2024 Is the Last Year of Free Speech and Democracy in the Western World

February 19th, 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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Don’t let the alarmist sound of this column’s title put you off. It is not a “conspiracy theory.” This column is a factual report as you will see if you read on.

Everyone needs to understand that the ruling elite in the US are implementing a decision to redefine democracy in a way that eliminates democracy, makes Congress superfluous, voting pointless, and discards the Constitution as an outdated document inconsistent with the power the ruling elite intend to wield over Americans and the rest of the world.

The decision has been made to redefine democracy from the will of the people to protecting “the sanctity of democratic institutions.” Precisely, what are “democratic institutions”? They are not the institutions, such as Congress and representative government or the rule of law and an independent judiciary, that we currently regard as democratic institutions. “Democratic institutions” are the institutions of the censorship industry, such as the military/security complex, State Department, NATO, CIA, FBI, IMF, World Bank, NGOs, the Atlantic Council, the Aspen Institute, the presstitutes, Black Rock, JP Morgan/Chase and other of the consensus-building institutions that set agendas and control the narratives. To express disagreement with the consensus these elite institutions build is considered to be “an attack on democracy.” In other words, “democracy” is the property of the elite institutions, and the sanctity of these elite institutions must be protected from the people defined by Hillary Clinton as “the Trump deplorables.” The will of the people is eliminated from the picture.

It might surprise you, but universities (Stanford, for example, is fully involved), major corporations especially the tech companies and social media, law schools, medical associations, and governors and members of Congress associated with the WEF accept the redefinition of democracy that excludes the will of the people. They also agree that the Constitution is inconsistent with the power they intend to wield over citizens. As I write the State Department is busy at work obstructing the House of Representatives inquiry into the executive branch’s use of taxpayers’ money to censor what we may hear about Covid, the Covid “vaccine,” election fraud, the Ukraine war, Iran, Russia, China, etc. See this.

On February 16, Tucker Carlson interviewed Mike Benz, the world’s leading expert on the censorship industry. Here you have a complete and accurate explanation of who rules us–and No it is not the Rothschilds and the Bilderbergs–and why the US government has decided to deep-six the First Amendment: see this.

The decision has been made, and it is currently being implemented. It means that suppression will be used to convert the entirety of the Internet and social media into a propaganda ministry serving official narratives. All of the hope that libertarians had of the freedom to speak that the Internet would provide has turned out to be unrealistic. You can see already the trouble Elon Musk is in for permitting free speech on X. The government has launched investigations of Musk and his companies with the intent of forcing him out. Both the state of California and the EU have moved against Elon Musk to force him via enormous financial penalties to turn over to the censorship industry the information that the previous owner was supplying, information used in AI programs to determine who to ban and what tweets to take down.

Soon the alternative and social media will exist only as propaganda sites for the “consensus-building elite institutions.”

The disintegration of Western civilization is proceeding so rapidly that I cannot keep up with it even as a full time job. As I reported yesterday the French government has just criminalized medical truth, and WHO is about to do so in May of this year. People will no longer have control over their own health decisions.

The US government not only keeps the US border wide open for “people of color,” Washington also supplies the NGOs who are recruiting the immigrant-invaders with hundreds of millions of dollars with which to provide the immigrant-invaders with food, water, medical care, and sleeping accommodation along the mapped routes. See this.

It can’t happen you say? But it is happening right in front of our eyes.

Insouciant gullible Americans are expert at fleeing from unsettling bad news. Thus, they pave their own path to tyranny. Tyranny is easy to establish over peoples who have confidence in their Constitutional rights and integrity of their institutions. The more patriotic the population is, the more susceptible it is to deception and betrayal by government. Try telling patriots what is happening to them, and they will call you a commie for speaking badly about their beloved country.

Christian evangelicals have no opposition to the evil that is engulfing us, because they have been brainwashed that they will escape it by being wafted up to Heaven. The growth of evil is actually their escape from a sinful world into Heaven. The more evil, the sooner their escape.

For most of the rest, liberal interventionists and hegemonic neoconservatives have taught that America is exceptional and indispensable, so how can anything go wrong.

Combine these awareness-blockers with the fact that uncomfortable truths are a bad news turnoff, and that censorship is being established as a national security matter with the argument that it makes us safe and “protects democracy.”

Consequently, the criminalization of truth is rushing ahead. Even the word “truth” is slated to become a hate word that cannot be spoken.

Any information that you have saved that helps you to understand the tyranny that is engulfing us should be stored in thumb drives and not in the cloud as all information undermining of the “consensus-building institutions” will be consigned to the memory hole.

Note: at the 47-48 minute mark in the interview, the redefinition of democracy is explained. As there are more US government agencies committed to the death of the First Amendment than you have ever heard of, watch the one hour video several times in order to gain an appreciation of how deep the rabbit hole is.

Note: The Atlantic Council, one of the main anti-democratic “consensus-building (false narrative) organizations,” is possibly associated with the Burisma/Hunter Biden scandal. Burisma, a Ukrainian company, put Hunter Biden on its board and paid him large sums of money for his father’s protection against prosecution of the company by Ukrainian authorities.  US Vice President Biden actually admitted on TV, indeed he was proud of it, that he used  billions of dollars in US taxpayers money to threaten Ukraine to withhold the US aid unless Ukraine fired the prosecutor, an offer Ukraine could not refuse. Atlantic Council board members Sally Painter is under investigation by the US Justice (sic) Department for illegal lobbying on behalf of Burisma. She and former Atlantic Council board member Karen Tramontano created a partnership between the Atlantic Council and Burisma.

Burisma contributed $300,000 to the Atlantic Council.  Perhaps it was the purchase price for Burisma officials to speak at Atlantic Council forums and for prestigious Atlantic Council members to speak at a Burisma conference in Ukraine in 2018. All of this to show American protection of the company to Ukrainian prosecutorial authorities.

In 2021 the United Arab Emirates Embassy donated more than $1 million to the Atlantic Council, and the UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs added another $100,00-250,000. This might have been the purchase price for the Atlantic Council to use its influence to have the UN choose the UAE for the location of its 2023 climate change conference.

Apparently, the Atlantic Council did not make the required or proper disclosures of the UAE’s donations.

The Atlantic Council, a principal member of the anti-democratic censorship industry is supported by the hapless, unaware American taxpayers by grants of taxpayer’s money from the Departments of Defense, State, and Energy and by the US Agency for International Development.  Thus, it is clear that “our” government in Washington is financing the replacement of American Democracy subject to the will of the people with the government’s protection of the elite institutions that have changed the definition of democracy to mean the service of their agendas.

Here are other major donors to the Atlantic Council:

Adrienne Arsht, Facebook, Goldman Sachs, the Rockefeller Foundation, the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the United Arab Emirates, a Swiss company System Capital Management, Abu Dhabu National Oil Company, the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the US Department of State, the Embassy of Bahrain, the Embassy of Japan, the Finish Ministry of Defense, the Lithuanian  Minister of Defense, the Norwegian Ministry of Defense, the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Chevron Corporation, Google, Crescent Petroleum, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Raytheon Technologies, John F.W. Rogers (Goldman Sachs), Carnegie Corp of New York, Delegation of the EU to the US, Foreign Ministry of Germany, JP Morgan Chase Foundation, US Department of Defense, US Department of Energy, Charles Koch Foundation. Amazon, Verizon, Pfizer, Aramco, Lockheed Martin, Omidyar Network.

All of this information is available on the Atlantic Council’s website.

So, No, it is not a conspiracy theory.

*

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: A US government propaganda poster from the 1940s (Source: Multipolarista)

Benjamin Netanyahu, Now Accused of Genocide

February 19th, 2024 by Hans Stehling

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The entire world, Christian, Jewish and Muslim has watched horrified as an alleged criminal leader has ordered his occupying force of US-armed, state military to kill or injure over 100,000 mainly civilian women and children in Gaza – with planes, drones, gunships, missiles, bombs, white phosphorus and shells, in an orgy of revenge for the Hamas massacre in the Israeli kibbutzim, of October 7th.

And as they fill the mass graves of bloodied, blackened bodies with their embedded American bullets, the global community and the United Nations are impotent in stopping this mass slaughter of civilians. However, notwithstanding this international  opprobrium, POTUS Biden and his US Congress continue to supply the bombs and bullets to sustain this crime against humanity – watched by an astonished and incredulous billions of ordinary people, on television, around the world.

And, as yet another child and mother are killed, global resentment and anger are now increasing exponentially and directed at the attacking Israeli forces and their American arms supplier.  And that anger is morphing into increased antisemitism as the international community erroneously believes that Jewish populations in the US, Canada, France, Argentina and Britain are equally responsible for these war crimes as are the actual perpetrators, the Likud revisionist Zionist government of Israel.

The tragic consequence is that this damaging hatred is now increasing by the day, causing extensive damage to national Jewish communities in general, with the fear that this hostility will  endure for generations, if not, forever. As for Israel itself: it will reap the whirlwind of Netanyahu’s legacy.

History will be scathing in its verdict on duplicitous, weak US and UK governments that, in the 21st century, succumbed to the machinations of the political lobbies and turned a tiny, 75 year-old, outlier state into a dangerous nuclear power that provided the spark for the inferno that consumed the Middle East and then Europe and beyond.

*

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.

Hans Stehling is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a message on Israel’s war with Hamas, January 10, 2024. (Video screenshot)

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

In recent months, winds of rapprochement with the West have been blowing in Turkish foreign policy. While it remains unclear whether this spring weather will be permanent or not, it is necessary to understand the basic reason well in order to evaluate this rapprochement correctly. The question of how soundly a country struggling with economic difficulties can define geopolitical interests is at the center of all discussions.

In order to make the discussion meaningful, it is useful to first look at the general outlook of the Turkish economy, which has a size of more than 1 trillion dollars. When macroeconomic indicators are examined, first of all, the foreign trade volume, which is more than half of Türkiye’s GDP, and the unlimited international capital flows attract attention. This naturally makes the country very open to foreign economic influences. Moreover, there are other data that make this effect more complicated: It is seen that Türkiye had a foreign trade deficit of roughly 105 billion dollars and a current account deficit of 45 billion dollars last year. It is known that this deficit, which has become structural, has been closed through increasing foreign borrowing for years. It should be noted that the short-term external debt stock of the country, whose Central Bank net reserves are in negative, has reached 225 billion dollars by the end of 2023. Moreover, the majority of exports are made to European and North American countries and foreign debts are largely provided by Western financial centers.

On the other hand, it is observed that the Turkish economy has become extremely dollarized internally and has almost become a dual currency. It should be noted that, contrary to trends in the world, there is no effort to reverse this situation, and confidence in the Turkish lira, which has depreciated at a high rate in recent years, has been shaken. It should also be added that inflation has exploded as a result of the harsh interest rate cuts implemented three years ago and the people are in serious economic distress.

Under all these conditions, the concern that the economy is facing an acute balance of payments problem and that a total crisis may occur remains a reality for decision-makers in Ankara. As a matter of fact, it is known that President Erdoğan implemented election economy until he survived the 2023 elections, which are critical for the continuation of power, and changed his economic management team immediately after the elections. Two completely different economic policies were implemented and the economy was handed over to Mehmet Şimşek, who has close relations with Western financial capital centers. However, the dollar, which was suppressed and kept at the 18 band until the elections, rose at a record speed against the Turkish lira after the elections, reaching 30 levels, and the fact that the basic indicators did not improve shows that things are not going well.

With all this, another election cycle is on the agenda this year: The local elections to be held on March 31, 2024, and it is understood that winning Istanbul is very important for Erdoğan. Considering the possible constitutional amendment that may follow, this year is aimed to be ‘problem-free’ for the government. The connection between the huge economic problems as a result of wrong policies and political priorities of Ankara underlines the expression ‘problem-free’. The government seems to have abandoned the key to the economy for the continuation of the political order to the neoliberal economic approach, which is outdated in the world and has proven unsuccessful in Türkiye as well.

This is exactly where political relations with the West come into play for Ankara, which has such a dependent economic relationship with the West and has not done much other than rhetoric to break this dependence. The Government is re-evaluating its foreign policy choice to ensure that any additional problems with the West do not disrupt its 2024 plans. This re-evaluation package for now; It includes concessions such as not dealing with Greece in the Aegean, putting the brakes on energy exploration in the Mediterranean, détente with the EU, trying to purchase F-16s from the USA at astronomical prices, and approving Sweden’s NATO membership. Beyond these, pressures from the USA that will deeply shake Turkish geopolitics, such as breaking the Montreux Convention, taking sides in hot conflicts, and officially accepting the PYD/PKK presence in Syria, are on the table. Here, it is necessary to remind that no matter how challenging the economic crises are, it will not be easy for Türkiye to give up its basic security concerns.

In this case, the question of how the course will be shaped from now on comes to mind. There seem to be three possibilities: The scope of the package will either expand or narrow, or the situation will be ‘managed’ in this way for a certain period of time instead of permanent preferences. The developments after the March 31 elections will determine which way the needle will shift. Two main dynamics will be decisive in this: The first is the changes in Turkish politics, the second is the outcome of the US elections to be held in November. Depending on the local election results, the cards in domestic politics may be shuffled again and discussions on a new Constitution may flare up. In foreign policy, it can be thought that the ‘manage’ option will be dominant until November and that no maneuver will be permanent. As a matter of fact, the possibility of Trump being elected will have significant repercussions on Türkiye as well as world politics.

Beyond all this, it should be understood that Türkiye must be economically strong for the independent foreign policy that we advocate in the form of active neutrality between the West and the East. However, Ankara is both wasting its future with wrong economic policies and cannot benefit from the blessings of the multipolar international system enough. This situation, which we describe as ‘Economic Pincer-Geopolitical Swing’, should no longer be a fate for Türkiye. In any case, it is clear that a troubled period awaits Türkiye after March 31, in which new exchange rate attacks and political turmoil may occur.

*

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 ATASAM.

Featured image is from ATASAM

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The most rational option would be to pressure Ukraine into recommencing peace talks with a view towards ending the conflict and resuming arms control talks afterwards. The problem is that rationality hasn’t prevailed thus far, however, since risky zero-sum and ideologically driven policies take precedence among US policymakers nowadays.

Americans were terrified for a brief moment after a Republican congressman cryptically tweeted about the existence of a pressing national security threat, but it later turned out that they were exaggerating the impact of new intelligence on Russia’s alleged space weapons program. Most reports about lawmakers’ classified briefing on this conclude that the anti-satellite weapon at the center of this scandal, which might either be nuclear-armed or -powered, hasn’t yet been deployed and might not be for some time.

The emerging consensus is that this congressman sought to hype up the so-called “Russian threat” in order to pressure the House to pass the Senate-approved bill designating $60 billion more to Ukraine. Nevertheless, their stunt served to prompt a discussion about the militarization of space, and this has in turn predictably led to more anti-Russian fearmongering. In reality, it was the US that formally initiated this long-running and hitherto unofficial process through Trump’s creation of the so-called “Space Force”.

The pretext upon which this decision was made was that Russia and China were already secretly militarizing space, so it made sense from the US’ perspective to formalize the latest round of this “race” in order to secure as much public funding for America’s related programs as possible. About the aforementioned trend, while it’s difficult to discern fact from fiction, there’s a logic to those two exploring creative means for neutralizing the US’ space-based communications and targeting systems.

After all, a significant share of its global military force is dependent on some sort of space-based support, with GPS being the most well-known but by no means the only such form of this. In the worst-case scenario of a hot war between them, the failure to at least interfere with these systems’ operation would enable America to retain its strategic advantage, thus raising the chances that those countries would lose. That said, their programs remain secret, and no major details have been confirmed.

Even so, Russia might be experimenting with nuclear-powered anti-satellite weapons or even nuclear-armed ones, not to deploy right away but to keep up their sleeve for negotiation purposes aimed at encouraging the resumption of arms control talks upon the end of the Ukrainian Conflict. Its officials already said that they’re not interested in this until after that proxy war is over because the US betrayed their trust by having Kiev attack some of the same strategic sites that it earlier inspected.

According to the latest reports, the US doesn’t yet have the means to counteract this theoretical threat, hence why it’s such a cause for concern among some. The most rational option would therefore be to pressure Ukraine into recommencing peace talks with a view towards ending the conflict and resuming arms control talks afterwards. The problem is that rationality hasn’t prevailed thus far, however, since risky zero-sum and ideologically driven policies take precedence among US policymakers nowadays.

Circling back to the previously mentioned Republican congressman who spilled the beans about the US’ latest intelligence for the presumable purpose of pressuring the House to vote for more Ukrainian aid, they might have actually inadvertently sabotaged this cause. Comparatively “reasonable” foreign policy hawks might question why the US wants to give so many billions of dollars to Ukraine that could otherwise be much better invested in researching solutions to this theoretical threat instead.

It’s too early to confidently predict the future of the Senate’s bill since the House will return from recess on 28 February and a lot can happen before then to move the needle either way, but the point is that there’s no real connection between Ukraine aid and alleged Russian space nukes. Even that threat itself isn’t yet deployed and might not be for some time, if ever, since it could always be kept out of service upon agreement on a new strategic arms pact before the current one expires in 2026.

*

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 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 frequent contributor to Global Research.

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

On January 31st, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a damning ruling in a case brought by Ukraine, in 2017. It accused Moscow of almost every conceivable “terrorism” offence codified in international law, particularly supporting, sponsoring, and committing “terrorism” in Donbas, while racially discriminating against ethnic Ukrainians and Tatars in Crimea, since 2014. In the end, the Court’s 13 judges ruled in Moscow’s favour in all but two instances. As we shall see, even these findings were highly questionable.

The ruling was highly significant, and threw up a great many seismic findings, raising multiple grave questions. First, about the Ukrainian government’s narrative about events in Crimea and Donbas over the past decade, duly parroted and reinforced by Western journalists, foreign policy pundits, military, intelligence and security officials, and politicians every step of the way. Second, about what precisely Kiev was itself doing during its “anti-terrorist operation”, launched in April 2014 against “pro-Russian separatists”.

While Kiev’s most ardent Western advocates are now admitting the war is already lost, and mainstream news outlets almost daily publish dire reports pointing unambiguously to a total frontline collapse in the very near future, the ICJ’s groundbreaking findings were universally ignored by the media. But of course – a Western government and media apparatus actively complicit in the horrors inflicted in Donbas by Ukraine and its British- and US-trained and armed fascist paramilitaries can only be expected to remain eerily silent.

‘Proving Facts’

Several charges levelled by Ukraine in 2017 related to purported treatment of Crimea’s Tatar and Ukrainian population, following the peninsula’s reunification with Moscow in March 2014. Kiev argued that Russian authorities had thereafter engaged in a concerted, state-sanctioned campaign of measures “that discriminate against persons of Crimean Tatar origin based on their ethnic origin.” The ICJ brutally slapped down almost everyone, while severely indicting the quality of evidence supplied in their support.

For example, the Court was “not convinced” the Russian Federation had discriminated against any Tatar or Ukrainian on the explicit basis of their ethnicity, or that Ukraine-supplied evidence indicated “a pattern of racial discrimination” against anyone. Judges furthermore dismissed witness testimony attesting to these accusations “collected many years after the relevant events” Kiev provided, which was “not supported by corroborating documentation.” They ruled any and all such “evidence” must be “treated with caution”, and associated charges “had not been established” as a result”:

“The reports relied on by Ukraine are of limited value in confirming that the relevant measures are of a racially discriminatory character…Ukraine has not demonstrated…reasonable grounds to suspect that racial discrimination had taken place, which should have prompted the Russian authorities to investigate.”

A particularly striking excerpt of the judgement noted the ICJ “held that certain materials, such as press articles and extracts from publications, are regarded ‘not as evidence capable of proving facts’,” speaking volumes about just how seriously the world’s premier international justice court views Western media reporting on serious matters. Which is to say, not at all. Kiev cited a wealth of negative press coverage to support its arguments, and reports from government-funded NGOs, on the purported plight of Tatars post-reunification.

Ukraine also claimed post-reunification, Crimean authorities created “difficulty” for local residents by forcing them to choose between Ukrainian and Russian citizenship. Again, this was robustly rejected by the Court, which also noted, “the Russian Federation…produced evidence substantiating its attempts at preserving Ukrainian cultural heritage.” Meanwhile, other Moscow-supplied documentation showed “ethnic Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar organizations” were “successful in applying to hold events,” but “multiple events organized by ethnic Russians” were denied. In other words, officials were clearly unconcerned by the population’s ethnic origin.

Elsewhere, Kiev had invoked a 90% reduction in demand across Crimea “for school instruction in the Ukrainian language” as a sign authorities had deliberately suppressed teaching in Ukrainian. Yet again, the ICJ was unmoved, attributing this to not only “a dominant Russian cultural environment and the departure of thousands of pro-Ukrainian Crimean residents to mainland Ukraine,” but to a genuine desire by locals to be taught in Russian, not Ukrainian.

Nonetheless, the ICJ did find Moscow “violated its obligations of the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination,” as Russia did not adequately demonstrate “it complied with its duty to protect the rights of ethnic Ukrainians from a disparate adverse effect based on their ethnic origin.” This, despite the Court conceding it was “unable to conclude, on the basis of the evidence presented, that parents have been subjected to harassment or manipulative conduct aimed at deterring them from articulating their preference.”

‘Alleged Offenders’

On the other charges, the ICJ was particularly excoriating. Ukraine accused Moscow of presiding over a campaign of “terrorism” in Donbas, which included the July 2014 downing of MH17. Kiev moreover framed the breakaway Donetsk and Lugansk “people’s republics” as terrorist factions, on a par with Al Qaeda. Judges overwhelmingly rejected these characterizations:

“The Court reaffirmed that an organization cannot be considered to be ‘terrorist’ just because one state labels it this way… [Neither the Donetsk and Lugansk “people’s republics” had] previously been characterized as being terrorist in nature by an organ of the United Nations.”

The ICJ furthermore found that, contrary to Western and Ukrainian allegations, Russia could not be found liable for facilitating terror activity against Kiev. Documentation supplied to that effect was considered “vague and highly generalized,” lacking anything like substantive evidence, let alone proof. Moscow was nonetheless found to have fallen short of its “obligation…to investigate allegations of the commission of terrorism financing offences by alleged offenders present in its territory.”

Even this flaccid finding was spurred by Russia simply not providing evidence it had upheld this “obligation” to the ICJ, and government of Ukraine. Moscow conversely did launch investigations into some “alleged offenders” named by Kiev, and handed over their results, which determined the individuals in question either “[did] not exist in the Russian Federation or their location could not be identified.”

In sum, Kiev was not fighting a counterinsurgency campaign against Russia-supported “terrorists”, and there is no serious indication Moscow was responsible for the litany of violent acts – including all-out invasion of Ukraine – attributed to the Kremlin following the US-orchestrated Maidan coup 10 years ago. Little consolation to the scores of independent researchers, journalists and activists who spent the past decade attempting to challenge prevailing Western narratives. Although evidently, the truth does eventually out, even if it’s ignored by the mainstream.

*

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: The ICJ ruling was highly significant, and threw up a great many seismic findings, raising multiple grave questions (Illustrated by Hadi Dbouk to Al Mayadeen

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

In 2021, after a year-long protest, India’s farmers brought about the repeal of three farm laws that were intended to ‘liberalise’ the agriculture sector. Now, in 2024, farmers are again protesting. The underlying issues and the facilitation of the neoliberal corporatisation of farming that sparked the previous protest remain and have not been resolved.  

The World Bank, the World Trade Organization, global agribusiness and financial capital are working to corporatise India’s agriculture sector. This plan goes back to the early 1990s and India’s foreign exchange crisis, which was used (and manipulated) to set this plan in motion. This ‘structural adjustment’ policy and process involves displacing the current food production system with contract farming and an industrial model of agriculture and food retail that serves the above interests.    

The aim is to reduce the role of the public sector in agriculture to a facilitator of private capital, which requires industrial commodity-crop farming. The beneficiaries will include Cargill, Archer Daniels Midlands, Louis Dreyfus, Bunge and India’s retail and agribusiness giants as well as the global agritech, seed and agrochemical corporations and the big tech companies with their ‘data-driven agriculture’.  

The plan is to displace the peasantry, create a land market and amalgamate landholdings to form larger farms that are more suited to international land investors and industrial farming. As a result, there has been an ongoing strategy to make farming non-viable for many of India’s smallholder farmers and drive hundreds of millions out of farming and into urban centres that have already sprawled to form peri-urban areas, which often tend to contain the most agriculturally fertile land. The loss of such land should be a concern in itself.  

And what will those hundreds of millions do? Driven to the cities because of deliberate impoverishment, they will serve as cheap labour or, more likely, an unemployed or underemployed reserve army of labour for global capital  labour which is being replaced with automation. They will be in search of jobs that are increasingly hard to come by the (World Bank reports that there is more than 23% youth unemployment in India).  

