são um assunto extremamente sério e indicam um estado de fracasso institucional.

Em 14 de julho, Trump foi atingido de raspão na orelha direita durante um comício eleitoral na Pensilvânia. O atirador foi rapidamente morto pelas forças de segurança após o tiroteio, o que torna difícil investigar quem ou o que estava por trás do ataque. Segundo o FBI, o atirador agiu sozinho e não tinha ligação com inteligência ou redes terroristas. A mídia ocidental está divulgando a narrativa do FBI, tornando o discurso “oficial”. No entanto, importa sublinhar que testemunhas afirmaram ter avisado a polícia sobre a presença de um homem com uma arma apontada a Trump no telhado de um edifício. Segundo testemunhas, a polícia ignorou os avisos, o que parece suspeito. Nenhuma explicação foi dada até o momento para o caso.

Na verdade, são muitas as possibilidades a serem analisadas. Trump poderia ter sido alvo de inimigos políticos ou agentes de inteligência (ambos estrangeiros ou americanos). O ex-presidente americano tem muitos adversários dentro e fora do país, principalmente devido às suas posições “dissidentes” na política externa. Promete abertamente acabar com o apoio militar à Ucrânia, o que irrita o lobby pró-Kiev nos EUA. Além disso, apesar de ser um sionista radical, Trump tem vários desentendimentos pessoais com o primeiro-ministro israelense, Benjamin Netanyahu, e criticou repetidamente a forma como Tel Aviv está a conduzir a atual guerra em Gaza – razão pela qual é possível que o lobby pró-Israel nos EUA quer “punir Trump”.

Considerando que o atirador foi eliminado, o processo de investigação será frustrado e nunca será alcançado um consenso sobre as razões do crime. A narrativa de que o atirador era um “lobo solitário” certamente se tornará hegemônica, com a mídia considerando qualquer interpretação adversa como “notícia falsa”. Também nunca será possível saber se a intenção do atirador era matar o ex-presidente, e o ataque falhou, ou se na verdade apenas o feriu, como “gesto de alerta”. Na prática, a verdade parece quase impossível de ser descoberta.

Porém, mais importante do que descobrir a verdade sobre o caso específico do ataque a Trump, é necessário compreender o contexto político americano como um todo. O simples fato de ter sido feita uma tentativa de assassinato contra um candidato presidencial é suficiente para mostrar que o país se encontra numa grave crise institucional e social. A maior potência mundial encontra-se numa situação semelhante à de muitos países pobres de África ou da América Central, onde os políticos são assassinados por criminosos e as eleições são conduzidas de forma violenta, fraudulenta e caótica.

A violência política nos EUA não é nova. O assassinato de JFK, por exemplo, chocou a sociedade internacional durante a Guerra Fria. As infames relações entre setores do governo e do Congresso americano com redes criminosas, máfias e agências de inteligência estrangeiras são bem conhecidas, com inúmeros relatórios, livros e artigos sobre o assunto disponíveis ao público. No entanto, é inegável que esta violência aumentou nos últimos tempos, com a situação interna nos EUA a piorar progressivamente.

Vários relatórios de inteligência alertam que os EUA poderão enfrentar uma guerra civil num futuro próximo. As tensões raciais e a polarização política são alguns dos principais problemas sociais do país. Recentemente, os sentimentos separatistas do Sul foram fortalecidos pela crise migratória no Texas, e houve até uma acusação formal de violação do pacto federal por parte de Washington. A tendência é que este cenário se deteriore ainda mais daqui para frente, especialmente nos estados de maioria conservadora, onde a reação popular à tentativa de assassinato de Trump deverá ser intensa.

Trump, sem dúvida, emerge do ataque mais forte. Diversas pesquisas já indicavam que ele era o favorito na disputa presidencial – agora, seus ganhos políticos serão ainda mais significativos. Joe Biden, que já foi criticado pelos sinais claros de problemas mentais, está ainda mais fraco agora. Será difícil para os Democratas reverterem a enorme vantagem dos Republicanos.

Por outro lado, os Democratas continuam a controlar o governo, os meios de comunicação social e a maior parte dos setores estratégicos do país. Tendem a reagir agressivamente à ascensão dos republicanos. Os juízes pró-democratas poderiam, por exemplo, tomar medidas como uma possível intervenção judicial contra a elegibilidade de Trump.

Tudo isto mostra como os EUA caminham para um ciclo vicioso de caos, violência política e instabilidade. Não parece haver qualquer possibilidade de um futuro pacífico para Washington nos próximos anos.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

 

Artigo em inglês : Attack on Trump proves US on the brink of civil war, InfoBrics, 15 de Julho de 2024.

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

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

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

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

“Whenever any American’s life is taken by another American unnecessarily—whether it is done in the name of the law or in the defiance of law, by one man or a gang, in cold blood or in passion, in an attack of violence or in response to violence—whenever we tear at the fabric of life which another man has painfully and clumsily woven for himself and his children, the whole nation is degraded.”Robert F. Kennedy on the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. (1968)

There’s a subtext to this assassination attempt on former President Trump that must not be ignored, and it is simply this: America is being pushed to the brink of a national nervous breakdown.

More than 50 years after John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., and Robert F. Kennedy were assassinated, America has become a ticking time bomb of political violence in words and deeds.

Magnified by an echo chamber of nasty tweets and government-sanctioned brutality, our politically polarizing culture of callousness, cruelty, meanness, ignorance, incivility, hatred, intolerance, indecency and injustice have only served to ratchet up the tension.

Consumed with back-biting, partisan politics, sniping, toxic hate, meanness and materialism, a culture of meanness has come to characterize many aspects of the nation’s governmental and social policies. “Meanness today is a state of mind,” writes professor Nicolaus Mills in his book The Triumph of Meanness, “the product of a culture of spite and cruelty that has had an enormous impact on us.”

This casual cruelty is made possible by a growing polarization within the populace that emphasizes what divides us—race, religion, economic status, sexuality, ancestry, politics, etc.—rather than what unites us: we are all Americans, and in a larger, more global sense, we are all human.

This is what writer Anna Quindlen refers to as “the politics of exclusion, what might be thought of as the cult of otherness… It divides the country as surely as the Mason-Dixon line once did. And it makes for mean-spirited and punitive politics and social policy.”

This is more than meanness, however.

We are imploding on multiple fronts, all at once.

This is what happens when ego, greed and power are allowed to take precedence over liberty, equality and justice.

This is the psychopathic mindset adopted by the architects of the Deep State, and it applies equally whether you’re talking about Democrats or Republicans.

Beware, because this kind of psychopathology can spread like a virus among the populace.

As an academic study into pathocracy concluded, “[T]yranny does not flourish because perpetuators are helpless and ignorant of their actions. It flourishes because they actively identify with those who promote vicious acts as virtuous.”

People don’t simply line up and salute. It is through one’s own personal identification with a given leader, party or social order that they become agents of good or evil. To this end, “we the people” have become “we the police state.”

By failing to actively take a stand for good, we become agents of evil. It’s not the person in charge who is solely to blame for the carnage. It’s the populace that looks away from the injustice, that empowers the totalitarian regime, that welcomes the building blocks of tyranny.

This realization hit me full-force a few years ago. I had stopped into a bookstore and was struck by all of the books on Hitler, everywhere I turned. Yet had there been no Hitler, there still would have been a Nazi regime. There still would have been gas chambers and concentration camps and a Holocaust.

Hitler wasn’t the architect of the Holocaust. He was merely the figurehead. Same goes for the American police state: had there been no Trump or Obama or Bush, there still would have been a police state. There still would have been police shootings and private prisons and endless wars and government pathocracy.

Why? Because “we the people” have paved the way for this tyranny to prevail.

By turning Hitler into a super-villain who singlehandedly terrorized the world—not so different from how Trump is often depicted—historians have given Hitler’s accomplices (the German government, the citizens that opted for security and order over liberty, the religious institutions that failed to speak out against evil, the individuals who followed orders even when it meant a death sentence for their fellow citizens) a free pass.

This is how tyranny rises and freedom falls.

None of us who remain silent and impassive in the face of evil, racism, extreme materialism, meanness, intolerance, cruelty, injustice and ignorance get a free pass.

Those among us who follow figureheads without question, who turn a blind eye to injustice and turn their backs on need, who march in lockstep with tyrants and bigots, who allow politics to trump principle, who give in to meanness and greed, and who fail to be outraged by the many wrongs being perpetrated in our midst, it is these individuals who must shoulder the blame when the darkness wins.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that,” Martin Luther King Jr. sermonized.

The darkness is winning.

It’s not just on the world stage we must worry about the darkness winning.

The darkness is winning in our communities. It’s winning in our homes, our neighborhoods, our churches and synagogues, and our government bodies. It’s winning in the hearts of men and women the world over who are embracing hatred over love. It’s winning in every new generation that is being raised to care only for themselves, without any sense of moral or civic duty to stand for freedom.

John F. Kennedy, killed by an assassin’s bullet five years before King would be similarly executed, spoke of a torch that had been “passed to a new generation of Americans—born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage—and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.”

Once again, a torch is being passed to a new generation, but this torch is setting the world on fire, burning down the foundations put in place by our ancestors, and igniting all of the ugliest sentiments in our hearts.

This fire is not liberating; it is destroying.

We are teaching our children all the wrong things: we are teaching them to hate, teaching them to worship false idols (materialism, celebrity, technology, politics), teaching them to prize vain pursuits and superficial ideals over kindness, goodness and depth.

We are on the wrong side of the revolution.

“If we are to get on to the right side of the world revolution,” advised King, “we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society.

Freedom demands responsibility.

Freedom demands that we stop thinking as Democrats and Republicans and start thinking like human beings, or at the very least, Americans.

JFK was killed in 1963 for daring to challenge the Deep State.

King was killed in 1968 for daring to challenge the military industrial complex.

Image: Robert F. Kennedy giving his speech on the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. (Licensed under Fair Use)

undefined

Robert F. Kennedy offered these remarks to a polarized nation in the wake of King’s assassination:

“In this difficult day, in this difficult time for the United States, it is perhaps well to ask what kind of a nation we are and what direction we want to move in. [Y]ou can be filled with bitterness, with hatred, and a desire for revenge. We can move in that direction as a country, in great polarization…filled with hatred toward one another. Or we can make an effort … to understand and to comprehend, and to replace that violence, that stain of bloodshed that has spread across our land, with an effort to understand with compassion and love… What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence or lawlessness; but love and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or they be black.”

Two months later, RFK was also killed by an assassin’s bullet.

Fifty-plus years later, we’re still being terrorized by assassins’ bullets, but what these madmen are really trying to kill is that dream of a world in which all Americans “would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

We haven’t dared to dream that dream in such a long time.

But imagine…

Imagine what this country would be like if Americans put aside their differences and dared to stand up—united—for freedom.

Imagine what this country would be like if Americans put aside their differences and dared to speak out—with one voice—against injustice.

Imagine what this country would be like if Americans put aside their differences and dared to push back—with the full force of our collective numbers—against government corruption and despotism.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, tyranny wouldn’t stand a chance.

*

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.

This article was originally published on The Rutherford Institute.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at [email protected].

Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The lodestar of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on July 8-9, it must be the disclosure by the Deputy Head of the Presidential Administration in the Kremlin Maxim Oreshkin that the two leaders discussed the topic of cash payments with the use of cards of national payment systems as an important element of trade support infrastructure and interaction in general. 

Oreshkin added that the two countries are also putting in place an arrangement on interaction between their central banks on the issue of accepting national payment card.

At one stroke, Modi electrified the forthcoming BRICS Summit in Kazan in October. Modi also informed Putin that he will be attending the summit meeting. It is no secret that the BRICS member states are seeking to improve the international monetary and financial system and are prioritising the creation of a platform that will enable them to conduct transactions in national currencies in mutual trade.

The Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had announced after a meeting of the economic bloc’s foreign ministers in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, last month that “Our agenda is extensive. It includes issues that will directly affect the future world order based on fair grounds.” Indeed, more and more countries are having doubts about SWIFT, after many Russian banks were cut off from the Belgium-based financial messaging system following the start of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. 

From the American perspective, the terrible beauty about Modi’s Russia trip is that behind his anti-war rhetoric, PM created an ambience of high moral standing for Delhi that he promptly exploited to bring about a paradigm shift in the India-Russia relations.

Make no mistake, SWIFT translates as US hegemony; it is about isolating Russia from the international financial system; and here we see India teaming up with Russia to create a payment system using local currencies. Notionally, this is not an anti-American move, because the bulk of trade continues to be in the US currency. Cynics may say India is running with the hounds and hunting the hares. But who cares? Americans must be going nuts. Oil, fertiliser, nuclear power plants, ABM system, joint development and production of weaponry — and now, an ecosystem  that ignores SWIFT.  

Coincidence or not, Modi arrived in Moscow on the same day that NATO’s 75th anniversary summit meeting began in Washington with an agenda loaded against Russia while Modi chose to spend that evening closeted with the Russian leader at his country residence in the Moscow suburbs for a private meal, a walk in the woods and several hours of intense conversation to choreograph a quantum leap in the Russian-Indian relations. And all this while the NATO summit made a renewed pledge to defeat Russia in the Ukraine war.

A Russian pundit at the Academy of Sciences and concurrently a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian foreign ministry, Andrey Volodin summed up Modi’s visit as signifying a “breakthrough” in Russian-Indian relations characterised by a “new climate of trust, which existed in relations between the Soviet Union and India during the times of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi.”

Volodin listed the increase in the bilateral trade turnover and the transition of the economic relations to national currencies as the second important outcome of the visit. He flagged that cooperation in the military-industrial sphere “received a certain boost” as indeed the development of the International North-South Corridor, which “opens up unprecedented opportunities.”

Indeed, disregarding the US state department spokesman’s repeated expressions of concern this week over the consolidation of the Indian-Russian relations, the Putin-Modi joint statement defiantly asserted that the Intergovernmental Commission on Military and Military Technical Cooperation will hold its session in Moscow in the second half of this year. The joint statement added,

“Responding to India’s quest for self-sufficiency, the partnership is reorienting presently to joint research and development, co-development and joint production of advanced defence technology and systems. The Sides confirmed commitment to maintain the momentum of joint military cooperation activities and expand military delegation exchanges.” 

From a geopolitical perspective, Volodin highlighted two points: first,

“India has declared itself as a developing world power that does not succumb to external pressures,” and, second, “an impetus has been given (this trend will continue in the future) to the development of the security system in Eurasia. Some countries hoped that India would avoid this dialogue, but it did not avoid this dialogue.”

This is the crux of the matter. At the grand ceremony in St Andrew’s Hall of the Grand Kremlin Palace where Putin presented the Order of St Andrew the Apostle to Modi on Tuesday, the prime minister made a highly revealing statement. Modi said:

“Our relationship is extremely important not only for our two countries, but is also of great significance for the entire world. In the current global context, India and Russia, as well as their partnership, have taken on a new importance. We are both convinced that further efforts are needed to ensure global stability and peace. In the future, we will continue to work together to achieve these goals.” 

The big picture is that India has taken a leap of faith. It is one thing not to give in to US bullying but it is another thing altogether that Delhi is co-relating the Indian experience with that of Russia — and even China. Interestingly, Modi left Moscow Tuesday and headed for Austria whose neutrality is anchored in Joseph Stalin’s statesmanship.

Today, India-Russia relations “are blossoming  and getting stronger as time goes by” and their cooperation “represents a guarantee for the future of our people” — to borrow Modi’s words. Make no mistake, this thought process goes way beyond strategic autonomy.  No country on earth can dictate the trajectory of the India-Russia relationship. 

To be sure, the walk in the woods by Putin and Modi in the presidential estate at Novo-Ogaryovo was much more than a photo-op. Putin had done his ‘homework’ alright.

Actually, we got a preview of it in Lavrov’s hugely significant remarks at the 10th Primakov Readings international forum in Moscow on June 26 pinned on the ‘media leak’ that Modi was due to travel to Russia in a fortnight’s time. That was one of the most important speeches by Lavrov in recent times.

Lavrov disclosed that Russia has plans to convene meetings with India and China again in the RIC format. Lavrov underscored that Russia, India and China will only benefit from the revival of RIC format.

“It is also obvious that the United States is trying to drag India into its anti-China project… Both China and India are much more deeply involved in the Western system of globalisation in terms of the volume of financial, investment, and trade agreements and many other things. But the fact is that just like us [Russia], China and India are fully aware of the discriminatory nature of what the West is doing,” Lavrov said.

It is a seductive thought that a long journey into the Asian Century may be beginning. If the RIC format revives on the sidelines of the BRICS Summit in Kazan, the journey will accelerate. China probably senses it.

Global Times featured two commentaries on successive days commending Modi’s foreign policies. (here and here) The second commentary cites Chinese expert opinion that “The deepening of relations between Russia and India is an important step toward global strategic balance.” (here)

While Modi was still in Moscow, China’s special representative on border talks with India, Foreign Minister Wang Yi messaged National Security Advisor Ajit Doval to express his willingness to collaborate with Delhi to “properly handle” border-related issues amid the ongoing dispute in eastern Ladakh.

*

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.

Featured image: President Vladimir Putin (R) and Prime Minister Narendra Modi (L) took a walk in the woods at the presidential estate in Novo-Ogaryovo, Moscow Region, July 8, 2024 (From Indian Punchline)

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

ABC News is reporting that the building on which the gunman (identified as Thomas Matthew Crooks) perched when he shot at Trump was the “police tactical staging area” for the providing event security.

The report makes the following strange assertions (my emphasis in bold).

ABC News learned the building was the same building a local police tactical team was using as a staging area to watch over the crowd at the Butler Farm Show grounds.

It is unclear if the team was inside the building, which sources said had been swept before the rally. Investigators are still working to learn if the roof was locked down.

According to a source who spoke with ABC News, Crooks did not use a ladder to get access to the roof.

Officials said an officer was “vaulted” up to the roof after rallygoers called attention to Crooks, who then turned and aimed his gun at the officer.

AP reported the officer retreated down the ladder and Crooks turned around and began shooting.

Note that none of the above makes any sense.

1). Though the building (with a parking lot, located just north of event) was indeed a logical place for a police staging ground, its single most valuable feature for the purpose “to watch over the crowd” was its roof. Why were no police posted on its roof?

2). Obviously the roof was NOT locked down, or else Crooks could not have accessed it in broad daylight in front of multiple witnesses who noticed him on the roof while he crawled up to the roof ridge to rest his rifle and shoot at Trump.

3). The part about the officer being “vaulted” up to the roof sounds like something Inspector Clouseau would do. After being “vaulted” up to the roof, why did the officer then “retreat down the ladder”?

4). If Crooks turned his rifle on the police officer who was “vaulted” onto the roof, why didn’t the counter-sniper—who was watching Crooks through his scope—shoot Crooks then? That is, why did the counter-sniper wait for Crooks to return his aim away from the vaulting police officer and back at Trump for long enough to fire at Trump?

Note that the barn roof on which the counter-snipers were positioned was higher than the low roof on which the would-be assassin was perched. From their vantage point, they could see Crooks well enough to hit him with a fatal head shot. Why did they wait for him to fire first?

Something tells me our mainstream media is not going to pursue answers to these questions with much rigor.

*

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.

All images in this article are from CD

170 Years of U.S. Aggression Against Nicaragua

July 16th, 2024 by Rick Sterling

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

When the Monroe Doctrine was declared, in 1823,  it was aimed at European colonial powers. It told them to butt out: the US “sphere of influence” included all of Latin America and the Caribbean. During the past two centuries, virtually every Latin American and Caribbean country has had to endure US intervention and interference in their internal affairs. The coups, political manipulation and aggression directed by Washington have been relentless.  

One of the most victimized countries has been Nicaragua. In this article, I will review the different types of aggression used by Washington against Nicaragua. This is not ancient history; the interference continues to today. The methods change but the purpose remains the same: to subjugate nominally independent countries and use them in the interests of US corporations, elites and government. When nations resist domination and insist on independence, the US goal becomes to prevent them from succeeding. 

July 19, 2024

On July 19 Nicaragua will celebrate the 45th anniversary of the Sandinista revolution. On that day, Nicaraguans overthrew the US backed Somoza dictatorship. In Managua, Nicaraguans will honor the day and re-assert their sovereignty and independence. Nicaraguan leaders will likely denounce US interference and their right to have friendly relations with any country they choose to. At the same time, we will surely see negative comments about Nicaragua from Washington and US media. 

There have been eight distinct types of US interference and aggression against Nicaragua:

1. Conquest 1855-56

undefined

In 1855, with a small army of US and European soldiers, William Walker (image on the right; from the Public Domain) arrived in Nicaragua. The country was in the midst of a civil war and the foreign military turned the tide. When Walker’s forces seized control of the Nicaraguan city of Grenada, he declared himself  President of Nicaragua. Walker’s presidency was quickly recognized by US President Franklin Pierce. Supported by southern slave holding US states, one of Walker’s early actions as Nicaraguan president was to re-legalize slavery which had been outlawed in 1832. Nicaraguans did not accept this. Within a couple years, Walker’s forces were defeated, and in 1857 he was executed in neighboring Honduras.

2. Military Occupation 1909-1933

Beginning in 1909, US Marines invaded and occupied Nicaragua when US financial interests were not being considered paramount. Nicaraguans were considering borrowing money from European countries to finance a canal running across the isthmus. For the next three decades, the US Marines were ever present to insure Washington and Wall Street controlled major decisions. USMC Major General Smedly Butler later reflected on his role: 

“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism…. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers.”

Beginning in 1927, US foreign military dominance was increasingly challenged by a peasant army led by Augusto Cesar Sandino. Sandino’s July 1, 1927 manifesto denounces the collaborators and commits to “defend the national honor and redeem the oppressed.” By 1930, Sandino’s army was 5,000 strong and inflicting serious blows. In 1933 the last US Marines left Nicaragua following the election of Juan Batista Sacasa.  

3. US-backed Dictatorship 1934-1969

Image: Anastasio Somoza García (From the Public Domain)

undefined

The US Marines departed but left behind trained surrogates. In 1934, the “National Guard” reneged on a peace agreement with Sandino and murdered him, his brother and two generals.  They proceeded to destroy Sandino’s army and then overthrew the elected government. With US support, the Somoza family dominated the country for the next 45 years. Poverty and illiteracy were widespread while corruption was rampant. In 1961, armed opposition to the Somoza dictatorship was formed under the banner of  the Sandinista Front for the Liberation of Nicaragua (FSLN). After 50,000 deaths, the Somoza dictatorship was overthrown on 19  July 1979.

4. Terrorism 1969-1980

Under the FSLN, Nicaragua made huge improvements with land reform and a very successful literacy campaign. For the first time, medical help was made available in remote communities and schools were open to all children. But in Washington, the Reagan administration could not accept an independent Nicaragua. US President Reagan was obsessed with overthrowing the Sandinista government.  They tried to do this by creating a “Contra” army which attacked community clinics, bombed gas pipelines and infrastructure and killed healthcare and rural cooperative members. They even killed foreign aid workers such as young US engineer Ben Linder who was constructing a small hydroelectric dam to provide electricity to a remote village. 

In the face of such obvious crimes, Nicaragua filed charges against the United States before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). They won their case and the US was ordered to pay compensation for the damages caused. Flaunting the ruling of the highest court in the world, the Reagan administration refused to pay damages to Nicaragua and continued to support the terrorist army. Under popular pressure, Congress passed the Boland amendment outlawing US assistance to the terrorist Contras. The Reagan administration ignored this as well,  funding the Contras through a scheme where weapons were sent to the Contras in small private airplanes. The same planes were used to bring Colombian cocaine into the US.  The profits went to the Contras while crack cocaine flooded poor and largely Black communities. A recent book from a CIA “Black Ops”agent documents the creation, training and financing of the terrorist Contras. 

5. Economic Warfare 1985 to 1990

In 1985, an economic embargo was applied by the US against Nicaragua. US products could no longer be exported to Nicaragua and Nicaraguan products were barred from entering the US.  The goal was clearly to hurt the Nicaraguan economy and pressure the Nicaraguan people to turn against the government. The justification stated:

“I, Ronald Reagan, President of the United States of America, find that the policies and actions of the Government of Nicaragua constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States and hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.” (emphasis added)

The truth was the exact opposite: the policies of aggression by the United States was an extreme threat to Nicaragua. 

6. Election Interference 1984 to Today 

The first democratic election in Nicaragua’s history took place in 1984. The FSLN won against a very divided opposition. Chuck Kaufman analyzed what happened then and afterward: 

“Already in 1984, we saw the United States place itself as the final judge and jury as to whether or not an election was legitimate… Delegitimizing elections is one of the primary overt tools used by the United States to subvert democracy around the world…. The 1990 election is where the US game plan for election intervention was written, perfected and victorious…. Through the use of money and pressure, the US took advantage of Nicaragua’s lack of laws controlling foreign money in its elections to create a unified 14 party anti-Sandinista coalition … The US then spent more money per Nicaraguan voter than George H W Bush and Michael Dukakis  combined spent per US voter in our 1988  presidential election. At the same time the US warned Nicaraguan voters that the Contra War, which had cost them 40,000 sons and daughters, would continue if Daniel Ortega won reelection.” 

US intervention was “successful” in bringing the US-supported team into power in Managua. A slim majority of Nicaraguans cried uncle in the face of  US aggression and threats. The US and western media was surprised when Daniel Ortega and the FSLN peacefully left office and passed on the leadership. 

Image: Daniel Ortega

Neoliberal policies reigned for the next 16 years. While they were good for the wealthy and elites, they were a disaster for the majority of Nicaraguans. Health care and education was again privatized. Land reform measures and the literacy campaign were ended. Illiteracy again became widespread. State controlled infrastructure including roads, water and electricity was not improved, it was in disrepair and decline. 

In the elections of 2006, Daniel Ortega and the FSLN won a plurality. There were multiple reasons: first, the economy and deteriorating infrastructure was a disaster. Second, the US failed to unite the right. Third, US election interference was publicly revealed after the US ambassador unwisely told some visiting activists how many millions were allotted for interfering in the election. 

7. Subversion Through NGOs and “Color Revolution” 

After 16 years in opposition, the FSLN came back to power in 2007 under the leadership of Ortega. With ever increasing electoral support, they have governed since then. The reasons for their popularity are practical.  Healthcare and education are provided free.  Roads and highways have been greatly improved and now extend across the country to the Caribbean. Electricity and running water have been continuously expanded and are now available throughout 98% of the country. Nicaragua is in the world top 10%  in gender equality and renewable energy. Nicaragua actively assists small farmers and is 90% food sovereign. 

Washington has not rushed to congratulate Nicaragua on their successes. On the contrary, this success has been noted with displeasure and Nicaragua has returned to the list of countries targeted for destabilization. 

Over the past decades, the US has developed a softer approach to undermining governments which are deemed to be “adversary”. A key component of this is funding “non-governmental organizations” (NGOs). These organizations may have innocuous or even progressive sounding purposes but inevitably serve US goals. The NGOs receive much of their funding from US government related organizations such as USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy. As documented by Max Blumenthal in June 2018, the NGOs proudly boasted of their role in “laying the groundwork for insurrection” and “nurturing the current uprisings”. 

With salaries which are high in comparison to local standards, the NGOs attract and influence ambitious students and youth. The directors of the NGOs learn which youth are promising to their objectives and what issues motivate them. In Nicaragua there were dozens of NGOs with a mission of  “democracy promotion”. In essence these were training sessions in anti-government activism.  Other focal points were journalism and the use of social media. There was little or no monitoring of these foreign funded activities.  

Masked protesters backed by the CIA who were part of 2018 coup plot against Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega. [Source: idcommunism.com]

In the spring of 2018, there was an attempt to overthrow the elected Sandinista government. The coup attempt was driven by youth influenced by US-funded NGOs with muscle provided by mercenary thugs and gangs. The coup attempt, from beginning to end, is described in a series of articles by Nicaraguan resident and journalist John Perry and author Dan Kovalik. This was similar to “color revolutions” carried out in numerous other countries on US target list. The common characteristics are: youth mobilized by US-funded NGOs, heavy use of social media, false or exaggerated accusations of government violence, false claims that the protests are strictly “peaceful” when there are actually widespread provocations and violence. 

Nicaragua passed through this stage from April to July 2018. The insurrection died when it became clear the violence was instigated by the protesters and the average Nicaraguan was being deeply hurt by the continued disruption and roadblocks.  Dozens of police and hundreds of civilians were killed in the confrontations. Hundreds of government buildings, police stations and schools were attacked and the economy severely disrupted.  

Ultimately, the insurrection and coup attempt collapsed. With police ordered to stay in their barracks, it was clear who was responsible for the violence. The public became increasingly angry at the protesters because their roadblocks and violence were ruining lives and the economy. The silver lining is that it sparked a realization in the FSLN that they needed to be more vigilant about education of youth and monitoring foreign funded organizations. 

8. Information Warfare and Extreme Sanctions 

Beginning with the 2018 coup attempt in Nicaragua, the US information war on Nicaragua escalated dramatically.  In 2020, Nicaragua started regulating foreign-backed organizations. Given that  foreign supported organizations played a big role in the insurrection resulting in hundreds of deaths and billions in economic damage, the need to do this was clear.  The new regulations require foreign-backed organizations to document where their funding comes from and how it is spent. The US has the same requirement known as the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), but that does not stop western media from claiming that these laws are “dismantling civil society”. On the contrary, many NGOs registered and continued as before. Those who refused to register were denied a permit, just as they would be in the United States.

US government influence extends to many “human rights” groups and some branches of the United Nations. For example the UN’s Human Rights Council established a “Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua” to investigate alleged Nicaraguan human rights violations and abuses since April 2018. Their mandate was extended until February 2025 but they have issued two preliminary reports that claim Nicaragua is committing crimes, violations and abuses including “persecution of  any dissenting voice”, torture and the “deprivation of Nicaraguan nationality.”

The reports by three “experts”, none of whom is Nicaraguan, are extremely biased. They have been rebutted in a detailed article co-written by international legal scholar Alfred de Zayas. It is endorsed by 85 different organizations and over 450 individuals including Nicaraguan citizens and residents. The article reveals that the “experts” failed to comply with their own mandate to gather information from all sides. The report of the Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua (GHREN) is solely based on the opinions and accusations of the dissidents and is a mockery of what should be an objective report based on evidence from all sides.  

Along with the drumbeat of negative accusations based on subjective or no evidence, the US keeps adding more and more sanctions on Nicaragua. Unknown to most Americans, sanctions (called ‘unilateral coercive measures’) have been repeatedly condemned by the United Nations General Assembly.  They are considered to be  in violation of international law and the UN Charter. Ignoring the opinions of 75%  of the world, the US Treasury Department has recently issued a slew of sanctions on Nicaraguan officials, state corporations, judges, mayors and attorney general. 

While trying to hurt the Nicaraguan economy, the US has started offering easy immigration to the US for Nicaraguans. They are even using Facebook and social media to lure Nicaragua youth. The goal seems to be to undermine the economy and encourage “brain drain” where youth with skills and ambition will be tempted to leave the country. After all, despite the positive gains and accomplishments, including free health care and education, most Nicaraguans are still poor. This phenomenon has been well documented in articles such as “New US Immigration Policies Effect on Nicaragua: Brain Drain and Deportation” and “US government exploits animosity toward migrants to demonize socialist countries”. 

Summary 

In late 2021,  three years after the coup attempt, Nicaragua held its national election.  Western criticisms of the election were refuted in this article. International observers were impressed with organization, large turnout and enthusiasm. The US administration and media falsely claimed the main opposition candidates had been imprisoned. In fact, the few imprisoned individuals represented no parties or significant base of support. They claimed to be “precandidates” not because they were viable contenders but because they sought to avoid prosecution while slandering the Nicaraguan government. 

On the contrary, there were five opposition candidates representing genuine parties and movements. The voters had a real choice. With 66% of the electorate voting, 75% voted for Daniel Ortega and the FSLN over the competitors.  The theme of the election was “Soberania”, beautifully sung by a young Nicaraguan patriot at the house where Cesar Augusto Sandino grew up.  

Nicaragua continues to assert its sovereignty and pursue its own foreign policy. In September 2021, Nicaragua cut ties with Taiwan and established diplomatic relations with China. In October 2022, Nicaragua refused to condemn Russia for its intervention in Ukraine, blaming the US and NATO for having provoked the conflict. On Oct 24 2023, Nicaragua called for an emergency session of the UN General Assembly to consider “protection of the Palestinian civilian population.” Later, Nicaragua’s Foreign Minister Denis Moncada said the Palestinian cause is one of the most just causes of our times. In January 2024, Nicaragua filed charges at the International Court of Justice against Germany for being an accomplice to genocide in Gaza.  

In June the results of an extensive poll conducted by the independent and well regarded M&R Consultants were released. They indicate high satisfaction with the direction and leadership of the country. Confidence in the “stability,  security, and economic progress” of the country has risen from 36.8% in 2018 to 74.8% today. 

Nicaragua has good reason to be wary of the United States. In the eight different ways described above, the US has interfered with Nicaragua’s independence for 170 years. The vast majority of Nicaraguans continue to  resist, calmly insisting on their independence and sovereignty. As the song “Soberania” says, “Respect my flag or go away.” 

*

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.

Rick Sterling is a journalist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. He can be reached at [email protected] 

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

 

Video: Brian Berletic

April 22, 2024 podcast .

Occupied Palestine: The Old Evil. Chris Hedges

July 16th, 2024 by Chris Hedges

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

It comes back in a rush, the stench of raw sewage, the groan of the diesel, sloth-like Israeli armored personnel carriers, the vans filled with broods of children, driven by chalky faced colonists, certainly not from here, probably from Brooklyn or somewhere in Russia or maybe Britain.

Little has changed. The checkpoints with their blue and white Israeli flags dot the roads and intersections. The red-tiled roofs of the colonist settlements — illegal under international law — dominate hillsides above Palestinian villages and towns. They have grown in number and expanded in size. But they remain protected by blast barriers, concertina wire and watchtowers surrounded by the obscenity of lawns and gardens. The colonists have access to bountiful sources of water in this arid landscape that the Palestinians are denied

The winding 26-foot high concrete wall that runs the 440 mile length of occupied Palestine, with its graffiti calling for liberation, murals with the Al-Aqsa mosque, faces of martyrs and the grinning and bearded mug of Yasser Arafat — whose concessions to Israel in the Oslo agreement made him, in the words of Edward Said, “the Pétain of the Palestinians” — give the West Bank the feel of an open air prison. The wall lacerates the landscape. It twists and turns like some huge, fossilized antediluvian snake severing Palestinians from their families, slicing Palestinian villages in half, cutting communities off from their orchards, olive trees and fields, dipping and rising out of wadis, trapping Palestinians in the Jewish state’s updated version of a Bantustan.

It has been over two decades since I reported from the West Bank. Time collapses. The smells, sensations, emotions and images, the lilting cadence of Arabic and the miasma of sudden and violent death that lurks in the air, evokes the old evil. It is as if I never left. 

I am in a battered black Mercedes driven by a friend in his thirties who I will not name to protect him. He worked construction in Israel but lost his job — like nearly all Palestinians employed in Israel — on Oct. 7. He has four children. He is struggling. His savings have dwindled. It is getting hard to buy food, pay for electricity, water and petrol. He feels under siege. He is under siege. He has little use for the quisling Palestinian Authority. He dislikes Hamas. He has Jewish friends. He speaks Hebrew. The siege is grinding him, and everyone around him, down.

“A few more months like this and we’re finished,” he says puffing nervously on a cigarette. “People are desperate. More and more are going hungry.”

We are driving the winding road that hugs the barren sand and scrub hillsides snaking up from Jericho, rising from the salt-rich Dead Sea, the lowest spot on the earth, to Ramallah. I will meet my friend, the novelist Atef Abu Saif, who was in Gaza on Oct. 7 with his 15-year-old son, Yasser. They were visiting family when Israel began its scorched earth campaign. He spent 85 days enduring and writing daily about the nightmare of the genocide. His collection of haunting diary entries have been published in his book “Don’t Look Left.” He escaped the carnage though the border with Egypt at Rafah, traveled to Jordan and returned home to Ramallah. But the scars of the genocide remain. Yasser rarely leaves his room. He does not engage with his friends. Fear, trauma and hatred are the primary commodities imparted by the colonizers to the colonized.

“I still live in Gaza,” Atef tells me later. “I am not out. Yasser still hears bombing. He still sees corpses. He does not eat meat. Red meat reminds him of the flesh he picked up when he joined the rescue parties during the massacre in Jabalia, and the flesh of his cousins. I sleep on a mattress on the floor as I did in Gaza when we lived in a tent. I lie awake. I think of those we left behind waiting for sudden death.”

We turn a corner on a hillside. Cars and trucks are veering spasmodically to the right and left. Several in front of us are in reverse. Ahead is an Israeli checkpoint with thick boxy blocks of dun colored concrete. Soldiers are stopping vehicles and checking papers. Palestinians can wait hours to get past. They can be hauled from their vehicles and detained. Anything is possible at an Israeli checkpoint, often erected with no advance warning. Most of it is not good.

We back up. We descend a narrow, dusty road that veers off from the main highway. We travel on bumpy, uneven tracks through impoverished villages.

It was like this for Blacks in the segregated south and Indigenous Americans. It was like this for Algerians under the French. It was like this in India, Ireland and Kenya under the British. The death mask — too often of European extraction — of colonialism does not change. Nor does the God-like authority of colonists who look at the colonized as vermin, who take a perverse delight in their humiliation and suffering and who kill them with impunity. 

The Israeli customs official asked me two questions when I crossed into occupied Palestine from Jordan on the King Hussein Bridge. 

“Do you hold a Palestinian passport?” 

“Are either of your parents Palestinian?” 

In short, are you contaminated?

This is how apartheid works.

The Palestinians want their land back. Then they will talk of peace. The Israelis want peace, but demand Palestinian land. And that, in three short sentences, is the intractable nature of this conflict.

I see Jerusalem in the distance. Or rather, I see the Jewish colony that lines the hills above Jerusalem. The villas, built in an arc on the hilltop, have windows intentionally narrowed into upright rectangles to double as gun slits.

Israeli checkpoint outside the Palestinian city of Ramallah. August 2004 (From the Public Domain)

We reach the outskirts of Ramallah. We are held up in the snarl of traffic in front of the sprawling Israeli military base that oversees the Qalandia checkpoint, the primary checkpoint between East Jerusalem and the West Bank. It is the scene of frequent demonstrations against the occupation that can end in gunfire.

I meet Atef. We walk to a kebab shop and sit at a small outdoor table. The scars of the latest incursion by the Israeli army are around the corner. At night, a few days ago, Israeli soldiers torched the shops that handle money transfers from abroad. They are charred ruins. Money from abroad will now be harder to get, which I suspect was the point.

Israel has dramatically tightened its stranglehold on the more than 2.7 million Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, who are surrounded by more than 700,000 Jewish colonists housed in some 150 strategically placed developments with their own shopping malls, schools and medical centers. These colonial developments along with special roads that can only be used by the colonists and the military, checkpoints, tracts of land that are off limits to Palestinians, closed military zones, Israeli-declared “nature preserves” and military outposts form concentric circles. They can instantly sever the flow of traffic to isolate Palestinians cities and towns into a series of ringed ghettos.

“Since Oct. 7 it is hard to travel anywhere in the West Bank,” Atef says. “There are checkpoints at the entrances of every city, town and village. Imagine you want to see your mother or your fiancée. You want to drive from Ramallah to Nablus. It can take seven hours because the main roads are blocked. You are forced to drive through back roads in the mountains.”

The trip should take 90 minutes.

Israeli soldiers and colonists have killed 528 Palestinian civilians, including 133 children, and injured more than 5,350 others in the West Bank, since Oct. 7, according to the UN human rights chief. Israel has also detained over 9,700 Palestinians — or should I say hostages? — including hundreds of children and pregnant women. Many have been severely tortured, including doctors tortured to death in Israeli dungeons and aid workers killed upon their release. Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has called for the execution of Palestinian prisoners to free up space for more. 

Ramallah, the seat of the Palestinian Authority, was in the past spared the worst of Israeli violence. Since Oct. 7, this has changed. Raids and arrests take place almost daily in and around the city, sometimes accompanied by lethal gunfire and aerial bombardments. Israel has bulldozed or confiscated more than 990 Palestinian dwellings and homes in the West Bank since Oct. 7, at times forcing owners to demolish their own buildings or pay exorbitant fines.

Heavily armed Israeli colonists have carried out murderous rampages on villages east of Ramallah, including attacks following the murder of a 14-year-old colonist on April 12 near the village of al Mughayyir. The colonists, in retaliation, burned and destroyed Palestinian homes and vehicles across 11 villages, ripped up roads, killed one Palestinian and wounded more than two dozen others. 

Israel has ordered the largest West Bank land seizure in more than three decades, confiscating vast tracts of land northeast of Ramallah. The extreme rightwing Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who lives in a Jewish colony and is in charge of colonial expansion, has promised to flood the West Bank with a million new colonists. 

Smotrich has vowed to obliterate the distinct areas in the West Bank created by the Oslo accords. Area A, which comprises 18 percent of the West Bank, is under exclusive Palestinian control. Area B, nearly 22 percent of the West Bank, is under Israeli military occupation, in collusion with the Palestinian Authority. Area C, over 60 percent of the West Bank, is under total Israeli occupation.