The impoverishment of farmers results from rising input costs, the withdrawal of government assistance, debt and debt repayments and the impacts of cheap, subsidised imports, which depress farmers’ incomes.  

While corporations in India receive massive handouts and have loans written off, the lack of a secure income, exposure to volatile and manipulated international market prices and cheap imports contribute to farmers’ misery of not being able to cover the costs of production and secure a decent standard of living.  

The pressure from the richer nations for the Indian government to further reduce support given to farmers and open up to imports and export-oriented ‘free market’ trade is based on nothing but hypocrisy. For instance, according to policy analyst Devinder Sharma, subsidies provided to US wheat and rice farmers are more than the market worth of these two crops. He also notes that, per day, each cow in Europe receives a subsidy worth more than an Indian farmer’s daily income.  

The World Bank, the World Trade Organization, global institutional investors and transnational agribusiness giants require corporate-dictated contract farming and full-scale neoliberal marketisation for the sale and procurement of produce. They demand that India sacrifice its farmers and its own food security for the benefit of a handful of billionaires.  

Farmers are merely regarded as producers of raw materials (crops) to be fleeced by suppliers of chemical and biotech inputs and the food processing and retail conglomerates. The more farmers can be squeezed, the greater the profits these corporations can extract. This entails creating farmer dependency on costly external inputs and corporate-dominated markets and supply chains. Global agrifood corporations have cleverly and cynically weaved a narrative that equates eradicating food sovereignty and creating dependency with ‘food security’.  

Farmers’ Demands  

In 2018, a charter was released by the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee (an umbrella group of around 250 farmers’ organisations). The farmers were concerned about the deepening penetration of predatory corporations and the unbearable burden of indebtedness and the widening disparities between farmers and other sectors.  

They wanted the government to take measures to bring down the input costs of farming, while making purchases of farm produce below the minimum support price (MSP) both illegal and punishable.  

The charter also called for a special discussion on the universalisation of the public distribution system, the withdrawal of pesticides that have been banned elsewhere and the non-approval of genetically engineered seeds without a comprehensive need and impact assessment.  

Other demands included no foreign direct investment in agriculture and food processing, the protection of farmers from corporate plunder in the name of contract farming, investment in farmers’ collectives to create farmer producer organisations and peasant cooperatives and the promotion of agroecology based on suitable cropping patterns and local seed diversity revival.  

These demands remain relevant today due to government inaction. In fact, the three farm laws that were repealed after a year-long protest by farmers in 2021 aimed to do precisely the opposite. They were intended to expose Indian agriculture to a massive dose of neoliberal marketisation and shock therapy. Although the laws were struck down, the corporate interests behind them never went away and are adamant that the Indian government implements the policies they require.  

This would mean India reducing the state procurement and distribution of essential foodstuffs and eradicating its food buffer stocks — so vital to national food security — and purchasing the nation’s needs with its foreign exchange reserves on manipulated global commodity markets. This would make the country wholly dependent on attracting foreign investment and international finance.     

To ensure food sovereignty and national food security, the Mumbai-based Research Unit for Political Economy (RUPE) says that MSPs, through government procurement of essential crops and commodities, should be extended to many major cops such as maize, cotton, oilseed and pulses. At the moment, only farmers in certain states who produce rice and wheat are the main beneficiaries of government procurement at the MSP.  

Since per capita protein consumption in India is abysmally low and has fallen further during the liberalisation era, the provision of pulses in the public distribution system (PDS) is long overdue and desperately needed. The PDS works with central government, via the Food Corporation of India, being responsible for buying food grains from farmers at MSPs at state-run market yards or mandis. It then allocates the grains to each state. State governments then deliver to ‘ration shops’.  

Today, in 2024, farm union leaders are (among other demands) seeking guarantees for a minimum purchase price for crops. Although the government announces support prices for more than 20 crops each year, government agencies buy only rice and wheat at the support level and, even then, in only some states.  

State agencies buy the two staples at government-fixed minimum support prices to build reserves to run the world’s biggest food welfare programme that entitles more than 800 million Indians to free rice and wheat. Currently, that’s more than half the population who per household will receive five kilos per month of these essential foodstuffs for at least the next four years, which would be denied to them by the ‘free market’. As we have seen throughout the world, corporate plunder under the guise of neoliberal marketisation is no friend of the poor and those in need who rely on state support to exist.  

If public procurement of a wider range of crops at the MSP were to occur — and MSPs were guaranteed for rice and wheat across all states — it would help address hunger and malnutrition, encourage crop diversification and ease farmer distress. Indeed, as various commentators have stated, by helping hundreds of millions involved in farming this way, it would give a massive boost to rural spending power and the economy in general.  

Instead of rolling back the role of the public sector and surrendering the system to what constitutes a transnational billionaire class and its corporations, there is a need to further expand official procurement and public distribution.  

The RUPE notes, it would cost around 20% of the current handouts (‘incentives’) received by corporations and their super-rich owners, which do not benefit the bulk of the wider population in any way. It is also worth considering that the loans provided to just five large corporations in India were in 2016 equal to the entire farm debt.  

However, it is clear that the existence of the MSP, the public distribution system and publicly held buffer stocks are an impediment to global agribusiness interests.  

Farmers’ other demands include a complete debt waiver, a pension scheme for farmers and farm labourers, the reintroduction of subsidies scrapped by the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2020 and the right to fair compensation and transparency concerning land acquisitions.  

In the meantime, the current administration is keen to demonstrate to international finance capital and agricapital that it is being tough on farmers and remains steadfast in its willingness to facilitate the pro-corporate agenda.  

After the recent breakdown in talks between government and farmers’ representatives, the farmers decided to peacefully march to and demonstrate in Delhi. But at the Delhi border, farmers were met with barricades, tear gas and state violence.  

Farmers produce humanities’ most essential need and are not the ‘enemy within’. The spotlight should fall on the ‘enemy beyond’. Instead of depicting farmers as ‘anti-national’, as sections of the media and prominent commentators in India try to, the focus needs to be on challenging those interests that seek to gain from undermining India’s food security and sovereignty and the impoverishment of farmers.  

The issues discussed in the above article are set out in the author’s free-to-read book (2022), which can be accessed below.  

*

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.

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


Read Colin Todhunter’s e-Book entitled

Food, Dispossession and Dependency. Resisting the New World Order

We are currently seeing an acceleration of the corporate consolidation of the entire global agri-food chain. The high-tech/big data conglomerates, including Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Google, have joined traditional agribusiness giants, such as Corteva, Bayer, Cargill and Syngenta, in a quest to impose their model of food and agriculture on the world.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is also involved (documented in ‘Gates to a Global Empire‘ by Navdanya International), whether through buying up huge tracts of farmland, promoting a much-heralded (but failed) ‘green revolution’ for Africa, pushing biosynthetic food and genetic engineering technologies or more generally facilitating the aims of the mega agri-food corporations.

Click here to read.

What’s at Stake for Julian Assange—And the Rest of Us

February 19th, 2024 by Karen Sharpe

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

On February 20 and 21, the High Court of Justice in London will conduct a hearing to decide whether WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can appeal the court’s earlier decision to extradite him to the U.S. to face 17 charges under the Espionage Act and one for computer crime, with a Methuselan prison sentence of 175 years. This, even though Julian is not an American citizen (he’s Australian), and he was not under U.S. jurisdiction when the “crimes” were allegedly committed. 

At the end of the two-day hearing the court could grant Julian permission to appeal, it could deny it, or it could postpone its decision to a later date. Or the two judges might have some other ruling up their puffy sleeves.

In the first instance, if permission to appeal is granted, whilst awaiting another hearing, Julian would most likely be returned to high-security Belmarsh Prison where he has been held for nearly five years under arbitrary detention in near-total solitary confinement, though he has been convicted of no crime. Belmarsh is known as Britain’s Guantanamo because of its torturous conditions as well as for its population of mostly alleged murderers and terrorists.   

Julian, an award-winning journalist and publisher, a life-long promoter of peace, a nine-time nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize, is quite obviously not in that category, though there are those who think he is. Most notable among these is former CIA Director Mike Pompeo, who pronounced Julian “a darling of terrorist groups”, and defined WikiLeaks as a “nonstate, hostile intelligence service”.

The crime that Julian is essentially “guilty” of is revealing truths most uncomfortable to the ruling powers—practicing journalism as it should be practiced.

The second possible outcome of the upcoming hearing, denial of permission to appeal, could mean that within hours Julian would be shackled and placed on a U.S. military jet headed for Alexandria, Virginia. There his case will be heard by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, where many residents work in national security (CIA, FBI, Department of Defense) or have a family member who does. The jury pool comes from this group and, not surprisingly, no one brought before this court under the Espionage Act has ever been exonerated.

Not only would Julian be denied a fair trial there, according to experts such as Nils Melzer, former U.N. rapporteur on torture, but he would not be able to use the defense that what he did was in the public interest, though clearly it was. The outcome there for Julian has virtually been decided even though his final appeal in Britain has not yet been heard.

What happens to Julian after a near-certain conviction by the federal court is that he will forthwith be sent to Supermax ADX Florence Colorado—or a comparable hell hole—which was described by a former supervisor there as being worse than death.

Possible Stay of the Extradition

There is one intervention that could at the very least delay Julian’s rendition to the U.S. if his appeal is denied: Julian’s lawyers will petition the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to become involved as a last resort. Julian’s case certainly falls within the scope of Rule 39, under which the court takes on a case if “the applicant would otherwise face an imminent risk of irreparable damage”. This would be Julian’s case in the U.S. where he would be subject to inhuman and degrading treatment—torture.

But there are also a few complications: it is not certain that Britain would respect the court’s decision, and if extradition has already taken place, the U.S.  may very well not honor a decision made by a European court.

If (the big if) the plane bearing Julian has not yet left the tarmac in Britain, and the ECtHR has taken on the case in time, it’s probable Julian would be returned to Belmarsh to await the subsequent ruling. Bail has previously been denied, even for health concerns, because Julian is considered a high flight risk, and it’s doubtful bail would be granted at this point.

It’s possible that the judges will not hand down a decision on February 21, but postpone it. A delay would avoid a messy outcry from the increasing numbers of fervent supporters of Julian during an important election year for both the U.S. and Britain, when a virtual death sentence of a publisher would not look good for an incumbent or any candidate who condones the extradition yet touts “a democratic society”.

In any case, barring instant extradition, nothing short of a deus ex machina could prevent Julian from being returned to Belmarsh to await his appeal, intervention by the ECtHR, or a delayed decision on the right to appeal from the High Court.

Deus ex machina?

As improbable as it might seem, the suggestion of a deus ex machina did recently come onto the scene in the guise of former president Donald Trump. Donald Trump, Jr., one of his father’s chief advisors, recently said that based on what he knows now, he would be in favor of dropping the charges against Julian Assange.

Vivek Ramaswamy, former candidate in the Republican party primary, now a Trump supporter who throughout his campaign said he would pardon Julian on day 1, stated that in a recent meeting with Trump, when they discussed various issues, Trump said he would be amenable to pardoning Julian. Three other presidential candidates also want to see Julian freed: Jill Stein, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Marianne Williamson.

For a Trump pardon of Julian to happen, many factors would have to come into play here. Trump has previously flipflopped with regard to Julian, and may well do so again. “I love WikiLeaks!” he declared with great fervor in 2016, lauding WikiLeaks for having published internal emails of the Democratic National Committee showing it undermined Bernie Sanders’ chances of becoming the Democratic presidential nominee and instead installed Hillary Clinton.

But then Trump indicted Julian under the spurious 107-year-old Espionage Act and declined to pardon him during his last days in office. And, under Trump’s presidency, the CIA plotted to kill Julian. Perhaps now Trump wants to be seen as doing the right thing for Julian—or just gain the hundreds of thousands of votes of those who want to see that happen.

The possibility of Trump being elected and then pardoning Julian is of course very far from certain. If indeed it did happen, it couldn’t be before January 2025. By that time, unless extradited, Julian will have suffered yet another year in Belmarsh prison, where he has been held since April 11, 2019, on remand, at the bidding of the U.S. 

Increasing Demands for Julian to be Freed

As Julian’s dire situation gathers more attention, voices from all around the world have risen up calling for his liberation. In a groundbreaking cross-party show of unity, members of Australia’s House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly (86 to 42) on February 14 for Julian not to be extradited but to be brought home. What was particularly significant here and welcomed by Julian’s supporters well beyond Australia is that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese also voted in favor, after months of waffling.  

“Enough is enough”, he kept saying, yet not insisting that the U.S. pardon and release his country’s most famous citizen. This despite the fact that Julian’s return is what nearly 80 percent of Australians want. Perhaps Albanese’s previous inaction was motivated by a recently signed juicy agreement with the U.S. to buy nuclear submarines, bringing the country yet more into the orbit of the U.S. as a strategic satellite in a geopolitically important part of the world.

In view of Albanese’s reticence, a multi-partisan group of Australian parliamentarians has been consistently acting on behalf of those constituents who want Julian freed. Recently they uncovered a ruling by the U.K. Supreme Court that could be the cog in the drive to send Julian to the U.S. According to the law, if a government stipulates that a country to which a person is to be extradited from Britain has given assurances that that person’s health or life won’t be threatened in the receiving country, then those “assurances” must be thoroughly investigated by a third party before extradition can take place.

And so the parliamentarians have written to British Home Secretary James Cleverly calling for a probe into the risks to Julian’s health should he be extradited to the U.S.

In the U.S., House Resolution 934, introduced by Rep. Paul Gosar, a Republican from Arizona, calls for the U.S. to drop the charges against Julian Assange, stating that “regular journalistic activities, including the obtainment and publication of information, are protected under the First Amendment”. The Resolution has eight other co-sponsors from both parties and is currently before the House Judiciary Committee. While its passage there, then onto the floor of the Congress, then over to the Senate could be a lengthy route, its supporters hope that thousands of people will write to their representatives urging their support for this resolution, thereby bringing massive attention to Julian’s case and what it means.

Parliamentarians in France, where Julian also has a family, have called for Julian to be granted political asylum, though it’s questionable if this could be allowed if a demand for asylum has not been requested while the person is actually on French soil. Mexico and Bolivia have offered Julian asylum. Cities in dozens of countries have named Julian an Honorary Citizen.

The five major publications, The New York Times, The Guardian, Le Monde, El Pais, and Der Spiegel, which had “partnered” with WikiLeaks in publishing thousands of files, signed an open letter on November 22 of last year calling for an end to the prosecution of Julian Assange They’re rather late to the game, even with that wishy-washy letter, having profited from enormous sales when the WikiLeaks files were released, then not only ignoring Julian, but criticizing him, often using lies and slander.

Julian’s importance has been acknowledged by hundreds of thousands of parliamentarians, human rights authorities, medical doctors, religious leaders (including the Pope), artists, teachers, trade unionists, legal professionals, journalists, students, writers all over the world who publicly demand his immediate release.

Nevertheless, the Americans and Brits may very well prevail, keeping Julian locked up for more years as he wastes away under the grueling prison conditions awaiting a final decision. Or they could prevail in having Julian sent to a supermax prison via the U.S. district court.

2 by 3 Meters in Belmarsh

During the nearly five years Julian has been incarcerated in Belmarsh, he has been kept mostly in solitary confinement in a cell measuring 2 meters by 3 meters, for 23 hours a day, allowed to stretch his long legs in an enclosed concrete area for an hour. Food is budgeted at 2 British pounds ($2.50) a day per prisoner, with meals consisting of gruel, thin soup, and little else.

Image: Julian Assange in Belmarsh Prison in 2019 (Source: WSWS)

Julian has not seen sunlight since he entered the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2012 seeking asylum there, apart from the day he was dragged from the embassy, or the days he was driven in a van from Belmarsh to those court hearings he was actually allowed to attend in person—albeit enclosed in a glass box (as is often the case in British courtrooms).

Not surprisingly his health has been consistently declining. Julian has lost a lot of weight and is paler than any human should be. In 2021, during or before a court hearing, (it’s unclear) he suffered a mini stroke at the age of just 49. He has subsequently been diagnosed with nerve damage and memory problems, and may very well suffer a much more serious stroke.

Death is never far away in Belmarsh—when Julian’s father John Shipton visited his son there, he reported that three suicides and one murder had occurred in the prison just during the past month alone. Nor was death far away in the embassy, where plain-clothes and uniformed officers menacingly patrolled and surveilled the embassy 24/7.

While Julian was considered paranoid for believing the U.S. wanted to kill him, an exhaustive investigation by Yahoo News in September of 2019 revealed that the U.S. and British intelligence services conspired to assassinate Julian by poisoning him while he was in the embassy or shooting him on the street or else kidnapping him from there.

Psychological Torture

Julian’s mental health has also suffered severely, as would be the case for anyone incarcerated for so long in such horrifying conditions, undergoing repeated legal proceedings to determine whether the equivalent of a death sentence—lifelong internment in a U.S. supermax prison— will be imposed.

In a supermax prison, and especially under “special administrative measures” that would most likely be applied to Julian, he would be completely isolated. At least in Belmarsh he can now have some visitors, though restricted, and, finally, some books and writing paper. In the U.S. prison he would be in a virtually empty cell, forbidden any contact with the outside world, or even fellow prisoners, and thus denied any support or motivation to keep on living.

The toll on Julian’s mental health has been so significant that when Nils Melzer visited Julian in Belmarsh in May of 2019 with two medical experts, he stated unequivocally that Julian showed all the signs of psychological torture. His excellent book, The Trial of Julian Assange, lays out the case in great detail.

Judge Vanessa Baraitser, the magistrate who officiated during Julian’s first hearing, recognized Julian’s psychological fragility, as described in evidence presented to the court. Although she ruled in favor of extradition based on the 18 points presented by the American lawyers (obtaining, receiving, and disclosing classified information), she ruled against extradition on the grounds that she was certain Julian would commit suicide if placed in a supermax prison.

It’s unlikely Baraitser was motivated by the milk of human kindness, as she refused bail, saying Julian would “abscond”, and, ironically, had him sent back to the same place where, testimony showed, he had seriously contemplated and possibly even attempted suicide. Moreover, subsequent hearings and a final ruling on the 18 points for which she supported extradition would mean Julian would never be released from any prison.

It is clear to many that the process—the relentless persecution and prosecution of Julian—is the punishment. Keeping him silenced, in a deathly dungeon, unable to do what has always been his passion—revealing truths so that we may all act upon them to make the world a better place—is clearly an eroding and fatal punishment.

A Threat to the Real Criminals

Why this ongoing punishment has been inflicted on Julian is to completely break him down, physically and psychologically, without even having to impose the very questionable ultimate blow of locking him up in a supermax prison for 175 years. The 10 million documents Julian published on WikiLeaks earned the wrath of those politicians, officials, plutocrats, dictators, rulers, generals, corporate executives whose murderous, illegal deeds he revealed, whether war crimes, crimes against humanity, corruption, mass surveillance. Ironically none of the perpetrators of those crimes has ever been convicted, while the publisher who revealed them remains in prison.

Revelations have helped end torture in Guantanamo, for example, overturn corrupt governments as in Egypt, end wars, for example in Iraq, aided by the very disturbing  Collateral Murder video showing U.S. soldiers in Baghdad joyfully shooting down civilians from an Apache helicopter. Julian has done more than anyone to uncover how governments, politicians, corporations, the military, and the press truly operate. It’s not surprising they want him silenced forever.

The possibility of Julian’s cranking up WikiLeaks to once again be the propaganda and lies-shattering, truth-telling online publication that it was makes him a huge threat to all those all around the world who are committing unseen—or even seen—and with impunity the same and even more nefarious crimes Julian earlier revealed.

During Julian’s incarceration and WikiLeaks slowdown, alternative journalists and bloggers have done heroic jobs of reporting what must be brought to light—in Gaza, Ukraine, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, for example. But few, if any, has the capability to receive securely and completely anonymously major revelations from whistleblowers and then publish them for free for anyone anywhere in the world, as WikiLeaks did so successfully using a revolutionary method Julian invented and pioneered.

The two-day hearing beginning on February 20 will be the fourth time Julian’s case has been in court. The first time, under Judge Baraitser in the Magistrate’s court that denied extradition but upheld the Americans’ 18 points, was followed by a hearing before two judges of the High Court, ruling on the U.S. demand to appeal the extradition decision based on additional assurances. While highly unusual, if not illegal, to present new assurances at that point, the High Court nevertheless agreed to hear the appeal.

In December 2021 it  overturned the denial of extradition, accepting the specious assurance by the U.S. that Julian would be treated well in a U.S. prison, unless, their worthless caveat stated, he did something to warrant changing that. Not only could such “assurances” be revoked, but they are unenforceable.

Assange’s lawyers then filed an application for a cross appeal to the High Court of the first court’s judgement as well as the Home Secretary’s decision to extradite. That application was denied by a single High Court judge.

Craig Murray (craigmurray.org), Kevin Gosztola (Guilty of Journalism: The Political Case against Julian Assange), and the excellent Consortium News have done thorough reporting on all these hearings, while the brilliant investigative reporter Stefania Maurizi has followed Julian and WikiLeaks from the beginning, uncovering, as in a detective novel, the government forces arrayed against Julian and their treacherous tactics (Secret Power: WikiLeaks and Its Enemies).

The right to an appeal will now be heard this February 20 and 21 by two High Court judges, Mr. Justice Johnson and Dame Victoria Sharp, who were recently announced. Sharp and her family have long and strong connections to Conservative party leaders, and Sharp’s recent ruling against a journalist, Carole Cadwalladr, in a libel case, was denounced by press freedom advocates for supporting the repression of public interest journalism. Previous judges ruling on Julian’s case have had equally questionable connections. 

A Case Rife with Illegalities

The illegalities in this case are numerous, as the bona fides of some of the judges suggest, and further underscore the fact that all along this case has not been about justice but politics. Among the many transgressions of justice and the rule of law figure initially the conditions under which Julian was kept in the Ecuadorian embassy, from which he could never step outside, even for a moment, even for urgent medical care, without risk of being whisked away and imprisoned.

He and his visitors, including his doctors and lawyers, had all their interactions with him filmed and ultimately sent to the CIA. Their electronic devices were confiscated during their visits, photographed, and that information was also sent to the CIA, thereby violating the rights of legal and medical confidentiality—to say nothing of the Fourth Amendment right to privacy—and potentially severely compromising Julian’s legal case.

Two lawyers and two journalists have filed a lawsuit against the CIA and Mike Pompeo plus UC Global, a Spanish security company thatcarried out the spying in the embassy, for these violations, and a federal judge in New York has agreed to let the suit go through, though any final decision will not be immediate.

An embassy’s premises are meant to be inviolable safe places for those seeking asylum there, yet British police, with the agreement of the Ecuadorian embassy under its newly elected government, dragged Julian—who is also an Ecuadorian citizen—from the embassy and locked him away in Belmarsh. They kept all his belongings, including his computers and legal notes. In Belmarsh he has been kept under conditions that violate any sense of human rights.

Image: Julian Assange was secretly recorded while living at the Ecuadorean embassy in London. (Source: EPV)

The original “crime” for which Julian was brought to prison was breaching bail when he went to the Ecuadorian embassy, rightfully fearing extradition from Sweden to the U.S. following subsequently dismissed—and fabricated—allegations of sexual assault in Sweden. Breach of bail in Britain carries a maximum penalty of a year’s incarceration, though in most cases it results in a fine or dismissal.

Yet Julian has been kept in Belmarsh well beyond that limit, never convicted of any crime, in clear violation of habeas corpus. Much of the irrefutable evidence presented by Julian’s lawyers—he did heavily redact documents before releasing them on WikiLeaks, not a single person was harmed because of the releases, Julian did not help Chelsea Manning leak classified documents—was indeed fallaciously refuted by the judges.

The Espionage Act, under which a journalist or publisher has heretofore never been prosecuted, was designed, as its name suggests, to prosecute those Americans working to undermine the U.S. war efforts by delivering national defense information to the enemy—espionage coming from espion, or spy, in French. Not only is Julian not an American citizen, and he was in Europe when he was publishing WikiLeaks, but the “enemy” to whom he was meant to have supplied classified information—information in the public interest—must ipso facto be any member of the general public anywhere in the world!

The U.S. First Amendment protects the publication of documents, even those that are classified. Moreover per extradition agreements between Britain and the U.S., a person convicted for political reasons—and the case against Julian is purely political—or who could face a death penalty in the receiving country, may not be extradited from Britain.

One of the most egregious transgressions of justice during Julian’s first hearing was the fact that the principal evidence against him was supplied by a diagnosed sociopath, Sigurdur Thordarson, who had been convicted of fraud, embezzlement, and crimes against minors, and who later recanted his testimony, saying he had been bribed by the U.S. to say what he did.