“Israel realizes that the world is blind, that no one will force it to end the genocide in Gaza, and no one will pay attention to the war in the West Bank,” Atef says. “The word war is not even used. This is called a normal Israeli military operation, as if what is happening to us is normal. There is no distinction now between the status of the occupied territories, classified as A, B and C. The settlers are confiscating more land. They are carrying out more attacks. They do not need the army. They have become a shadow army, supported and armed by Israel’s rightwing government. We have lived in a continuous war since 1948. This is simply the newest phase.” 

Jenin and its neighboring refugee camp are assaulted daily by Israeli armed units, undercover commando teams, snipers and bulldozers, which level entire neighborhoods. Drones equipped with machine guns and missiles, as well as warplanes and Apache attack helicopterscircle overhead and obliterate dwellings. Medics and doctors, as in Gaza, are assassinated. Usaid Kamal Jabarin, a 50-year-old surgeon, was killed on May 21 by an Israel sniper as he arrived for work at the Jenin Governmental Hospital. Hunger is endemic.

“The Israeli military carries out raids that kill Palestinians and then departs,” Atef says. “But it returns a few days later. It is not enough for the Israelis to steal our land. They seek to kill as many of the original inhabitants as possible. This is why it carries out constant operations. This is why there are constant armed clashes. But these clashes are provoked by Israel. They are the pretext used to continually attack us. We live under constant pressure. We face death daily.”

The dramatic escalation of violence in the West Bank is overshadowed by the genocide in Gaza. But it has become a second front. If Israel can empty Gaza, the West Bank will be next.

“Israel’s objective has not changed,” he says. “It seeks to shrink the Palestinian population, confiscate larger and larger tracts of Palestinian land and build more and more colonies. It seeks to Judaize Palestine and strip the Palestinians of all the means to sustain themselves. The ultimate goal is the annexation of the West Bank.”

“Even at the height of the peace process, when everyone was mesmerized by peace, Israel was turning this peace proposal into a nightmare,” he goes on. “Most Palestinians were opposed to the peace accords Arafat signed in 1993, but still they welcomed him when he returned. They did not kill him. They wanted to give peace a chance. In Israel, the prime minister who signed the Oslo accords was assassinated.”

 “A few years ago, someone daubed a strange slogan on the wall of the U.N. school east of Jabaliya,” Atef wrote from the hell of Gaza. “‘We progress backwards.’ It has a ring to it. Every new war drags us back to basics. It destroys our houses, our institutions, our mosques and our churches. It razes our gardens and parks. Every war takes years to recover from, and before we’ve recovered, a new war arrives. There are no warning sirens, no messages sent to our phones. War just arrives.”

The Jewish settler colonial project is protean. It changes its shape but not its essence. Its tactics vary. Its intensity comes in waves of severe repression and less repression. Its rhetoric about peace masks its intent. It grinds forward with its deadly, perverted, racist logic. And yet, the Palestinians endure, refusing to submit, resisting despite the overwhelming odds, grasping at tiny kernels of hope from bottomless wells of despair. There is a word for this. Heroic.

*

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.

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for fifteen years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East Bureau Chief and Balkan Bureau Chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning News, The Christian Science Monitor, and NPR. He is the host of show The Chris Hedges Report.

Featured image: Which Genocide Are You On? – by Mr. Fish via ScheerPost

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Just days after the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump, theories are flying from all directions. Many who ridiculed the “conspiracy theories” of conservatives are now suggesting the whole event was a set-up to boost Trump in the polls ahead of the election. Others suggest it was the “deep state” or even foreign actors who organized it.

Former US Navy Seal and founder of Blackwater, Erik Prince, claims that

“The fact that [the Secret Service] allowed a rifle armed shooter within 150 yds to a preplanned event is either malice or massive incompetence.” He went on to observe that, “unaccountable bloated bureaucracies continue to fail us as Americans,” adding that “unserious and unworthy people in positions of authority got us to this near disaster. Merit and execution must be the only deciding factors in hiring and leadership, not the social engineering priority of the day.”

Video has emerged showing that for at least two minutes law enforcement knew someone with a gun was on a roof aiming at the former President and no one communicated the need to pull Trump from the stage. You can clearly hear the crowd warning law enforcement that someone was on the roof. Yet he was unhindered until the first shots rang out.

Considering this fact, Erik Prince has a point.

If this is like any previous governmental foul-ups, we can expect hearings, investigations, and commissions that will actually serve to hide the official errors or even malicious intent by some in the government. That’s what government does no matter who is in office: protect itself from actual scrutiny and resist being exposed as incompetent or worse.

But what if there was a genuine investigation that actually revealed the truth about what happened at the Trump rally over the weekend? Could we rely on the mainstream media to even report it? This is the same media that, after Trump was clearly shot on live television, reported “Trump escorted away after loud noises at PA rally.” (Washington Post). And “Secret Service rushes Trump offstage after he falls at rally.” (CNN).

This is the same mainstream media that has been comparing Donald Trump to Hitler for years, and now pretends to be shocked that their vile rhetoric ended up in violence. There is a good reason why the mainstream media is regarded by the American public with record levels of contempt.

The current Director of the Secret Service has been interviewed expressing her dedication to “diversity” in hiring agents. What if her dedication to DEI goals led to an agency that is more “diverse” but fails at its core mission? Can we rely on the media to inform us of this? Or will they, as usual, just blame it all on the Second Amendment?

What if the problem with the Secret Service is that it was moved into the bloated, incompetent, and menacing Department  of Homeland Security, the creation of which I strongly opposed when I was in Congress?

We shouldn’t count on hearing the truth about the attempted assassination from the mainstream media. No wonder the elites remain determined to censor social media sites like Twitter/X and TikTok. We live in an empire of lies, propped up by the mainstream media. And seeking the truth in this empire of lies is the greatest challenge for us in the moral bankruptcy in which we live.

*

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.

Featured image source

Attack on Trump Suggests “US on the Brink of Civil War”

July 16th, 2024 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The recent assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump has shocked the world.

The US, a country which describes itself as a defender of democracy, freedom and human rights, is becoming an unstable, dangerous and chaotic nation. Assassination attempts against presidential candidates are an extremely serious matter and indicate a status of institutional failure.

On July 14, Trump was grazed in the right ear during an election rally in Pennsylvania. The [alleged] shooter was quickly killed by security forces after the shooting, which makes it difficult to investigate who or what was behind the attack.

According to the FBI, the shooter acted alone and had no connection to intelligence or terrorist networks. The Western media is spreading the FBI narrative, making the speech “official”. However, it must be emphasized that witnesses claimed to have warned the police about the presence of a man with a rifle targeting at Trump on the roof of a building. According to witnesses, the police ignored the warnings, which seems suspicious. No explanation has been given so far for the case.

In fact, there are many possibilities to be analyzed. Trump could have been targeted by political enemies or intelligence agents (both foreign or American ones). The former American president has many opponents inside and outside the country, mainly due to his “dissident” positions in foreign policy.

He openly promises to end military support for Ukraine, which irritates the pro-Kiev lobby in the US. Furthermore, despite being a radical Zionist, Trump has several personal disagreements with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and has repeatedly criticized the way Tel Aviv is conducting the current war in Gaza – which is why it is possible that the pro-Israel lobby in the US wants to “punish Trump”.

Considering that the shooter was eliminated, the investigation process will be thwarted and a consensus on the reasons for the crime will never be reached.

The narrative that the shooter was a “lone wolf” will certainly become hegemonic, with the media considering any adverse interpretation as “fake news”.

It will also never be possible to know whether the shooter’s intention was to kill the former president, and the attack failed, or whether he actually just injured him, as a “warning gesture”. In practice, the truth seems almost impossible to be discovered.

However, more important than discovering the truth about the specific case of the attack on Trump, it is necessary to understand the American political context as a whole. The mere fact that an assassination attempt was made against a presidential candidate is enough to show that the country is in a serious institutional and social crisis.

The world’s greatest power is in a situation similar to that of many poor African or Central American countries, where politicians are assassinated by criminals and elections are conducted in a violent, fraudulent and chaotic manner.

Political violence in the US is not new. The assassination of JFK, for example, shocked international society during the Cold War. The infamous relationships between sectors of the American government and Congress with criminal networks, mafias and foreign intelligence agencies are well known, with numerous reports, books and articles on the subject available to the public. However, it is undeniable that this violence has increased in recent times, with the domestic situation in the US progressively worsening.

Several intelligence reports warn that the US could face a civil war in the near future. Racial tensions and political polarization are some of the country’s main social problems. Recently, southern separatist sentiments were strengthened by the migration crisis in Texas, and there was even a formal accusation of violation of the federal pact on the part of Washington. The tendency is for this scenario to deteriorate even further from now on, especially in the conservative majority states, where the popular reaction to the assassination attempt on Trump is likely to be intense.

Trump undoubtedly emerges from the attack stronger. Several polls already indicated that he was the favorite in the presidential race – now, his political gains will be even more significant. Joe Biden, who has already been criticized for his clear signs of mental problems, is even weaker now. It will be difficult for the Democrats to reverse the Republicans’ huge advantage.

On the other hand, the Democrats remain in control of the government, the media and most of the country’s strategic sectors. They tend to react aggressively to the rise of the Republicans. Pro-Democratic judges could, for example, take measures such as possible judicial intervention against Trump’s eligibility.

All of this shows how the US is heading towards a vicious cycle of chaos, political violence and instability. There does not seem to be any possibility of a peaceful future for Washington in the coming years.

*

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.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Lucas Leiroz is a member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

Featured image source

Further Thoughts on the Near Assassination

July 16th, 2024 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

“The fact that [the Secret Service] allowed a rifle armed shooter within 150 yds to a preplanned event is either malice or massive incompetence.” — Security expert Erik Prince, Navy Seal and founder of Blackwater

One of the most puzzling aspects of the near assassination of Donald Trump on the Secret Service’s watch is the shooter’s expectation to find the buildings within the protected area unoccupied by Secret Service and no agents guarding the sniper positions on the buildings.

It is very unusual that an intended assassin would expect to be able to appear with a rifle in a protected area and not be accosted. In other words, it reeks of the smell of a stand down.

Here is the Russian state news agency RIA-Novosti’s comment:

“The assassination attempt on Donald Trump is surprising only because it happened on July 13, and not earlier — a year, three or eight years ago. The upstart, who challenged not only most of the American establishment, but also the ‘Washington swamp’ as such, has risked his head very much all these years… It is clear that now the ‘swamp denizens’ are biting their elbows because they did not think to kill Trump before November 2016: they underestimated the threat, did not believe in the reality of his victory.” 

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the atmosphere of hatred created around Trump by the Biden regime has led to the near assassination of Donald Trump.

“After numerous attempts to remove Trump from the political arena with the help of legal tools, courts, the prosecution, attempts to politically discredit and compromise the candidate, it was clear to all outside observers that his life was in danger.”

Trump Pledges to Fight Evil

“We will FEAR NOT, but instead remain resilient in our Faith and Defiant in the face of Wickedness.” — Donald Trump

Trump understands that the real fight is against the evil that has in its grasp the Democrat Party, the media, the liberal-left intellectuals who control the educational system, and the financial system that enslaves the population to debt service.

It is extraordinary that former Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama along with Biden and Trump himself have issued statements thanking the Secret Service for their “swift intervention.” Think about this for a minute. To get five presidents, including the nearly assassinated Trump, to issue thanks to the Secret Service, thanks not justified by the Secret Service’s failure, took organization. That this presidential support came so quickly implies prior organization which supports the hypothesis of a planned attack on Trump. It is a pity that Trump himself was roped into participating in what could be a pre-planned coverup.

Swift intervention? After an assassin in plain view of the Secret Service fires a series of shots that kill one person and dangerously injures two others standing behind Trump and misses killing Trump by a quarter of an inch? Only when the assassin finishes firing does the Secret Service intervene.

How does a Secret Service that totally fails in its responsibility to protect a presidential candidate get congratulations for preventing an assassination?

Trump’s assassination failed because Trump turned his head when the assassin shot, thus throwing the bullet off mark. The Secret Service did nothing to prevent Trump’s assassination.

Is it the case that once the Secret Service saw Trump was down, Trump was believed to be mortally injured and it was the time to eliminate, like happened to Oswald, the shooter before he could talk?

I don’t say this is the case. It is a question that needs investigation.

The question of the unsecured buildings from which the intended assassin fired has produced a dispute between the Secret Service and local police. The Secret Service claims the neglected shooting positions were the responsibility of the local police. The local police say they are merely the ordered around adjuncts of the Secret Service, who are in charge. Let’s assume the local police were responsible for the security of the nearby sites. Why did not the Secret Service check if the police performed their alleged duty?

The greatest puzzle is the near assassin’s unencumbered access to perfect spots for a successful assassination.

To those few Americans still capable of thought, the outpouring of former presidents clearing the Secret Service with praise of its non-performance suggests it was an establishment attack on Donald Trump’s life.

Trump’s response to the attack on his life is not promising. Indeed, he is already moving off-task. He says he is going to reunite the country. This assumes that America has no internal enemies intent on destroying her, her values, and her liberties, and in her place erecting a Sodom & Gomorrah Tower of Babel.

How can Trump reunite a country when the Democrat half is dedicated to the country’s destruction via open borders and the legitimization of all forms of sexual perversion? Is Trump going to compromise with his enemies and give them, in the false name of unity, part of their agenda?

What is the point of a raised fist with blood running down your face shouting “fight, fight, fight” if you are going to compromise?

Trump has to root out the evil, to extinguish the evil. He has to find and appoint and get confirmed a government that will support him in this battle. Anything less and he is a failure.

*

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.

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.

Featured image source

Rod Rosenstein

RussiaGate 2.0: Donald Trump Has Opted for “Real Peace” Negotiations with a “Foreign Adversary”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 16, 2024

Normalization of diplomatic relations with the Russian Federation had first been proposed by Donald Trump in 2017. Even prior to the inauguration of president Trump, the US media in liaison with US intelligence had launched successive waves of smears directed against President-elect Donald Trump. The objective from the very outset was to discredit president Trump, presenting him as a Manchurian candidate serving the interests of the Kremlin.

The Supreme Court Takes on the Administrative State

By Ellen Brown, July 16, 2024

In a highly controversial decision, the Supreme Court on June 28 reversed a 40-year old ruling, reclaiming the Court’s role as interpreter of statutory law as it applies to a massive body of regulations imposed by federal agencies in such areas as the environment, workplace safety, public health and more.

Response to Substack Authors Who Claim Trump Assassination Attempt Was Staged

By John Leake, July 16, 2024

In our strange era in which we are contending with the Matrix, it is important to remember that there are good conspiracy theories and bad conspiracy theories. Good conspiracy theories are supported by evidence that stands up to critical scrutiny.

Iran’s President-Elect Has a Refreshing Foreign Policy Vision

By Andrew Korybko, July 16, 2024

The Iranian people voted for him because they wanted a “reformist” who’d gradually change their country’s domestic and foreign policies, knowing that nothing radical can be expected due to the strict system of checks and balances that’s in place to prevent this.

The USA Is the Only Country Where There Are More Firearms Than People. Why Curbing Gun Violence Is Not Succeeding

By Bharat Dogra, July 16, 2024

Over the years, the number of those killed or seriously injured in gun violence continues to accumulate. In surveys, one out of five Americans have stated that a family member or someone very close has been fatally shot.

How the US Government Is Failing to Protect Migrant Children from Trafficking and Abuse

By Tara Rodas and Clayton Morris, July 15, 2024

Tara Rodas is an HHS whistleblower who exposed how the US government is using taxpayer dollars to traffic illegal migrant children all throughout the United States. Yesterday Tara testified before Senator Grassley’s committee.

NATO “Terrorist Attacks” Against Russia. Trying to Push Russia Into Direct Confrontation? Will Moscow “Keep Its Cool” or Retaliate?

By Drago Bosnic, July 15, 2024

On June 23, Russia was hit by a series of very well-coordinated terrorist attacks by NATO, the Neo-Nazi junta and Islamic radicals. The combined death toll was nearly 30 people.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The USA in the only country in the world where there are more firearms than people.

46% of all households have a firearm. This is the average. In some places this can be over 60%.

About 48,000 people die in gun-violence in a year, the majority of this being suicide cases.

When seen in the context of comparable rich countries, the US gun homicide rate is about 25 times higher while gun suicide rate is about 10 times higher.

For every victim of shooting who dies, there are more than double the number who go to emergency rooms in hospitals for the treatment of their injuries.

Over the years, the number of those killed or seriously injured in gun violence continues to accumulate. In surveys, one out of five Americans have stated that a family member or someone very close has been fatally shot.

However the harm done by excessive number of firearms goes much beyond the actual shootings. Many people in certain communities say that due to the excessive number of people having or carrying firearms, they live in perpetual fear and their life has become much more stressful than it would otherwise be without so many guns. Even within families the life of several family members is very adversely affected, particularly of women in families with a history of domestic violence. Schools have also come under the shadow of the stress caused by the wide spread of gun violence and gun culture, including most students as well as teachers.

While there is wide concern over the easy availability of guns and bullets, those people and social movements who have been campaigning against such easy and widespread availability of guns have not been successful so far in reducing the presence of guns and the supporters of easy and unhindered gun availability are known to be politically influential and powerful. They are known to often take very aggressive positions.

While there is obvious need to curb gun violence and the wide presence of guns and gun culture, supported by gun movies and other popular media, some other important questions also need to be raised. These relate to why such popular gun culture flourishes, who fuels it and why such a large number of people feel the need to have so many firearms. Unless such broader questions are also examined sincerely, it may not be possible to reduce the demand for guns and the supply of guns.

Of course the industry which feeds on the sales of such huge numbers of guns and bullets on a continuing basis is also likely to acquire a strong interest in such continuing sales and these powerful economic interests may also be fueling popular gun culture and keeping the demand and supply of civilian firearms at a very high level.

However there are also factors beyond this which also need to be considered. The aggression of the US establishment abroad has to be matched by a popular culture of aggression at home as these two trends feed off each other. It appears that maintaining and popularizing aggressive cultures, using Hollywood movies and other devices, is considered desirable by the establishment to create domestic perceptions and thinking that are supportive towards external aggression. 

The military industrial establishment, which has emerged as a powerful force, is also fine with the continuation of external as well as internal aggression, both being supportive of each other.

Hence while gun control efforts and campaigns are obviously justified and deserve the support of people, these may not be able to progress much on their own, unless they become part of wider peace campaigns which seek to check internal as well as external aggressive trends of the USA. Such a broader peace movement can also be helpful in checking some other important social problems of the USA as well, while also contributing to world peace.

*

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.

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, A Day in 2071 and Man over Machine. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The Iranian people voted for him because they wanted a “reformist” who’d gradually change their country’s domestic and foreign policies, knowing that nothing radical can be expected due to the strict system of checks and balances that’s in place to prevent this.

Iranian President-Elect Masoud Pezeshkian, who won the snap elections that were called after former President Ebrahim Raisi’s death in a tragic helicopter crash in mid-May, published a refreshing foreign policy vision at the Tehran Times on Friday titled “My message to the new world”. The reason why it’s described as refreshing is because it moves beyond the zero-sum thinking that the Mainstream Media (MSM) and many folks from the Alt-Media Community (AMC) nowadays espouse.

Both media camps largely believe that the world is divided into the West and the non-West, with the US leading the first and China the second, and they’re both supposedly predestined to clash. Each recoils whenever one of their own cooperates with their side’s perceived rival. The MSM was apoplectic that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban visited Moscow as part of his peace mission earlier this month while the AMC reacted similarly when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited DC last summer.

Iran has hitherto been considered by many in the MSM and the AMC alike to be one of those zero-sum countries considering its regional role in the global systemic transition to multipolarity and the opprobrium that this has provoked from the West in response. Such a perception was just shattered by Pezeshkian, however, who declared in his article that he’s prepared to improve ties with his country’s adversaries so long as they treat it with respect and allow it to preserve its dignity in all ways.

In his words, “we will welcome sincere efforts to alleviate tensions and will reciprocate good-faith with good-faith”, beginning with Iran’s home region and then spreading outwards. In connection with that, he called for expanding relations with Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Iraq, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates; doing the same with respect to Russia and China; and then trying to find a way forward with the West. His goal is to create stable international conditions for peace and development.

Pezeshkian is associated with the “reformist” school of policymakers who advocate gradual changes in Iranian policy at home and abroad, while their “friendly rivals” are the “principalists” who believe that that reforms might corrupt the country and could ultimately lead to a pro-US regime change. Regardless of whatever one’s views are about these two, the fact of the matter is that they’re each patriots in their own way, and there’s no way that the Iranian system would ever allow a “traitor” to rise to power.

This clarification is required to dispel the false perceptions among some in the AMC who assumed that Pezeshkian’s critiques of various policies were proof of him being a “Trojan Horse”. Iran’s post-1979 system is chock-full of checks and balances which prevent any such figure from ruining the country. Nothing of significance can be done without the approval of the Supreme Leader, who acts as the leading bulwark against radical policies, though they’re also backed up by the IRGC and other groups.