Though Julian’s defense in any impartial courtroom based on the rule of law would undeniably be upheld, he remains condemned, locked up, perhaps forever, with the uncertainty of his future a gnawing torture.

Groundswell of Support

Thousands of people from all over the world plan to gather outside the Royal Courts of Justice where the hearing will be held on February 20 and 21 to support Julian, to demand that justice be done. As this is not a trial but a hearing to determine if an appeal against extradition can take place, it is unclear whether Julian will be present, though he has requested that he be allowed to be in court so he can confer with his lawyers. Though for most of his time in Belmarsh Julian was deprived of a computer—although he was once allowed one that had the keys glued—he has nevertheless played a major role in helping his lawyers prepare his legal case.

Stella Assange, Julian’s wife, mother of their two children, and one of his lawyers, has been travelling all over the world trying to convince world leaders, journalists, individuals why it’s in all of our interests that Julian be freed, that justice be upheld, that freedom of expression is sacrosanct, as is our right to know, and that governments must be held accountable.

There has been a groundswell of support for Julian as the court date approaches. Day X, as  this date has been referred to in calls to action, has rallied even those who haven’t been active in Julian’s defense to protest in support of what may be Julian’s last attempt to be freed. From Boston to Buenos Aires, Sydney to Naples, Mexico to Hamburg, San Francisco to Montevideo, Denver to Paris, and well beyond, major demonstrations have been planned all across the world on February 20 and 21.

What’s at Stake

What’s at stake for Julian is horrendous. What’s at stake for the rest of us is terrifying. If Julian is extradited and convicted under the draconian Espionage Act, the message will be that anyone anywhere in the world who says or writes anything that the U.S. considers against their interests can also be locked away forever.

While the U.S. seems to feel that extraterritorial jurisdiction is its right alone, other countries may decide to follow suit, picking off journalists or activists who don’t toe the government line. If a journalist and publisher is locked away forever for revealing truths, a clear message is broadcast, and even more journalists and publishers will self-censor, so the same fate isn’t rained down on them. And that ends a free and open press, that kills our right to know.

Today it is open season on journalists in many parts of the world, most egregiously in Palestine where some 120 journalists—and often their families as well—have been targeted and assassinated by the IDF of Israel. Increasing numbers of so-called news organizations unquestioningly publish government press releases essentially as news reports, to maintain access to those governments. Bloggers who write on Twitter or Facebook or other social media sites are frequently censored.

To understand what’s going on in the very complex world of today, we desperately need Julian Assange, with his analytical, erudite, prophetic mind, to reveal, assimilate, and interpret this precarious world so we might understand and act.

Some Good News

The good news is that Julian has behind him his devoted family, travelling the world, speaking out for him. The excellent film “Ithaka” shows this in detail and very movingly. Julian also has behind him a dogged legal team of hundreds of lawyers and researchers looking for every possible way to secure his freedom.

And he has behind him the hundreds of dedicated supporters who hold weekly vigils whether in Piccadilly Circus or outside Belmarsh prison or in a square in Brussels or Berlin, or who join marches and rallies all over the world.

The other good news is that Julian is indefatigable. While incarcerated in the Ecuadorian embassy, under very difficult circumstances, during the last year often without Internet or telephone connections, Julian helped to publish 5 million documents, produced 3 books, launched more than 30 publications, and gave 100 talks. And he is extraordinarily resilient—few, if any of us, would be able to go through what Julian has, and to keep on going.

John Pilger, the brilliant journalist and filmmaker who recently passed away, said of his dear friend, whom he visited on several occasions in Belmarsh, “Julian is the embodiment of courage.” As Pilger was leaving the prison visitors room, he looked back at Julian. “He held his fist high and clenched, as he always does.”

*

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.

Karen Sharpe is the author of Julian Assange in His Own Words, translated into French (Julian Assange parle), and into Spanish (Julian Assange habla).

Featured image: Campaigners pressing for the release of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange take part in a demonstration during a Night Carnival in Parliament Square in London, February 11, 2023

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

We owe a debt to Elie Wiesel, Leon Uris and all the historians, writers and filmmakers who produced thousands of books and films about the Nazi holocaust of the Jews, as well as some who documented the extermination of the Roma, homosexuals, communists, mentally handicapped and others in almost equal numbers. Even the fictionalized stories helped to sensitize us all to the horrors of genocide (a word coined in 1943 by the eminent Polish Jewish lawyer Rafael Lemkin to refer to the elimination of at least a quarter of the world’s Armenians, before he or anyone else knew of the Nazi horrors).

This is a great service, because their work removed all excuse for ignorance toward genocidal acts, among both the general public and the political elite. They helped, either directly or indirectly, to indict and prosecute many who participated in the holocaust and to cast everlasting shame upon those who looked the other way.

Lemkin and other eminent, hardworking and resourceful individuals and institutions also contributed to the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, a major component of international law now shared by the 153 nations that are its signatories. Among other provisions, the convention requires its signatories to take action to stop genocidal acts when they occur, partly overriding national sovereignty.

This in turn gave rise to the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, which espoused the duty of governments and other institutions to intervene in situations of genocidal activity. That doctrine has been abused and discredited by powerful nations, sometimes using it as a pretext to intervene for their own purposes, but it is nonetheless a testament to the pervasive awareness of genocide and the sensitivity to it, both public and official.

One effect of this awareness is the shame cast upon those who looked away or “didn’t want to get involved” during the Nazi holocaust and subsequent genocides, including Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and others. “Where were you?” “Why didn’t you do something?” These are questions that no one wants to be asked, least of all public officials.

This makes it all the more difficult to understand how such awareness has failed to stop the Gaza genocide. It is by far the most widely covered genocide in history, replete with mass torture, glorification of the deaths of innocents, mass hysteria among the perpetrators, endorsement by government officials, and racism of the most extreme kind, all on video, social media and every other imaginable form of communication. The perpetrators are essentially crying to the world, “Watch us. We can do the unthinkable if we want to”. The utter cruelty is not just horrifying; it’s incomprehensible. If you’re really that evil, why would you say so in such a loud voice?

The answer, of course, is that they feel entitled to commit these crimes, and they believe that no one can or will stop them. In fact, they expect and demand complicity for their deeds, and they are getting it from the very powers – primarily the US – who backed the Genocide Convention and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But this begs the question. We can easily understand what motivates Netanyahu and his government, and why they deserve life in prison, but why not the Biden administration and US government and war industry, as well? Do they think there will be no price to pay? Do they think there will be no Nuremberg trials?

The answer is yes, of course they do. In fact, they have everything to gain, if for no other reason than that offshore Gaza waters hold an estimated 30 billion cubic meters of natural gas. Their participation in the orgy of death assures them of a share in the spoils.

But what of the rest of us? Will we share in the spoils? Most of us, to our credit, would not want to and will not get a chance to do so in any case. Will Netanyahu, Gallant, Gantz, Smotrich, Ben-Gvir, Biden, Blinken, Austin, Nuland, Clinton (both) and others complicit in the greatest genocide of our century appear before Nuremberg trials?

That will at least partly on whether the rest of us escape the question, “What were you doing during the Gaza genocide?”

*

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 Larudee is a retired academic and current administrator of a nonprofit human rights and humanitarian aid organization. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: The UN says nearly 1.9 million people have now been displaced in Gaza. [AbdelHakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera]

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The Ukrainian government desperately needs billions of dollars more in US aid, a senior Pentagon official admitted, citing the critical situation in Avdeyevka, a frontline town in Donetsk that Ukrainian forces withdrew from on February 17 due to sustained Russian pressure. More alarming for the Kiev regime is the fact that the Pentagon is warning even more territory will be lost to Russian forces following the fall of Avdeyevka.

The US Senate approved on February 13 a $95 billion aid package, which includes $61 billion to finance Ukraine’s war against Russia, but the House of Representatives did not approve the measure before going on a two-week break.

“Ukrainian forces are running short of ammunition and other critical supplies, and the city is at risk of soon falling into Russian hands,” a senior Department of Defense official told the media on February 16, the day before the city was lost.

“We see this as something that could be the harbinger of what is to come if we do not get this supplemental funding—because without supplemental funding, not only can we not resupply those forces that are bravely trying to defend Avdiivka, we also will find many other locations along the forward line of troops that will be running low on supplies of critical ammunition,” the official said. 

The official also said that besides Avdeyevka, other areas will also fall as Ukrainian forces run out of ammunition and air defence capabilities. 

In the early hours of February 17, the commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Oleksandr Syrskyi, who was born in Novinki to the east of Moscow, announced the decision to withdraw his troops from Avdeyevka and enter defensive mode. This decision was forced since the Armed Forces of Ukraine lost some 5,550 more troops, including deaths and injuries, in the week leading to the decision.

“Based on the operational situation around Avdeyevka, in order to avoid encirclement and preserve the lives and health of servicemen, I decided to withdraw our units from the city and move to defence on more favourable lines,” Syrskyi wrote on social media.

However, Ukraine’s withdrawal from Avdeyevka is not a surprise. It is recalled that then Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, General Valery Zaluzhnyi, said in December that the Russian military could “concentrate its forces, including artillery and aviation, in one direction or another. And they can make it so that in two-three months, the town [Avdiivka] will have the same fate as Bakhmut,” which ultimately was proven true.

Maksym Zhorin, the deputy commander of Ukraine’s 3rd Assault Brigade, revealed on February 16 that his troops were outnumbered 15 to one after the Russian military sent seven brigades into combat, totalling about 15,000 personnel.

Even though the Institute for the Study of War claims that “the continued marginal rate of Russian advance in and around Avdiivka suggests that Ukrainian forces are currently conducting a relatively controlled withdrawal from Avdiivka,” the withdrawal has come at a huge cost as Russian units mined some routes, mostly muddy rural roads since all paved roads out of the town are under Russian control. Nonetheless, ISW warns that “Ukrainian forces may have to stabilise the frontline by counter-attacking in the area where Russian forces are trying to close the encirclement of Ukrainian forces in Avdiivka in order to conduct an orderly withdrawal.”

Contradicting the ISW’s claims of a “controlled withdrawal,” Commander of the Tavria group, Oleksandr Tarnavskyi, said on February 16 that “a number of Ukrainian servicemen were taken prisoner at the final stage of the operation, under pressure from the enemy’s superior forces,” even though the withdrawal was supposedly carried out in accordance to plans.

For his part, Zhorin also admitted, “The overall situation in this area is difficult, and we are facing some very tough battles ahead.”

There is no doubt that Ukraine will face even more difficulties ahead, which is why President Volodymyr Zelensky warned on February 17 of an “artificial deficit” of weapons following the fall of Avdeyevka.

“We can get our land back, and (Russian President Vladimir) Putin can lose, and this has already happened more than once on the battlefield,” he delusionally added.

Zelensky made the comment in the hope of securing more funding from the West, and although he might eventually achieve this, Russia’s capture of Avdeyevka has put another dent in Western resolve to continue supporting Ukraine since the situation will only worsen for Ukraine across the frontlines.

Avdeyevka is key to securing full control of Donbass since the town is a gateway to Donetsk city and will finally stop Ukrainian forces from indiscriminately bombing citizens in the city. Just as importantly, since Avdeyevka was a powerful fortress, just as Bakhmut was, the road has now opened for Russian forces to push on and evict Ukrainian troops from Donbass once and for all, a situation the Pentagon has more or less acknowledged.

*

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.

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

Featured image source

“The Zone of Interest” Is a Film About Auschwitz and Gaza

February 19th, 2024 by Steven Sahiounie

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The Zone of Interest is a film directed by Jonathan Glazer, who has said, “This is not about the past, it’s about now”. The film’s story mirrors the current story in Gaza, even though the film is set next door to the gas chambers at Auschwitz in the WW2 era.

A German family with children live in a lovely home and garden right on the walls of Auschwitz. The father of the family is a Nazi officer, and the wife and children live a seemingly normal life while ignoring the deaths of thousands of Jews next door.

The German wife enjoys wearing a lovely fur coat taken off a wealthy Jew who is murdered by her husband’s military unit. This reminded me of Laila Jardali, a Palestinian refugee in Fresno, California. She and her family were driven from their home in Palestine in 1948. She recalled seeing Jewish immigrants fresh off the refugee boats from Europe, living in Palestinian homes they had confiscated, and wearing the homeowners clothing, while eating on their China dishes. 

Having the garden plays a significant role in the family home, as the German father was a follower of the Artaman League, a German anti-urban, back-to-the-land movement that advocated for family farms and living off the land. Many Jews live in a Kibbutz in Israel, which are communal farms. The farm houses living on the walls of Gaza are full of families who chose to live within sight of the Palestinians living in Gaza because they lied farming.

Jews in Europe were rounded up by the Nazis and forcibly displaced to concentration camps, like Auschwitz. The UN and other human rights organizations have labeled Gaza the largest open-air concentration camp on earth, which had housed about 3 million people prior to the Israeli attack which has killed about 28,000 people, mainly women and children, with another 65,000 injured.

The Jews live in freedom just yards away from 3 million Palestinians who are denied all human rights. Gaza has been under siege since 2007, and life had deteriorated there prior to the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel.

Now, the last remaining Palestinians in Gaza are huddled in the extreme southern portion of Gaza, with nowhere to hide. 1.2 million people are just hours away from the promised Israeli ground invasion of Rafah which will likely end in a bloodbath of civilians.

The Jewish farm-kids can grow up with the opportunity to go to any University abroad for higher degrees, while having the right to return home to Israel and work. The Palestinian children have no opportunity to study abroad, or to return home if they leave.  Studies abroad result in a lifetime of exile.

In the film, the Nazi family lived a normal life just yards away from the gas chambers, and yet were seemingly oblivious to their neighbors suffering. This is a mirror image of Gaza; faced on two sides by Israeli homes, schools and farms full of seemingly educated and sophisticated Jews who are well aware of their neighbors plight, but chose to ignore it. Their self-absorption and self-isolation turns them into unfeeling narcissists, who only feel their own pain acutely.  The inability to feel the pain of others is a sign of mental illness, as the ability to feel empathy is the foundation to having a healthy mind.

But, the Jews are not alone in their lack of empathy. The US, UK, France, Germany and Italy all have sent weapons to Israel to use to commit genocide in Gaza. 

In WW2, the Germans were taking over land, and expanding the Nazi state. It was this expansion and occupation which brought the US government into the war. While the Nazis were marching through Europe, the US President Franklin D. Roosevelt declined to step in to stop the genocide of Jews. Roosevelt ignored the obvious and allowed the gas chambers to keep functioning until the British PM Winston Churchill begged FDR to save Great Britain from invasion and occupation.  The holocaust did not sway F.D.R., it was only the land-grab by Hitler’s regime that got the US to enter the war.

Just as the American newspapers in WW2 were publishing the articles of incredible suffering in Europe, and the American Jewish groups were speaking out in an effort to save the Jews in the concentration camps, the US and European media, and social media, today carry the news of the genocide unfolding in Gaza. The whole world is well aware of what atrocities are being carried out by the IDF in Gaza, but no one takes action today, and in WW2 no one took action until the US stood up to Hitler. 

Only the US President Joe Biden can stop the genocide in Gaza. Pleading, and begging Netanyahu, Ben Gvir and Smotrich to stop the war crimes will not have any affect. Biden needs to play his hand, as he holds all the weapons and cash promised to Israel in his hand.  Biden simply needs to say, “Ceasefire now, or no more weapons and cash.”

The German Nazi officer was following an unquestioning commitment to National Socialism, which made it acceptable to murder millions of Jews.  This parallels with the Israeli dedication to Zionism, which also is a political ideology, which makes it acceptable, and necessary, to kill and displace millions of Palestinians.  Israeli ministers in the Netanyahu government, 

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said on October 9,

“We are fighting human animals and we will act accordingly,” and added, “there will be no electricity, no food, no fuel. Everything is closed”. 

“My right, my wife’s, my children’s, to roam the roads of Judea and Samaria are more important than the right of movement of the Arabs,” said Israel’s National Security Minister, Itamar Ben Gvir.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said, that there is “no such thing as Palestinians” and they are a “fictitious nation invented only to battle against the Zionist movement.”

The Nazi party was based on a racist view that German “Aryan” blood was pure, and Jews were inferior and deserved to be exterminated because of their race. The Zionist political ideology of the Jewish State of Israel is the same, but with a twist. In their view, Jews are the exalted race, and all non-Jews are inferior and sub-human. 

The reviews written about this shocking, and chilling film are describing it a film which will change the viewer forever. There are some films which stick in your mind a lifetime, and this film is branded a hard film to watch. It has secured Oscar nominations in the category of best screenplay, best picture, best director and others.

What happens when you deny your neighbors of their human rights? Israelis, Americans and Europeans all live in freedom. The Palestinians in Gaza and the Occupied West Bank are asking for their rights which for 75 years have been denied from them.  Jews refer to the holocaust and like to say, “Never again”, but it is happening once again, and the Zone of Interest makes us all come to face the ugly truth.

*

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Introduction

This heart-wrenching article – a reality account as close as can be – had been published by the Los Angeles Times two days ago. It depicts the horrendous inhumanity thrust upon Gaza – and ultimately, upon Rafah, the southern-most city in Gaza, border to Egypt, where an estimated 1.5 million Gazans are amassed in catastrophic conditions, many of them living side by side, so close that they touch each other or in makeshift tents that leave no space to breathe. 

The stench from human proximity and lack of hygiene is unbearable – acceptable only by getting used to it by the human struggle to survive.

Let us not even mention the constant famine, the wanton lack of food and water, while kilometers after kilometers of aid trucks with food and water and medical supplies are stranded in Egypt, in front of the Rafah border entrance, but barred from entering by Israeli military forces. 

Inhumanity, injured, maimed, force-amputated, no anesthesia, constant humming of drone surveillance, endless deafening noise from bombings and sniper shootings, has no name in current vocabulary. The Zionists have “elevated” the term “inhumanity” to a level between extreme suffering for which there is no verbal description — and death.

While operating and working for 14-16 hours a day, at one point, Dr. Irfan Galaria makes one of the saddest possible reflections – wishing that some of the kids and adults, so badly maimed and hurting, that they may have better died, thus escaping this tremendous and non-stop suffering.

Please read on, understanding what Dr. Irfan Galaria means, when he says “What I saw was not war, it was annihilation”.

Peter Koenig, February 19, 2024

*

I’m an American Doctor Who Went to Gaza. What I Saw Wasn’t War — It Was Annihilation

By Irfan Galaria, Los Angeles Times

In late January, I left my home in Virginia, where I work as a plastic and reconstructive surgeon and joined a group of physicians and nurses traveling to Egypt with the humanitarian aid group MedGlobal to volunteer in Gaza.

I have worked in other war zones. But what I witnessed during the next 10 days in Gaza was not war — it was annihilation. At least 28,000 Palestinians have been killedin Israel’s bombardment of Gaza. From Cairo, Egypt’s capital, we drove 12 hours east to the Rafah border. We passed miles of parked humanitarian aid trucks because they weren’t allowed into Gaza. Aside from my team and other envoy members from the United Nations and World Health Organization, there were very few others there.

Entering southern Gaza on Jan. 29, where many have fled from the north, felt like the first pages of a dystopian novel. Our ears were numb with the constant humming of what I was told were the surveillance drones that circled constantly. Our noses were consumed with the stench of 1 million displaced humans living in close proximity without adequate sanitation. Our eyes got lost in the sea of tents. We stayed at a guest house in Rafah. Our first night was cold, and many of us couldn’t sleep. We stood on the balcony listening to the bombs, and seeing the smoke rise from Khan Yunis.

As we approached the European Gaza Hospital the next day, there were rows of tents that lined and blocked the streets. Many Palestinians gravitated toward this and other hospitals hoping it would represent a sanctuary from the violence — they were wrong.

People also spilled into the hospital: living in hallways, stairwell corridors and even storage closets. The once-wide walkways designed by the European Union to accommodate the busy traffic of medical staff, stretchers and equipment were now reduced to a single-file passageway. On either side, blankets hung from the ceiling to cordon off small areas for entire families, offering a sliver of privacy. A hospital designed to accommodate about 300 patients was now struggling to care for more than 1,000 patients and hundreds more seeking refuge.

There were a limited number of local surgeons available. We were told that many had been killed or arrested, their whereabouts or even their existence unknown. Others were trapped in occupied areas in the north or nearby places where it was too risky to travel to the hospital. There was only one local plastic surgeon left and he covered the hospital 24/7. His home had been destroyed, so he lived in the hospital, and was able to stuff all of his personal possessions into two small hand bags. This narrative became all too common among the remaining staff at the hospital. This surgeon was lucky, because his wife and daughter were still alive, although almost everyone else working in the hospital was mourning the loss of their loved ones.

I began work immediately, performing 10 to 12 surgeries a day, working 14 to 16 hours at a time. The operating room would often shake from the incessant bombings, sometimes as frequent as every 30 seconds. We operated in unsterile settings that would’ve been unthinkable in the United States. We had limited access to critical medical equipment: We performed amputations of arms and legs daily, using a Gigli saw, a Civil War-era tool, essentially a segment of barbed wire. Many amputations could’ve been avoided if we’d had access to standard medical equipment. It was a struggle trying to care for all the injured within the constructs of a healthcare system that has utterly collapsed.

I listened to my patients as they whispered their stories to me, as I wheeled them into the operating room for surgery. The majority had been sleeping in their homes, when they were bombed. I couldn’t help thinking that the lucky ones died instantaneously, either by the force of the explosion or being buried in the rubble. The survivors faced hours of surgery and multiple trips to the operating room, all while mourning the loss of their children and spouses. Their bodies were filled with shrapnel that had to be surgically pulled out of their flesh, one piece at a time.

I stopped keeping track of how many new orphans I had operated on. After surgery they would be filed somewhere in the hospital, I’m unsure of who will take care of them or how they will survive. On one occasion, a handful of children, all about ages 5 to 8, were carried to the emergency room by their parents. All had single sniper shots to the head. These families were returning to their homes in Khan Yunis, about 2.5 miles away from the hospital, after Israeli tanks had withdrawn. But the snipers apparently stayed behind. None of these children survived.

On my last day, as I returned to the guest house where locals knew foreigners were staying, a young boy ran up and handed me a small gift. It was a rock from the beach, with an Arabic inscription written with a marker: “From Gaza, With Love, Despite the Pain.” As I stood on the balcony looking out at Rafah for the last time, we could hear the drones, bombings and bursts of machine-gun fire, but something was different this time: The sounds were louder, the explosions were closer.

This week, Israeli forces raided another large hospital in Gaza, and they’re planning a ground offensive in Rafah. I feel incredibly guilty that I was able to leave while millions are forced to endure the nightmare in Gaza. As an American, I think of our tax dollars paying for the weapons that likely injured my patients there. Already driven from their homes, these people have nowhere else to turn.

*

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.

Irfan Galaria is a physician with a plastic and reconstructive surgery practice in Chantilly, Va.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020). 

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.  

Featured image: Ahmad Shabat and his uncle Ibrahim at Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in Deir el-Balah in the central Gaza Strip [Atia Darwish/Al Jazeera]

Joe Biden: The Damnation of Age

February 19th, 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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

He was sweet and well meaning, but he was old. He was hazy. His memory was poor. Doddering, confused, the self-proclaimed leader of the Free World seemed ready to check into a retirement village. That, at least, is the thick insinuation of the Special Counsel’s report on President Joe Biden’s mishandling of classified documents when vice president during the Obama administration.

The findings of the Special Counsel Robert Hur were not punitive. But they were laceratingly wounding. It seemed to resemble more of a nurse’s assessment of whether you need an upgrade in aged-care treatment, a bolstering of services for a person in declining years. (“Have you lost your mind, dear?”)

During the course of the investigation, things did not get better. “In his interview with our office, Mr. Biden’s memory was worse.  He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended (‘if it was 2013 – when did I stop being Vice President?’), and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began (‘in 2009, am I still Vice President?’).”

At an ill-tempered press conference, Biden insisted that his memory was “fine”, that Hur should never have asked such questions as whether the president could recall when his son died and that he was “well meaning. And I’m an elderly man. And I know what the hell I’m doing. I’ve been president – I put this country back on its feet.”

The picture is not a good one. But then again, when was it? Prior to coming to power, Biden already had a bookshelf list of bungles, gaffes and misjudgements. The only question looming behind was the degree of intent behind them. In 1987, he notoriously plagiarised much of a speech by the then leader of the British Labor Party, Neil Kinnock and, to show he was on a hot streak, generously decorated his academic record from Syracuse Law School. Despite describing this as “much ado about nothing,” he withdrew from the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination that September.

His campaign team, terrified that he might verbally snare himself leading up to the 2020 election, tried their best to insulate him from penetrative public scrutiny. This was very much aided by the ravages and restrictions of the pandemic, which afforded him the perfect excuse to operate in conditions of masked isolation.

As commander-in-chief matters have only worsened. Figures, for example, were airily revised – a million dead US residents and citizens from the ravages of COVID-19 became the somewhat reduced figure of “over 100”. World leaders dead or alive were swapped in Biden’s memory channel – a flattering form of death revival, and a denigration of the living. Biden, for instance, confused the current French president, Emmanuel Macron, with the late François Mitterrand before a campaign rally in Las Vegas.

His geographical recall was not too good either.

“Right after I was elected, I went to a G7 meeting in southern England. And I sat down and said, ‘America is back!’ and Mitterrand from Germany – I mean France – looked at me and said, ‘How long are you back for?’”

In terms of wars, he has remarked that Russia’s Vladimir Putin was “losing the war in Iraq”, which would have surprised the Russians, Ukrainians and everybody else. More could have been made by the Republicans about this in Congress, but then again, their aged warriors are hardly endowed with brainbox memories of sound recall or cognition either.

Other mishaps could cause titters of amusement – the harmless, dotty chap who muddles the facts, lighting up pub conversation.  During his April visit to Ireland last year, light entertainment was caused by his confusion between the terroristic Black and Tan enforcers during the Irish War of Independence (1919-21) and the All Blacks, New Zealand’s fabled rugby team. The remarks were made in Louth in the context of speaking about a former rugby player and distant cousin Rob Kearney.  “He beat the hell out of the Black and Tans,” an admiring Biden recalled.

The more significant, and dangerous problem is that a decaying, eroding memory can become the perfect pretext of making appalling policy even as it is forgotten, a form of erasure as things are being done. Policies long pursued and understood can be given the heave-ho. Biden’s belligerence over the Taiwan question, and whether a war over the province with China would be worthwhile, is a case in point.

Biden’s opponent does not, oddly enough, have that problem.  Donald Trump, even at 77-years of age, has a habit of transmuting inability to faux talent. One never knows whether his confusions are intentional in their malice or genuine acts of indifference or imbecility. (He very intentionally forgot the existence of WikiLeaks after the 2016 election, despite lauding the organisation’s press achievements prior.) More recently, competing Republican contender Nikki Haley got switched with Democrat veteran Nancy Pelosi. Petulant, hysterical, and stubbornly adolescent, he has a form of counterfeit youth on his side, the child in rompers who always screams even after downing the milk. When he errs, he is not only forgiven but given candied approval by his understanding supporters.

What matters now is the sense that the errors and lapses have arisen because of Biden’s age, the causal attribution to worn memory that renders the ruling magistrate enfeebled and vulnerable to overthrow. The campaign trail till November 2024 will be long and vicious, and Biden’s team may well have to reprise their role as quarantine specialists for their leader.  In the meantime, best consult the RAND Corporation study about the risks posed by dementia afflicting the US imperium’s aged security and intelligence community. It promises to only get worse.

*

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]

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The inhumane conduct of Israel’s military and its political leaders in the bloody campaign in the Gaza Strip puts Israel outside the civilised countries of the world. Regardless of whose side we stand on in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it is time to admit that the international mechanisms to protect civilians and non-combatants have completely failed. According to the most recent data, nearly 30,000 Palestinian civilians have already been killed, and this number will continue to rise unless the world quickly and effectively takes decisive action to stop the Israeli butchery in the Gaza Strip. Even previously staunch supporters of Israel, including US President Joe Biden, are now trying to get Israel to halt its killing machinery in Gaza. The completely destroyed neighbourhoods in the Gaza Strip, people living on the streets without shelter, ubiquitous diseases and acute shortages of food, water, medicine and other necessities of daily life are just a stark list of the atrocities that the Israeli army has resorted to, collectively punishing civilians in the most heinous and despicable way.

It is evident that at this stage of the conflict, all this is not about the elimination of the Hamas movement (which was only pium desiderium from the very beginning), but nothing less than the deliberate mass murder of civilians who have nowhere to escape and nowhere to hide from non-stop bombing campaigns and violent incursions by the Israeli army. Thirty thousand deceased Palestinians are apparently not enough for the world to say a resolute no to this human catastrophe for which Israel must be held accountable. If something is to be changed, then it is absolutely necessary and urgent to impose even stronger international pressure, even if that means excluding Israel from the international community, which would be an appropriate and legitimate measure in the current situation. It is not possible to stand by idly any longer and silently observe how the Israeli army massacres civilians and decimates the Gaza Strip, including the livelihoods of the Palestinians, without any realistic future plan for the two million suffering inhabitants.

Let’s not forget how convincingly Israeli leaders claimed they knew precisely where the Hamas Operational Centre was and where its leaders were hiding. First, it was under the Al-Shifa Hospital in central Gaza, where nothing was found, then it was Khan Yunis, where the leadership of Hamas was also not found. Now, it should be the last habitable city of Rafah – the last refuge of 1.5 million civilians who did nothing but obey the instructions of the lying politicians of the Jewish state “to move south where they would be safe.” Safety was only an illusion and pretext for Israeli soldiers to destroy all the civilian infrastructure so that the civilians could not return to their homes and be forced to leave the Gaza Strip forever.

Israel, now increasingly infamous for its army and intelligence services, greatly failed, and this is clearly shown in the tragic civilian death toll and total destruction of the Gaza Strip. Israel has not yet reached any significant military victory, and this fact has driven it to the conviction that the desired results will only be achieved by total destruction and unprecedented killing. Unfortunately, the only thing Israel is doing without realising it is destroying itself, and it’s only a matter of time before this situation gets out of control and past the turning point.

We know all too well, despite the populist statements in many of the world‘s media, that the attack of 7 October is not a new pogrom against the Jews but that it was preceded by a long and well-documented eighteen years of a complete blockade of the Gaza Strip, which threw more than two million Gazans into despair, striking poverty and utter hopelessness. There is no need to be pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli, but it is clear that action provokes a reaction. The primary action and the main problem of Israel is the constant oppression of the Palestinians, multiplied by immunity, impunity and the double standards that Western powers have been using for a long time and without precedent on the one hand to Israel and, on the other, to the rest of the world.

We can repeatedly point to Hamas and claim that it is a terrorist movement based on the fact that its fighters killed 1,200 Israelis on 7 October. However, we will also have to be fair that since 7 October, Israel has killed ten times more Palestinians than Hamas has killed Israelis and thus has no less terrorist practices than Hamas (the opposite is true). The information circulating in the media outlets favourable to Israel not only deliberately ignores this fact and mistakenly gives us an image of a morally behaving and legitimately self-defending Israel and evil terrorists from Hamas, which could not be further from the truth, that is, if we look at the whole matter objectively.

So why has Israel been demonising Hamas and trying to destroy it at all costs?

Let’s not forget on what basis Israel has been building its security policy for decades: an invincible army that can withstand anyone’s attack and can fight on several fronts at the same time. This may have been true until 7 October when Hamas fighters made a mockery of Israel and managed to deal it a blow from which it has not yet recovered and may never recover. This whole strategy of deterrence and invincibility of the Israeli army was just a paper tiger and suddenly collapsed. Even those in the Arab world who once believed that it was reasonable to conclude a peace treaty with Israel, such as Jordan or Egypt, will quite possibly back down in the near future since they will not want to maintain relations with the state that proudly and openly commits the crime of genocide. For both Jordan and Egypt, the termination of the peace treaties with Israel would be a pragmatic step with regard to the fragile internal political equilibrium, which would be violated by the exodus of Palestinians from Gaza to either Sinai or to Jordan from the West Bank. Neither President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi nor King Abdullah can allow that in the current fragile situation.

Of course, this is only one side of the coin – perhaps the easier side to argue. The other is the rational perception of the fact that Israel is militarily vulnerable and more so than anyone ever thought (which was not true until 7 October). It is now trying to regain its lost reputation and “masculinity” by razing the Gaza Strip and slaughtering as many innocent Palestinians as possible so that it can blame its suffering on the bad policies of Hamas leadership. But that is not how things are; in the long run, it will not save Israel. On the contrary, by killing civilians, it is exposing its vulnerability and shameful incompetence to destroy the Hamas movement conventionally. Even with its most modern espionage technologies, Israel cannot locate the Hamas leaders nor most of the kidnapped Israeli hostages, and we are only talking about an area of around 40 by eight kilometres.

It was none other than Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, who has long and consistently claimed that Israel is vulnerable and militarily paralysed. Nasrallah perceives this fact about Israel’s weakness very well and will try to use it to the fullest. The leader of Hezbollah is a pragmatic thinker and a very smart person, and without a cast of doubt, superior to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing racist partners, and that is very dangerous in the current situation.

It is surprising that despite the tragically bad results of the Israeli army in the Gaza Strip, the voices of hawks (for example, the historian Benny Morris) are still heard in Israel. Insanely, they are trying to force Israel into another military campaign against Iran or the Lebanese Hezbollah. The endless wars that Israel has provoked with its neighbours in the region will certainly not bring it security, a simple fact understood by everyone except perhaps Israel. In the long term, Israel loses strategically not only on the geopolitical map of the Middle East but also in the Western countries in particular, losing support among the majority of the world population. This sharp drop in popular support is a clear sign that people largely oppose Israel’s policy of genocide and apartheid.

*

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: A view of Palestinians as they try to continue their daily life amid Israeli attacks at the Jabalia Refugee Camp in Jabalia, Gaz on February 17, 2024 [Dawoud Abo Alkas – Anadolu Agency]

The World Must Force Peace on Israel

February 19th, 2024 by Gideon Levy

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Now is the time for the United States, and in its wake the international community, to make a decision: Will the endless cycle of violence between Israel and the Palestinians continue, or are we going to try to put a stop to it? Will the United States continue to arm Israel and then bemoan the excessive use of these armaments, or is it finally prepared to take real steps, for the first time in its history, to change reality? And above all, will the cruelest Israeli attack on Gaza become the most pointless of all, or will the opportunity that came in its aftermath not be missed, for a change?

There is no point in appealing to Israel. The current government, and the one that is likely to replace it, does not and never will have the intention, courage or ability to generate change. When the prime minister responds to American talks about establishing a Palestinian state with words indicating that he “objects to coerced moves,” or that “an agreement will only be reached through negotiations,” all one can do is both laugh and cry.

Laugh, because over the years Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has done all he can to foil negotiations; cry, because Israel is the one employing coercion – the nature of its policy toward the Palestinians is coercion carried out in one big unilateral, violent, aggressive and arrogant move. All of a sudden, Israel is against acts of coercion? Irony hides its head in shame.

It is therefore pointless to expect the current Israeli government to change its character. To expect a government led by Benny Gantz, Gadi Eisenkot or Yair Lapid to do so is also painfully futile. None of them believe in the existence of a Palestinian state that is equal in its sovereign status and rights to Israel. The three of them together and each one separately will at most, on a really good day, agree to the establishment of a Bantustan on part of the land. A genuine solution will not be found here. It’s best to leave Israel to wallow in its refusal.

But the world cannot afford to let this opportunity pass. This is the world that will soon have to reconstruct, with its funds, the ruins of the Gaza Strip, until the next time Israel demolishes it. It is the world whose stability is undermined as long as the occupation persists, and is further undermined every time Israel embarks on another war. This is the world that agrees that the occupation is bad for it, but has never lifted a finger to bring it to an end. Now, an opportunity to do so has cropped up. Israel’s weakness and dependence following this war must be exploited, for Israel’s benefit as well.

Enough with words. Enough with the futile rounds of talks held by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the barbed words uttered by President Joe Biden. They lead nowhere. The last Zionist president, perhaps the last one to care about what is happening in the world, must take action. One could, as a prelude, learn something from the amazingly simple and true words of European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, who said:

“Well, if you believe that too many people are being killed, maybe you should provide less arms [to Israel].”

However, the issue is not just ending the war, but mainly, what will happen when it’s over. If it depended on Israel, under any government, we would return to the warm bosom of apartheid and to living by the sword. The world cannot accept this any longer and cannot leave the choice to Israel. Israel has spoken: No. The time has come for a Dayton Accords-like solution. It was a forced and imperfect agreement reached in Bosnia-Herzegovina that put an end to one of the cruelest wars, and in contrast to all predictions, it has held for 29 years. The agreement was imposed by coercion.

A Palestinian state may no longer be a viable solution because of the hundreds of thousands of settlers who ruined the chances for establishing one. But a world determined to find a solution must pose a clear choice for Israel: sanctions, or an end to the occupation; territories or weapons; settlements or international support; a democratic state or a Jewish one; apartheid, or an end to Zionism. When the world stands firm, posing these options in such a manner, Israel will have to decide. Now is the time to force Israel to make the most fateful decision of its life.

*

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: Let Them Eat Dirt – by Mr. Fish

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Tuesday, February 21 is the big day and ‘moment of truth’ for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and his legal team. That is when two high court judges in London will hear arguments on whether Assange can appeal a ruling to extradite him to the United States, where he would most certainly spend the rest of his life in prison, likely in a harsh ‘supermax’ federal facility. The hearing is scheduled through Wednesday.

Stella Assange, his wife, has warned that if the judges rule against Assange, he could be on a plane to US soil in a matter of days. He would be removed from the high security Belmarsh prison for a trial in the US on espionage-related charges and publishing state secrets, where a 175 year jail sentence would await him.

His wife told a Thursday press briefing,

“It is the final hearing if it does not go Julian’s way, there is no possibility to appeal to the supreme court or anywhere else in this jurisdiction.”

She said further that situation is “extremely grave” given his health continues to be “in decline”. She warned: “If he is extradited, he will die.”

The Guardian has meanwhile commented on US authorities’ attempts to bully journalists who worked with Assange to turn against him:

At least four well-known journalists have been approached by the Metropolitan police on behalf of the FBI: James Ball, his ex-WikiLeaks colleague, who is now with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism; David Leigh, the former Guardian and Observer journalist; Heather Brooke, a freedom of information campaigner; and Andrew O’Hagan, who had been commissioned to ghost Assange’s autobiography.

All of them have declined to cooperate with the FBI. In an article for Rolling Stone last year, Ball said that he had first been approached in 2021 and subjected to pressure, including the threat of being prosecuted himself.

O’Hagan said that although he had his differences with Assange, he would happily go to jail rather than assist the FBI. “I would only add that the attempt to punish Assange for exposing the truth is an attack on journalism itself. I notice that none of those mainstream collaborators who published his material – the New York Times, the Guardian, and Der Spiegel – are being pursued, which demonstrates that a generational bias against internet-based journalism is at the heart of the case … If Julian goes to the US, Britain will have failed to protect one of the first principles of democracy.”

Editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks Kristinn Hrafnsson has commented on what Assange’s prosecution and possible extradition means for the future of press freedoms.

“It cannot be underestimated, the effect that it will have,” he said. “If an Australian citizen publishing in Europe can face prison time in the United States, that means no journalists anywhere are safe in the future.”

As for Assange’s native Australia, its parliament has just voted to issue formal request that charges against Julian Assange be dropped. The motion adopted by parliament emphasized “the importance of the UK and USA bringing the matter to a close so that Mr. Assange can return home to his family in Australia.”

Days ago, Amnesty International also renewed its call to drop the charges against Assange. 

“The risk to publishers and investigative journalists around the world hangs in the balance. Should Julian Assange be sent to the U.S. and prosecuted there, global media freedoms will be on trial, too,” a statement said.

*

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.

American Strategists Fearing War with Russia. Rand Corporation Report

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, February 18, 2024

Apparently, American strategists are concerned about the future of US-Russian relations in a post-Ukrainian conflict scenario. In a recent report, one of the most important US think tanks stated that Washington’s implementation of a “hardline” policy in Europe could lead to a direct war with Russia, encouraging American decision-makers to rethink the country’s European policy.

Which Countries Have Stopped Supplying Arms to Israel?

By Al-Jazeera, February 19, 2024

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute’s arms transfers database, 68 percent of Israel’s weapons imports between 2013 and 2022 came from the US. The US military also stockpiles weapons on the ground in Israel, presumably for use by the US army itself. However, the US has allowed Israel to make use of some of these supplies during the Gaza war.

Beware of Big Bad Russian Space Nukes!

By Drago Bosnic, February 18, 2024

It’s truly inexplicable how the “evil” Kremlin is being “defeated” in Ukraine, mostly because its soldiers “lack” weapons and ammo and are forced to fight with “shovels and tree branches”, but still, Russia is somehow able to deploy “nukes in space”.

Pan-African Struggles Against Colonialism and the First Imperialist War, 1876-1919

By Abayomi Azikiwe, February 16, 2024

Several years after the Belgian intervention in Congo during 1884-85, the Berlin West Africa Conference was held in Germany which carved up the continent as spheres of interests for the imperialist powers.

Is Lebanon the Next War After Gaza? Interview with Alwan N. Amin Eddine

By Alwan N. Amin Eddine and Steven Sahiounie, February 16, 2024

On February 14, Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon killed at least seven civilians, after Hezbollah rocket fire killed an Israeli soldier. In Souaneh, a woman was killed along with her two children. Rawaa al-Mohammed, and her two sons, Hassan Mohsen, 13, and Amir Mohsen, 2 were killed in their home.

UCSF Chair of Medicine Dr. Bob Wachter (6x COVID-19 Vaccinated) Collapsed in the Shower

By Dr. William Makis, February 16, 2024

He had a very close call with that bad fall, he got COVID anyways, and his wife has been harmed as well, yet he persists with pushing the same failed pharma products that have almost certainly damaged his family. It really does seem like many doctors are willing to quietly accept shortened lives, disability and even death, rather than admit they were wrong.

American Foreign Policy Seems to Have Nowhere to Go. “The bombing of Gaza into the stone age”

By Philip Giraldi, February 16, 2024

The bombing of Gaza into the stone age continues with hardly any coverage in the mainstream media as if it is an atrocity that will disappear from the collective conscience if no one refers to it in spite of the rows of dead women and children.

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

“In Gaza, everyone is involved. Everyone voted for Hamas. Anyone over the age of four is a Hamas supporter. And our goal at the moment, and this is in continuation of what you said, is to turn them from Hamas supporters to Hamas dislikers,” stated former head of Mossad’s Captive and Missing Division.

Rami Igra claimed, during an interview broadcast on Israeli state television, that all civilians in Gaza are guilty and deserve to face Israel’s policy of collective punishment, which prevents food, medicine and humanitarian aid.

This is not the first time that Israeli officials have incited against civilians in Gaza. In November, the Israeli occupation Minister of Heritage Amihai Eliyahu said that dropping a nuclear bomb on Gaza is a possible solution to destroy it and an option that must be studied.

Eliyahu, a member of the extremist Otzma Yehudit party headed by Itamar Ben-Gvir, explained in statements to the Israel Hayom newspaper:

“Death does not frighten the residents of Gaza, and we must know what scares and terrifies them, in order to force them to leave, and wipe them off the face of the Earth. They should tremble in fear and terror.”

He added:

“I do not agree with describing the residents of Gaza as civilians. There are no civilians in Gaza and there is no difference between them and Hamas.”

In mid-October, Israeli President Isaac Herzog incited the killing of civilians in the Gaza Strip, asserting that everyone in Gaza was involved in the war.

*

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: Palestinian children try to eat from a single bowl inside the tent as Palestinians, trying to live in makeshift tents they set up, are viewed in Rafah, Gaza on February 14, 2024 [Abed Zagout – Anadolu Agency]

Which Countries Have Stopped Supplying Arms to Israel?

February 19th, 2024 by Al Jazeera

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The United States Senate has approved a bill committing $14bn to support Israel’s war on Gaza this week.

Even before the start of the war last October, the US firmly supported Israel with the supply of military equipment, contributing $3bn annually in military aid. Many other countries provide military support to Israel via arms sales.

Civilian casualties continue to mount in Gaza – currently standing at more than 28,000 dead with thousands more trapped under rubble and presumed dead in just four months of bombardment and ground invasions. The rising death toll is prompting international condemnation from humanitarian and civil society groups in the form of statements, protests and lawsuits filed against countries alleged to be providing military support to Israel. Some countries are responding to this pressure.

On Monday, the European Union foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, commented on US President Joe Biden’s description of Israel’s response to the October 7 Hamas attacks as “over the top”. “Well, if you believe that too many people are being killed, maybe you should provide less arms in order to prevent so many people being killed,” Borrell told reporters.

So which countries continue to send weapons to Israel and which are taking steps to suspend supply?

Who Supplies Arms to Israel?

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute’s arms transfers database, 68 percent of Israel’s weapons imports between 2013 and 2022 came from the US.

The US military also stockpiles weapons on the ground in Israel, presumably for use by the US army itself. However, the US has allowed Israel to make use of some of these supplies during the Gaza war.

Interactive-US-military-aid-Israel

Besides the US, Israel also receives military imports from other nations.

  • Weapons imported from Germany make up 28 percent of Israel’s military imports. Germany’s military exports rose nearly tenfold in 2023 compared with 2022 after it increased sales to Israel in November, according to figures from the German Economic Ministry. Germany primarily supplies Israel with components for air defence systems and communications equipment, according to the German press agency dpa.
  • The United Kingdom has licensed at least 474 million pounds ($594m) in military exports to Israel since 2015, Human Rights Watch reported in December 2023. These exports included aircraft, missiles, tanks, technology and ammunition, including components for the F-35 stealth bomber used in Gaza.
  • In Canada, dozens of civil society groups have recently urged Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to end arms exports to Israel. The government says it does not send full weapons systems to Israel, but these civil society groups claim it is downplaying the amount of military support it provides. “Canadian companies have exported over $84m [114 million Canadian dollars] in military goods to Israel since 2015,” said Michael Bueckert, vice president of Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, an advocacy group, adding that the government has continued to approve arms exports since the start of the war.
  • Australia’s foreign affairs minister has said the country has not provided weapons to Israel since the start of the war. However, The Australian Greens party’s defence spokesperson, David Shoebridge, has asked for the government to be more transparent about exactly what items have been exported to Israel, adding that the country has one of the most secretive weapons export systems in the world. Amnesty International has also called on Australia to halt arms sales to Israel and claims the country has approved 322 defence exports to Israel over the past six years.
  • In France, a pro-Palestine demonstration on February 7 called on French companies, including Dassault Aviation, to stop selling arms to Israel. Demonstrators said, according to the Anadolu news agency, “all French companies that sell arms to the Tel Aviv administration are complicit in Israel’s genocide in Gaza”.

Click here to read the full article on Al Jazeera.

*

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: Golan Heights, Israel – An Israeli soldier prepares 155m shells for firing (Gal Rotem/Shutterstock)

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

After more than 130 days of war on Gaza, many of the coastal enclave’s universities and educational institutions lie in ruins.

At least 28,700 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces since the start of the war on 7 October and around 70 percent of the Strip’s buildings have been damaged or destroyed.

Palestine has one of the highest literacy rates in the world, but the war on Gaza has devastated the education sector, killing thousands of students, and leaving hundreds of thousands out of school for almost five months.

According to the Euro-Med Monitor, Israel’s army has so far killed 94 university professors, along with hundreds of teachers, in what the rights group describes as “deliberate and specific air raids” on the homes of academic, scientific or intellectual figures.

“The targeted academics studied and taught across a variety of academic disciplines, and many of their ideas served as cornerstones of academic research in the Gaza Strip’s universities,” the rights group said. 

Here, Middle East Eye looks at some of the academics and scientists killed in the war on Gaza.

1. Amin al-Bahiti, al-Azhar University

Amin al-Bahiti, a 24-year-old from Gaza, was a dentist and assistant lecturer at al-Azhar University. 

Al-Bahiti was killed on 5 November, after leaving his home to find food for his mother and nine siblings. 

Israel cut off all supplies from the besieged enclave, including food, water, electricity, fuel and aid on 9 October, forcing many Palestinians to leave their homes amidst heavy bombardment to find food.

Al-Bahiti’s body was found two days after he left his home.

He graduated from university in 2021 and one of his biggest ambitions was to open his own dental surgery. 

Tributes online described him as “talented, smart and hardworking”.

2. Adham Hassouna, professor at Gaza and al-Aqsa universities 

Adham Hassouna was a professor at the Gaza and al-Aqsa Universities, as well as a freelance journalist. 

Hassouna was killed alongside several members of his family in an Israeli air strike, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

The air strike targeted his home on 1 December.

3. Jihad al-Masri, al-Quds Open University

Jihad al-Masri was a historian and university professor, as well as the director of al-Quds Open University’s Khan Younis branch. 

He was killed on 17 October, after succumbing to wounds sustained in Israeli shelling on Khan Younis.

According to reports, he was on the way to join his wife and daughter when the attack happened. 

Al-Masri was known for publishing research papers on Islamic history and Palestinian oral traditions in both regional and international journals.   

4. Tariq Thabet, University College of Applied Sciences 

Tariq Thabet was a fellow at Michigan State University in the US as well as a professor in Gaza.