The point is that Pezeshkian’s interest in exploring a rapprochement with the West doesn’t make him a “sell-out” to the multipolar cause. China is in a relationship of complex economic interdependence with those countries despite being one of the world’s most powerful multipolar engines, while India proudly multialigns between the West and the non-West, the pragmatic approach of which Pezeshkian apparently wants to emulate. There’s nothing wrong with either and they both deserve praise.

In fact, it’s far more common for non-Western countries to balance between their side and the West than it is for them to not have any significant ties with the West, so Iran, Russia, North Korea, and a few others are the exception, not the rule. The only reason why they don’t have a similar level of ties with the West as their peers do is because the West sanctioned them for their foreign policy, thus being the ones who decided that they didn’t want cordial relations, not Iran and company.  

To be sure, the West oftentimes exploits these selfsame relations by gradually making them lopsided in its support and thus creating disproportionate dependence on its markets, investments, arms, etc., but it’s possible to avoid such a trap if non-Western leaders are careful. Pezeshkian is confident that Iran can thwart the hybrid threats connected with resuming trade with the West in the scenario that some of those countries are interested, but to be honest, it’s unlikely that his outreaches will be reciprocated.

While the MSM and AMC are almost equally influenced by zero-sum thinking, it’s only the West as a whole that actually formulates policy according to this paradigm, not non-Western countries. This is evidenced by the former’s comprehensive pressure campaigns against Russia, Iran, and North Korea, while the latter proved its strategic autonomy by not cutting off ties with those three in solidarity with the West nor cutting off ties with the West out of solidarity with those three.

It’s therefore natural that the MSM is caught in zero-sum thinking, but those in the AMC who have such views are mostly ideologically driven activists who are so committed to the cause that they subconsciously behave as though they’re “more multipolar than the top multipolar countries”. No value judgement is being implied here, it’s just a reflection of reality to help readers understand why many in the AMC promote views that are at variance with most of the non-West’s who they claim to represent.

This is crucial to keep in mind when reflecting on some of the dire predictions that were made about Pezeshkian before his election and in assessing the intentions behind his newly articulated foreign policy. The Iranian people voted for him because they wanted a “reformist” who’d gradually change their country’s domestic and foreign policies, knowing that nothing radical can be expected due to the strict system of checks and balances that’s in place to prevent this.

In the event that the West rejects his outreaches as is expected, then Iran will simply continue along the foreign policy course that Raisi charted for it, in which case nothing will change. On the off chance that at least some of them positively respond to his appeal, then the most that might happen is a boost in bilateral trade and a reduction in tensions. Nothing dramatic will likely happen either way, but at least Pezeshkian is trying to promote peace despite the odds, which speaks to his personal integrity.

*

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.

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

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

Featured image is from the author

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website 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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

I’ve seen a few Substack posts from authors who claim that the assassination attempt was staged in order to garner sympathy for Trump. One author asserted that there is a lack of visible blood on Trump’s right hand immediately after he touches his right ear immediately after the shots ring out, and that this lack of blood visible (in a millisecond of video) on his right hand at this instant is proof that his ear was not actually wounded.

Another Substack author boldly proclaimed that the direction of blood flow down Trump’s face indicates that the apparent blood flow was staged.

As one who has a written a book about staged suicides for which I consulted top bloodstain pattern analysts, I can confidently state that both of these authors are making the wildest of assumptions.

A high-velocity bullet that superficially grazes the outer ear will NOT necessarily produce a wound that bleeds instantly. In Trump’s case, it appears that the wound only started to bleed with sufficient volume to run down his face AFTER he was placed in a kneeling position by Secret Service. It is perfectly plausible that the wound only started to bleed in this manner after he was placed in this position. I have personally suffered multiple wounds that only began to bleed with notable volume after a few seconds.

Note that the direction of flow in this photograph is consistent with his head being held approximately in this position for several seconds.

Copyright Getty Images

In order to make a persuasive case that the assassination attempt was staged, the Substack commentators would have to explain away the following:

1) Multiple, credible witnesses stated independently that they saw the shooter on the roof, firing a rifle towards Donald Trump.

2) Video recordings of a young man on the roof in the prone position, aiming a rifle at Trump at same time that multiple shots can be heard coming from the direction of the roof.

3) The death of Cory Comperatore, whose fatal gunshot wound to the head was observed by multiple witnesses, including an ER doctor in the audience who tried to resuscitate him.

If the young man on the roof was—as some commentators have suggested—merely firing blanks—and Donald Trump crushed a theatrical blood capsule onto his ear while he was in a kneeling position—these commentators must present a persuasive explanation of what killed Cory Comperatore and—according to reports—wounded David Dutch, 57, of New Kensington, Pennsylvania, and James Copenhaver, 74, of Moon Township, Pennsylvania. Both are purportedly being treated at Allegheny General Hospital in Pittsburgh.

I wonder if those who propose the staging theory could present evidence that Cory Comperatore was not fatally shot in the head—and that David Dutch and James Copenhaver were not severely wounded—in the same fusillade.

If—as some commentators have suggested, Comperatore, Dutch, and Copenhaver were sacrificial victims to make the staging seem real, I wonder if these commentators can present evidence to support their theory?

In our strange era in which we are contending with the Matrix, it is important to remember that there are good conspiracy theories and bad conspiracy theories. Good conspiracy theories are supported by evidence that stands up to critical scrutiny.

*

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. 

Featured image is by Evan Vucci / Licensed under Fair Use

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

In a highly controversial decision, the Supreme Court on June 28 reversed a 40-year old ruling, reclaiming the Court’s role as interpreter of statutory law as it applies to a massive body of regulations imposed by federal agencies in such areas as the environment, workplace safety, public health and more. 

The Court’s 6-3 conservative majority overturned a 1984 ruling, also issued by that Court’s conservative majority, that granted authority to a federal agency if a Congressional statute involving that agency was ambiguous or incomplete. It left the interpretation of the law to the agency rather than the courts. 

This principle blocked individuals and businesses from suing agencies in court for damages incurred when the agencies exceeded their Congressional mandates. 

Chevron deference,” the name given the 1984 decision due to the litigation involving that company, has been grounds for upholding thousands of regulations by a host of federal agencies over the last four decades. Opinions by commentators on its reversal range from “an epic disaster, … one of the worst Supreme Court rulings … another huge gift to special interests and corporations,” to “a victory for the common man” and “an important win for accountability and predictability at a time when agencies are unleashing a tsunami of regulation — in many cases clearly exceeding their statutory authority ….” 

On July 10, Reuters reported that House Republicans had asked all federal agencies to begin reviews of regulations that could be affected by the recent ruling, noting:

Three House committees — Agriculture, Oversight, and Education and Workforce — targeted agencies including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Securities and Exchange Commission and Department of Labor in what the chamber’s No. 2 Republican, Steve Scalise, called a “fight to free the American people from the power-​hungry administrative state.”

The “administrative state” had modest beginnings during George Washington’s presidency, with the formation of the Defense, State, Treasury and Justice Departments. Today it has mushroomed into more than 400 agencies.  For the 178 laws passed by Congress in 2020 alone, federal agencies issued an average of 19 rules and regulations for each law passed, for a total of 3,382 such rules. The Federal Register, a common measure of regulatory action, hit an all-time high 95,894 pages in 2016. That’s 75 times The Complete Works of William Shakespeare, which contains 1280 pages.

The issues raised by the Chevron doctrine go back to the founding of the country and make for an interesting lesson in civics. But first a look at the fishing case that reversed it. 

The Fishermen Who Challenged a Bureaucracy

On Jan. 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two combined cases, Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo and Relentless, Inc v Department of Commerce, which would determine the fate of Chevron. On June 28, the Court ruled in favor of the fishermen plaintiffs in the Loper Bright case, rejecting the deference that courts have given federal agencies in cases where the law is unclear. The Court did not rule on the merits — the question whether the agency had exceeded its statutory authority. It just ruled on the judicial question whether Chevron blocked the case from proceeding. Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote the Opinion of the Court, stated:

Chevron’s presumption is misguided because agencies have no special competence in resolving statutory ambiguities. Courts do. …

Chevron is overruled. Courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, as the APA [Administrative Procedures Act] requires.

The case was therefore allowed to go forward in the lower D.C. District Court where it originated. Those proceedings are expected to begin this fall.

The plaintiffs are three New Jersey herring fishermen who challenge what they say is an unlawful requirement that forces them to surrender 20% of their earnings to pay at-sea monitors – individuals who gather information used to regulate their industry. The cost works out to as much as $700 a day, which can be more pay than the crews themselves take home. 

The requirement was imposed on them by the U.S. Department of Commerce, which oversees the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which regulates the nation’s fisheries. The fishermen don’t contest that federal law allows the government to require at-sea monitors on their boats, but they argue that Congress never gave the executive branch authority to pass monitoring costs onto the fishermen. They contend that the NOAA abused its power, but they were handicapped by Chevron in fighting the rule. 

“We are grateful the Court has overruled Chevron,” said Bill Bright, one of the fishermen plaintiffs. “Restoration of the separation of powers is a victory for small, family-run businesses like ours, whether they’re involved in fishing, farming or retail.”

Paul Clement, former U.S. Solicitor General and attorney for the fishermen, echoed that sentiment, stating, “We are gratified that the Court restored the constitutionally mandated separation of powers.” And that Constitutional mandate is what makes for an interesting civics lesson on the issues.

Designing a Republic with a Balanced Separation of Powers

The Founding Fathers were famously afraid of centralized power, and they designed the Constitution and Bill of Rights to avoid it. Power was balanced among separate branches of the government — watchers watching the watchdogs, with no one imperial controller. 

In colonial America, judges were appointed and paid by the monarchy, receiving salaries that were raised from duties paid by the colonists. King George exercised sole authority to appoint colonial governors to represent the Crown’s interests. For legislative control, the monarchy possessed the powers of the purse and the sword, stationing soldiers in the colonies while requiring that colonists house, feed, and pay taxes for the soldiers’ imported supplies.

Today, many regulatory agencies have their own in-house court systems, which similarly serve as judge and jury. As Stone Washington with the Competitive Economic Institute, a nonprofit libertarian think tank, wrote:

The judicial branch is presumably an independent branch of government, alongside the legislative and executive branches. But many regulatory agencies have their own in-house court systems, called administrative law courts (ALCs). In ALCs, agencies choose their own judges, pay their salaries, and set the rules of procedure. Agencies rarely lose in their own courts. And their abuses to established constitutional norms have garnered the attention of federal courts in recent years especially in antitrust and securities law matters.

In administrative law courts, private litigants are deprived of basic constitutional privileges, including the right to trial by jury, freedom to petition a case before a Constitutional (Art. III) court, and equal application of justice under the law. Litigants who lose may or may not be granted the right to appeal to a federal court; but even if they succeed in getting on the appellate court docket, the process is lengthy and expensive, undemocratically excluding those who cannot afford the cost or the time to wait for a decision. 

The New Jersey fishermen in the two herring boat cases were not required to go through the administrative law court system, but the result was the same: the agency made the rules and enforced them; and under “Chevron deference,” the plaintiffs were powerless to contest the outcome. 

Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist that any irreconcilable differences between the Constitution and the laws passed by Congress were to be decided in favor of protecting the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. The power of judicial review was first asserted in the Supreme Court’s 1803 decision in Marbury v. Madison, recognizing the Constitution as the highest law in the land. Through judicial review, the Court reinforced that constitutional system by checking the power of other branches. Not just the administrative arm of the executive branch but the legislature itself could be restrained from passing legislation that violated the Constitution. 

In 1946, Congress passed the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to codify the procedure for executing administrative law. The APA provides that the “reviewing court shall decide all  relevant questions of law, [and] interpret… statutory provisions.”

It is that deviation from the constitutional system as codified in the APA that the Supreme Court intended to rectify. Justice Elena Kagan, who wrote the dissenting opinion, stated that “the majority’s decision today will cause a massive shock to the legal system, ‘cast[ing] doubt on many settled constructions’ of statutes and threatening the interests of many parties who have relied on them for years.”  But Justice Roberts made clear that prior decisions relying on Chevron were not automatically nullified but stood under stare decisis (to “stand by things decided”). The issues could be challenged in new cases, but the challenged rules had to be shown to exceed the mandate of Congress. 

The Question of Corporate Capture

No doubt the floodgates to new cases will be opened, as other critics have stated; and it will be a major burden for the court system, which is already backlogged. But it is actually a democratic development. As Robert F. Kennedy Jr. explains on X:

The Chevron decision cuts both ways. The original ruling allowed agencies to function effectively, which they cannot if every interpretative gray area in the law requires a court decision. If the agency is working in the public interest, we definitely want it to exercise broad interpretive leeway. For instance, almost every important environmental decision in federal court over the past 40 years is based upon Chevron. Without it, the EPA (not an entirely captured agency) is virtually powerless. But when corporate interests have captured a federal agency, then the same interpretive leeway gives the agency even more power to serve their corporate masters at the expense of the public interest. Thus we have the FDA sending armed police to shut down Amish farmers and grocery stores for selling raw milk, while they allow into our food supply hundreds of harmful but profitable chemical additives that are banned in other countries. The Chevron controversy is therefore a false dilemma with no solution. The real issue is corporate capture. If federal agencies served the public interest, then no one would want to hamstring them.

Although critics say the ruling is a boon to corporations, it is the agencies themselves that are notoriously susceptible to “corporate capture.” As explained in Investopedia:

Regulatory capture is a process by which regulatory agencies may come to be dominated by the industries or interests they are charged with regulating. The result is that an agency, charged with acting in the public interest, instead acts in ways that benefit incumbent firms in the industry it is supposed to be scrutinizing. 

It is that sort of corporate capture that Chevron deference protected from the reach of the courts, and that the Supreme Court’s latest ruling has opened to private challenge. The APA tells agencies they cannot act illegally, arbitrarily, or without letting the public meaningfully participate in the creation of new rules. Many agency rules are now vulnerable to judicial review for violating those standards.  

Agency Overreach: Some Areas of Vulnerability

Technically, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, the Treasury, the State Department, the IRS and even the Defense Department are agencies falling under the Administrative Procedure Act and its rules. Even those secretive, non-transparent, unaccountable intelligence agencies sometimes called the “deep state” could be subject to APA review. But as detailed in a Vanderbilt Law School article titled “The Politics of Deference,” “national security” has its own special deference under separate case law, so it probably cannot be reached. 

The more likely initial targets will be agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

MSNBC experts expect electric vehicles to be most at risk. A Reuters article titled “Biden Tailpipe Emission Rules on Shakier Ground after Supreme Court Ruling” explains, “That’s because the rules target mobile sources of greenhouse gas rather than stationary ones like power plants, even though environmental laws are ambiguous on whether regulators have the mandate to do that.” Another expert says the controversial tailpipe regulations “will eliminate most new gas cars and traditional hybrids from the U.S. market in less than a decade.”  

 Steve Forbes argues that Congress would not have passed such a prohibition because of intense public opposition, so it got kicked over to the EPA, which was thought to be untouchable under Chevron. But Chevron deference is no more. On July 3, 26 states filed suit against the Administration over EV mandates. The Petition for Review states, “the final rule exceeds the agency’s statutory authority and otherwise is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law.” 

Other agency regulations expected to be the subject of lawsuits include the SEC’s imposition of civil penalties without the benefit of a jury trial, and FDA and CDC regulations involving vaccines, pharmaceuticals and dietary supplements.

The administrative law system does not follow constitutional principles, which it must if it is ruling on regulations having the force of law. Removing some of the arbitrary red tape hampering small business, local politicians, schools and families by holding administrative regulations up to Constitutional standards can not only stimulate economic productivity and lower inflation and taxes but can help restore the system of checks and balances so important to our country’s founders. 

*

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.

This article was first posted as an original to ScheerPost.com.

Ellen Brown is an attorney, founder of the Public Banking Institute, and author of thirteen books including Web of DebtThe Public Bank Solution, and Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. She also co-hosts a radio program on PRN.FM called “It’s Our Money.” Her 400+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com.

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

His entire set of teeth, and gums, must be gold plated by now.  Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has decided to let the world, and more specifically Sir Keir Starmer’s freshly elected government, in on a secret: that artificial intelligence is inexorably majestic, glorious and sovereign.  Embrace it and fob off the doomsdayers.  Importantly for Blair, embracing it will ensure that the rivers of gold continue to flow into his private purse.

In May, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (TBI) released a report that unabashedly embraced the role of AI in influencing the way states govern.  It is the accompanying document to Blair’s own address given at the Future of Britain Conference on July 9, which called for reimagining the state through the prism of AI.  As he spoke, the sound of money going out the door was palpable.

The former PM would have the new Labour government believe, plucking various numbers out of the air, that technological reforms made to the public sector could see £12 billion of “annual fiscal space” at the conclusion of the first term, followed by £40 billion at the end of the second, with cumulative savings of £15 billion in the first term and £150 billion in the second.

As one has come to expect from Blair’s ruminations, complexity and troubling consequence is obscured by anaemic waffle.  He found it hard to avoid the prospect that this enthusiastic embrace of AI by governments would see a contraction of the public sector, offering no details about chronology or severity.  Little, as well, on how the revolution could offer “the best route to a society that is not only more productive but one that is more equitable… a contemporary version of the combination of economic efficiency and social justice.”

In Governing in the Age of AI: A New Model to Transform the State, the institute takes a hammer to the traditional caution expressed by the state.  “Like all well-established organisations, the state has a bias towards caution.  But this is an illusion – a failure to modernise, reform and deliver is a perilous course for a nation and those who govern it.”  With a breezy confidence, the report estimates that £40 billion in annual savings will be made as things stand with current technology.  “But of course, over time, this technology will accelerate dramatically in its capability, and so will the savings.”

Screenshot from TBI

The report is shameless in charting out the institute’s own marketing strategy.  Here is the scenario, and we are happy to offer our services in facilitating it, swooping in for the corporate kill.  “To access this opportunity [presented by AI], government will need a coordinated strategy to put in place the necessary infrastructure, sovereign capability and skills.”  Appropriate data, “interoperable” across departments, will require investment.  Models will need to be trained, with necessary computing power to “for AI to run at scale”.  Enter the linking of hands between government and the private sector, something the institute is more than willing to facilitate.

Blair’s donor base is impossible to discount when considering his speeches on the subject of AI and the reports of his institute.  Over the years, the billionaire co-founder of Oracle, Larry Ellison, has forked out vast sums to the organisation.  In 2021, Ellison, through his philanthropic offices, furnished the institute with US$33.8 million, with a promise of US$49.4 million in 2022.  These contributions should suggest more than a bit of string pulling by the likes of Ellison over the TBI research agenda, a case of purchasing corrupted advice that can be duly advertised to government and corporate clients the world over.

Benedict Macon-Cooney, the body’s chief policy strategy, is dismissive of the suggestion.  “There is no conflict of interest, and donations are ringfenced.”  He did, however, concede that the institute did partner public officials with companies to attain their respective goals.  “Sometimes the state is the best way to do things, but if we are [to] look around and see private providers which would be better helping with reforms, then we will say so.”

In what seems like a mud wrestle between the mendacious and truth in slant, Goldman Sachs has begged to differ from the TBI’s dreams of technological nirvana in a dampening analysis.  On this occasion, the devil is singing in different registers.  In its June 2024 report, the investment banking colossus notes that the vast sums being expended – an estimate of US$1 trillion over the next few years is offered – on data centres, chips, AI infrastructure and the power grid has, and will have “little to show for it in so far beyond reports of efficiency gains among developers.”

The report features an interview with MIT’s Daron Acemoglu, who estimates that a mere quarter of tasks subject to AI “will be cost effective to automate within the next 10 years, implying that AI will impact less than 5% of all tasks.”  In his interview, Acemoglu observes that numerous tasks currently being performed by humans “for example in the area of transportation, manufacturing, mining, etc., are multifaceted and require real-world interaction, which AI won’t be able to materially improve any time too soon.”

The GS Head of Global Equity Research, Jim Cavello, is even less impressed, noting that AI technology, to be viable, must be able to solve complex problems.  AI technology is not the holy grail of company valuations, being simply too costly in terms of building critical products such as GPU chips and unable, so far, to “replicate humans’ most valuable capabilities.”

There you have it.  On the one hand, the flowery promises of AI benefits and savings arising from a fierce embrace of technology by governments, as put forth by Blair and his institute.  Then we have Goldman Sachs, similarly famed for its ruthless tailoring of advice to swell monetary returns.  Neither is encouraging, but Blair’s offerings always come with a barely concealed odour of self-interest masquerading as human salvation.

*

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. 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]

NATO Summit in Washington: Focusing on Asia

July 16th, 2024 by Leonid Savin

Introduction

Normalization of diplomatic relations with the Russian Federation had first been proposed by Donald Trump in 2017.