He was a Fulbright scholar, studying economic development and entrepreneurship in developing countries as part of the Humphrey Fellowship Program in Michigan. 

He was killed in November in Gaza, along with 15 members of his extended family.

Thabet’s research focused on empowering small business owners in places like Gaza, where he was born.

According to Kyle Hess, the programme manager for the Humphrey Program, Thabet hoped to take what he learnt in the US and bring it back home to Gaza to help improve the local economy.

His fellowship programme issued a statement saying: “While at MSU, he built on his extensive experience in the nonprofit sector and entrepreneurship by taking courses in finance and marketing, networking extensively with his local counterparts, and speaking to local community groups and youth.”

The community in East Lansing, Michigan, where he spent a year while studying, mourned his loss, remembering his positive impact.

“For a person coming from a territory which is effectively under siege by Israel, he had a very positive and upbeat attitude to life,” said Thasin Sardar, a member of the board of trustees at the Islamic Centre of East Lansing. 

“He came here with a mission to learn, and he was trying to make use of his time very effectively and give back to his country,” he added.

According to Sardar, multiple generations of his family were killed in the bombing. 

Thabet was remembered as a “warm and bright” person who regularly attended Friday prayers at the Islamic Centre of East Lansing. 

5. Sufyan Tayeh, scientist 

Sufian Tayeh, the president of the Islamic University of Gaza, was a leading researcher in physics and applied mathematics.

He was killed in an Israeli air strike on the al-Faluja neighbourhood northeast of Gaza City on 2 December. 

His death was announced by the Palestinian Higher Education Ministry. The air strike also killed several members of his family. 

Tayeh was born in 1971 in Gaza’s Jabalia refugee camp, going on to gain a bachelor’s degree in physics from the Islamic University of Gaza.

He won the Palestine Islamic Bank Award for Scientific Research for the years 2019 and 2020, among many other awards. 

According to reports, Tayeh was considered to be in the top two percent of scientific researchers worldwide in 2021.

He had also been appointed Unesco’s chair for physics and space sciences in Palestine. 

6. Sirin Mohammed al-Attar, Islamic University of Gaza

Born in 1984, Sirin Mohammed al-Attar was a gynaecologist working for the UN agency Unrwa as well as a professor at the Islamic University of Gaza.

She was killed in an Israeli air strike on the al-Bureij camp on 11 October.

According to Unrwa, she was a highly accomplished medical professional, holding Arab, Jordanian, and Palestinian board certifications in obstetrics and gynaecology. 

Al-Attar graduated from al-Quds University’s Faculty of Medicine and was the mother of three daughters.

Unrwa remembered her for her “generosity, deep love for her work and the care and affection she extended to her patients, offering unwavering support to them”.

“She was one of the best, most wonderful and most humane doctors I have met and dealt with,” said Ghada al-Jadba, chief of the agency’s field health programme in Gaza.

7. Raed Qaddoura, academic

Raed Qaddoura, who held a PhD from the National University of Malaysia, was killed on 19 November alongside 29 other members of his family.

According to reports, his twin children were born two weeks before he died. Qaddoura was described as a “smart and talented writer and thinker”.

In 2022, he published an article in Mondoweiss on his grandfather’s expulsion from the city of Jaffa in 1948. 

“For my grandfather, Jaffa was his first love before Israel deprived him of that bride by forcing him to move out along with hundreds of thousands of other Palestinians, in search of a safer place and escape from the criminality of the Zionist gangs,” he wrote.

“Then, as soon as my grandfather arrived in Gaza, he swore to return again and not to leave his beloved to anyone else.” 

8. Saher Yaghi, psychologist 

Shaher Yaghi, a professor and renowned psychologist, worked for Gaza’s education ministry and was found dead after an Israeli air strike on the Jabalia refugee camp in December. 

He was killed alongside his wife and children, a neighbour and family friend announced on social media on 10 December. 

Yaghi worked with several non-profit organisations and was a school quality assurance coordinator for over nine years. 

He also worked with Unrwa as a special educational needs supervisor as well as a mental health counsellor.

He graduated from the University of Calgary in 1994 with a bachelor’s degree in rehabilitation, and then went onto study at the Islamic University of Gaza, where he achieved a master’s degree in psychology in 2006.

9. Ibrahim al-Astal, Islamic University of Gaza

Ibrahim al-Astal was a professor and dean of the Islamic University of Gaza.

Born in 1961, he was an educational theorist and researcher, who spent many years writing and editing publications on educational and psychological studies. 

Al-Astal was killed in an Israeli attack on 23 October, along with his wife, daughters and a number of family members. According to some reports, a total of 87 members of his family were killed in the air strikes. 

He was known for working on programmes related to improving the quality of technological education in universities and colleges in Gaza.

In 2005, he co-wrote a book called The Teaching Profession and the Roles of Teachers in the School of the Future.

10. Saeed al-Dahshan, international law expert

Saeed Talal al-Dahshan was an expert in international law as well as an author.

He was killed, along with his family in Gaza, on 11 October.

In his book, The International Prosecution of Israel and its Leaders for Their Crimes Against the Palestinians, he outlines the legal path to hold Israel accountable for breaking international laws.

Ismail Thawbta, head of the government media office in Gaza, said that al-Dahsan, like many other academics in Gaza, was intentionally targeted.

“Israel is systematically selecting top Palestinian academics to inflict maximum damage on the Palestinian community and obstruct scientific and technological development in the future,” he said. 

*

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: Dr. Amin Al-Bahtiti was killed on 5 November, after leaving his home to find food for his mother and nine siblings (Screengrab/X)

Israel Killed 75% of Journalists in War Zones Last Year

February 19th, 2024 by Kyle Anzalone

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

A global watchdog group for the treatment of journalists found that Israeli forces were responsible for about three-quarters of all journalists killed in war zones during 2023. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) found that 72 Palestinian reporters were killed last year. 

“More than three-quarters of the 99 journalists and media workers killed worldwide in 2023 died in the Israel-Gaza war, the majority of them Palestinians killed in Israeli attacks on Gaza, The CPJ report concluded. “The conflict claimed the lives of more journalists in three months than have ever been killed in a single country over an entire year.”

In the last three months of 2023, Israel killed 72 Palestinian and three Lebanese journalists. Two Israeli journalists were killed in the Hamas attack on October 7. Excluding the Israeli onslaught in Gaza, CPJ found worldwide deaths of journalists last year was less than half of 2022’s total. At least 11 Palestinian journalists have been killed so far in 2024

CPJ believes some of the Palestinian journalists were targeted by Israel, and the organization is conducting further investigations. The Gaza Strip’s Government Media Office puts the number higher, saying at least 126 Palestinian media workers have been killed.

“This war is unprecedented in terms of the threat to journalists,” Jodie Ginsberg, president of the CPJ, said

She explained that Israel’s killing of journalists prevents war crimes in Gaza from being seen by the international community.

“What’s important to remember about this war is that Gazan journalists are the only journalists able to report on what’s happening inside Gaza. International journalists have not been able to get in, have not been allowed in, except on very, very controlled trips that are overseen by the Israeli army.” Ginsberg continued, “So we are entirely reliant on those [Palestinian] journalists, who are risking their lives to bring us this story.” 

The head of CPJ went on to express she was “disappointed … at the lack of public solidarity that we have seen” with Palestinian journalists. The Biden administration has denounced and sanctioned several governments over their treatment of journalists. However, President Biden has refused to condition American aid to Israel even as Tel Aviv has ordered the massive slaughter of civilians and journalists in Gaza. 

*

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.

Kyle Anzalone is news editor of the Libertarian Institute, opinion editor of Antiwar.com and co-host of Conflicts of Interest with Will Porter and Connor Freeman.

Featured image: The funeral of two Palestinian journalists killed by Israeli forces in Gaza. (Photo: Mahmoud Ajjour, The Palestine Chronicle)

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Among the puzzling questions that the media chooses to ignore is asking high government officials why they are exercising the illegal use of power that violates the rule of law which they are required to obey.

This week, the Veterans for Peace (VFP) made it very easy for reporters to pose questions by sending an open letter (see veteransforpeace.org) to the inspector general of the U.S. State Department and Antony Blinken, secretary of state, invoking several U.S. statutes that require the “termination of provision of military weapons and munitions to Israel.”

Josh Paul, a former senior official in the State Department’s office charged with reviewing weapon transfers to foreign countries, said:

“The secretary and all relevant officials under his purview should take this letter from Veterans for Peace with the utmost seriousness. It is a stark reminder of the importance of abiding by the laws and policies that relate to arms transfers.”

What laws are being violated by the State Department daily as it approves ships and cargo planes full of weapons of mass destruction to be used in Israel’s war crimes and genocide against hundreds of thousands of Gaza’s civilians, mostly children and women?

These are the laws highlighted in the VFP letter:

  • The Foreign Assistance Act, which forbids the provision of assistance to a government which “engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.”
  • Arms Export Control Act, which says countries that receive U.S. military aid can only use weapons for legitimate self-defense and internal security. Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza goes way beyond self-defense and internal security.
  • The U.S. War Crimes Act, which forbids grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, including wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and unlawful deportation or transfer, perpetrated by the Israeli Occupying Forces.
  • The Leahy Law, which prohibits the U.S. Government from using funds for assistance to units of foreign security forces where there is credible information implicating that unit in the commission of gross violations of human rights.
  • The Genocide Convention Implementation Act, which was enacted to implement U.S. obligations under the Genocide Convention, provides for criminal penalties for individuals who commit or incite others to commit genocide

Under these laws, the State Department has a “Conventional Arms Transfer Policy” which, the letter notes, “prohibit [U.S. weapons transfers when it’s likely they] will be used by Israel to commit… genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, [including attacks intentionally directed against civilian objects or civilians protected] or other serious violations of international humanitarian or human rights laws.”

The VFP letter continues, “Dozens of authoritative complaints and referrals made by hospital administrators in Gaza, as well as by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Palestine Authority, South Africa, Turkey, Medicins san Frontieres, UNRWA, UNICEF, the secretary-general of the United Nations, the Norwegian Refugee Council, and the World Food Program have confirmed that there is an ongoing human rights and humanitarian disaster due to Israel’s cutoff of water and electricity, deliberate destruction of sewage infrastructure, and delaying of aid shipments by Israeli forces.”

If you are wondering why these laws are not being enforced—the answer is that individual citizens or groups of citizens do not have any “legal standing” to sue Secretary Blinken, according to the U.S. Supreme Court. Only a committee of Congress, backed by a Senate or House resolution, can take the State Department to federal court. That action to enforce congressionally passed and enacted laws is not likely to happen in this lawless, Israeli government-indentured Congress which refuses even to demand a ceasefire.

Mike Ferner, VFP national director, observed, “Just as any good soldiers can recognize when they are given an unlawful order, we believe some State Department staff are horrified at the orders they’re given and will decide to uphold the law, find the courage to speak out, and demand an end to the carnage.”

There is a related serious matter, pointed out by international law practitioner Bruce Fein, who said: “The United States has clearly become a co-belligerent with Israel in its war against Hamas-Gaza Palestinians by systematically supplying the IDF with weapons and intelligence without conditions. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, nationals of a co-belligerent state are not regarded as protected persons if their state has customary diplomatic relations with an allied nation [in this case, Israel].”

For decades, the State Department has had an independent Office of the Legal Adviser. The present occupant of that post, acting legal adviser Richard C. Visek, has been publicly silent. I am sending the Veterans for Peace letter to him and asking him to respond to this letter and to the American people who pay his salary.

*

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.

Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate and the author of “The Seventeen Solutions: Bold Ideas for Our American Future” (2012). His new book is, “Wrecking America: How Trump’s Lies and Lawbreaking Betray All” (2020, co-authored with Mark Green).

Featured image source

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on  August 27, 2023

Author’s Update

The Smoking Gun is Who Started the War.

It comes from the Horse’s Mouth. 

On September 7, 2023, NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg  in a presentation to the European Parliament, formally acknowledged that:

“the war didn’t start in February last year. It started in 2014.”

This far-reaching declaration confirms his earlier statement in May 2023 to the effect that the Ukraine War

“didn’t start in 2022”, “The war started in 2014”. 

Speaking on behalf of NATO, what this statement implies is that US-NATO was already at war in 2014. It also tacitly acknowledges that Russia did not “initiate the war” on Ukraine in February 2022.

“The purpose of this is to prevent war”

In a twisted irony, in his presentation to the European Parliament, Stoltenberg portrays “the purpose” of the Ukraine war,  which has resulted in more than 300,000 casualties as a means “to prevent war”. 

Video

“Therefore, we have already increased our presence in eastern part of the Alliance, to send a very clear message to Moscow. To remove any room for misunderstanding, miscalculation. That NATO is there to defend every inch of NATO territory, one for all for one.

At the NATO summit, we agreed new plans for the defence of the whole Alliance. We also agreed to establish and identify more high readiness troops, 300,000 troops on different levels of high readiness, and also have more air and naval capabilities, ready to quickly reinforce if needed. 

The purpose of this is to prevent war. The purpose of this is to ensure that NATO continues to be the most successful Alliance in history because we have prevented any military attack on any NATO Allies. And when there’s a full-fledged war going on in Europe, then it becomes even more important that we have credible deterrence and by strengthening our deterrence and defence, we are preventing war, preserving peace for NATO Allies, because there’s no room for miscalculation. 

And the third thing was that NATO Allies have really now demonstrated that they are delivering on the commitment we made in 2014, because the war didn’t start in February last year. It started in 2014. The full-fledged invasion happened last year, but the war, the illegal annexation of Crimea, Russia went into eastern Donbas in 2014. (emphasis added)

What Stoltenberg fails to acknowledge is the US-NATO’s role in triggering the 2014 EuroMaidan massacre which was conducive “in the name of Western democracy” to a “regime change”: namely the instatement of a Neo-Nazi puppet regime in Kiev.

US-NATO is firmly embedded in the Kiev regime’s Neo-Nazi project the objective of which is to destroy Ukraine as well wage war on Russia. 

Ironically the head of State of this neo-Nazi government –hand-picked by US intel– is of Russian-Jewish descent, who prior to entering politics did not speak a word of Ukrainian:

Zelensky is Jewish. He supports the Nazi Azov Battalion, the two Nazi parties, which have committed countless atrocities against the Jewish community in Ukraine.  And now this Jewish-Russian proxy president wants to “ban everything Russian”, including the Russian language (his mother tongue), …  

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, September 21, 2023, November 8, 2023

 

NATO Says “War Started in 2014”.

“Fake Pretext” to Wage War against Russia?

To Invoke Article 5 of Atlantic Treaty?

by

Michel Chossudovsky

August 27, 2023

Introduction

 

This article addresses the implications of a controversial statement by NATO to the effect that the Ukraine War “didn’t start in 2022”, “The war started in 2014”

It’s a Bombshell: NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg confirmed (speaking on behalf of NATO) that the “war didn’t start in 2022”. 

In an interview with The Washington Post (May 9, 2023), Jens Stoltenberg unequivocally confirmed that “the war started in 2014″. 

Jens Stoltenberg’s bold statement (which has barely been the object of media coverage) has opened up a Pandora’s Box, or best described “A Can of Worms” on behalf of the Atlantic Alliance.

What he bears out is that the beginning of the Ukraine war coincided with a U.S. sponsored Coup d’état, confirmed by Victoria’s Nuland‘s “F**k the EU telephone conversation with U.S. Ambassador Pyatt  in February 2014. (see below)

Part I of this article examines the legal implications of Stoltenberg’s statement on behalf of the Atlantic Alliance. 

Of crucial significance: Having stated that “the war started in 2014”, NATO can no longer claim that Russia’s Special Military Operation (SMO) of February 24, 2022 constitutes, from a legal standpoint, “an invasion”. 

Part I also addresses the issue of The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC). 

Parti II focuses on Stoltenberg’s twisted statement that Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty could be invoked as means to declare war against Russia.

“Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty – its collective defence clause” declaring that an attack on one member state is “to be an attack against all NATO members.” Article 5 is NATO’s doctrine of Collective Self-Defense. 

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all”.

In regards to the invocation of Article V in relation to Russia, a justification or fake “pretext” was mentioned by Stoltenberg in his interview with the Washington Post.

Were Article V to be invoked, this would inevitably precipitate the World into a WWIII scenario, consisting of a war whereby all 30 member states of the Atlantic Alliance, most of which are members of the European Union would be involved. 

.

Part I 

Legal Implications

 

The legal implications of Stoltenberg’s statements are far-reaching. Speaking on behalf of NATO, he has acknowledged that Russia did not declare war on Ukraine on February 24, 2022.

“The war started in 2014“, which intimates that the war was launched in 2014, with US-NATO directly involved from the very outset:

Lee Hockstader, Washington Post Editorial Board: How has the war led NATO to recalibrate its defense posture and doctrine?

.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg: The war in Ukraine has fundamentally changed NATO, but then you have to remember the war didn’t start in 2022. The war started in 2014. And since then, NATO has implemented the biggest reinforcement of our collective defense since the end of the Cold War. 
.

For the first time in our history, we have combat-ready troops in the eastern part of the alliance, the battle groups in Poland, Lithuania, the Baltic countries, actually the whole eight battle groups from the Baltic Sea down to the Black Sea. Higher readiness of our forces. And increased defense spending.

Stoltenberg also confirmed that US-NATO’s intent from the outset in 2014 was to integrate the Kiev Neo-Nazi regime as a full member of NATO. 

Lee Hockstader, Washington Post Editorial Board: What does a plausible way forward to Ukraine’s eventual membership in NATO look like?

Stoltenberg: First of all, all NATO allies agree that Ukraine will become a member of the alliance. All allies agree that Ukraine has the right to choose its own path, that it is not for Moscow, but for Kyiv, to decide. 

1. The Legality of Russia’s “Special Military Operation”

Inasmuch as the war had commenced and has been ongoing since 2014 as confirmed by Stoltenberg, Russia’s Special Military Operation cannot be categorized as an “illegal invasion” (under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter). The latter states that  members of the UN shall refrain:  “from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state” … 

Inasmuch as the war started in 2014, Art 2(4) applies to both the Kiev Neo-Nazi regime and well as US-NATO which was  behind the February 2014 illegal Coup D’état.

What this implies is that from a legal standpoint, US-NATO on behalf and in coordination with the US sponsored Neo-Nazi  Kiev regime had initiated a de facto undeclared war against Luhansk and Donesk.

From a legal standpoint, this was not “An Act of War against Russia”. Led by US-NATO, this was an “Act of War against Ukraine and the People of Ukraine”. 

Putin’s February 24, 2022 Statement

As we recall President Putin had defined a Special Military Operation (SMO) in support of the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. The stated objective was  to “demilitarise” and “denazify” Ukraine.

Article 51 of the UN Charter which was referred to by President Putin in his February 24, 2022 speech confirms the following:

“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, …

Russia’s SMO complies with the exercise of self defense. Putin in his speech (February 24, 2022) referred to:

“the fundamental threats which irresponsible Western politicians created for Russia consistently, rudely and unceremoniously from year to year.

I am referring to the eastward expansion of NATO, which is moving its military infrastructure ever closer to the Russian border.”

.

2. “NeoCons Endorse NeoNazis”: U.S. Sponsored 2014 EuroMaidan Coup d’état. An Illegal and Criminal Act Supported by US-NATO

What Stoltenberg intimated in his interview with the WP (no doubt unwittingly) is that the Ukraine War was a US-NATO Initiative, carried out in the immediate wake of the illegal US Supported February 2014 EuroMaidan Coup d’Etat which was then conducive to the instatement of a Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev.

The New York Times described the EuroMaidan as “a  flowering of democracy, a blow to authoritarianism and kleptocracy in the former Soviet space.” ( After Initial Triumph, Ukraine’s Leaders Face Battle for Credibility,  NYTimes.com, March 1, 2014, emphasis added)

The grim realities were otherwise. The forbidden truth was that US-NATO had engineered –through a carefully staged covert operation– the formation of a US-NATO proxy regime integrated by Neo-Nazis, which was conducive to the removal and brutal demise of the elected president Viktor Yanukovych. 

The staged EuroMaidan Protest Movement initiated in November 2013 was led by the two Nazi parties, with Dmytro Yarosh, of the Right Sector (Pravy Sector) playing a key role as leader of  the Brown Shirt Neo-Nazi paramilitary. He had called for disbanding the Party of the regions and the Communist Party.

 

Right Sector, EuroMaidan February 11, 2014

The shootings of protesters by snipers were coordinated by Yarosh’s Brown Shirts and Andriy Parubiy leader of the Neo-Nazi Svoboda Party. 

Of significance there was a  leaked telephone conversation (February 2014) between Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and European Union Commissioner Catherine Ashton, which confirmed that “the snipers who shot at protesters and police in Kiev were  hired by Ukrainian opposition leaders [NeoNazis]”.

Video: Leaked Conversation: Urmas Paet and Catherine Ashton

(Starts at 1′.50″)

Estonia Foreign Minister Urmas Paet tells Catherine Ashton the following (excerpts):

“There is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovych, but it was somebody from the new coalition [Parubiy  and Yarosh].”

“And second, what was quite disturbing, this same Olga [Bogomolets] told as well that all the evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen and then people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides.”

“[Dr. Olga Bogomolets] then also showed me some photos she said that as a medical doctor she can say that it is the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it’s really disturbing that now the new [Neo-Nazi] coalition, that they don’t want to investigate what exactly happened.” (quoted by Mahdi Nazemoroaya, Global Research, March 18, 2014, emphasis added)

Foreign Minister’s Urmas Paet’s statements (above) are corroborated by A Kiev Post (March 13, 2014) report: 

Selected excerpts below, click here to access full Kiev Post report (March 13, 2014):  

“Former State Security Head of Ukraine Oleksandr Yakimenko blames Ukraine’s current government [Neo-Nazi Kiev regime] for hiring snipers on Feb. 20, when dozens of people were killed and hundreds more wounded. The victims were mainly EuroMaidan Revolution demonstrations, but some police officers were also killed. This was the deadliest day during the EuroMaidan Revolution, a three-month uprising that claimed 100 lives.

Yakimenko also blamed the United States for organizing and financing the revolution by bringing illegal cash in using diplomatic mail.

Yankimenko says that Parubiy [leader of the Svoboda Neo-Nazi Party], as well as a number of other organizers of EuroMaidan, received direct orders from the U.S. government. … 

These are the forces that were doing everything they were told by the leaders and representatives of the United States,” he says. “They, in essence lived in the U.S. embassy. There wasn’t a day when they did not visit the embassy.”…

“From the beginning of Maidan we as a special service noticed a significant increase of diplomatic cargo to various embassies, western embassies located in Ukraine,” says Yakimenko. “It was tens of times greater than usual diplomatic cargo supplies.” He says that right after such shipments crisp, new U.S. dollar bills were spotted on Maidan. (emphasis added)

On a personal note, I lived through two of the most deadly U.S. military coups in Latin America: as Visiting Professor in Chile in 1973 (Gen. Augusto Pinochet) and then in Argentina in 1976 (Gen. Jorge Videla and “La Guerra Sucia”).

In comparison, the criminal acts and atrocities (Neo-Nazi sniper killings) committed by the US sponsored EuroMaidan are beyond description.

 

The Central Role of  the Svoboda Neo-Nazi Party 

As outlined above, Andriy Parubiy played a key role in the EuroMaidan massacre. Andriy Parubiy (image right) is the co-founder together with Oleh Tyahnybok of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda). Parubiy was first appointed Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU) by the Kiev regime. (Рада національної безпеки і оборони України), a key position which overseas the Ministry of Defense, the Armed Forces, Law Enforcement, National Security and Intelligence. 

He subsequently (2015-2019) became Vice-Chair and Chair of the Verkhovna Rada (Ukraine’s Parliament) shifting into the realm of international diplomacy on behalf of the Neo-Nazi regime.

In the course of his career, Parubiy developed numerous contacts in North America and Europe, with members of the European Parliament. He was invited to Washington on several occasions, meeting up (already in 2015) with Sen. John McCain (chair) of the Senate Armed Services Committee. He was also invited to Ottawa, meeting up with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Parliament Hill in 2016. 


Victoria Nuland and Andriy Parubiy, 2018 

The Role of Victoria Nuland

Victoria Nuland, acting on behalf of the US State Department was directly involved in “suggesting” key appointments.

While the Neo-Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok was not granted a cabinet position, members of the two neo-Nazi parties (namely Svoboda (Freedom Party) and The Right Sector (Pravy Sektor) were granted key positions in the areas of Defense, National Security and Law Enforcement.

The Neo Nazis also controlled the judicial process with the appointment of  Oleh Makhnitsky of the Svoboda Party (on February 22, 2014) to the position of prosecutor-general. What kind of justice would prevail with a renowned Neo-Nazi in charge of the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine?