Under RussiaGate (2016), President-elect Donald Trump had been accused of treason “after President Obama announced new sanctions [in late December 2016] against Russia and Trump praised Vladimir Putin’s response to the sanctions.” (Daily Caller, December 30, 2016, emphasis added)

Former Secretary of Defense and CIA Director Leo Panetta had already intimated prior to the elections that Trump was a threat to national security. 

Even prior to the inauguration of president Trump, the US media in liaison with US intelligence had launched successive waves of smears directed against President-elect Donald Trump.

The objective from the very outset was to discredit president Trump, presenting him as a Manchurian candidate serving the interests of the Kremlin.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

 

Vanity Fair November 1 2016

The Atlantic October 8 2016

RussiaGate 2.0

The RussiaGate objective as formulated in 2016 was: 

“to get rid of a President who intended to normalize relations with Russia, thus curtailing the budget and power of the military/security complex.” (Paul Craig Roberts, emphasis added)

In January 2019, the FBI Russia investigation was quoted by the media as “evidence” that Trump was “wittingly or unwittingly” an agent of the Kremlin.

What is the stance of the FBI today in regard to the candidacy of Donald Trump? The FBI played a key role in sustaining RussiaGate. (P. C Roberts). I should mention that the FBI is also responsible (coincidentally) for the investigation of the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Pennsylvania.

Let us wake up to REALITY.  

The levels of political manipulation, fraud and criminality have reached their pinnacle.

The ultimate intent of the campaign against Trump in 2016-19, led by the Neocons and the Dems Clinton faction was to destabilize the Trump presidency.

From RussiaGate 1.0 to RussiaGate 2.0

There is continuity: Under RussiaGate 2.0 (2024) which we are currently experiencing, various accusations of treason against Trump will once more go into high gear, ultimately with a view to sabotage the peace process as well as destabilize Trump’s candidacy to the presidency of the U.S. 

Trump has confirmed: …

“that if reelected, he would swiftly bring an end to the war in Ukraine by speaking with Putin.

“I will have that war settled between Putin and Zelensky as president-elect before I take office on January 20.

I’ll have that war settled,” Trump said on June 27 during a debate with Biden, adding,

“I’ll get it settled fast, before I take office.” (Quoted by Newsweek)

Speaking with Putin is regarded as an act of treason. This courageous statement, reminiscent of Donald Trump –the alleged Manchurian Candidate— is unlikely to be accepted by the “Deep State”, the Military Industrial Complex and the powerful financial groups which support the Democratic Party leadership.

What will be the ultimate outcome? 

Real peace negotiations are an integral part of Trump’s election campaign.

Trump’s national security advisory team has prepared a balanced plan: if the Kiev regime does not enter into peace talks with Moscow, the U.S. would (under a Trump presidency) immediately suspend the flow of US weapons to Ukraine:

“Under the plan drawn up by [General Keith] Kellogg and Fred Fleitz, who both served as chiefs of staff in Trump’s National Security Council during his 2017-2021 presidency, there would be a ceasefire based on prevailing battle lines during peace talks, Fleitz said.

They have presented their strategy to Trump, and the Republican presidential candidate responded favorably”. (Reuters, June 23, 2024)

It is worth noting that this peace proposal — which is part of his election campaign — was formulated barely a few weeks prior to the failed attempt to assassinate Donald Trump in Pennsylvania.

*

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.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Canadian citizen and journalist Laith Marouf along with Hadi Hotait were reporting for Free Palestine TV (FPTV) in the south of Lebanon, when the Israeli military attempted to assassinate them.

Laith Marouf described the attack to Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse.

“The Israeli military have been targeting media workers in Gaza and Lebanon, and even in the West Bank.  We can remember before October 7 they assassinated Shireen Abu Akleh in the West Bank.”

“And, now over 160 journalists have been martyred in Gaza, and of course here in Lebanon the Israelis have assassinated four journalists in the south.  The enemy is vicious and they do not like people that do journalism work, because that brings the truth to the world. This is especially true for those who write in English.”

“We were alone, and nobody was around us when we were targeted.  Thank God the shells fell 200 meters away from us. There was a short cement fence which partially protected us, and the wind was blowing away from us, so the white phosphorus that fell in the first shell did not injure us, thank God.”

According to Hotait, he and Marouf were near an open field taking photos when the shell landed on the edge of a house near them. Hotait told The Canada Files that this was obviously a targeted assassination attempt because there were no weapons or military assets in the area. Israel has a long history of killing journalists.

White phosphorous was dropped by Israel, and soon afterwards an Israeli guided missile landed in the same area. The white phosphorous remains active, very toxic and flammable for much longer than previously known.

Lebanese researchers and experts are warning that Israel’s tactics are causing long-term and potentially irreversible damage to south Lebanon’s environment, agriculture and economy, potentially making it uninhabitable.

By March 6, 117 phosphoric bombs had been dropped on southern Lebanon, according to Lebanon’s National Council for Scientific Research (CNRS).

Israel is using it as part of a larger strategy to push out civilians and make south Lebanon uninhabitable, now and in the future.

The Israeli military knows that white phosphorus is detrimental, that it reignites even up to a month after being dropped, and is toxic to the environment.

The Lebanese side is completely barren land, but the Israelis are cultivating down to the last inch before the border. The white phosphorus used by Israel is effectively making the south of Lebanon uninhabitable.

The continuous Israeli bombing has caused huge evacuations, but those who have to remain in their homes recognize the smell of the white phosphorus, which is similar to garlic.

White phosphorous ignites when exposed to the oxygen in the air at temperatures above 30C (86F) and rains down streaks of dense white smoke mixed with phosphorus oxides.  The fragments burn plants, houses and human flesh.

On March 19, Oxfam and Human Rights Watch reported that cited Israel’s use of white phosphorus on Gaza and south Lebanon as one in “a wide range of Israeli violations of international humanitarian law” and called on the Biden administration to “immediately suspend arms transfers to Israel”.

This isn’t new in Lebanon, as the Israeli army targeted civilians with white phosphorus in the 1982 invasion and since October 7 there has been a lot of white phosphorus used on forests, plantations, olive and fruit trees.

Experts in the field have said that the use of white phosphorus is ‘environmental terrorism’ and ‘psychological warfare’.

Over the last 46 years or more, experts and officials say a pattern has become clear; Israel is creating a barren ‘no-man’s-land’ in the south of Lebanon as their buffer zone.

Israel’s invasions of Lebanon in 1978 and 1982, its occupation from 1985 to 2000, and the wars between Hezbollah and Israel in 2006 and 2023-2024 have eroded the land on the Lebanese side of the border.

An investigation by Forbidden Stories and 13 media outlets, including Le Monde, suggests that some of these Israeli strikes were deliberate attacks on journalists.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has conducted investigations as of July 12, 2024 which showed at least 108 journalists and media workers were among the more than 39,000 killed since the Gaza war began, making it the deadliest period for journalists since CPJ began gathering data in 1992. CPJ is investigating almost 350 additional cases of potential killings, arrests and injuries.

The Canada Files’ Editor-in-Chief, Aidan Jonah, and Marouf, co-host a weekly show called Canada and Palestine: The War on Zionism. Marouf appears on other shows regularly every week, and regularly is interviewed by prominent Canadian lawyer and journalist Dimitri Lascaris.

FPTV now does reports from the field on the border between South Lebanon and Israel/occupied Palestine and a weekly show called Wartime Café where Lebanese pro-resistance activists, artists and thinkers are interviewed, and translation of all the resistance videos coming out from Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq, around the whole of the Axis of Resistance.

*

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.

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

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

Featured image is from MD

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Tara Rodas is an HHS whistleblower who exposed how the US government is using taxpayer dollars to traffic illegal migrant children all throughout the United States.

Yesterday Tara testified before Senator Grassley’s committee.

Click Here to Download the Oral Testimony presented at U.S. Senate Roundtable

TRANSCRIPT BELOW

TRANSCRIPT

Oral Testimony for U.S. Senate Roundtable Witness: Tara Lee Rodas, HHS Whistleblower

Roundtable Title: “The Exploitation Crisis: How the U.S. Government is Failing to Protect Migrant Children from Trafficking and Abuse”

Tuesday, July 9, 2024 at 2:30 PM EST

Senator Grassley and Honorable Senators, thank you for your tireless efforts to protect migrant Unaccompanied Children from abuse, neglect, labor trafficking, sex trafficking, and other unspeakable horrors.

I especially appreciate Senator Grassley’s oversight unit’s extensive and multi-year investigations into sponsors who have obtained children under suspicious circumstances and sponsors who have known criminal histories to include gang affiliation.

What keeps me up at night is wondering about the safety & well-being of children:

  1. I think about a 16-year-old girl from Guatemala.I’ll call her Carmen.Her sponsor claimed to be her older brother. But after Carmen was released from the Unaccompanied Children (UC) Program to her sponsor in North Carolina, she appeared in a photo on his social media. He was touching her inappropriately. It was clear her sponsor was not her brother. Later, Carmen appeared on her sponsor’s social media again – this time she was alone and all-dolled-up: her hair was styled; her makeup was done; and her shirt was unbuttoned. ORR’s Federal Field Specialist said Carmen looked drugged and that she was for sale. It was discovered that Carmen’s sponsor had other social media accounts containing child pornography. What keeps me up at night is wondering if Carmen is safe.
  2. I thinkabouta 13-year-old girl from El Salvador.I’ll call her Maria. Maria was released from the Unaccompanied Children (UC) Program to a sponsor in Ohio with confirmed MS-13 gang affiliation. It’s unthinkable that a child was released to the home of the sponsor affiliated with a gang. What keeps me up at night is wondering if Maria is safe.

More than 500,000 children like Carmen and Maria have arrived at our border alone. These children are funneled through a network of U.S. government agencies and contractors and

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) who have little or no training in how protect children from trafficking and abuse.

More than 8,300 of these children were funneled through the Pomona Fairplex Emergency Intake Site where I served as the Deputy to the Director of the Federal Case Management Team. If I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes, I would not believe that a federal government agency is using billions of taxpayer dollars to place vulnerable migrant children into the hands of sponsors who have criminal history and gang affiliation. It’s shocking and shameful.

As a whistleblower, I’d like to thank Senator Grassley for being a trusted pathway to report the most horrific injustices against children that I’ve witnessed in my federal career. When I reported the MS-13 case and provided evidence that other MS-13 and 18th Street gang members were sponsoring children, ORR retaliated against me. In just 16 days after making my first protected disclosure to the Department of Justice Inspector General, the Honorable Michael Horowitz:

  • I was taken off the MS-13 case by ORR’s Federal Field Specialist (FFS),
  • The FFS told me I was under investigation,
  • I was escorted off my job by the FFS & security, and
  • My badge was taken.
  • For my personal safety, my home agency offered to send armed agents to escort me from California back to Washington, DC.

    So, Senator Grassley and Honorable Senators, I thank you for protecting whistleblowers like me. And, again, I thank you for your tireless efforts to protect children from trafficking and abuse.

    I’d be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

 

*

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.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

Key Messages for Education in and Beyond School

July 15th, 2024 by Bharat Dogra

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Perhaps the most remarkable feature of the human species is that inherently it is neither particularly constructive not particularly destructive. How human beings actually behave and live depends to a large extent on the ideas, information, and understandings to which they are exposed, particularly in the formative years of their life but also later.

 So for all those who are committed to the creation of a better world, a key concern should be the extent to which people and particular children and teenagers are being exposed in interesting and creative ways to ideas and understanding of justice, equality, peace, social harmony and protection of environment and biodiversity. Unfortunately, the situation just now in this context is not at all encouraging. Although people are exposed to mountains of information and news, mostly this is of a frivolous kind. Reading habit is fast diminishing, particularly in terms of serious study.

Secondly, even when ideas of justice, environment protection and peace are taken up, often there are serious distortions in these. To give an example, some action of a big power which is promoted as an action of peace may actually turn out to be provocation of violence. Or something promoted by a big multinational company as being taken up for environment protection may ultimately be revealed to be a cover-up for wider destruction of environment. 

Hence at a time when there is great urgency of promoting sincere ideas of justice, peace and environment protection rooted in truth, this task is actually suffering from shocking neglect, apathy and inadequacy.

As remedial action, perhaps the first step in this direction is to select certain key messages based on secular ethics around which the social change role of education should be carried forward. These messages need to reach all groups so certainly such an educational effort should not remain confined to just schools and colleges. Of course when different age-groups are covered, the same messages are discussed and debated in very different ways that are appropriate for different age groups. 

Some of the key messages relate to important aspects of social relationships and behavior. One key message can be that as far as possible one should avoid trying to cause any distress to anyone in daily life. One has to discipline oneself accordingly and train oneself for this, for this does not come naturally. This may appear to be a very simple message, but look at the implications of this, how the world will change or how a single village will change in very important ways if all the people are consciously trying not to cause any distress to anyone.

Another key message is that we should not discriminate between any fellow human beings, whether on the basis of religion, ethnicity, caste, color or in any other way. This opens up our hearts and minds and we can be receptive to the friendship of all people and wish for the welfare of all people.

Thirdly, whenever we are interacting with anyone poorer to us, or less advantaged than us, our effort should be to be kind and generous, while entirely avoiding being exploitative or taking undue advantage of the weaker state of the other person or persons.

Another important message is to have a firm commitment to one’s family and its welfare, and be very respectful towards women. This includes avoiding all forms of domestic violence—physical and emotional—which is one of the biggest causes of human distress.

All these key messages involving social distress are of course related to each other, but nevertheless it is useful to state these separately.

Then there can be some key messages relating to personal behavior. Here perhaps the most important message can be to entirely avoid all intoxicants including alcohol, tobacco, smokeless tobacco and gutka, opium as well various other kinds of intoxicating drugs. These are the cause of not just too many health problems but in addition increase human distress in many other ways as well. A wider message along the same lines can be to avoid all harmful and wasteful consumption.

In terms of community actions certain key messages should emphasize that we all should all contribute to maintaining public hygiene and sanitation. We should contribute to protection of environment as a part of community efforts and also try as far as possible to keep our life pattern and life style in keeping with the needs of environment protection. We should contribute whenever we can to the early resolution of any disputes around us and contribute to maintaining social harmony in our surroundings.

If most people behave in accordance with these messages, then we would have a world much better than it is and our community and surroundings would also be much better than these are. We ourselves would be much more creative and happier persons if we tried to live according to these messages and tried to spread them in our social relationships.

However there is a much bigger reason why these messages are important. Our world is faced with very serious environmental problems, highly destructive wars and arms race. There is much injustice and the resulting distress. To create a different world, we need support for an agenda of peace, justice and environment protection from a very large number of people. Education for social change based on important key messages can help to create a very wide and strong base of people, including the upcoming generation, who believe more firmly in peace, justice and environment protection and therefore will be more active for these causes.

Education for social change is a very creative process in which poems, songs, stories, essays are created around certain key messages all the time and ordinary people including children also contribute with their real life experiences. It is an effort which starts contributing some good results from the very initial stages and keeps contributing more and more for a better world the longer it continues and the more creative it becomes over a period of time with all its valuable experiences.

Hence this concept of education for social change which continues beyond school and college for all age-groups should get wider attention.

*

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.

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Earth without Borders, Man over Machine, Planet in Peril, When the Two Streams Met and A Day in 2071. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

On June 23, Russia was hit by a series of very well-coordinated terrorist attacks by NATO, the Neo-Nazi junta and Islamic radicals. The combined death toll was nearly 30 people. And while NATO-controlled extremist ideologies such as Islamic radicalism and ultra-liberalism/wokeism can be extremely damaging to societies at large, the world’s most aggressive racketeering cartel often directly engages in terrorist activities.

Whether it’s NATO’s direct and indirect aggression against the world or “occasional strikes” within the framework of the vaunted (neo)colonialist “rules-based world order“, the belligerent alliance is always on the lookout for new victims and plunder. However, in the last two and a half years, it has become far more aggressive than ever before, poking the Bear and trying to push Russia into a direct confrontation. All this has brought the world to the brink of thermonuclear annihilation.

Attempting to avoid this scenario, Moscow kept its cool even in moments of almost universal public anger and cries for retaliation. However, things changed dramatically after June 23. Whether the date was chosen by NATO to nearly coincide with the beginning of “Barbarossa” (June 22) is unclear, but its symbolism cannot be ignored.

The political West has demonstrated time and again that it’s the virtual heir to Nazi Germany and much of the same actions and policies that Berlin used 80 years ago are now being recycled by NATO.

This was a step too far for the Kremlin and it reacted. Since the terrorist attack on Sevastopol, the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) were instructed to start suppressing or even downing US/NATO ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets over the Black Sea to ensure these cannot help the Neo-Nazi junta target Russian civilians.

Ever since, the world’s most aggressive racketeering cartel hasn’t dared fly close to Crimea, mostly limiting its activities to airspace over NATO-occupied Romania. However, the Russian military realized it needs to do even more to ensure the safety of its people. While detecting and targeting NATO-sourced weapons was always a priority for Moscow, as evidenced by regular updates on the destruction of various assets, particularly the overhyped HIMARS, June 23 was a turning point.

Thus, a more intense hunt for HIMARS, M270/MARS and ATACMS started. By June 27, at least two launchers were destroyed by an “Iskander-M” SRBM (short-range ballistic missile). The HIMARS and M270 were stored in a warehouse near the settlement of Yasenovoe in the Donetsk oblast (region). On June 27, video footage of the precision strike was posted on various social networks, particularly Telegram.

According to various military sources, at least 20 enemy soldiers were neutralized, composed most likely of mixed NATO crews and the Neo-Nazi junta forces. Apart from the destruction of the system itself, the elimination of personnel capable of operating and maintaining the launchers is a high priority for the Russian military. Another system was detected by a drone while withdrawing to a warehouse near the settlement of Shevchenkove in the Nikolayev oblast. The warehouse was then promptly obliterated by an “Iskander-M”. The video of the precision strike appeared online on June 28, while the after-action reports suggested that the strike neutralized 25 enemy troops. However, the Kiev regime and NATO were given no time to consolidate, as the Russian military continued hunting down their overhyped HIMARS and M270 already the next day. What’s more, the damage was even worse this time.

Namely, according to military sources, another precision strike on the village of Matveyevka in the Zaporozhye oblast resulted in the destruction of a warehouse with various munitions for the HIMARS/M270. The building reportedly housed both rockets and ATACMS tactical ballistic missiles. Another stockpile was hit shortly afterward in the nearby Kamennoye settlement. This forced the Neo-Nazi junta troops to disperse to reduce losses. However, the situation was hardly better. Quite the contrary, it turned out to be even worse. In the last two days alone, reports surfaced about the destruction of seven more HIMARS/M270 systems, including those armed with ATACMS missiles. The destruction of the first three was reported on July 8. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) posted video footage from one of its tactical ISR drones, showing the elimination of the systems in the Kherson oblast.

The precision strike was conducted at night, after the launchers were detected near the village of Klapaya. Minutes later, an “Iskander-M” obliterated the position. The Russian MoD reported that dozens of NATO personnel were eliminated, while it was also suggested that these launchers were among those used in the previously mentioned terrorist attack on a packed beach in Sevastopol. Some unofficial reports also suggest that this Russian night strike thwarted a NATO plan to launch another attack on the Crimean peninsula, as the launchers were loaded precisely with the ATACMS missiles when the “Iskander-M” hit their position. However, this wasn’t the end of it, as on July 9, more footage was posted by the Kremlin’s MoD, with reports showing the destruction of another four HIMARS systems, and once again, the “culprit” was the “Iskander-M”. Two were destroyed in the Zaporozhye and another two in the Kherson oblast.

The latter were detected in Novopetrovka in the Kherson oblast, with the precision strike destroying two launchers, five escort vehicles and neutralizing at least 20 enemy personnel. The enhancement of the Russian military’s tactical and strategic ISR capabilities resulted in the easier detection and destruction of assets such as the HIMARS.

The Kiev regime has had a lot of trouble in this regard, particularly in recent months, as its overhyped NATO-sourced weapons are having trouble going past the world-class Russian electronic warfare (EW) systems, meaning that their lethality has been greatly reduced. At the same time, the aforementioned Russian ISR is making it far riskier to engage in combat with the HIMARS, with or without the ATACMS. The usage of regular guided rockets has become ineffective due to EW, while the usage of larger ATACMS makes it easier to detect and neutralize the launchers.

This sort of catch-22 situation is turning the HIMARS/M270 into yet another overhyped NATO-sourced weapon that can’t really do what its manufacturers are marketing it for, denting its reputation, most of which was the result of NATO propaganda either way. And it should be noted that this certainly isn’t the only Western weapon whose reputation has been tarnished by the Russian military. This was particularly apparent during last year’s much-touted counteroffensive, when NATO-sourced armor was obliterated by Russian drones, attack helicopters and specialized ATGM teams.

More recently, Su-57 next-generation fighter jets, “Tornado-S” MLRS and Russia’s unrivaled hypersonic weapons all proved their combat capabilities against the latest NATO gear. And all this was before the Russian government decided to massively increase investment into the military and also reshuffle the MoD for maximum efficiency.