 

Video: F**k the EU. Nuland-Pyatt Leaked Phone Conversation

The controversial conversations between Victoria Nuland and US Ambassador Pyatt are recorded below. (See video and transcript below, YouTube version  (below).  

(Leaked Online on February 4, 2014, Exact Date of Conversation Unconfirmed, Three weeks prior to the demise of President Yanukovych on February 21-22, 2014)

 

 

Transcript of Conversation between Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, on YouTube

source of transcript: BBC

“Warning: This transcript contains swearing” 

Voice thought to be Nuland’s: What do you think?

Voice thought to be Pyatt’s: I think we’re in play. The Klitschko [Vitaly Klitschko, one of three main opposition leaders] piece is obviously the complicated electron here. Especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister and you’ve seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now so we’re trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you’ll need to make, I think that’s the next phone call you want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats [Arseniy Yatseniuk, who subsequently became Prime Minister], another opposition leader]. And I’m glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I’m very glad that he said what he said in response.

Nuland: Good. I don’t think Klitsch should go into the government. I don’t think it’s necessary, I don’t think it’s a good idea.

Pyatt: Yeah. I guess… in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I’m just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok [Oleh Tyahnybok], the other opposition leader] and his guys and I’m sure that’s part of what [President Viktor] Yanukovych is calculating on all this.

Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the… what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in… he’s going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it’s just not going to work.

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

Pyatt: Yeah, no, I think that’s right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step?

Nuland: My understanding from that call – but you tell me – was that the big three were going into their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a… three-plus-one conversation or three-plus-two with you. Is that not how you understood it?

Pyatt: No. I think… I mean that’s what he proposed but I think, just knowing the dynamic that’s been with them where Klitschko has been the top dog, he’s going to take a while to show up for whatever meeting they’ve got and he’s probably talking to his guys at this point, so I think you reaching out directly to him helps with the personality management among the three and it gives you also a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn’t like it.

Nuland: OK, good. I’m happy. Why don’t you reach out to him and see if he wants to talk before or after.

Pyatt: OK, will do. Thanks.

Nuland: OK… one more wrinkle for you Geoff. [A click can be heard] I can’t remember if I told you this, or if I only told Washington this, that when I talked to Jeff Feltman [United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs] this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy Robert Serry did I write you that this morning?

Pyatt: Yeah I saw that.

Nuland: OK. He’s now gotten both Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, Fuck the EU.

Pyatt: No, exactly. And I think we’ve got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure that if it does start to gain altitude, that the Russians will be working behind the scenes to try to torpedo it. And again the fact that this is out there right now,

I’m still trying to figure out in my mind why Yanukovych (garbled) that. In the meantime there’s a Party of Regions faction meeting going on right now and I’m sure there’s a lively argument going on in that group at this point. But anyway we could land jelly side up on this one if we move fast. So let me work on Klitschko and if you can just keep… we want to try to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing. The other issue is some kind of outreach to Yanukovych but we probably regroup on that tomorrow as we see how things start to fall into place.

Nuland: So on that piece Geoff, when I wrote the note [US vice-president’s national security adviser Jake] Sullivan’s come back to me VFR [direct to me], saying you need [US Vice-President Joe] Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick. So Biden’s willing.

Pyatt: OK. Great. Thanks.

3. U.S.-NATO Military Aid and Support (2014-2023) to a Full Fledged Neo-Nazi Proxy Regime is an Illegal and Criminal Act.

There is ample evidence of collaboration between the Kiev Neo-Nazi regime and NATO member states, specifically in relation to the continuous flow of military aid as well the training and support provided to the Neo-Nazi Azov Battalion. 

Collaborating with a Neo-Nazi regime is criminal under international law. Anti-Nazi laws exist in a number of European countries.

In the aftermath of World War II, the National Socialist Party (the Nazi party) of Germany was considered a criminal organization and therefore banned.

The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1946 likewise ruled that the Nazi Party was a criminal organization.”

In a far-reaching initiative the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution on the “Glorification of Nazism” Click image too enlarge 

Since 2014, Ukraine’s Neo-nazi regime has been generously funded by several NATO member states.

The Nazi Azov Battalion was from the outset integrated into Ukraine’s National Guard which is under the jurisdiction of Ukraine’s Ministry of  Internal Affairs.

The Azov battalion has (2015) been trained by the U.S. Canada and the UK. ““The US contingent of instructors includes 290 specialists … Britain has dispatched 75 military personnel responsible for training “in command procedures and tactical intelligence”. (Los Angeles Times, April 20, 2015).

The training program was coupled with the influx of  military equipment under a program of so-called “non-lethal” military aid.

In turn, the Azov battalion –which is the object of military aid, has  also been involved in the conduct of Summer Nazi training Camps for children and adolescents.

See:

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

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 08, 2023

The Azov battalion’s Summer Camps are supported by US military aid channelled to the Ukraine National Guard via the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The MIA coordinates the “anti-terrorism operation” (ATO) in Donbass.

© vk.com/tabir.azovec

Media Propaganda 

The Sunday Times confirms that the children and adolescents are eventually slated to be recruited in the National Guard, which was integrated into the Ukrainian Military in 2016. The Guardian casually dismisses the criminal nature of the Azov Battalion’s Summer Camp for children (which bears the Nazi WolfAngel SS insignia):

“In Ukraine, the far-right Azov militia is fighting on the frontline – and running a summer camp for children. The Guardian visited the camp and followed 16-year-old Anton through his experiences. Is Azov really a modern Hitler Youth organisation, or is it trying to prepare young Ukrainians for the tough reality that awaits them?” (To view the video click here Guardian, emphasis added)

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. 

 

4. The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC)

Inasmuch as “the war started in 2014”, Stoltenberg’s statements confirm that US-NATO were supportive of Ukraine’s  artillery and missile bombardments of Donbass which resulted in more than 14,000 deaths of civilians, including children. 

Stoltenberg’s admission on behalf of NATO that “the war started in 2014” would have required that from the very outset in February  2014 the warring parties including their allies abide by the Four Basic Principles of  The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) which consist in:

“….respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.” [Additional Protocol 1, Article 48]

Civilian population (children) and civilian objects (schools, hospitals, residential areas) were the deliberate object of UAF and Azov Battalion attacks in blatant violation of the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC).

In accordance with the LOAC, Moscow took the decision starting in February 2014 to come to the rescue of Donbass civilians including children. Visibly the president of the I.C.C. Piotr Hofmanski in accusing President Putin of “unlawful kidnapping of Ukrainian children” hasn’t the foggiest understanding of Article 48. of the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC). Is this an issue of incompetence? Or has Piotr Hofmanski been co-opted into endorsing crimes against humanity?

In derogation of The Law of Armed Conflict, US-NATO bears the responsibility for having endorsed the Neo-Nazi Azov battalion, which was involved in the conduct of atrocities against civilians.

Part II

Is NATO Intent upon

Invoking Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty

as a Means to Declaring War on Russia?

 

Dangerous Crossroads

There are ambiguous statements by Stoltenberg (in his interview with the Washington Post) which suggest that the invocation of Article 5 is on the US-NATO drawing board.

Click to access the full text on NATO’s website

Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty constitutes NATO’s doctrine of Collective Self-Defense. 

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all…”.

Article V was invoked in March 1999, based on a “fabricated pretext” to bomb and invade Yugoslavia.

It was subsequently invoked on September 12, 2001 by the Atlantic Council meeting in Brussels as a justification to declare war on Afghanistan, on the grounds that an unnamed foreign power had attacked America on September 11, 2001. 

In both cases (Yugoslavia and Afghanistan), “fabricated pretexts” were used to justify the invocation of Article V. 

Fabricating A Pretext to Wage War on Russia?

While Stoltenberg firmly acknowledges that “Russia is not seeking a full-fledged confrontation with NATO triggering Article 5″, he nonetheless intimates that NATO is prepared to invoke Article 5 against Russia, based on a fabricated pretext (e.g attack on “undersea infrastructure”), thereby potentially leading to a World War III scenario. 

Lee Hockstader. WP: Would a Russian attack on critical infrastructure like undersea cables owned by NATO members or companies cause the invocation of NATO’s Article 5?

Stoltenberg: That’s for NATO to decide. We are now looking into how can we do more when it comes to sharing intelligence, including with the private sector, to detect any potential threats.  …

We’ve seen over the last years that Russia is not seeking a full-fledged confrontation with NATO, triggering Article 5, but they’re trying to operate below the Article 5 threshold. Meaning with hybrid, cyber, covert actions. And, of course, attacks against undersea infrastructure — it’s easy to deny because it’s hard to monitor.  (emphasis added)

Stoltenberg’s reference to “undersea infrastructure” intimates that Russia was behind the sabotage of Nord Stream in September 2022, which had been ordered by President Biden with the acceptance of Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz. 

What the above statements suggest is that the invocation of Article 5 as well as the use of “a pretext” to wage war on Russia are being discussed behind closed doors.

Stoltenberg claims that NATO is committed to supporting Ukraine (aka the Neo-Nazi Kiev regime) while “preventing escalation” through  “increased military presence” as well as confirming that “we are not part of the conflict”:

Stoltenberg: NATO has fundamentally two tasks in the war. One is to support Ukraine, as we do. The other is to prevent escalation. And we prevent escalation by making absolutely clear that we are not party to the conflict, and by increasing military presence in the eastern part of [the] alliance as we have done — with 40,000 troops under NATO command backed by substantial naval and air forces.

Contradictory statement: Is “Preventing Escalation” contemplated by Invoking Article 5?

Among NATO Member States, there are both “Allies” and “Enemies” 

It is worth noting that in the course of the last two years, several of America’s European “allies” (NATO member states) whose corrupt politicians are supportive of the Ukraine war, have been the victims of de facto U.S. sponsored acts of economic warfare including the sabotage of Nord Stream.

The EU economy which has relied on cheap energy from Russia is in a shambles, marked by disruptions in the entire fabric of industrial production (manufacturing), transportation and commodity trade..

Specifically this applies to actions against Germany, Italy and France, which have resulted in the destabilization of their national economies and the impoverishment of their population.

See:

NATO/EU Aggression Plunges Germany Into Crisis. “Deindustrialization”

By Rodney Atkinson, August 23, 2023

Video: America is at War with Europe

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 16, 2023

 

“…the sabotage of Nord Stream was an U.S. Act of War against both Germany and the European Union. 

And Germany’s Chancellor was fully aware that an act of sabotage against Nord Stream had been envisaged by the US, to the detriment of more than 400 million Europeans.

A string of corporate bankruptcies resulting in lay-offs and unemployment is unfolding across the European Union. Small and medium sized enterprises are slated to be wiped off the map: “Rocketing energy costs are savaging German industry”… “Germany’s manufacturing industry — which accounts for more than one fifth of the country’s economic output — is worried some of its companies won’t see the crisis through. …. 

“Industry behemoths like Volkswagen (VLKAF) and Siemens (SIEGY) are grappling with supply chain bottlenecks too, but it is Germany’s roughly 200,000 small and medium-sized manufacturers who are less able to withstand the shock [of rising energy prices]” 

“Collective Defense”  

In a bitter irony, many of the NATO member states (who are categorized as “allies” under the Atlantic Alliance’s Collective Defense Clause) are the “de facto enemies” of America, victims of U.S. economic warfare

The practice of so-called Collective Defense under Article 5 constitutes a process of mass recruitment by the 30 NATO member states, largely on behalf of Washington’s hegemonic agenda. It was applied twice in NATO’s history: in March 1999 against Yugoslavia and in October 2001 against Afghanistan.

It constitutes on the part of  Washington not only a means to recruit soldiers on a massive scale,  but also to ensure that NATO member states contribute financially to America’s hegemonic wars: In other words:

“to do the fighting for us on our behalf” or  “They will do the Dirty Work for Us” (Dick Cheney).

What is important is to initiate a coordinated grass-roots movement in all NATO member states to withdraw from the Atlantic Alliance

Neo-Nazism and the Atlantic Alliance 

This article has addressed the Unspoken Truth, which we have known all along, from the very outset: “The War Started in 2014”. This statement –which is now acknowledged by NATO–, was the basis of my detailed analysis.

My conclusions are as follows: 

The Atlantic Alliance has no legitimacy. It is a criminal entity which must be repealed.

US-NATO is responsible for extensive crimes committed against the People of Ukraine.

What is required is a Worldwide campaign at all levels of society, with a view to eventually dismantling the Atlantic Alliance, while promoting an immediate cease fire and meaningful peace negotiations in solidarity with the people of Ukraine. 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, August 27, 2023


Historical Addendum:

The War against Russia Started in January 1918.

From a historical standpoint the US and its Allies have been threatening Russia for more than 105 years starting during World War I with the deployment of US and Allied Forces against Soviet Russia on January 12, 1918, (two months following the November 7, 1917 revolution allegedly in support of Russia’s Imperial Army).

The 1918 US-UK Allied invasion of Russia is a landmark in Russian History, often mistakenly portrayed as being part of a Civil War.

It lasted for more than two years involving the deployment of more than 200,000 troops of which 11,000 were from the US, 59,000 from the UK. Japan which was an Ally of Britain and America during World War I  dispatched 70,000 troops.

US Occupation Troops in Vladivostok 1918


Annex

Below are relevant excerpts from Stoltenberg’s Interview with the Washington Post: (emphasis added)

We suggest you access the full text of the interview, click image below

 

Lee Hockstader, Washington Post Editorial Board: How has the war led NATO to recalibrate its defense posture and doctrine?

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg: The war in Ukraine has fundamentally changed NATO, but then you have to remember the war didn’t start in 2022. The war started in 2014. And since then, NATO has implemented the biggest reinforcement of our collective defense since the end of the Cold War. 

For the first time in our history, we have combat-ready troops in the eastern part of the alliance, the battle groups in Poland, Lithuania, the Baltic countries, actually the whole eight battle groups from the Baltic Sea down to the Black Sea. Higher readiness of our forces. And increased defense spending.

Until 2014, NATO allies were reducing defense budgets. Since 2014, all allies across Europe and Canada have significantly increased their defense spending. And we have modernized our command structure, we have more exercises, we have established new military domains like cyber.

So in totality, this is a huge transformation of NATO that started in 2014.

Hockstader: What does a plausible way forward to Ukraine’s eventual membership in NATO look like?

Stoltenberg: First of all, all NATO allies agree that Ukraine will become a member of the alliance. All allies agree that Ukraine has the right to choose its own path, that it is not for Moscow, but for Kyiv, to decide. And thirdly, all allies agree that NATO’s door remains open. Then the question is when, and I cannot give you a timetable on that.

What I can say is that we are now working with them, to help them transition from Soviet-era equipment, doctrines and standards to NATO doctrines and standards, to make their armed forces interoperable with NATO forces, and to help them to further reform and modernize their defense and security institutions.

The urgent task now is to ensure that Ukraine prevails as a sovereign, independent nation, because if Ukraine doesn’t prevail, then there is no issue to discuss at all.

Stoltenberg: NATO has fundamentally two tasks in the war. One is to support Ukraine, as we do. The other is to prevent escalation. And we prevent escalation by making absolutely clear that we are not party to the conflict, and by increasing military presence in the eastern part of [the] alliance as we have done — with 40,000 troops under NATO command backed by substantial naval and air forces. 

.

Hockstader: Would a Russian attack on critical infrastructure like undersea cables owned by NATO members or companies cause the invocation of NATO’s Article 5?

Stoltenberg: That’s for NATO to decide. We are now looking into how can we do more when it comes to sharing intelligence, including with the private sector, to detect any potential threats. That’s one thing. The other is presence, military presence, as a way to deter but also to monitor.

We cannot protect every inch of every internet cable, but presence helps to reduce the risks and reduce the possibility for Russian deniability. We’ve seen over the last years that Russia is not seeking a full-fledged confrontation with NATO, triggering Article 5, but they’re trying to operate below the Article 5 threshold. Meaning with hybrid, cyber, covert actions. And, of course, attacks against undersea infrastructure — it’s easy to deny because it’s hard to monitor.  

 

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

More and more evidence is emerging about illegal US biomedical activities in ex-Ukrainian territories. In addition to the topic of biological weapons, it was recently discovered that Western Big Pharma companies were conducting drug tests on ethnic Russian citizens in a psychiatric hospital in Donbass with approval and support from Ukrainian authorities.

According to recently discovered documents published by Russian media, patients at a psychiatric hospital in Mariupol (Donetsk People’s Republic) were being subjected to irregular medical tests by agents linked to Western Big Pharma companies.

The hospital “No. 7″ in Mariupol is currently undergoing restoration work. During the repair activities, local employees found documents in the basement of the psychiatric sector’s facilities which prove that foreign companies were unofficially testing rheumatological drugs on local patients.

The objective of the research was to evaluate the effectiveness of medicines according to the standards established by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). Several companies participated in the experiments, including large Big Pharma corporations, such as “Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Celltrion, Novatris International AG, IQVIA, Sanofi, Galapagos NV, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Abbott Laboratories, Covance, Merck KGaA, Centocor Biopharmaceutical and [even] a branch of Samsung that produces medical equipment.”

In the same place where the documents were stored, boxes containing biomaterials were also found. The materials were apparently ready to be sent to laboratories in the US, UK and Switzerland. With this, the Russian authorities were able to obtain biological evidence, not just documentary one, about such research – showing that the experiments were in fact carried out.

“According to the results of studying the documents, it became known that the drugs were tested on people with numbers, without names. The drugs themselves were in white envelopes and also without names. The main purpose of the research was to evaluate the effectiveness of drugs in relation to the proportion of patients who achieved a response to it according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. In addition, boxes were found containing many envelopes from logistics companies and containers for biomaterial with recipient addresses in laboratories in Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States,” Russian report says.

The selection of psychiatric patients appears to have been a “strategic” decision on the part of Western companies and Ukrainian authorities.

Obviously, people with fragile psychiatric conditions are an “easier” target to be convinced to undergo such experiments. More than that, many of the patients may have been subjected to the tests completely unconsciously, having their bodies abusively exploited by foreign doctors.

These practices do not sound surprising, however. It had previously been revealed that foreign agents had carried out tests with neuromodulators on socially vulnerable patients in the Kharkov region. In 2022, Russian forces exposed evidence that experiments of this type had taken place in American military biolaboratories, causing irreversible damage to the nervous systems of several patients submitted to the illegal procedures.

“In accordance with the available information, highly active substances of neuromodulators were tested on socially vulnerable citizens of Ukraine, which caused, among other things, irreversible damage to the central nervous system. This is a clear violation of the norms of international treaties in the field of human rights (…) Thanks to the documents obtained during the special military operation, we became aware that such studies have been carried out in Ukraine since at least 2011, and Alharoun has repeatedly visited the branch of the Merefa laboratory, built at the expense of the Pentagon in the village of Sorokovka, Kharkov region,” Lt. Gen. Igor Kirillov, the head of the radiation, chemical and biological defense of the Russian Armed Forces said at the time.

In fact, American biolaboratories in Ukraine were joint civilian-military schemes, having received funding not only from the Pentagon but also from private organizations such as Big Pharma companies and even “philanthropic” foundations. This broad network to promote biomedical research operated in a cooperation system in which the Pentagon developed biological weapons and private companies used military facilities to operate irregular experiments by inoculating their drugs on vulnerable native patients.

It is shocking to know that the Ukrainian government cooperated with this type of practice and allowed its citizens to be subjected to such abuse by foreign agents. This just shows how in fact the Kiev regime never cared about its own people, being willing to even allow operations of high biological, health danger in its territory just to please its Western “partners”.

Indeed, territorial liberation through Russian military force was the only way to prevent the continuation of these brutal acts.

*

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 journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on X (former Twitter) and Telegram. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

Beware of Big Bad Russian Space Nukes!

February 18th, 2024 by Drago Bosnic

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

It’s truly inexplicable how the “evil” Kremlin is being “defeated” in Ukraine, mostly because its soldiers “lack” weapons and ammo and are forced to fight with “shovels and tree branches”, but still, Russia is somehow able to deploy “nukes in space”.

Precisely this is the “logic” of the mainstream propaganda machine, stuck in a schizophrenic limbo of trying to underestimate Moscow while grossly exaggerating its losses and the need to present it as an immediate threat to the political West.

Namely, on February 14, Ohio Republican Mike Turner, the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said that his panel had “made available to all Members of Congress information concerning a serious national security threat”. The major, imminent, grave, terrifying security threat soon turned out to be “Russian space nukes”!

The mainstream propaganda machine didn’t specify how these weapons got to space, as Russia is just a “nuclear-armed gas station with little to no real economy”. However, in all seriousness, ABC News quoted “two sources familiar with deliberations on Capitol Hill” who allegedly said that “the intelligence has to do with the Russians wanting to put a nuclear weapon into space”.

Still, what the fearmongering media “forgot” to mention in its reports is that this “nuclear weapon in space” would actually be a nuclear-powered anti-satellite weapon (ASAT).

There’s a massive difference between having thermonuclear warheads pointed at Earth from space and having a nuclear-powered spacecraft. The Russian military is already in possession of the former, as it was the world’s first operator of the FOBS back in the early 1960s.

FOBS, an acronym for the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (СЧОБ in Russian), is a thermonuclear weapon system found on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), designed to make their range effectively limitless.

China tested its own version of the technology only in 2021, while the United States has been unable to create anything similar.

Thus, Russia has had this capability for well over half a century, so why is there such hype over a supposed nuclear-powered ASAT all of a sudden?

It’s exceedingly difficult to ignore the fact that this is being used as yet another excuse to push several warmongering agendas at once.

First, it furthers the idea that there “cannot be peace” with Moscow, and

Second, it gives Washington DC the perfect excuse to continue militarizing space, started years before the special military operation (SMO).

House Speaker Mike Johnson played the role of a “good cop” and stated there was “no need for public alarm”, while Turner kept his role as a “bad cop”, calling on President Joe Biden to “declassify information about a serious national security threat”.

On the other hand, three members of the House Intelligence Committee told Politico that the “threat caused by this new Russian capability is disturbing”, but that it’s a “longer-term concern, not a today thing” and that it’s a “serious issue, but not an immediate crisis”.

In other words, it’s extremely likely that Moscow hasn’t even deployed this ASAT system (provided it even plans to). On February 15, the White House even said so, with National Security Council spokesman John Kirby vaguely confirming this assumption by saying that it’s “related to an [ASAT] capability that Russia is developing”.

In fact, Kirby even said that “this is not an active capability that’s been deployed”. In other words, this was an admission that the mainstream propaganda machine’s “end of the world” panic mode in the last two days was absolutely unnecessary.

Kirby even went on to admit that, although this Russian capability is “troubling”, the weapon itself isn’t really a threat to anyone’s safety, as “it cannot be used to attack human beings or cause physical destruction here on Earth”.

It’s very important to note that ASAT weapons have existed for much of the (First) Cold War and that all the fearmongering we’ve seen in the last two days would be almost the same as if somebody complained about thermonuclear weapons that have been around for nearly 80 years at this point. Worse yet, the latter can actually destroy the world, while ASAT weapons can’t.

Still, the US and NATO are indeed looking to militarize space and both have been saying so in recent years.

This includes the belligerent alliance’s top officials, in particular its Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg who openly stated that space is the “next operational domain” back in 2019. Much earlier, during the (First) Cold War, the Reagan administration launched the much-touted SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative) program, now better known under its more popular name – “Star Wars”.

However, unlike the US, whose SDI was largely a PR stunt, Russia actually built space-based weapons, including orbital lasers. What’s more, back in 1987, it launched a laser-armed spacecraft called the “Polyus/Skif-DM”. Although the program was scrapped due to the unfortunate dismantling of the Soviet Union, Moscow kept its know-how.

In fact, Russia even built land-based laser and other directed energy ASAT defenses in recent years, reactivating numerous programs, particularly in the aftermath of NATO-backed long-range attacks by the Kiev regime. Namely, the world’s most aggressive military alliance, a chronic threat to global security, is providing targeting data to its Neo-Nazi puppets through the usage of various ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets, including its vast network of space satellites. It has even embedded private space companies such as SpaceX into its military capabilities. Both Russia and China see this as a threat and are responding in kind, including through close technological cooperation. However, the political West adamantly refuses their overtures to uphold international treaties that ban the militarization of space.

*

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 Strategists Fearing War with Russia. Rand Corporation Report

February 18th, 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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Apparently, American strategists are concerned about the future of US-Russian relations in a post-Ukrainian conflict scenario. In a recent report, one of the most important US think tanks stated that Washington’s implementation of a “hardline” policy in Europe could lead to a direct war with Russia, encouraging American decision-makers to rethink the country’s European policy.

The document was published by the Rand Corporation. According to the think tank’s analysts, if the US tightens its policies in Europe after the conflict, a situation of war with Russia will become very likely. Experts do not believe that Washington is capable of deterring Russia through the militarization of Europe, with all policies in the region becoming forms of provocation against Moscow.

“A hardline postwar US strategy in Europe could make conflict with Russia more — not less — likely,” the report reads.

Analysts also warn of the danger of American policies damaging the unity of the Western bloc. According to them, by implementing bellicose measures in Europe, Washington could come to be seen as a provocateur by its own European partners – mainly France and Germany. Obviously, this would generate discontent and crisis in EU-US relations, as Europeans would feel directly threatened by the imminence of a conflict, given their geographical location close to Russia – which would supposedly make them “easy targets”.

“Russia reinvigorated its defense industry during the war, addressed some military challenges (such as poor training), and gained lethal aid from China. Although NATO is still stronger than Russia, hardline postwar U.S. policies, such as bilateral agreements to deploy more forces to Eastern Europe, lead some allies (such as France and Germany) to see the United States as a provocateur. As a result, those allies’ commitments to collective defense are less robust (…) Both the United States and Russia bolster their force postures along the NATO-Russia frontier. Diplomatic relations remain poor and threat perceptions run high, creating conditions ripe for misperception about intentions. Therefore, the risk of catastrophic conflict is higher than before the war in Ukraine, even if the absolute risk remains low,” Rand’s experts predicted.

Click below. Complete Report in PDF can be downloaded 

The group also warned that a serious escalation of violence in the Ukrainian conflict could have irreversible negative consequences for US’ interests in Europe. American experts believe that at the current moment the best thing for NATO to do is to encourage Kiev and Moscow to negotiate and reach a ceasefire, trying to calm the situation as quickly as possible and reducing the damage on both sides.

However, analysts also state that, although the scenario of war is possible in the future, the current situation generates less fear, as it appears that the US is already taking measures to de-escalate tensions.

They believe that Washington wants to resume dialogue on arms control and that it will not be willing to accept Kiev into NATO, thus reducing the risks of war with Russia.

Unrealistically, Rand also believes that NATO’s deterrent power remains strong enough to prevent Russia from attacking other countries – although this could change in a post-conflict scenario, when Moscow will become even stronger.

“Washington’s willingness to return to bilateral arms control, its lack of support for deeper Ukrainian integration with NATO, and its restraint on engagement with other non-NATO former Soviet countries all reduce U.S.-Russia political tensions. Despite fears that such moves would embolden Russia, these less hardline policies do not undermine NATO’s already strong deterrent. After all, Russia did not attack NATO member states during the war, despite the allies’ unprecedented support for Ukraine.”

In fact, although there are many interesting points in this analysis, most of Rand’s arguments are biased and baseless.

Obviously, an escalation in the militarization of Europe would lead to a scenario of increasing tensions between the US and Russia, which could end in a direct conflict. It is curious to see that even radically anti-Russian think tanks like the Rand Corporation are already admitting this. In practice, this shows how the West’s defeat in Ukraine is already being widely recognized.

However, analysts are wrong in assessing that the US is already taking steps to prevent the worst-case scenario. There is no diplomatic goodwill from the US to resume arms control dialogue with Russia – on the contrary, more and more American aggressive mentality is making the treaties fail, promoting a new arms race.

In the same sense, it is clear that NATO is weakened and at a disadvantage when compared to Russian military capacity. The Western alliance has invested heavily in Ukraine to “wear down” Moscow, spending massive amounts of money and weapons on pointless and unwinnable battles. The bloc is weakened and does not have deterrent power enough to threaten Russia. Therefore, the fact that Russia has not attacked any NATO country is not a consequence of any deterrence or de-escalation measure, but of the lack of Russian interest in waging any war.

Despite the errors in analysis, it would be interesting for the report to be read by American decision makers, so that they can start thinking about the post-conflict scenario. Increasing the militarization of Europe may not only pose a risk of war with Russia, but may be a step towards the destruction of NATO itself, as the Europeans may decide to no longer be used as cannon fodder for American 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 journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Al Mayadeen

Kiev mais uma vez atacou Belgorod. Num bombardeamento brutal contra a cidade fronteiriça russa em 15 de Fevereiro, as forças neonazistas mataram pelo menos seis pessoas, incluindo uma criança. O fato de o ataque ter ocorrido nos primeiros dias da administração militar de Aleksandr Syrsky é talvez um sinal de que o novo general ucraniano seguirá uma estratégia centrada em incursões terroristas contra a zona desmilitarizada da Rússia.

O ataque foi realizado usando um sistema de lançamento múltiplo de foguetes RM-70 “Vampire” fornecido pelo Ocidente. Vários mísseis foram disparados contra Belgorod, tendo mais de uma dúzia deles sido neutralizados pelas forças de defesa russas. Alguns mísseis, no entanto, atingiram alvos civis, resultando em vítimas. É possível que o número de mortes aumente nos próximos dias, tendo em vista que diversas pessoas continuam internadas com ferimentos graves.

Fotos e vídeos gravados por moradores locais têm circulado na internet mostrando as consequências dos atentados. Como se pode verificar nas imagens, os alvos não tinham qualquer relevância militar, tratando-se de instalações como centros comerciais e outros pontos civis. A absoluta ausência de impacto militar na operação ucraniana comprova a intenção de Kiev de matar civis, razão pela qual o ataque pode ser classificado como terrorista.

Os repetidos ataques contra Belgorod – a mesma região onde há algumas semanas Kiev abateu um avião com prisioneiros ucranianos no interior – geraram preocupação entre as autoridades locais. O governo regional pediu à população que permanecesse em alerta máximo, incentivando os residentes a procurarem abrigo em instalações seguras.

Existem algumas razões pelas quais Belgorod é uma cidade particularmente visada por Kiev para este tipo de incursão terrorista. Sendo uma cidade fronteiriça e geograficamente próxima da Ucrânia, Belgorod torna-se um alvo relativamente mais fácil do que outros territórios russos, aumentando o interesse do regime neonazista em lançar ataques na região. Não por acaso, em Dezembro, as forças ucranianas mataram 25 russos e feriram mais de 100 outros durante um violento ataque a Belgorod.

As autoridades russas manifestaram-se várias vezes sobre a gravidade de tais ataques, sublinhando que os atos de terrorismo são absolutamente intoleráveis ​​e que os ataques nas zonas indiscutíveis e desmilitarizadas da Federação legitimam importantes medidas de retaliação. Ao condenar o terrorismo, Moscou não retalia com ataques semelhantes, tendo o cuidado de evitar vítimas civis. O foco das operações de retaliação são as instalações militares e a infraestrutura ucraniana. Neste sentido, são esperados ataques russos de alta intensidade contra tais alvos nos próximos dias.

Um detalhe interessante é que o ataque ocorreu nos primeiros dias da administração militar de Alesaksandr Syrsky. O novo comandante-em-chefe das Forças Armadas da Ucrânia tem gerado expectativas entre os analistas sobre qual será a sua postura na atual crise ucraniana. Alguns especialistas tendenciosos pró-Ocidente acreditam que Syrsky liderará movimentos estratégicos relevantes e permitirá à Ucrânia “mudar o jogo” no campo de batalha, enquanto analistas mais realistas afirmam que ele apenas repetirá nas batalhas atuais o que fez anteriormente no “moedor de carne”. de Bakhmut, quando liderou tropas ucranianas numa operação suicida, gerando perdas desnecessárias para Kiev.

Considerando o incidente em Belgorod, é possível prever que a tática utilizada por Syrsky consistirá na combinação de um “moedor de carne” na linha de frente com o aumento das operações terroristas na fronteira e nas regiões desmilitarizadas. Esta combinação faz sentido para as atuais ambições ucranianas, uma vez que, enfraquecido e sem qualquer hipótese de vencer a guerra, só resta ao regime neonazista se esforçar para continuar a lutar, a fim de provar aos seus patrocinadores ocidentais que vale a pena receber mais armas. Os ataques terroristas não têm valor estratégico do ponto de vista militar, mas funcionam como operações de natureza psicológica, levando o público ocidental a pensar que a Ucrânia é capaz de atingir profundamente a Rússia – legitimando assim o envio de armas de longo alcance.

Contudo, é improvável que as táticas de Syrsky tenham um efeito relevante no longo prazo. A Ucrânia está demasiado fraca para continuar a resistir à retaliação por todos os atos terroristas. Se sofrer muitos ataques russos massivos, Kiev terá rapidamente destruído completamente a sua infraestrutura militar remanescente. Além disso, no campo de batalha o regime ucraniano não consegue continuar a criar novos “moedores de carne”. A capacidade de mobilização de Kiev diminui dia a dia, razão pela qual não será possível repetir novos cenários como os de Bakhmut sem entrar em colapso militar.

Paralelamente, é necessário realçar que estes ataques terroristas ucranianos estão a gerar efeitos cada vez menos positivos na opinião pública ocidental. Em vez de provar ser capaz de vencer a guerra, Kiev simplesmente prova ser um Estado disposto a matar pessoas inocentes para servir os interesses da OTAN. Com o atual crescimento de opiniões críticas sobre a Ucrânia nos países ocidentais, a estratégia de angariar apoio através do terrorismo poderá ser verdadeiramente “suicida” para o regime neonazista.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

Artigo em inglês :

https://infobrics.org/post/40499/

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, jornalista, pesquisador do Center for Geostrategic Studies, consultor geopolítico.

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

Articolo e trasmissione a cura di Manlio Dinucci.

*

 

Stralci dall’intervista a John Shipton, padre di Julian Assange, realizzata da Berenice Galli.

“Devo dire che girando gli Stati Uniti, l’Australia, la Nuova Zelanda e l’Europa ho incontrato sul mio cammino molti altri combattenti per la battaglia della libertà di parola. Ci stiamo dunque rafforzando, nonostante che l’Europa, assieme agli Stati Uniti, all’Australia, al Canada e al Regno Unito, si siano assurdamente resi partner e complici di un genocidio, come previsto da l’articolo 2 C della convenzione di Ginevra sul genocidio.

Ho cominciato a disperare riguardo agli stati vassalli. Tutti i primi ministri d’Europa tranne Orban e il Primo Ministro della Slovacchia, sembrano usciti da una stessa fabbrica, come se fossero tante bottiglie di Coca Cola, hanno qualche minima differenza, ma alla fine sono tutti uguali. E questo è davvero un problema.

Non mi stancherò mai di ripeterlo: quella nei confronti di Julian è una persecuzione e una prosecuzione politica e gli avvocati dell’accusa fanno quello che gli viene detto di fare: continuare la prosecuzione. Mi pare che a questo punto siamo a 27 casi giudiziari che Julian ha dovuto affrontare. Il problema è che il sistema che porta avanti la sua persecuzione è ancora integro: il Dipartimento di Giustizia non si è ancora dissolto per esempio, e porta avanti questa persecuzione, così come il coloniale Ministero degli Esteri del Regno Unito, assieme al Servizio della Procura della Corona, loro non si sono fermati. La prigione di Belmarsh ancora paga i carcerieri che tengono Julian rinchiuso; l’Ufficio della Procura statunitense continua a cercare accuse contro Julian.

Queste persone, questi funzionari governativi si sono macchiati in modo indelebile della persecuzione di Julian, come del genocidio in Medio Oriente che essi sostengono.Macchiati in modo indelebile, per sempre! Non può essere cancellato! Quei…è difficile per me dirlo… quei 17.000 bambini non resusciteranno! Il loro sangue fertilizzerà la terra di Gaza. E cosa nascerà da quella terra? Quale rabbia si diffonderà nell’anima di milioni di esseri umani in tutto il mondo, che si manifesterà con l’odio e con la violenza per difendere lo spirito di quei bambini perduti? Dobbiamo capire tutto questo.”

 

VIDEO :

https://www.byoblu.com/2024/02/16/parla-il-padre-di-assange-mio-figlio-perseguito-politicamente/

 

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Beginning in 1876, the monarchy in Belgium initiated a massive campaign to fully conquer the Congo where tremendous wealth existed in natural resources and labor power.

King Leopold I pursued the riches and workforce in Congo as a private enterprise where agents of the monarchy and other transnational corporations functioned as a de facto regime.

Over the next 32 years until 1908 when the colonial administration in Brussels took over the national oppressive and exploitative system in Congo, several reports indicate that up to ten million Africans were killed in the territories claimed by Belgium.

Several years after the Belgian intervention in Congo during 1884-85, the Berlin West Africa Conference was held in Germany which carved up the continent as spheres of interests for the imperialist powers.

Nonetheless, in the so-called Belgian Congo, Africans from various regions of the country resisted the horrendous methods of domination and forced labor. According to Calvin C. Kolar in his review of the literature on the efforts by the people to repel colonial rule noted that:

“A Force Publique officer reported, ‘I expect a general uprising…the motive is always the same, the natives are tired of the existing regime transport work, rubber collection, furnishing [food] for whites and black…For three months I have been fighting, with ten days rest…Yet I cannot say I have subjugated the people. They prefer to fight or die…What can I do?’ These revolts by the Mongo people highlighted the fact that revolts were not constrained to the Kasai region. Reacting to various pressures, violent resistance was widespread throughout the Congo.”

These developments were by no means isolated incidents. Africans resisted the onslaught of classical colonialism which resulted in the reported deaths of millions. From the late 19th century through the period of World War I, there were several rebellions and organized wars of resistance in the areas now known as Zimbabwe and Malawi, then controlled by Britain, along with Southwest Africa and Tanganyika under German domination.

The attempts to conquer Mashonaland and Matabeleland, now known as Zimbabwe, by the British military forces prompted the First Chimurenga (war of resistance). Africans fought a series of battles over a two-year period (1896-97) against the British.

Due to the lack of sophisticated weapons in abundance, the people of Mashonaland and Matabeleland were eventually defeated militarily and brought under colonial domination. See this.

Later between 1904-1907, the Herero and Nama people of Southwest Africa, now known as Namibia, waged a resistance war against German colonialism. In retaliation for their resistance, the German imperialists systematically relocated and slaughtered 80 percent of the Namibian people. See this.

Also under German control, the colony of Tanganyika experienced a war of resistance popularly referred to as the Maji Maji Revolt of 1905-7. Africans in Tanganyika objected to the theft of their land, the paying of taxes to the colonialists while being subjected to forced labor in the production of agricultural products. (See this)

Image: Belgian colonialism in Congo

These events in Southern and Eastern Africa are highlighted to emphasize that African people responded in similar ways to the rise of colonialism during the 19th and early 20th centuries across the continent. The atrocities committed by the Belgian, British and German colonialists have been well documented by numerous journalists and historians during this period and in subsequent years.

The military phase of the struggle against imperialism in Africa was paralleled by the formation of mass organizations and conferences throughout the world. This process of opposition to European domination was a combined political, cultural and military effort to bring about the eventual independence of these territories and colonial states.

Colonialism in Africa and the Movements Against Racism

On July 23-25, the First Pan-African Conference was held in London, England just prior to the Paris Exposition. The gathering was attended by Africans and people of African descent largely from the British colonies and other English-speaking territories.

This meeting followed the Chicago Columbian Exposition and the Congress on Africa in 1893 where African American leaders such as anti-slavery organizer, women’s suffrage advocate and diplomat Frederick Douglass along with Ida B. Wells, who had built an international reputation as a journalist and an outspoken critic of the United States legal system for its refusal to prosecute mobs and law-enforcement personnel for carrying out thousands of lynchings in the South, utilized Douglass’ links with the Haitian government to distribute thousands of pamphlets exposing the actual conditions of Black people during this period. Wells’ work in defense of the security and rights of African Americans played an instrumental role in the launching of the African American women’s movement which came into fruition during the late 1890s and early 1900s. (See this)

The 1900 Pan-African Conference was described by the following source in this way:

“Speakers over the three days addressed a variety of aspects of racial discrimination. Among the papers delivered were ‘Conditions Favoring a High Standard of African Humanity’ (C. W. French of St. Kitts), ‘The Preservation of Racial Equality’ (Anna H. Jones, from Kansas), ‘The Necessary Concord to be Established between Native Races and European Colonists’ (Benito Sylvain, Haitian aide-de-camp to the Ethiopian emperor), ‘The Negro Problem in America’ (Anna J. Cooper, from Washington), ‘The Progress of our People’ (John E. Quinlan of St. Lucia) and ‘Africa, the Sphinx of History, in the Light of Unsolved Problems’ (D. E. Tobias from the USA). 

By 1912, Duse Muhammad Ali from Egypt, founded the African Times and Orient Review in London. The newspaper published articles in opposition to colonialism in Africa and Asia.

People such as Marcus Garvey, the founder of the Universal Negro Improvement Association-African Communities League (UNIA-ACL) in 1914 worked at the African Times and Orient Review prior to his emergence as world leader. In 1916 Garvey re-located to the U.S. and by the early 1920s, the UNIA-ACL had grown to an international movement with chapters around the U.S., the Caribbean, South America, Europe and in some regions of the African continent. (See this)

Consequently, leading up to the beginning of World War I, there were many instances of political and military resistance to imperialism on the part of African people on the continent and within the Diaspora. The First imperialist war from 1914-1918 led to an intensification of the struggle to end institutional racism and colonialism.

African Resistance to World War I

One of the earliest rebellions against the First Imperialist War took place in the British colony of Nyasaland, which is modern-day Malawi in early 1915. The rebellion was led by John Chilembwe, a U.S.-trained Baptist minister and educator who sought to prevent Africans from being recruited into the war effort.

There were battles on the African continent between German and British imperialist forces over the control of territories. Chilembwe protested the conscription of Africans into the British military for the purpose of fighting the Germans.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in a publication said of the Nyasaland Revolt:

“John Chilembwe’s rising was precipitated by the enlistment of Nyasas and their large death toll in the first weeks of the war in battle with the Germans. In his memorable censored letter to the Nyasaland Times of 26 November 1914 he protested ‘We understand that we have been invited to shed our innocent blood in this world’s war … we are imposed upon more than any other nationality under the sun’.” (See this)

John McCracken in his book entitled “A History of Malawi, 1859-1966, the author said of the Nyasaland Revolt:

“Within a fortnight the revolt had been suppressed. Three Europeans had died; two had been severely wounded, 36 convicted rebels had been executed, many others had been killed by the security forces. ‘For a rebellion against foreign rule, it had been, on the face of it, singularly ineffective’ noted Shepperson and Price in their authoritative account of the rising. Yet, as they also commented, the importance of the rising was far greater than its immediate, quantifiable, impact. A leading historian has claimed that this was the only significant rebellion in the whole of Africa to be inspired by Christianity prior to the First World War. It provided Malawi with its one unproblematic hero, John Chilembwe; his image is now depicted on Malawian bank notes.” 

In the U.S., A. Philip Randolph and Chandler Owens, editors of the Messenger newspaper, which was affiliated with the Socialist Party during World War I, were charged with violating the Espionage Act of 1917. The paper opposed African American involvement in the imperialist war. (See this)

Although Randolph and Owens were arrested at a Socialist Party rally in Cleveland on August 4, 1918, and brought into court for espionage, the judge refused to sentence them because he did not believe that the two young African Americans could have written and edited the Messenger. He believed that they were mere agents of the Socialists and ordered them to leave the city.

Randolph and Owens were only two of the estimated 10,000 people who were arrested for opposing the war, many of whom were socialists. Others were deported for advocating peace and social change. The repression initiated by the Department of Justice during the war continued under Attorney General W. Mitchell Palmer when in 1919-20, 6,000 people were unlawfully detained in over 30 cities.

After the conclusion of the First Imperialist War, Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois convened the Pan-African Congress in Paris. This gathering in 1919 coincided with the escalation of racist violence inside the U.S. along with anti-colonial rebellions in Egypt. (See this and this)

As the 1920s and 1930s would reveal, the struggle against national oppression, institutional racism and imperialism escalated. By the beginning of the Second Imperialist War, the historical stage was set for the advent of the independence and civil rights movements which swept the entire African world.

*

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The United Kingdom paid a high price for Brexit, which spurred inflation, reduced the size of its economy, and compromised the country’s investment capacity, Bloomberg reported on February 12, citing economists at Goldman Sachs. Yet, despite Britain’s economic suffering, the media are demanding a greater financial commitment to support Ukraine’s war on Russia.

Leaving the European Union reduced the UK’s GDP by around 5% compared to the performance of its economic peers, according to Goldman Sachs’ chief European economist, Sven Jari Stehn. He noted that seven years after the referendum campaign, the UK has ended up with an underperforming economy and a rising cost of living due to shrinked international trade, weak business investment and a reduction in migrants from the EU, the UK’s biggest trading partner.

“The evidence points to a significant long-run output cost of Brexit,” Goldman Sachs economists wrote in a note. “The UK has significantly underperformed other advanced economies since the 2016 EU referendum.”

Previous estimates from other observers also pointed to a negative long-term impact of Brexit. In November, the UK’s National Institute for Economic and Social Research (NIESR) estimated that Brexit reduced the size of the economy by 2-3%, an impact that is expected to increase to 5-6% by 2035. According to estimates made last year by the UK’s Office for Budget Responsibility, leaving the EU likely reduced economic output by 4%.

However, according to Goldman economists, not all the UK’s economic problems can be linked to leaving the EU. The headwinds of Brexit add to the damage caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the high interest rates necessary to control inflation, which has reached historic highs in the UK, and the energy crisis triggered by the UK-sponsored Ukraine war on Russia.

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said in January that he would increase military aid to Ukraine in the next financial year to £2.5 billion pounds, an increase of £200 million on the previous two years. Sunak and Volodymyr Zelensky also signed a security agreement that the Ukrainian president said would remain in place until Kiev joins NATO, something that will certainly not occur in the short-medium term.

London’s unrelenting support for the Kiev regime has resulted in Russia imposing sanctions on 18 British citizens, including officials, academics, and so-called Russia experts.

“We are forced to state that Russophobically charged British representatives do not shy away trying to discredit the constitutional system and socio-political processes in our country,” Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on February 12. “By pushing the Zelensky regime to continue the bloodshed, the British must realise that, along with Ukrainian neo-Nazis, they bear responsibility for crimes against civilians.”

Despite the UK’s economic suffering, there is very little criticism in the British media about billions of pounds being wasted on a futile war that Ukraine has no chance of winning. Although there is a begrudging acknowledgement that sanctions against Russia are failing whilst the British economy struggles, there is no critiquing or criticism of the billions of pounds being funnelled to Ukraine.

Notable is the Sun’s article published on February 10, ludicrously titled: “Two years of war and sanctions but as the UK economy struggles, tyrant Vladimir Putin’s Russia is GROWING.”

“By imposing the toughest-ever ­economic sanctions on the Kremlin to add to our generous backing for Ukraine, Joe Biden and Co assumed that the Russian economy would tank, Putin would run out of cash to pay for his army, then the Russian people — not least the pampered super-rich oligarchs — would rebel against Putin for plunging them into poverty,” the outlet wrote, adding that the Russian economy has grown faster than any in Western Europe, unemployment in Russia has fallen sharply since war broke out.

However, staying true to form, the British outlet, rather than demanding an end to the war and a prioritisation of fixing the economy, stated that “the world must give Ukraine enough to win, not just survive.”

Very few realise that the British media juggernaut has adopted an anti-Russia position since the 19th century and has continued unrelentingly ever since. The vitriolic Russophobia is so entrenched that even during a period of economic struggle, the British media are demanding an increase in financial support for Ukraine on the delusional premise that the war-torn country has any chance of pushing back Russian forces from their former territories. With such an attitude, it is demonstrable why the UK has never been able to recover from Brexit.

*

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.

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

Featured image: UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak greets Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky outside Chequers, the prime minister’s countryside residence, where the president arrived by helicopter on Monday seeking pledges of further military support. The UK promised hundreds of air-defense missiles and drones to Ukraine. / UK Government photo.

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

On February 14, Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon killed at least seven civilians, after Hezbollah rocket fire killed an Israeli soldier.

In Souaneh, a woman was killed along with her two children.  Rawaa al-Mohammed, and her two sons, Hassan Mohsen, 13, and Amir Mohsen, 2 were killed in their home.

In Aadchit, one man was killed, and 10 others were injured by Israel.

In another Israeli strike, two women, and four members of one family were killed by Israel, and none of those killed had any connection to Hezbollah.

Israeli government spokesperson Ilana Stein told Reuters,

“The current reality, where tens of thousands of Israelis are displaced [in the north] and cannot return to their homes, is unbearable. They must be able to return home and live in peace and security.”

Stein never mentioned the 28,000 killed in Gaza, or the 1.2 million in Rafah now awaiting planned extermination by the Israel Defense Forces.

On February 13, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah warned Israeli leaders,

“To those who threaten us with a widening of the war: if you widen, we will too,” he said, adding that “those who think the resistance might be afraid are very mistaken”.