*

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.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

The Slow-Motion Assassination

July 15th, 2024 by Matt Taibbi

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Before the attempt on Donald Trump’s life, while questions raged about the health of President Joe Biden, officials downplayed the importance of the physical leader. White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters to look at the administration, not the man. “What we are saying,” she said, “is there are results, his record.” As my podcast partner Walter Kirn wrote, we were “being introduced to the idea that the presidency is a diffuse impersonal ‘office,’ and the bucks stops nowhere that is… conventionally identifiable.”

But we live in a physical world, and individuals still matter. Official actions betray this more than anything else. When a populist movement built on frustration over decades of misrule began having electoral success, they created a legend that the backlash was irrational and the fault of one Donald Trump, building him into a figure of colossal art, a super-Hitler. It became cliché that he was the embodiment of all evil and needed to be stopped “at all costs.” By late last year, mainstream press organizations were saying legal means had failed, and more or less openly calling for a truly final solution to the Trump problem.

Now he’s been shot, in an incident that’s left two dead. We don’t exactly know why yet. We barely know the “who,” as stories about slain 20-year-old suspect Thomas Matthew Crooks are citing investigations into “whether the shooter had accomplices,” as NBC put it. New York Times analysts say the gunman fired eight shots. That’s a lot of rage, and even if we don’t know its direct source, it can’t have been much lower than what was already in the air around Trump. He and his supporters have been dehumanized as part of an induced collective madness that’s a bigger crime than the coverup of Biden’s incapacity.

Click here to read the full article.

*

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.

Featured image source

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

I recently was asked about COVID-19 vaccination and colon cancer. Are they related? What is new in the literature?

Akkus et al studied the impact of COVID-19 vaccination more than 3 months before newly diagnosed with a special kind of colon cancer. Microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) colon cancer is a type of colon cancer where tumor cells are highly unstable due to a high number of genetic mutations. Instability occurs when mismatch repair (MMR) genes, which correct errors during cell division, stop functioning properly. As a result, errors accumulate and tumors become unstable. MSI-H colon cancer cells look and behave abnormally, making it easier for the immune system to recognize them as invaders and with proper immune surveillance, the tumor cells are effectively killed.

 

 

Akkus E, Karaoglan B, Akyol C, Ünal AE, Kuzu MA, Savaş B, Utkan G. Types and Rates of COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Microsatellite Stable and Instable Non-Metastatic Colon Cancer. Cureus. 2024 Jun 6;16(6):e61780. doi: 10.7759/cureus.61780. PMID: 38975417; PMCID: PMC11227084.

Exposure to the Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was associated with a > 6-fold increased risk for this form of cancer. Because the Spike protein is believed to impair tumor surveillance systems, among several cancer-promoting mechanisms, it is plausible that these cancerous cells are allowed to proliferate among the vaccinated where the cancer was not yet detectable at the time of injection.

*

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.

Featured image is from Dr. Rath Health Foundation


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

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

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Driving Vice President-elect Kamala Harris by an undetected bomb. Refusing extra resources for a presidential candidate. Admitting an agent on a White House detail assaulted her supervisor. 

Long before the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump on Saturday night such focused a harsh light on the Secret Service, the presidential security agency was already facing difficult questions about its capability, training, recruitment and emphasis on diversity.

Secret Service agents reportedly were even circulating a petition raising questions about their management a few weeks ago.

Those questions are now certain to receive intense new attention after video footage showed a gunman on was able to scale a building less than 200 yards from Trump, get to a shooting perch with a rifle and fire several rounds before being neutralized by a Secret Service sniper team at the event Saturday night in Butler, Pennsylvania.

Several witnesses said they started to yell the man had a gun before he started shooting. And several lawmakers say they are now investigating reports that the Trump campaign had requested additional security resources recently, and was turned down. 

“How could you have somebody on the rooftop?” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, himself a victim of political violence when he was seriously wounded at a congressional baseball practice. “There are reports that people watched him climb up the roof and even alerted authorities, and we’re going to be looking into that.”

How could that happen with all the authorities around that they miss something so clear that the shooter was able to get that kind of line of sight just 150 yards away from the stage?”

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer on Saturday night demanded the Secret Service provide Congress immediate answers as to how it failed to stop the assassination attempt.

Comer announced just hours after Trump survived the attack that he would be demanding testimony from the head of the Secret Service as well as documents and other evidence.

”I have already contacted the Secret Service for a briefing and am also calling on Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle to appear for a hearing,” he said on X. “The Oversight Committee will send a formal invitation soon. There are many questions and Americans demand answers.”

Criticism of the Secret Service spread quickly on social media – from X owner Elon Musk to members of Congress. Several urged Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mallorca to reconsider his denial of Secret Service resources for third-party presidential candidate Robert F Kennedy Jr.

“Extreme incompetence or it was deliberate. Either way, the SS leadership must resign,” Musk wrote.

Democrats also are likely to face new questions after Rep. Benny Thompson sought to end Trump‘s Secret Service protection recently and President Joe Biden reportedly told donors in recent days it was time to put a “bullseye” over his Republican rival.

Back in May, Congress requested a briefing with the Secret Service, after several incidents allegedly raised internal concerns over the quality of its trainings.

A petition within the Secret Service has reportedly been circulating because of the incidents and called for a congressional investigation into the agency, according to Comer.

One incident saw a Secret Service agent assigned to Vice President Kamala Harris allegedly attack her superior and other agents. The unnamed agent also exhibited other “concerning” behavior, according to her colleagues.

Comer mentioned the incident in a letter to Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle and asked for a briefing on how the Secret Service is responding to the allegations of “inadequate training.”

“This incident raised concerns within the agency about the hiring and screening process for this agent,” Comer wrote in his letter. “Specifically [concerns] whether previous incidents in her work history were overlooked during the hiring process as years of staff shortages had led the agency to lower once stricter standards as part of a diversity, equity and inclusion effort.”

Comer also flagged concerns from the petition related to a “double standard in disciplinary actions, and a vulnerability ‘to potential insider threats’ that could pose a risk to U.S. national security.”

The letter requests the briefing by June 13, and cites “potential vulnerabilities” that could keep the Secret Service from “fulfilling its mission to ensure the safety and security of its protectees,” including the president, vice president, and their families.

*

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.

Featured image is from the Public Domain

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Days before the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, President Joe Biden publicly declared that “it’s time to put a bullseye on Trump.” While Biden clearly wasn’t openly calling for the assassination of Trump, words have meaning. And at a time when heated rhetoric can fuel political violence, everyone—including the President and former President—need to weigh their words carefully.

In David Cronenberg’s 1983 film, The Dead Zone (based upon a novel written by Stephen King), Christopher Walken plays a schoolteacher named Johnny Smith who, after nearly dying in an accident, awakens from a coma possessed with psychic powers—an ability to see into the future. This new power turns into a curse after Smith shakes the hand of Greg Stillson, a populist third-party candidate for the US Senate, played by Martin Sheen. Smith has a vision of Stillson becoming president and ordering a nuclear strike against the USSR. Smith confers with his neurologist/therapist, Dr. Sam Weizak (played by Herbert Lom), who is cognizant of Smith’s psychic power. Weizak postulates the question, “What would you do if you could go back in time and kill Adolf Hitler?” before he committed his many atrocities. After pondering this question, Smith decides that the only course of action left to him is to assassinate Stillson before he becomes president.

I don’t know what motivated Thomas Matthew Crooks, the 20-year-old Pennsylvania resident whom authorities have named as the person who fired the shots that wounded former President Donald Trump and two bystanders, and killed another innocent bystander, before himself being killed by the Secret Service. There will presumably be a very thorough investigation into this criminal act of political violence.

What I do know is that the rhetoric which had superheated the American political scene in the months, weeks and days leading up to the attempted assassination at a pro-Trump political rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, mirrored in tone, content, and purpose the advice Dr. Weizack gave to Johnny Smith about how best to deal with the threat posed by the potential election of Greg Stillson.

The perpetrators of this rhetorical lambasting populate the entire spectrum of societal influence and control, from the President of the United States, Joe Biden, to the former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, to numerous Senators and Representatives in the US Congress, to various pundits, experts, and analysts who provide commentary on political events for the mainstream media, and to their respective echo chambers and independent content creators on social media.

All are complicit in the attempted assassination, just as Dr. Weizack was complicit in the crime planned by Johnny Smith. The difference between Weizack and these modern conspirators, however, is that one event takes place as part of a fictional narrative, and the other as part of a national reality.

Image: A defiant Donald Trump following the failed attempt on his life 

President Biden has emerged as the principal voice among the crowd of politicians, pundits, and politicized activists who have been defining former President Donald Trump as an existential threat to American democracy, and America itself.

Just to be clear (because words do matter), an existential threat is a threat to something’s very existence—when the continued being of something is at stake or in danger.

It is, literally, about life and death.

This apocalyptic description has now been attached to any supporter of Donald Trump (reviled by Biden as “MAGA”, the acronym for “Make American Great Again”, the rallying cry of the pro-Trump movement).

Perhaps Biden and his supporters forgot that Trump pulled in some 74 million votes in 2020—about 47% of the participating electorate. There is no more certain way to incite a literal Civil War than to label one half of the country as an existential threat that must be neutralized come hell or high water.

“I believe in free and fair elections and peaceful transfer of power,” Biden proclaimed at an Arizona election event in September 2023. “I believe there’s no place in America—none, none, none—for political violence,” Biden said.

If only he had remained on script.

“There’s something dangerous happening in America now,” Biden at the same event. “There’s an extremist movement that does not share the basic beliefs of our democracy: The MAGA movement.”

Later, in December 2023, Biden went further.

“Donald Trump and his MAGA Republicans are determined to destroy American democracy,” Biden declared. “We cannot let him win.”

Speaking on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of the Normandy landings, Biden invoked the imagery of war when speaking about defending American democracy.

“American democracy asks the hardest things: to believe that we’re part of something bigger than ourselves,” Biden said. “So, democracy begins with each of us.”

As Biden spoke, his campaign released a video which declared,

“There is nothing more sacred than our democracy. But Donald Trump’s ready to burn it all down.”

Biden literally invoked the struggle against Hitler as being synonymous with his struggle against Trump and the MAGA Republicans.

Biden speaking in Arizona in September 2023

A day before the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, Biden, speaking in Michigan, announced that the gloves were coming off.

“We’re going to say who he is, what he intends to do. Folks, Donald Trump is a convicted criminal.” Biden later declared that “Most importantly, and I mean this from the bottom of my heart, Trump is a threat to this nation.”

Donald Trump is no more a threat to the United States than Joe Biden.

Each articulates policies the other finds reprehensible.

But these policies must pass through the gauntlet of constitutional processes before becoming policy.

And, when speaking of the United States, it is these very processes that give us the right to call ourselves a Constitutional Republic.

There is nothing undemocratic about having differences of opinion.

That is what elections are all about.

But there is something inherently unconstitutional in promoting political violence by converting these political differences into articulations of existential gravitas, where literal life and death outcomes hinge on who prevails in an election.

By labeling Donald Trump as a threat to America, Joe Biden was—literally—saying that to preserve America, this threat must be eliminated.

This is not an extreme interpretation of how Biden’s words can be construed by those inclined to believe Donald Trump is a danger to the Republic. The actress Lea DeLaria, who appears in the popular television drama, Orange Is the New Black, recently uploaded a video to her Instagram channel.

“Joe,” DeLaria declared (referring to the current President of the United States), “you’re a reasonable man. You don’t want to do this. But here’s the reality: This is a fucking war. This is a war now, and we are fighting for our fucking country. And these assholes are going to take it away. They’re going to take it away. Thank you, [Supreme Court Justice] Clarence ‘Uncle’ Thomas. Joe, you now have the right to take that bitch Trump out. Take him out, Joe. If he was Hitler, and this was 1940, would you take him out? Well, he is Hitler. And this is 1940. Take him the fuck out!

As Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes noted in a landmark 1919 decision regarding the First Amendment of the US Constitution, free speech does not give one the right to shout “fire” in a crowded movie theater.

Nor should it empower anyone, from the President on down to radical personalities such as Lea DeLaria, the right to incite political violence—especially against a former US President who aspires—not without reasonable justification—to be the next President of the United States.

Threatening the president of the United States is a federal felony under United States Code Title 18, Section 871. The law prohibits anyone from making “any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict great bodily harm upon the president of the United States.” The law also includes presidential candidates, vice presidents, and former presidents. The Secret Service is responsible for investigating suspected violations of this law.

The Secret Service needs to pay Lea DeLaria a visit. So does the FBI. She should be detained, questioned and charged appropriately.

Lea DeLaria (left), Jacquline Marsaw (right)

So, too, should anyone who articulates in favor of political violence against Donald Trump or Joe Biden. This includes US Congressman Bennie Thompson, who has openly called for Donald Trump to be stripped of his Secret Service protection if sentenced to prison, holding that prison authorities would be responsible for the protection of Trump.

Ask Jeffrey Epstein how that worked out.

And, just to prove the point that Bennie Thompson’s intention behind his proposed legislation wasn’t driven by pure legislative motive, enter, stage right, Thompson’s Field Director, Jacqueline Marsaw, who posted on her Facebook page the following comment: “I don’t condone violence but please get you some shooting lessons so you don’t miss next time oops that wasn’t me saying that.”

But it was Jacqueline Marsaw that said it. Her subsequent removal of the post doesn’t erase the deed.

And she should be held accountable.

So, too, should everyone who articulates actual violence as a solution to the issues that divide the nation when it comes to presidential politics.

I don’t take these matters lightly. On March 21, 1981, I was in the Student Union of Franklin and Marshall College checking my mail when the news broke about the attempted assassination of President Reagan. “I hope he dies,” one of my fellow students announced, after watching the shooting on a television located in the common area.

The attempted assassination of President Reagan, March 1981

I immediately put him up against the wall and told him I took violent exception to his support for the attempted assassination of my commander in chief (I was fresh out of the Army at that time).

My antics earned me a trip to the Dean of Student Affairs, who informed me (I was a newly arrived Freshman) that I would probably be expelled from college.

“We don’t tolerate acts of violence among students,” the Dean said.

“But you do tolerate the promotion of the political assassination of the President of the United States,” I retorted. “I’m curious what the Secret Service would think about that.”

The Dean thought on my words, and the incident was resolved by having me apologize to the student in question for roughing him up, and the student apologizing for his “insensitive” comments about President Reagan.

Today I made the decision to suspend the chatroom associated with my Telegram channel. This suspension will last 24 hours.

I made the decision after participants commented in response to a post I made about the attempted assassination.

The post was as follows:

The attempted assassination of former President Trump underscores the extraordinarily precarious situation America finds itself in at this point in time in history.

Political violence is tragically not unknown in America—the assassination and attempted assassination of American Presidents is a sad reality of the American experience.

That an estranged citizen would convert his personal demons into an action designed to end the life of the person he blamed for what haunts him is sadly a byproduct of a society conditioned to accept violence as a means of resolving disputes, regardless of the underlying legality of the action. The Second Amendment, and the Supreme Court’s current interpretation of its articulation and implementation, is the living manifestation of this reality.

But America has never before experienced a situation where the political environment itself has contributed so heavily to an atmosphere where political violence is openly advocated by a sitting President and his political party.

The depiction of Donald Trump by President Joe Biden as a criminal who represents a direct threat not only to democracy but also the existential survival of the American Republic creates a causal linkage that leads inevitably to the attempted assassination. Biden’s words have been echoed by the Democratic Party and anti-Trump activists on mainstream and social media in such a fashion that it constitutes a veritable green lighting of political violence against the former President.

At a time when the American people and nation are fundamentally divided on political issues for which it seems there is no middle ground, when these divisions are articulated in stark existential terms, and when the Democratic Party is already being accused—with good reason—of politicizing and weaponizing the apparatus of judicial power to prevent Donald Trump from successfully challenging Joe Biden in the upcoming presidential election, the articulation by Biden and his supporters of Trump as a threat to the survival of the Republic that must be stopped at all costs is little more that an open directive for political violence.

America has never been closer to Civil War at any time since 1861. The assassination of the former President on the orders—perceived or otherwise—of a sitting president and the establishment he directs would likely result in the permanent irreconcilable division of the nation along ideological grounds and lead to massive outbreaks of violence and the potential fracturing of the physical unity of the nation.

We live in a very precarious moment. The fever pitch of political rhetoric must be cooled down immediately. If both sides cannot walk back their respective political passions, then what happened in Bulter Pennsylvania yesterday will become the inevitable norm, and violence, not reason, will become the chosen means of ideological differences.

And if that is the direction America is heading, God help us all.

In response to this post, several chat participants posted content which endorsed political violence in American, to include the attempted assassination of Donald Trump.

You can’t shout “fire” in a crowded theater.

And you can’t advocate for the assassination of a candidate for the presidency of the United States.

Not in my chat.

And not in my America.

Postscript (movie spoiler alert):

Johnny Smith doesn’t shoot Gregg Stillson. Stillson’s loathsome character is exposed to the public, which rejects him, ending his political career. Therein lies the lesson: let politicians be themselves. And trust the American people to make the right choice. And if your choice doesn’t win, do better next time. Because in America, if we actively participate in the democratic processes that underpin our Constitutional Republic, there will always be a next time.

*

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.

Featured image: Christopher Walken, as Johnny Smith, draws a bead on Martin Sheen’s Greg Stillson in The Dead Zone / All images in this article are from the author unless otherwise stated

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Although perfectly healthy, Saba had a severe and life changing reaction to a 2010 flu vaccine at age 11 months.

She suffered severe brain damage and multi-organ failure. Saba has been diagnosed as having cerebral palsy from an acquired brain injury. Saba required and will continue to require intensive rehabilitation for the rest of her life.

“We had a perfect pregnancy with Saba and an easy natural birth. Saba was a very healthy little girl who had a loving, cheeky & strong-willed personality.

Saba has been diagnosed now as having cerebral palsy from an Acquired Brain Injury caused by the flu vaccination (‘Flu-vax’ by CSL). She is a spastic quadriplegia (GMSCF level 5 – the worst) has epilepsy and respiratory weakness.

We are reminding you to be INFORMED and do your research before you make the decision to vaccinate your children with ‘any’ form of vaccine ~ Saba’s Parents

This could have been prevented.

The West Australian Health Department knew that there had been some terrible adverse reactions to the flu vaccine cc, particularly in children, but didn’t issue a warning.

The flu program continued for two more days. Parents continued to vaccinate their children, unaware of the permanent damage it had caused to Saba and dozens of other children. Fluvax is now banned for children under the age of five in Australia after hundreds of children suffered from adverse reactions in 2010. See this.

*

Settlement for Saba Button, Severely Disabled After Flu Vaccine 

5 Jun 2014, ABC News

Below is an excerpt from the article.

 

Saba Button with her parents Kirsten and Mick in 2011

Saba Button with her parents Kirsten and Mick in 2011.(ABC News)

The family of a West Australian child left severely disabled after receiving a flu jab has reached a settlement with the vaccine’s manufacturer and the State Government.

Saba Button suffered brain and organ damage after getting the Fluvax shot when she was 11 months old in 2010.

Her parents launched legal action in the Federal Court against the vaccine’s manufacturer, CSL Limited.

CSL cross-claimed against the State of WA and the Health Minister.

All parties have reached a confidential settlement which has today been accepted by Federal Court Justice Michael Barker.

Her mother Kirsten Button said she was relieved the legal action had been finalised.

“It doesn’t matter how much you have because you can’t buy your health but it is a good outcome, and the fact that it’s settled, we’re quite a strong family and we have moved forward but I think having that hanging over your head as such can be stressful so now we can move forward knowing that it’s all over.”

Mr Button said the funds would help Saba continue ongoing therapy and explore new options both in Australia and overseas.

“This doesn’t just stop now, once all the cameras are gone, it’s back to business and we’ve got a lot to do with Saba,” he said.

Problems with flu vaccine sparked national ban

In his judgement, Justice Barker said Saba had suffered hypoxic brain injury and consequential, severe disabilities.

Her disabilities are profound and permanent. She will require constant care for the remainder of her life.

Hundreds of children suffered adverse reactions after they were given the flu shot in 2010 with many of them taken to hospital.

It led to an Australia-wide suspension of the vaccination for children under five.

Authorities were criticised for not acting quickly enough to advise GPs of the problems or identifying that there was an issue.

*

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. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.

Featured image is from COVID Intel

Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump. Secret Service Has Some ‘Splainin to Do

By John Leake, July 15, 2024

As I have observed in previous columns, our era in the United States is frequently beset with incidents characterized by a catastrophic loss of competence. Decades of procedural knowledge seem to vanish from one day to the next, leaving sensible people wondering how it could possibly happen.

Presidential Candidate Donald Trump Barely Escapes an Assassination Attempt

By Peter Koenig, July 15, 2024

Trump’s security guards immediately killed the shooter, no attempt whatsoever to arrest him, so he could NOT be put on trial. There is no trace and Thomas can no longer talk about his possible motives, what may have prompted his shooting, whether he acted alone or in a team or whether he was in one way or another prepared for the assault – if so, by whom. He was silenced.

NATO Reinforces Its War Plans During Washington Summit

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, July 15, 2024

NATO held a summit in Washington from July 9 to 11 to celebrate its 75th anniversary and discuss strategies for dealing with the current global issues. Instead of reaching any consensus on making meaningful changes to improve global security and advance diplomacy, Western states focused only on thinking of ways to continue the war, despite the disadvantageous conditions for the alliance.

Supporting Israel Is Big Business in the United States. Dr. Philip Giraldi

By Philip Giraldi, July 15, 2024

One thing that should be completely clear is that the United States gets absolutely nothing out of the relationship with Israel, which all flows in only one direction to the tune of what probably amounts to more than a billion dollars a month if all the extras and the inevitable fraud are taken into account.

Lessons for the US Secret Service: When the CIA Tried to Assassinate Fidel Castro More Than 638 Times

By Timothy Alexander Guzman, July 15, 2024

There is a period of history that the US Secret Service can learn from and that is from the Dirección General de Inteligencia (DGI) or Cuban Intelligence that protected Cuba’s Fidel Castro for many years from the US government, namely, the CIA.  You may ask, what can the US Secret Service learn from Cuban Intelligence?   

Video: At NATO Summit, Biden Introduces Zelensky as Putin. Gets “His Countries Mixed Up”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 13, 2024

Concluding his opening remarks, Biden handed over to Zelenskiy with the words: “Now I want to hand it over to the president of Ukraine, who has as much courage as he has determination.” “Ladies and gentlemen, President Putin!”

The Convulsed Republic: The Shooting of Donald Trump

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, July 14, 2024

As a nation, the United States, as if we did not already know, is convulsed.  Paranoid and divided, giddy with conspiracy and deranged by a fear of totalitarian seizure, hyper partisan and hostile to debate and any loose definition of facts (this condition afflicts the entire political spectrum), the only thing missing so far was this: an assassination attempt on a presidential candidate.

NATO Reinforces Its War Plans During Washington Summit

July 15th, 2024 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

NATO held a summit in Washington from July 9 to 11 to celebrate its 75th anniversary and discuss strategies for dealing with the current global issues. Instead of reaching any consensus on making meaningful changes to improve global security and advance diplomacy, Western states focused only on thinking of ways to continue the war, despite the disadvantageous conditions for the alliance.

Under the current circumstances, there is little that NATO can do to escalate the war against Russia. The alliance is already sending to the Kiev regime all possible types of weapons, except nuclear ones, as well as a large number of mercenaries. In practice, a further escalation of hostilities would be an extremely dangerous scenario, and could even reach the level of open global war. However, the bloc does not seem interested in de-escalating and starting diplomatic talks. Instead, NATO’s internal negotiations are being advanced to further worsen the crisis.

For example, during the summit in Washington, US officials promised to deploy new long-range missiles to Germany as part of a “preparation” for the event of open war in Europe. The US plans to use German territory as an important operational hub in case of hostilities against Russia, which is why from 2026 on many advanced missile systems will start to be placed in German strategic areas.

The alliance has not only promised to strengthen its positions in member countries, but has also made it clear that expansion of the bloc remains a possibility. Despite constant Russian calls for NATO to stop expanding, the group appears to have little interest in any kind of diplomatic dialogue. In a joint statement, the countries announced their intention to grant membership to countries in the Western Balkans region. In addition, it was stated that the Black Sea – a key region of Russia’s strategic environment – is one of NATO’s points of greatest interest, suggesting that an expansion of maritime activities in that area may be about to happen.

“The Western Balkans and the Black Sea regions are of strategic importance for the alliance. [We promise to help] counter malign influence, including disinformation, hybrid, and cyber threats, posed by both state and non-state actors (…) NATO supports the Euro-Atlantic aspirations of interested countries in this region,” the statement reads.

It is important to emphasize that any expansion into the Black Sea could cause a serious crisis in the current context. The conflict in Ukraine already forces Russia to maintain constant military activities in the Black Sea. In addition, NATO has been illegally providing intelligence and geolocation data to Kiev’s forces through Western drones that are circulating in the Black Sea region. This data has been vital for Ukraine to plan terrorist attacks against fully demilitarized Russian cities, which is leading Moscow’s patience to gradually run out. If NATO decides to promote further expansion into the Black Sea, it is possible that the escalation of the conflict will reach a point of no return.

location map

A map showing the location of the Black Sea and some of the large or prominent ports around it. The Sea of Azov and Sea of Marmara are also labelled. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

Russia was not the only target of NATO’s war plans. China was also heavily targeted by NATO strategists during the event in Washington. Delegations from member countries accused China of being an important “enabler” of Russian military actions. According to Western logic, if a country maintains diplomatic and trade relations with Russia, it automatically becomes a co-participant in the hostilities in Ukraine and should therefore be punished, sanctioned and isolated.

Beijing has never supplied weapons to Russia – both because it is not part of Chinese foreign policy to participate in conflicts and because Moscow is strong enough to face its enemies alone, without needing external help. Instead of being interested in conflicts, China is focused on maintaining strategic and mutually beneficial trade ties that generate profits for both sides and gains for ordinary people. This is why Russians and Chinese are increasingly engaged in cooperation projects, with the alliance between the two countries not being a military pact.

The reason why the Russian-Chinese partnership is causing fear in NATO is simple: Moscow and Beijing are rivals of American hegemony and publicly advocate for the reconfiguration of the geopolitical order. For the Atlantic alliance, this is a reason to go to war – which is why Ukraine is already being used as a proxy and tensions in the Pacific are getting worse. The only thing that became clear after the Washington summit is that, even weakened, NATO will not give up its war plans.

*

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.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Lucas Leiroz is a member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

Featured image is licensed under CC BY 2.0

A Light in the Darkness

July 15th, 2024 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

 

 

 

[First published by PCR in March 2020.]

Diana Johnstone’s just published book, Circle in the Darkness: Memoir of a World Watcher, is the best book I have ever read, the most revealing, the most accurate, the most truthful, the most moral and humane, the most sincere and heartfelt, and the best written.  Her book is far more than a memoir.  It is a history that has not previously been written.  If you want the truth of the last 60 years in place of the contrived reality constructed for us by controlled explanations, it is in this book.

This book is so extraordinary in its truthfulness and conciseness that it is difficult for a less gifted writer to do it justice.  It is a book without a superfluous sentence.

Herein I will provide some of the books message.  In future columns I hope to present some of the  history in the book.  

In the Western World the legitimate national interest of people has become identified with racism and fascism.  Corporate globalism requires open borders, and the left has aligned with globalism and has become the most zealous enforcer of open borders, which has come to mean the right of refugees with victim status to other peoples’ countries.  The left has abandoned the working class and anti-war activity.  Today the left is pro-war in order to enforce “human rights” on alleged dictators by bombing their peoples into oblivion, thus producing refugees and tag along opportunistic immigrants that flock to the Western aggressor nations.  

Image is from Zero Hedge

Self-styled moral censors, such as Antifa, denounce hate while violently hating those they denounce. Everything is settled by controlled explanations that cannot be questioned or examined in debate.  Those who engage in critical free thinking are censored, shouted down, beaten up, fired, and cancelled.  The cancel culture permits no debate, only enthusiastic acquiesce to explanations that have been settled in advance. 

Antifa by shutting down open debate actually serves to protect the authoritarian center consisting of “the Clintonian Democratic Party, mainstream media, the military industrial complex and globalized neoliberal finance capital.”  Antifa turns the left into a support group for the authoritarian center.

In the European Union’s so-called constitution, private corporate interests take precedence over—indeed do not permit—the socialized elements of European mixed economies that made the societies livable communities. Today people are sacrificed to the greed of the global elite as social services are curtailed and privatized. 

In the “Western democracies,” democracy–that is, rule by the people and a rule of law– has been extinguished. European peoples were forced into the European Union at the expense of their national sovereignty despite having voted down EU membership.  The French people voted 54.7% against EU membership and 45.3% for.  The Dutch people voted 61% against the EU and 39% for.  Faced with an unacceptable democratic outcome, the ruling elites removed the question from the people by turning EU membership into a “treaty” that could be signed by governments without input from the peoples.  When the French Constitutional Court ruled that the “treaty” was contrary to the French Constitution, the French Constitution was changed to accommodate the “treaty.”  Only the Irish government gave the people a choice by putting the “treaty” to a referendum, and the people rejected it. Chastised for allowing the people to decide their own fate, the Irish government collapsed under elite pressure and after a period of intense propaganda in favor of the “treaty” forced it through on a second referendum.  The Western “democratic” media were principal agents of the elite in stripping European peoples of any control over how they are governed.

In the West lies and orchestrated deceit have replaced truth in government and media. Instead of spreading facts and mutual understanding, media have deceived the public in order to gain support for unjustifiable wars.  Deceit “reached an extravagant new peak of danger with the campaign of calumny against Russia” culminating in the preposterous charge investigated by a “special prosecutor” that Hillary Clinton’s defeat was caused by a Putin/Trump plot involving Russian interference in the US presidential election.  

Image: A US government propaganda poster from the 1940s (Source: Multipolarista)

“Western values” are constantly invoked, but what are these values?  They are not the values that made the West what it is, or rather was.  These values are rejected.  Free speech is out if it challenges official explanations whether the government’s or the left’s or uses any words that can be misrepresented as “hate speech.”  Democracy is out as demonstrated by the anti-democratic formation of the European Union. Truth is out as it is “offensive.”  Rational inquiry is regarded as denial of emotion-based proclamations.  It goes on and on.  Diana Johnstone notes that government repression is most significant not against violent acts of rebellion but against Julian Assange for exercising press freedom to convey information to the public.  

Where does this leave us?  We have the West against the world, the West against itself, and the people against themselves.  Washington is unable “to view the world other than as a field for exercising US ‘leadership,’ and all who balk are considered deadly enemies.”  The diplomacy of the US and its NATO vassals consists of dropping sanctions and bombs on those who refuse to submit to Washington’s will, while the West itself dissolves into “diversity” and the mutual hatred of Identity Politics, which has progressed to the point that the transgendered are busy at work hating feminists. Diana Johnstone puts it best:

“When individuals are bunched into groups assigned intrinsic qualities—from victimhood to racism—normal human ties of mutual concern, shared purpose, comprehension and compassion are severed. In a grotesque development, new gender identities are invented, whose ‘cause’ overshadows the real problems of genuinely disadvantaged people. Economic issues are forgotten as groups mobilize solely to police attitudes.  Billionaires prosper more than ever before, while down below people bicker over safe spaces and toilet use.”

Hubris has destroyed humanity:

“The countries of the Western world are in a state of schizophrenic overconfidence and self-doubt. Their leaders persist in proclaiming ‘our values’ as the model for the rest of humanity, while their own people are increasingly divided and disillusioned. 

“The 18th century was the century of the liberated mind. The 19th century was the century of Great Men. The 20th century was the century of the common man. And the 21st century’s looks like it may become a negation of all of them. The century of nobody at all.

“Irrationality and censorship restore chains to thought. Great Men are only statues to be demolished. The common man, once hailed as the hero of a radiant future, has been degraded to a superfluous nuisance, probably racist and homophobic. Ordinary folks have been reassigned from the glorious concept of ‘the people’ to their derogatory redefinition under the rubric of populism’ [and Trump deplorables].

People are reduced to ‘consumers,’ while being told that by consuming, they are destroying the planet. Identity Politics has not only turned people against each other by group, but its late manifestation, Vegan speciesism, even turns people against people altogether, for being an overprivileged life form.”

What will our future be? Currently we live in a dystopia of deceit.  But the failure of our leaders to deal adequately with a health crisis and their hostility to an economic system that serves people rather than the wealth of elites are marking the Western world as a massive failure. Will realization of this failure cause the people to revolt as the Yellow Vests have, or will it break the people and further diminish them?

As we are confined at home in an effort to avoid infection and to limit the spread of infection, now is a good time to read a clear explanation of what has happened to us in our time, assess the failures that have undermined our existence as a united and free people, and prepare for reconstructing a livable and humane society.  

Diana Johnstone’s book is available from Clarity Press.

*

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.

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.


CIRCLE IN THE DARKNESS: Memoir of a World Watcher

Author: Diana Johnstone

ISBN: 978-1-949762-13-6

eBook ISBN: 978-1-949762-14-3

Publication date: 2020

Page Count: 435

 

 

 

Reviews

“Diana Johnstone spent over half a century chronicling contemporary history from the Cold War to the rise of groups such as Antifa. Her memoir, Circle in the Darkness, is not only a fascinating window into a contemporary event, but also a blistering attack on the Left, which she argues, correctly, betrayed its historical role as a champion of social justice and peace, replacing it with the boutique activism of identity politics, political correctness, and what has become known as humanitarian intervention.” CHRIS HEDGES

” … fiercely courageous and independent reporting, historical analysis, and activism … With her eyes on the prize, Diana Johnstone has stayed the course to oppose U.S. and Western aggression, using her critical skills to expose endless horror and insisting that a truthful understanding of historical events remains a necessary tool against murder and illegality. We are deeply indebted to her.”  JOHN MARCIANO, Monthly Review.

“Diana Johnstone’s just published book, Circle in the Darkness: Memoir of a World Watcher, is the best book I have ever read, the most revealing, the most accurate, the most truthful, the most moral and humane, the most sincere and heartfelt, and the best written.  Her book is far more than a memoir.  It is a history that has not previously been written.” —PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Click here to purchase.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The following three sets of international treaties for arms control, disarmament, the control of emerging technologies, and international security are absolutely essential to reverse the covert drive for war, even world war, that is taking place at every level in human society, that has accelerated over the last twenty years, and has spun out of control over the last eight months. The current drive for war, and the destruction of all government institutions in the United States make world war inevitable if we cannot formulate a viable alternative now.

Although these treaties cannot be realized overnight, and cannot be enacted by a Congress in the United States that is led by shills for private equity, pawns for billionaires, operatives for Israeli private intelligence, and consultants for weapons contractors, the decision to promulgate a serious proposal for meaningful arms control and disarmament treaties has tremendous value in that it offers a roadmap forward to those who have been discouraged by the vain and self-serving blather of cardboard messiahs and the prattle of limited-hangout “truth tellers” who refuse to face the truth about world war.

Demanding the drafting and signing of such treaties, including mutual inspection regimes, as opposed to globalist conniving, or the destructive fiction of isolationism which suggests that we can simply withdraw into our shells, will be a transformative act for us and we will find allies where we least expected them to be when we embrace true internationalism, grounded in sovereign rights and opposed to globalism, either in its pure narcissistic form, or disguised as nationalism.

Before we present a solution, it is critical that we firmly, and unambiguously, condemn the efforts of certain public intellectuals to denounce all efforts of the United Nations, and before the United Nations, the League of Nations, to establish treaties, guidelines, and norms to regulate the military and to promote arms control and disarmament.

Although the United Nations, the League of Nations, and Hague Conventions before, did not realize their full potential, and they all included some corrupt elements, it is simply not true that they were the tools the globalists, or a plot by the banks to establish one world government. International institutions are essential and that fact that current international organizations are the pawns of the rich does not mean that true international institutions cannot be established again in the future.

The United Nations and the League of Nations served as a critical platform for the establishment of international policies for peace and cooperation, and they developed sophisticated practices to promote disarmament, prohibit war crimes, and encourage diplomacy that made a difference.

It was the “globalists” who worked hard to keep the League of Nations and the United Nations from reaching their full potential because both these institutions offered a vision for peace and international cooperation that undermined their financial plots.

The infection of the United Nations by global finance and the Gates Foundation (and other such catspaws of billionaires) is a consequence of the extreme power of money in the current political economy, and the decay of ideology. Today, the wealthy employ the very institutions that were developed for promoting world peace as weapons against the citizens so as to promote and justify militarization as a way of generating financially beneficial consumption.

We need international institutions that serve the people and that can only be achieved if the nations that participate in them are run in a participatory manner so that money does not determine policy. We must fight at the local level to guarantee transparency and the rule of law and that will allow us to establish meaningful treaties. If national governments are run by multinational corporations, there will be no meaningful international treaties. 

It is mistaken to assume that arms control treaties are not possible, or not enforceable. They have worked in the past and they are the only effective way to protect ourselves.

History shows that it is possible for nations to create a civil service that works for the people in a transparent and accountable manner, and limits the power of the rich, granted the innate limitations of human nature.

It is possible to sign binding treaties on weapons that include inspection regimes, to limit, and then eliminate most dangerous weapons.  It is possible for the United States to accept and embrace invasive inspection regimes that address directly its corrupt and decadent military industrial complex. It is not an issue of law, or of science, but rather of will.

International treaties for arms control and disarmament, including inspection regimes, are the only thing that can save our sick nation at this point, that can give us a new birth of freedom, and a government of the people, by the people and for the people that shall not perish from the earth.

The proposed treaties and international agreements are arranged in three sets:

Set One: The full implementation of existing treaties and proposals for treaties for arms control and disarmament

Set Two: Proposals for new treaties that address emerging weapons and their proliferation

Set Three: Treaties and agreements that bring the quest for international peace and security up to date

***

Set One: The Full Implementation of Existing Treaties and Proposals for Treaties for Arms Control and Disarmament

1)  International treaties limiting conventional weapons

The United States will draft and sign robust and enforceable treaties on conventional arms between the major powers that will limit the numbers of tanks, bombers, fighter planes, missiles, warships, conventional artillery, and troop size and that will be enforced through mutual transparent inspection regimes to be honored by all nations of the Earth—starting with the United States. The 1990 Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) will serve a starting point for the negotiations for these treaties that will extend also to missiles and other conventional weapons systems.

The treaties will be linked to concrete steps to take the profit out of weapons sales and to promote peace and international cooperation in a concrete manner around the world by demonstrating to citizens how funding for weapons manufacturers is used as a means to transfer wealth to the elites.

2) Set of international treaties limiting, and the eliminating, nuclear weapons

A comprehensive treaty for the reduction and elimination of nuclear weapons will be drafted and signed by the United States in which it, and the other nuclear powers, fully embrace the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1968. All nations with nuclear weapons, starting with the United States, will follow the imperative for “the cessation of the manufacture of nuclear weapons, the liquidation of all their existing stockpiles, and the elimination from national arsenals of nuclear weapons and the means of their delivery pursuant to a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control” expressed explicitly in the original treaty. Because the realization of this part of the treaty has been criminally overlooked by the United States and other nuclear powers, all attention must be focused on this first step.

As part of that process, the United States and the other nuclear powers will join the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and start to dismantle their arsenals immediately.

All nuclear weapons will be eliminated within ten years by the United States, and other nations, and the radioactive materials employed within those weapons will be designated as sensitive substances and kept out of the hands of any organization that might use them for a military purpose. The end of the nuclear power system, and the corporate lobby promoting nuclear power and nuclear weapons, must be a part of this process so as to ensure the end of nuclear weapons.

3) Treaty on lethal autonomous weapons systems

The United States will take the United Nations resolution on the Dangers of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (2023) as the basis for a comprehensive international treaty banning the development, sale, and deployment of autonomous weapons systems. The United States will draft and promulgate such a treaty in cooperation with the other nations of the Earth.  

4)  Ban on Weapons in Space

The United States will draft with the other nations of the Earth a comprehensive treaty banning weapons from space, and strictly regulating the deployment of satellites with military or dual-use functions. The treaty will build on the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 banning weapons of mass destruction in space, this time establishing a binding treaty, supported by mutual inspection regimes, that grows out of the 1981 United Nations resolution “Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space.”

Among the measures that will be included in the treaty to end the militarization of space will be the banning of the deployment of satellites, and the launch of cargos into space, by private for-profit corporations, and a ban on the development of space-based weapons.

Armed satellites and spacecraft will be prohibited by the treaty. Other weapons systems that include the use of satellites will be eliminated over the next ten years.

All deployment of satellites in space, or other objects, must be carried out in a completely transparent manner by public monopolies that are accountable to the government and to the international community at every level so as to assure that they have no military functions.

Strict regulations on satellites with possible military/intelligence use will be enforced and the use of satellites to observe the Earth will be subject to careful control regimes that assure that the information cannot be abused using international inspection regimes.

5)  Ban on landmines and cluster bombs

The United States will enact a robust international ban on landmines that follows the conventions established by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, and will join the Convention on Cluster Munitions and enact an international ban on all cluster munitions, including a prohibition on research and development of such inhuman weapons. The ban on landmines and cluster bombs can be covered by a single international treaty.

Set Two: Proposals for New Treaties that Address Emerging Weapons and Their Proliferation

1) Treaty limiting the use of radioactive substances

The full range of dangerous technologies related to radioactive substances and nuclear technologies must be regulated, and eventually eliminated, and the weaponization of radioactivity must be banned, through an international treaty. That treaty will recognize the danger of all radioactive materials, the threat posed by nuclear power for the environment and for health, and the innate linkage of nuclear power to the development of nuclear weapons. The treaty will set up a strict regulation and enforcement regime for nuclear technologies in general that makes them unprofitable so that they cease to serve as opportunities for exploitation and profit.

Weapons such as depleted uranium shells, hybrid nuclear/conventional weapons, and other weapons systems that employ radioactive materials will be prohibited by this treaty. A strict regime for the long-term control of radioactive substances will be established internationally that will permit the use of radioactive materials for medical treatments, and other scientific processes, but strictly regulate that process.

2)  Treaty banning nano-weapons

 

The secret development and deployment of nano-weapons around the world by nation states and multinational corporations is one of the greatest threats we face which must be addressed by an international treaty. Nano-weapons (whether nano-robots, hydrogel, or nano-particles) are being introduced covertly into medicines, foodstuffs, water and the air as weapons that target the health, and the mental well-being of citizens.

Such nano-weapons must be prohibited explicitly by an international treaty demanding that the true nature of current nano-weapons programs be made public (as they are currently developed and deployed in secret) and that nano-robots, nano-particles, and other nano-substances with dual use must be strictly regulated.

3)  Treaty regulating drones, robots, and satellites, and banning the most dangerous versions

The United States will lead the establishment of a series of international treaties that severely limit the use of armed drones, robots, and satellites, including the prohibition of the most dangerous of them. The regulations will extend to drones, robots and satellites that have potential dual use.  

There must be stringent limits on the use of armed drones, robots and satellites (both autonomous and remote controlled) and also control over the development of potentially dangerous new technologies.

In the future, in order to reduce opportunity for abuse of such technologies, they will be handled exclusively by regulated public monopolies and kept out of the hands of private corporations which stand to profit from their manufacture and deployment.  

4)  Treaty banning the use of energy weapons

The development of dangerous new energy weapons is highly destabilizing and, because these weapons are effectively unregulated, they are already being employed covertly. The United States will draft and sign with other nations a comprehensive international treaty that bans energy weapons and that will strictly regulate all devices with potential dual-use.

The international treaty will ban directed energy weapons, and prohibit their deployment in space, in the air via airplanes and drones, on tanks, trucks and boats, and elsewhere. The development of the relevant technologies for directed energy weapons will be subject to strict international control conventions, including mutual open inspections.

Other energy weapons currently being developed, including electromagnetic radiation weapons (often disguised using the term 5G), microwave radiation weapons, infrared radiation weapons, terahertz radiation weapons, and other energy weapons currently being developed and deployed must be declassified, made open knowledge, and then subject to strict bans, and or regulations, on development and deployment.

Bans, restrictions, and robust inspection regimes will not be limited to weapons systems, but will also cover dual use technologies (such as 5G or infrared cameras) that can be rendered as a weapon through a turnkey maneuver at any moment.

5)  International treaty banning bioweapons

The United States will draft and sign a comprehensive global treaty that bans the development, deployment, and use of bioweapons of a variety of forms (to be determined in negotiations). The term bioweapon refers not only to viruses, bacteria, and other biological materials that have been modified to serve as weapons, but also to weapons innocuously disguised as medicines such as the COVID-19 vaccines. Nano-technologies are also classified in some cases as bioweapons.

The treaty will set in place walls that prevent the weaponization of medical and scientific research. Above all, there will be a clear wall that separates 1) scientific inquiry into the nature of natural phenomena from 2) the development of medications and treatments, from 3) the speculation of private capital, and from 4) the development of weapons and security-related technologies.

6) International treaty banning all weather modification programs

The United States will establish an international treaty banning all programs for weather modification globally and making it a crime to release chemicals (or particles) into the atmosphere aimed at modifying the weather, at contaminating the water or soil, or harming the health of citizens. Such actions will be considered to be acts of war, even if they are supposedly undertaken to fight climate change, and the chemicals, or devices, released will be considered as weapons.

All existing weather modification programs will be immediately declassified and if criminal intent is revealed, legal action will be taken.

The atmosphere belongs to all citizens of the Earth and any effort to contaminate the atmosphere, to affect the climate, or to contaminate the air, the water, or the soil will be seen as a grievous attack on all citizens of the Earth. This treaty will have broad implications for air pollution as well—making it impossible for corporations to pollute the air with impunity.

7) Strict international regulation of GMO technology and ban on GMO weapons

The United States will establish an international treaty banning the use of GMO (genetically modified organisms) plants and animals, as well as weapons that cause the genetic modification of plants, animals, and humans using biological or nanotechnological means. The weaponization of plants, animals, and humans by means of GMO technology as a means of controlling sources of food, destroying biodiversity, and modifying humanity is an act of war, and the GMO technologies thus employed, including vaccines, must be designated as weapons.

This long-term project to establish slavery and subjugation through the use of GMO technologies must be stopped. The United States will create a strict inspection regime to enforce this international treaty, prohibiting the development and use of GMOs, as well as the technologies employed to surreptitiously modify the genetic material of plants and animals.

Set Three: Treaties and Agreements that Bring the Quest for International Peace and Security Up to Date

1)  Treaty banning super-computer assisted mass psychological operations

The United States will propose an international treaty banning the use of supercomputers to coordinate mass psychological operations, such as the COVID-19 operation, that employ false narratives, the disruptive stimulation of the brain through advertisements and media, electromagnetic radiation, and other tools so as to induce a hypnotic state or to impede rational thinking by citizens.

Image source

The treaty will prohibit the destruction of the capacity of citizens to think for themselves through the use of addictive, repetitious, or mentally degrading stimulation. Such weapons are currently being deployed and employed through the corporate media, educational institutions, the internet, and elsewhere around the world.

The strategy of using supercomputers that run sophisticated algorithms driving international campaigns to dumb down, distract, and delude citizens using a weaponized media-entertainment-education complex must be rightfully identified as a criminal campaign, an act of war, and the tools employed, such as supercomputers and social media algorithms, must be designated as weapons that are potentially even more dangerous than bombs in that they attack the ability of citizens to think independently.

We must develop international regulations on such weapons of psychological manipulation that will be strictly enforced through an international treaty, including inspection regimes for supercomputer banks so that wealthy citizens (and the trusts and corporations that represent them) cannot employ computers that run complex psychological operations to manipulate the entire population of the Earth.

2) Treaty banning the military use of Antarctica, the Artic, the oceans, and other wildlands

The United States will establish an international treaty to ban the military use Antarctica, the Artic, the oceans, and other natural wildlands around the world.

The vast majority of the natural formations of the Earth shall be placed off limits for military activity, and in many cases for commercial exploitation as well.

The United States will strengthen the Antarctic Treaty of 1959 so as to end all military use of Antarctica, starting with the declassification of all current projects that will reveal, and terminate, all of the illegal and unethical uses of Antarctica by the US military, and other militaries, taking place today.

We will establish a similar treaty for the Artic that will ban all military exploitation of that region by all militaries and intelligence agencies of the United States, and other countries. Moreover, we will establish large sections of the oceans and of wildlands (forests, jungles, and mountains) that will be similarly off limits for use by the military, and also off limits for commercial exploitation.

The sea floors will be off limits for military exploitation, and also for commercial exploitation for minerals, gas, and oil. We must protect the ocean for future generations, looking forward for hundreds of years, and not destroy them for the short-term profits of corporations. We will also set substantial restrictions on the use of destructive fishing technologies.

New technologies for digging tunnels under the Earth will be tightly regulated, perhaps in a separate treaty, especially tunnels with military, or dual use, applications. The Earth beneath our feet, and the sky above our head, is the common property of all of humanity that no one has a right to exploit, above all not in a covert manner.

The protection of the natural environment for future generations will be the primary mandate in security discourse in the United States. The role of future militaries will be to protect those natural environments.

3) Ban on secret treaties for diplomatic and security cooperation

The current crimes against humanity taking place around the world, whether rigged up military conflicts, false-flag operations, or covert actions to kill (quickly or slowly) citizens through radiation, false medications, food additives, pesticides, and other weapons would not be possible if not for the presence of a lattice of secret treaties (intelligence agreements and secret corporate-government contracts) that permit such clandestine cooperation in the development and deployment of such weapons between nations, multinational corporations and banks, and international governmental organizations such as the United Nations and the World Bank.

These secret agreements currently overrule the constitutions, local and national laws, as well as the chain of command within the nation state (and in international bodies) in a manner that is illegal, unconstitutional, and unethical.

Secret agreements in the form of non-disclosure agreements for employees, secret contracts, classified directives and national security letters, or secret laws and guidelines issued by nations, global organizations, or private corporations and banks make possible an invisible chain of command that is beyond the reach of the political system and is capable of overruling every organization in the nation.

We will establish an international treaty that will severely limit the use of secret treaties and agreements (including nondisclosure agreements and secret law) between nations, multinational corporations, and international organizations as a means to determine policy and process.

The treaty will require that all existing secret treaties and agreements (whether agreements between governments and governments, or between multinational corporations, intelligence sharing agreements, or other cooperative agreements between governments and private entities) that are illegal or unethical be declassified and made available to the public.  

4) Bring the definition of the actors making political and security decisions up to date through a revision of the language of international law and treaties

Efforts to promote diplomacy are hobbled by forced adherence to outdated concepts concerning the actors involved in international relations that are promoted intentionally so as to obscure the true players determining policy.

Citizens, scholars, government officials and politicians currently are forced to speak only in terms of nation states in the discussion of diplomatic and security policy. This practice continues on even though it is self-evident that political decisions are not made by presidents and ambassadors, but rather by private equity and investment banks, multinational corporations, private intelligence and consulting firms, global special interests such as the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization, and the Gates Foundation, and other opaque and undemocratic institutions that serve the rich and powerful.

The United States will draft and promote an international treaty that lays out clearly who these non-state actors are and how they will be treated in the discussion on international relations and in practice. These institutions are too powerful, and too dangerous, to be permitted to operate at will in secret. 

Whereas the term “non-state actors” is employed to refer exclusively to terrorist organizations in current policy debate, the fact is that many non-state actors exist which are not terrorist organizations but that have displaced nation states as the functional unit in international relations—many are involved in planning and carrying out state crimes.

We must extend the use of the term “non-state actor” to include multinational banks, private equity, private trusts, multinational corporations, political consulting and lobbying firms, the private research and PR teams of wealthy individuals and families, and the forest of pay-to-play private intelligence firms. Together, these organizations work to corrupt and subvert the rule of law in nation states and they must be treated as threats, at times as criminal institutions, that are formally named in the discourse on security and international relations and responded to directly.  

Their illegal activities, and their manipulation of government policy in nation states through institutionalized bribery, cannot be dismissed as lobbying and consulting, but must be treated explicitly in public discourse on international relations, and in treaties and security agreements, as corruption, as an attack on the nation, and as a tremendous threat to international security.

For example, we will identity the parts of the United States Department of Defense, or of the intelligence community, that no longer serve as part of the United States government due to privatization or infiltration by such non-state actors as private equity and investment banks as “non-state actors.”

When appropriate, we will bring criminal charges against those units responsible for state crimes and strip them of all authority as a government institution. Their members will no longer be permitted to employ clearance to hide their crimes, and all classified documents and non-disclosure agreements related to such criminal syndicates will be made public.

5) International treaty that establishes clear institutional walls domestically and internationally between 1) finance, 2) scientific research, 3) the development and manufacture of weapons, and 4) healthcare and medical treatment

The dangerous merger of finance, science, weapons, and medicine has created deadly alliances for profit between fields that should be inherently autonomous and distinct thus creating to a weaponized medical system that is aimed at the unsuspecting citizen.

The United States will take the lead in drafting a set of international treaties, and domestic laws, that establish clear walls between banks and financial institutions, scientific research institutions and universities, weapons manufacturers, and medical and health care providers that follow the model of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 which separated investment and commercial banking so as to avoid dangerous speculation.

Banks will be limited to the cooperative function of serving the needs for finance of individual citizens and prohibited from speculation in scientific research, weapons, or health care. Corporations will be stripped of their unconstitutional powers as “persons” and in many cases closed down in response to their criminal activities over the last twenty years.

Scientific research at institutes and universities will be conducted as an investigation of natural phenomenon, or an effort to provide technologies that improve the lives of citizens in a concrete and unambiguous manner, and that research will be separated from financial speculation, the production of weapons, or any efforts to create profits from medical treatments.

Weapons are necessary at some level in human society, but will be produced only by highly-regulated public monopolies for specific purposes, and the manufacturers must be cut off all ties to financial speculation by banks, and to scientific research in its pure form, and the medical field.

Healthcare and medicine must focus on the wellbeing of citizens, on diet, air and water quality, food quality and nutrition, exercise, long-term health, and treatment of acute injuries and diseases as well as chronic conditions.

Although the government can play a role in supporting healthcare, healthcare must be cut off from the speculation of banks and from the development of biological weapons. Healthcare is intimately connected to scientific research, but it must be at a distance from that process lest citizens become the subjects of research and development themselves, rather than the beneficiaries of effective treatments.

The most important aspect of these treaties will be taking the profit out of speculation in weapons and weapons systems and thus eliminating the incentive for promoting conflict.

A lively debate among experts and citizens on the nature of a healthy financial system, on science and technology, on security, and on healthcare must be conducted in an objective environment that assures that profit plays no role in the assessment of the interests of society. 

*

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.

This article was originally published on Fear No Evil.

Emanuel Pastreich served as the president of the Asia Institute, a think tank with offices in Washington DC, Seoul, Tokyo and Hanoi. Pastreich also serves as director general of the Institute for Future Urban Environments.

Pastreich declared his candidacy for president of the United States as an independent in February, 2020.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and U.S. President Ronald Reagan signed a landmark nuclear arms control treaty in 1987. (Photo: White House Photographic Office/National Archives and Records Administration)

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

In a recent article discussing how US Treasury Department tax breaks are exploited by groups that raise money in America in support of the Israeli so-called Defense Forces (IDF), I concluded that it does not require any particular brilliance on the part of even a casual observer to realize that both politically and economically Israel and Israelis are not treated like everyone else by governments at various levels in the United States, quite the contrary in many cases.

Nevertheless, some key questions must be asked even at risk of being repetitive about Israel’s clearly privileged status. One must consider how is it possible that organizations that are committed to financially supporting war crimes and even genocide by a foreign nation are allowed to have tax breaks that enable them to collect more money which in turn helps them to corrupt the system that feeds them while also empowering those foreign militaries? How is it possible that the foreign army carrying out the war crimes is also allowed to benefit directly from the US laws that have created exemption from taxation? In short, is there no sense of responsibility and/or consequences on the part of American government when it comes to the behavior of the pariah apartheid Jewish state?

In the event, comments and insights from some readers both on my posting and privately in emails and on Facebook have convinced me that I have greatly understated the case. Those who argue, perhaps somewhat in jest, the Congress is the Knesset West and that both Donald Trump and Joe Biden are in fact Israeli puppets are very close to being on the mark, making Israel and its all-powerful billionaire funded lobby indisputably in control of many key aspects of American government beyond the obviously targeted foreign policy. Combine that with control over the media and entertainment industries that shape the Israeli preferred narrative at all times, and you have a situation where when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says “jump” 95% of Congress and everyone in the White House begin hopping. We will no doubt see that in play when the monstrous Netanyahu arrives in Washington to address a joint session of Congress on July 24th. The performing monkeys who will appear on television leaping up and down while cheering Bibi will definitely be something to see, though one hopes that at the same time there will also be a million demonstrators surrounding Capitol Hill calling for the head of the world’s leading war criminal.

One thing that should be completely clear is that the United States gets absolutely nothing out of the relationship with Israel, which all flows in only one direction to the tune of what probably amounts to more than a billion dollars a month if all the extras and the inevitable fraud are taken into account. And that does not even include special donations like the $14 billion recently granted by Congress and President Joe Biden to fund Israel’s never-ending war of extermination against the Palestinians. In my recent piece, I took particular aim at 501(c)(3) non-profits set up in New York City and in Massachusetts which exist to provide funds to the Israeli army. Friends of the Israel Defense Forces (FIDF), based in New York but with twenty branches in the US, boasts on its website that it has provided tens of millions of dollars to the Israeli military. The money contributed is federal income tax exempt and most of the donors are able to write the contributions off on their own federal taxes as an inducement to give. Such non-profits are generally granted that special status through demonstrating that they are religious, charitable or educational. Sending money to the Israeli army satisfies none of those requirements.

Not only does Israel take advantage of a tax break on money coming from groups that are ostensibly US-based, one of my correspondents advised me that the corruption goes far deeper than that, consisting of the fact that 501(c)(3) organizations must be registered through what is referred to as a “domicile.” Most are in the United States but domiciles in Canada and Mexico are also accepted given the economic realities of the North American market. Only one other country has an acceptable domicile and that is, of course, and, inevitably, Israel. In other words, an allowable exemption and the related deductible contribution for US tax purposes, might uniquely consist of US taxpayer money that goes to a charity registered in Israel. As Israeli charities have no reporting requirements vis-à-vis the US Treasury and no mechanism exists to validate their function and activity, they only answer to the government of the state of Israel.

And of course the pandering to Israel includes much more in the way of manipulating the political process to provide benefits to the Jewish state. It has long been a cliché in Washington that any long bill like defense appropriations that passes through the Congress will inevitably have some goodies for Israel inserted in it. Recent and current legislation reflects the perceived need by Congressmen to show the flag, which would be the Star of David rather than the Stars and Stripes, given the Israeli engagement in the military extermination of Palestinians that has no sign of ending as it is entering into its tenth month. The United States is not only funding and arming the Israelis, it is also providing political cover by vetoing nearly every United Nations proposal that would have led to a cease fire accompanied by some kind of exchange of hostages and prisoners. Along the way, no excess by Israel is considered to be too outrageous to require an objection coming from Congress and/or the White House, including Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s proposal that he would relieve the overcrowding in the prisons with Palestinians who are being held without charges by taking them out and killing them, one pistol shot to the head each. Former defense minister Avigdor Liberman has gone one step farther, calling on his country to use its nuclear weapons to obliterate Iran, presumably with full US approval. Israel has also been charged with killing journalists, humanitarian workers, medical workers including doctors, and torturing and starving Palestinian prisoners, but hey, that all constitutes minor stuff when one is best friends with the “Chosen” in Israel.

Image: Health center operated by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) in the southern Gaza Strip. UNRWA was established by the General Assembly in 1949 and mandated to provide assistance and protection to some 5.6 million registered Palestine refugees. Photo by United Nations/Flickr.

And there is much more. The International Criminal Court ruling that Israel’s Prime Minister and Defense Minister should be on the receiving end of arrest warrants over war crimes and possible genocide in Gaza was responded to by US Congress with a letter threatening the jurors and their families if the court were to proceed. The US also cut off all funding and even cooperation with the United Nations’ UNRWA which, Israel has declared to be a terrorist organization, but which has been the major source of what food and medicine was actually getting through to Gaza in spite of Israeli efforts to block it. Congress also has moved to ignore any reports coming from the remaining Gazan authorities revealing the casualties resulting from the Israeli bombing and other killing, as if hiding the death toll will make it go away. The respected British medical journal The Lancet is now reporting that as many as 186,000 Gazans might be dead, mostly among the rubble of their homes, uncounted because the Gazan officials who would have performed that task are dead and whole families are wiped out so no one is reported missing. It is a far larger number than the ca. 37,000 that keeps appearing in the western media in an attempt to mitigate what Israel is up to.

And there is also the really petty stuff that surfaces regularly from the pro-Israel message control network. Three Columbia University senior officials have been removed from their positions because of comments and private emails they have written deriding the claims of “surging” antisemitism at colleges. Among the “evidence” was an intercepted message suggesting that a panelist could have used recent campus protests as a fundraising opportunity and another that appeared critical of a campus rabbi’s essay about antisemitism.

The university will also launch a “vigorous” antisemitism and antidiscrimination training program.” Meanwhile a leading New York law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, headed by an Orthodox Jew, is setting up an index that will identify law students who have been demonstrating against Israel, creating a “do not hire” list of the names so they will not be offered employment after graduation. “The firm is scrutinizing students’ behavior with the help of a background check company, looking at their involvement with pro-Palestinian student groups, scouring social media and reviewing news reports and footage from protests. It is looking for explicit instances of antisemitism as well as statements and slogans it has deemed to be ‘triggering’ to Jews.” And then there is Donald Trump using the word “Palestinian” as a slur in his debate with Joe Biden and efforts by politicians like Governor Ron DeSantis to reject the arrival of any refugee Palestinians as immigrants to Florida as they are all “terrorists.” You know, little stuff like that and the efforts at criminalization of free speech if it comes to criticizing either Israeli or Jewish group behavior. You know, minor stuff. Pretty soon we Americans will all be terrorized into dancing to the same tune that Congress and the White House dance to. Then it will be too late.

*

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.

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: US Embassy in Jerusalem. Image: Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs/ Flickr