He also vowed that Hezbollah would only cease fire “when the aggression stops and there is a ceasefire in Gaza”.

While the Israeli war on the people of Gaza rages on, Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Alwan N. Amin Eddine, founder of Sita Institute, Beirut, and the author of ‘Paths to War: An Analysis of International and Regional Potential Sources of Conflict’, 2019. 

Steven Sahiounie (SS): The situation between Hezbollah and Israel is very tense. In your opinion, do you see the US supporting Israel in a large air campaign to destroy Hezbollah?

Alwan N. Amin Eddine (AE):  I don’t see the US being able to do anything in Lebanon, especially since the US is in an election year.  The US tradition for a presidential election year is one that they will not begin a major war and hand it over to a new president.  Therefore, it is my opinion that the US will not enter a major war in Lebanon at this time.  Of course, Hezbollah is a target for both Israel and the US, and especially after all the accusations Hezbollah has faced in the past from the US and others.

We should be fearful of the madness of Benjamin Netanyahu, because he has not achieved any field victories in Gaza.  Netanyahu’s only achievement in Gaza has been the deaths of civilians, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, and freeing only two hostages.

Netanyahu is afraid of the corruption charges against him, because he will certainly be put in prison.  For this reason, he must remain in power in order to remain personally free. The only reason Netanyahu wants to continue the Gaza war as long as possible, is to delay his own incarceration.  This war in Gaza is fought by Netanyahu as a personal matter, to save himself.  And I think, the political future of Netanyahu is at risk, and he does not want to end up like Ehud Olmert, who was sentenced to prison for the Lebanese war in 2006, and the first Gaza war.

Today, Netanyahu is behaving like a gambler; he is losing, but still borrowing money while hoping he will win eventually. 

In my opinion, the US interference in a war in Lebanon is out of the question.  The only way the US could begin a major war in Lebanon, would be in response to some big unexpected event.

All of the Europeans, and Americans who have come to Lebanon recently, have said they are against enlarging the Gaza war into a regional war. In his last visit to the Middle East, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken assured the various Arab leaders that the Gaza war will not be enlarged upon.

Even the Iranian Foreign Minister announced that the fear is not from a regional war, but the fear is what Netanyahu, and his Likud Party might do in Gaza, and against the Palestinian people.

SS: Prime Minister Mikati and others have condemned the Israeli airstrikes and drone attacks. In your view, can the Lebanese government do anything to decrease tensions?

AE: The Lebanese government has a very weak military, because the Lebanese Army is dependent on US aid, which comes with conditions.  Even when Lebanon asks for the smallest, and most basic weapons, the US still places conditions on them.  The Americans will say where, when and how those weapons can be used.

An example of this, is when the Lebanese Army clashed with the Radical Islamic terrorist group, Fetah al-Islam in Nahar al-Bared, US Secretary of State Condelezza Rice refused to allow the Lebanese Army to arm their helicopters in the fight.  However, the Lebanese Army insisted on using them, and making adjustments, according to my recollections.

The Lebanese government, and its army, are severely handicapped due to the lack of aircraft and helicopters.  The aircraft are not war-ready or capable. The Lebanese Army is one of the strongest armies in the region concerning training.  The ideology of the Lebanese Army includes resistance to the Israeli occupation. 

Concerning the Israeli attacks on Lebanon, the government sent formal complaints to the UN, and the Arab leaders, and Hezbollah responds to the attacks on the battlefield.  The Lebanese government have stated officially they do not want the war to enlarge, and they have no ability to prevent the many Israeli attacks.  However, the Lebanese Army may respond to the Israeli attacks, and they have done so in the past, and have lost martyrs to the Israeli aggression.

SS: Lebanon has experienced a financial disaster. In your opinion, if a ceasefire begins in Gaza, what effect will it have on Lebanon?

AE: Concerning the financial crisis in Lebanon: it is not related to the war in Gaza. Only if there were major regional changes, like peace treaties, or UN resolution 1701 being implemented, the surrendering of weapons, and Hezbollah being pull back, then the west will give the government a financial inducement which could help the economy.

The financial crisis in Lebanon, is not similar to the crisis in Greece and Cyprus in the past.  The Lebanese crisis is rooted in the fundamentals of the country. There are conflicting financial decisions throughout the government, and corruption in every corner of the regime. In my opinion, I do not see a connection between the war in Gaza and the financial crisis in Lebanon.

The Lebanese financial crisis is continuing, and Lebanon needs new financial resolutions, emerging banks, and remitting money back to account holders, even if it may be done in segments over time.

In my opinion, there might be a connection between the war on Gaza and the US presidential election, because if Hamas keeps resisting, and the Israeli army pulls out, and Israel realizes this point very well, that it will be an achievement for the axis of resistance.  The axis of resistance will use this to implement several conditions that they demand in the various countries they reside in, such as: Yemen, Gaza, Lebanon, Iraq, but not Syria.  In Syria, the situation is different because of the presence of Russia and the alliances between them. 

Although there is not a connection between Gaza and the Lebanese financial crisis, there could be a connection between Gaza and filling the Lebanese presidential vacancy.

*

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

July 12, 2023 – UCSF Doctor Dr. Bob Wachter contracts COVID and collapses (6x COVID-19 Vaccinated).

We’re all wishing a speedy recovery to UCSF’s cult-hit COVID sage Dr. Bob Wachter,  who contracted the virus himself this week, then collapsed in the shower and suffered bleeding around the brain and a neck fracture.

SFist has often turned to UCSF Department of Medicine Chair Dr. Bob Wachter for advice on navigating COVID-19, and he’s become something of a local Twitter superstar for his data-rich, highly approachable, lengthy Twitter threads on the matter. He also conducted a weekly “Grand Rounds” forum on the pandemic on YouTube, which just aired its last episode two weeks ago.

Yet Dr. Wachter himself had not yet contracted COVID-19 — though he tweeted through his son getting the virus and when his wife had long COVID.

But Wachter did recently contract COVID-19, and started experiencing symptoms this past Sunday. And one of the consequences of those symptoms was pretty out of the ordinary, as the Chronicle reports Wachter collapsed in the shower and suffered some brutal injuries

If you’re saying  “Pics or GTFO,” Wachter has the pics to prove it. Be warned, some of them are graphic, and they are of course displayed in a signature Bob Wachter tweetstorm.

 

First, yes, that is the bathroom trash can onto which Wachter fell, and left a significant dent in. The fall happened during or just after a shower — he doesn’t remember — and this was after he woke up with serious sweats from the virus.

“I made a mistake – I took a shower,” he said. “While the instinct to take a shower when you’re sweaty and gross is understandable, stepping into hot water when you’re dehydrated and flu-ish can cause your blood vessels to dilate, leading to a dangerous drop in blood pressure.”

“And that’s what happened: I [woke] up in a bloody pool on my bathroom floor,” he added. “I had smashed the hell out of both my right forehead & the back of my scalp.”

 

Being Dr. Bob Wachter, he of course gets highly technical with the medical terminology. “Given the extent of injuries on both front & back of head, the ED docs ordered a head and cervical spine CT,” he tweeted. “The head CT showed a small subdural hematoma, a little rim of bleeding in the space around the brain. This bought me an overnight stay in the hospital for a repeat scan to ensure the bleeding wasn’t enlarging; it also led to a week of an anti-seizure medication.”

“More fun: the spine CT showed a small non-displaced cervical fracture (C3 for aficionados), which bought me a cervical spine collar and a few neurological exams to be sure I had no symptoms of spinal cord damage,” he added. “With that kind of syncope and fall, I could easily have taken out an eye, been paralyzed from my spine injury, or died of a subdural bleed. I must have bruised my flank pretty good going down, since that’s what hurts more than anything – no fun while I was coughing.”

 

But Wachter says he is not alarmed enough to make any changes to his famously COVID-cautious behavior.

“As long as the case rates remain low (they are now, tho wastewater is showing a little uptick; Figure), I’ll continue being relatively careful, but no more than I’ve been,” he concluded on Twitter. “I will, however, be more careful about showering or taking a hot bath or hot tub when dehydrated. That’s one important takeaway from this mess.”

*

July 26, 2023:

 

 

Dr. Bob Wachter, UCSF Chair of Medicine is 6x Vaccinated. How do we know?

 

 

These are the COVID-19 Vaccines recommended in Canada, but the recommendations are almost identical in the US:

If he had his 2nd bivalent in April 2023, that was his 6th COVID-19 Vaccine.

It makes sense that the UCSF Chair of Medicine would always be “UPTODATE” on his jabs.

2024:

 

 

 

 

Dr. Bob’s wife has “Long COVID” (April 2023):

Click here to view the video

Dec. 15, 2023 – Philippines, DOCTOR Rowena Burden, 58, dead of a HEART ATTACK on December 15, 2023. “6th COVID-19 Vaccination Done..2 primary series (2 Sinovac and 2 full-dose Moderna) #heterologous and 2 boosters (half-dose Moderna & full-dose #Pfizer

Image

*

Dec. 2023 – New Zealand family doctor Dr. Sandhya Ramanathan had her 6th COVID-19 Vaccine. She got COVID after her booster but is thankful for the vaccine that did absolutely nothing for her.

My Take… 

The idea that anyone would take 6 failed experimental COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines, let alone a doctor, seems utterly irrational.

It is unclear what caused UCSF Dr.Bob Wachter’s collapse. He believes it was COVID. But it could also have been a COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine TIA (Transient ischemic attack) or a mini-stroke.

How common are post COVID-19 Vaccine strokes or collapses? WHO VigiAccess Database shows:

  • 398,269 Dizziness
  • 74,906 Syncope
  • 34,623 Loss of consciousness
  • 18,461 Cerebrovascular accidents
  • 6,331 transient ischemic attack (mini-strokes)

 

 

In 2022, COVID-19 Vaccine Induced strokes skyrocketed: 

UK Government Disability Data shows a stunning rise of strokes causing disability in 2022 for all age groups of +127%.

 

Conclusion 

I’m glad Dr. Bob made a full recovery from his fall. But it seems he hasn’t even considered the possibility of injury from 6 COVID-19 Vaccines, especially considering that clotting is one of the more common side effects.

His wife, presumably 6x COVID-19 Vaccinated also, allegedly suffers from Long COVID (or more likely COVID-19 Vaccine injury).

With his strict N95 masking regimen, I have to assume that he is a “true believer” and not that he is putting on a theatrical performance.

He had a very close call with that bad fall, he got COVID anyways, and his wife has been harmed as well, yet he persists with pushing the same failed pharma products that have almost certainly damaged his family.

It really does seem like many doctors are willing to quietly accept shortened lives, disability and even death, rather than admit they were wrong.

*

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


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

How do you like the idea of 3 years in prison for speaking out against the toxic jabs?

This is an evolving issue. In recent developments according to France Info:

The rejection of the measure on the night of Tuesday, February 13 had caused an outcry in the macronist ranks in the Assembly.

After long debates, the deputies adopted at first reading the draft law against sectarian excesses on Wednesday, February 14, in which they reintegrated the controversial article 4, which creates a new crime of “provocation to abstention from medical care”.

Translated from French

Décret de présentation

La Première ministre,

Sur le rapport du ministre de l’intérieur et des outre-mer,

Vu l’article 39 de la Constitution,

Décrète :

Le présent projet de loi visant à renforcer la lutte contre les dérives sectaires, délibéré en conseil des ministres après avis du Conseil d’État, sera présenté au Sénat par le ministre de l’intérieur et des outre-mer, qui sera chargé d’en exposer les motifs et d’en soutenir la discussion, avec le concours de la secrétaire d’État auprès du ministre de l’intérieur et des outre-mer, chargée de la citoyenneté et auprès du ministre de l’intérieur et des outre-mer et du ministre de la transition écologique et de la cohésion des territoires, chargée de la ville.

Fait à Paris, le 15 novembre 2023

Signé : Élisabeth BORNE

Par la Première ministre :

Le ministre de l’intérieur et des outre-mer

Signé : Gérald DARMANIN

La secrétaire d’État auprès du ministre de l’intérieur et des outre-mer, chargée de la citoyenneté et auprès du ministre de l’intérieur et des outre-mer et du ministre de la transition écologique et de la cohésion des territoires, chargée de la ville

Signé : Sabrina AGRESTI-ROUBACHE

TRANSLATION

Presentation decree

The Prime Minister,

On the report of the Minister of the Interior and Overseas,

Having regard to Article 39 of the Constitution,

Decree:

This draft law to strengthen the fight against sectarian excesses, deliberated in the Council of Ministers pursuant to the opinion of the Council of State, will be presented to the Senate by the Minister of the Interior and Overseas, who will be responsible for setting out the reasons and supporting the discussion, with the assistance of the Secretary of State to the Minister of the Interior and Overseas, in charge of citizenship and to the Minister of the Interior and Overseas and the Minister of Ecological Transition and Territorial Cohesion, in charge of the city.

Paris, November 15, 2023

Signed: Élisabeth BORNE

By the Prime Minister:

The Minister of the Interior and Overseas

Signed: Gérald DARMANIN

The Secretary of State to the Minister of the Interior and Overseas, in charge of citizenship and to the Minister of the Interior and Overseas and the Minister of Ecological Transition and Territorial Cohesion, in charge of the city

Signed: Sabrina AGRESTI-ROUBACHE

After article 223-1-1 of the penal code, article 223-1-2 is inserted as follows:

”  Art. 223-1-2 . – Provocation to abandon or abstain from following therapeutic or prophylactic medical treatment is punishable by one year of imprisonment and a fine of 15,000 euros, when this abandonment or abstention is presented as beneficial for the health of the persons targeted when it is, in the state of medical knowledge, clearly likely to result in serious consequences for their physical or psychological health, taking into account the pathology from which they suffer.

Provocation to adopt practices presented as having a therapeutic or prophylactic purpose for the persons concerned is punishable by the same penalties when it is, in the state of medical knowledge, clear that these practices expose them to an immediate risk of death. or injuries likely to result in mutilation or permanent disability.

“When the provocation provided for in the first two paragraphs has been followed by effects, the penalties are increased to three years of imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euros.

“When these offenses are committed through the written or audiovisual press, the specific provisions of the laws which govern these matters are applicable with regard to the determination of the persons responsible. »

The “authoritarians” in the French government wanted a law where they could shut down anyone presenting any alternatives to their “state of medical knowledge”.

For example, anyone claiming that their modRNA gene therapy treatments are harmful. The punishment? Up to three years in prison.

Surely, no parliament would ever agree to this, Right?

Stupid rhetorical question since we already know they wanted to imprison people for not taking the jabs in Canada, and they did imprison people in Austria, and our “leaders” talked about critics as “taking up space” and being “dangerous extremists” – it was clear where this was heading a long time ago).

But now it is formalized in France

On February 13, 2024 , the French National Assembly approved the bill:

While the National Assembly had rejected, on the night of Tuesday February 13 to Wednesday February 14, article 4 of the bill aimed at “strengthening the fight against sectarian aberrations”, a second deliberation took place on Wednesday after- noon, on the measure relating to the creation of an offense of inciting people to abandon care. The government and its relative majority this time won their case against the main opposition groups. 

The transpartisan work paid off .” Not without a certain optimism, this is how the Secretary of State for Citizenship, Sabrina Agresti-Roubache , chose to summarize the bitter battle waged in the hemicycle of the National Assembly between defenders and slayers of Article 4 of the bill “aimed at strengthening the fight against sectarian abuses” , at the end of the examination of the text on first reading.  

Specifically dedicated to therapeutic abuses, this article 4 creates a new offense aimed at punishing

provocation to abandon or abstain from following therapeutic or prophylactic medical treatment “, as well as

provocation to adopt practices presented as having a therapeutic or prophylactic purpose “,

when these incentives can prove to be “particularly serious” for physical or psychological health .

Seen by most opposition groups – with the exception of the Socialist group – as an a priori condemnation of so-called “parallel” medicine, as posing a threat to whistleblowers, the government and the majority have in initially failed to get the measure adopted.

The sincerity of this fight against sectarian aberrations must not consist of sanctioning by law complementary care practices or the consumption of phytotherapeutic products ,” said Jean-François Coulomme (La France insoumise) , when Thomas Ménage (Rassemblement national) had castigated ” a liberticidal drift ” and Paul Molac (LIOT) a ” danger for [ the ] freedom of expression “. The amendments to delete article 4 – presented by deputies from Les Républicains, Rassemblement national, Gauche Démocrate et Républicaine, and LIOT – were adopted by almost 8 votes ( 116 For, 108 Against ).

This was without taking into account the determination of the government and the majority.

Wednesday February 14, at the end of the examination of the bill, the president of the Laws Committee, Sacha Houlié (Renaissance) , spoke in the hemicycle to request a second deliberation , as permitted by the Article 101 of the  Regulations of the National Assembly. This provides that ” the second deliberation is by right at the request of the Government or the commission seized with the merits “.

Brigitte Liso therefore presented an amendment to reinstate – and rewrite – Article 4.

If the rapporteur stressed that the offense would not be constituted when proof of the free and informed consent of the person is provided , she also specified that the new wording brought an additional dimension linked to the protection of whistleblowers, which was  the reason for the law of December 9, 2016 relating to transparency, the fight against corruption and the modernization of economic life.

An objective reaffirmed in the text of the amendment, according to which ” the information reported or disclosed by the whistleblower under the conditions provided for in Article 6 ” of the law previously cited ” does not constitute provocation ” in the sense of article 4 of this bill.

A precaution that the Socialists group itself had proposed by amendment, allowing one of its members, Arthur Delaporte , to unreservedly praise the reinstatement in the text of the offense aimed at punishing incitement to abandon care. “ With this article, we defend science ,” he also welcomed.

A tone radically different from that expressed by the main opposition groups – Rassemblement national, La France insoumise, Les Républicains – who voted against the amendment aimed at reinstating article 4.

During the debates, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (no registered) denounced a method of “contempt, of force “,

Jean-François Coulomme (LFI) deplored the absence of ” seriousness of the deliberation “.

And following the  reinstatement of article 4 (by 182 votes “for” and 137 “against”, details of the vote here ), Aurélien Pradié (LR) denounced ” a Pyrrhic victory “.

The entire bill was finally adopted, on first reading, by 151 votes to 73 He will now continue his legislative journey by returning to the Senate. 

It just needs to pass the Senate now, and the French will be well on the way to the authoritarian medical dystopia we have predicted.

Just as in Canada, and elsewhere, it is the authoritarian “Left/Liberals” [coopted by the WEF, powerful financial interests as well as Big Pharma] who are using The Science ™ (State Scientism) as a weapon against their enemies, the people. It is the “populist” parties who are defending the people.

In France, the biggest opposition to the Bill came from the Rassemblement National, which Wikipedia describes as:

…right-wing populist party in France.[9] It is the largest parliamentary opposition group in the National Assembly…It is an anti-immigration party, advocating significant cuts to legal immigration and protection of French identity,[10] as well as stricter control of illegal immigration. It also advocates for a ‘more balanced’ and ‘independent’ French foreign policy by opposing French military intervention in Africa and by distancing France from the American sphere of influence by leaving NATO’s integrated command. It supports the reform of the European Union (EU) and its related organisations. It also supports economic interventionism and protectionism, and zero tolerance of breaches of law and order.[11] The party has been accused of promoting xenophobia and antisemitism.[12]

If the Senate approves this Bill, which they probably will, the populists will grow in strength.

We have long predicted that populist/libertarian/traditionalist political parties will regain control; but will this be before the social fabric of our societies has been totally destroyed?

And, even more pressingly, will this be before the globalists roll out their plan for global vaccine mandates?

*

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

In the New York Times on October 5, 2002, reporter Michael Gordon authored “C.I.A. Says Iraq Revived Forbidden Weapons Programs After the U.N. Inspectors Left.” It reported “a classified National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s programs to make weapons of mass destruction was provided to Congress early this week,” and quoted an unclassified summary of that Estimate, or NIE, saying “although Saddam probably does not yet have nuclear weapons… he remains intent on acquiring them.”

A month earlier, Gordon worked with Judith Miller to co-author what was to become an infamous article, “U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts.” That piece was based on interviews with George W. Bush administration officials who previewed the public case for war, claiming “Iraq has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes” that “could be used to make centrifuges to enrich uranium.” Miller and Gordon added that technical specifications “persuaded American intelligence experts” that the attempted tube purchases were for Iraq’s nuclear program.

Both articles were important parts of the Bush administration’s case for war, but the second was more impactful than the first. Everyone knew the White House was hot to take out Hussein, but news that a major intelligence report backed the administration’s belief about a reconstituted Iraqi nuclear program suggested widespread agreement across government about the White House’s conclusions. The CIA’s “intent on acquiring them” line was critical in helping Bush build public consensus and gain congressional approval to attack. As Gordon noted, the report came at “a critical juncture in the Congressional debate over the possible use of force.”

As it turned out, the 2002 NIE was a pioneering effort in a new form of executive mischief, one that wedded selective releases of classified research to suppression of dissent to build public cases for action, with secrecy rules guaranteeing long delays between initial public deceptions and later disillusioning revelations. This practice is at the center of today’s Racket/Public story about how the January 6, 2017 report that “Cooked the Intelligence” to hide that Russia didn’t fear a Clinton presidency, and people of all political persuasions should care about it because the corruption issue isn’t partisan.

This is a process problem, and what was laid out to us about the crooked techniques used to “cook” the last surviving myth of the Russiagate era — that Vladimir Putin ordered an “influence campaign” to help Trump — could be used by any party, any administration, any group of intelligence officials seeking to use a bogus pretext to do something nasty.

Using dubious foreign conclusions to buttress the initial domestic campaigns is part of the pattern. The October 2002 American report on “Iraq’s Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction” was written on the heels of a British assessment from September 24, 2002, that among other things claimed that some of Saddam Hussein’s WMDs were ready for deployment “within 45 minutes of an order to use them.” Not until a year later, in August of 2003, did reports begin to emerge sourced to British dossier scientist David Kelly that the UK assessment had been “sexed up.” British journalist Alistair Campbell described talking to Kelly, who said he’d been told a week before publication that the British report was insufficiently exciting. From the Guardian:

“He said ‘until the last week, it wasn’t very exciting, it was transformed the week before publication.’

“I said ‘To make it sexy?’ and he said ‘Yes, to make it sexy.’”

For the U.S., the WMD story fell apart on the ground in Iraq, where searches came up empty, but it also fell apart on paper, as intelligence secrets began to leak out. On July 25th, 2003, after the invasion, a paper called “Declassified and Released Excerpts of the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq,” was released that began to hint at things the public wasn’t told in October 2002. Lines like We have low confidence in our ability to assess when Saddam Hussein might use WMD stood out.

Only in 2015, when the 2002 NIE was finally declassified, did we find out how badly our own intel had been “sexed up.” A remarkable array of crude tricks was used to manipulate opinion toward invasion. A little white-out transformed “We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs” into the far more convincing pre-invasion line: “Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs.”

The early NIE also redacted dissenting opinions from the Department of Energy, the Air Force, and the intelligence wing of the State Department, the Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), reduced to a distant implication in lines like “most analysts assess” or “most analysts believe.” Officials even added lines for the public’s benefit only about Saddam having biological agents capable of threatening “the US Homeland.” It was all a scam.

The manipulation of Iraq intelligence remains, for modern Democrats, the archetypal corruption story of our century. It’s the unforgivable sin that sullied Bush forever in our eyes and also, incidentally, helped launch “constitutional lawyer” and Iraq critic Barack Obama to the White House over Hillary Clinton, who saw the classified NIE and voted for the war anyway. The “sexed up” British scandal will forever be a black mark on Labor Prime Minister Tony Blair, once slated for historical honors as a paradigm-shifting “Third Way” politician. It therefore makes no sense that Democrats and progressives on both sides of the pond shouldn’t be horrified by the story of how the 2017 ICA was corrupted, a tale that we also learned this week followed an equally upsetting campaign of political espionage targeting at least 26 Trump aides and associates.

The story released in Racket and Public today is remarkably similar to the 2002 disaster, and likely worse. In the 2017 “Intelligence Community Assessment” which is the subject of today’s piece, dissent wasn’t just confined to the classified version and kept from the public, but rather pre-empted entirely. Here, the State Department’s INR was barred from participating in the analysis process, as was the enormous Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), which has coverage responsibility for a supposed key player in the Russian influence story, the GRU. This is why it was, in fact, a big deal when news agencies erroneously reported that “17 agencies” backed the ICA instead of three, as Clapper later conceded in testimony. An assessment of Russian activity based on opinions from all 17 agencies would almost certainly have been as riddled with dissent as the Iraq NIE.

Former Ambassador to Russia Jack Matlock claimed years ago that the INR was kept out because “it did, in fact, have a different opinion” on the central question of Russia’s motives. One source I spoke with for this story said the same thing, while another suggested CIA chief John Brennan barred the INR out of concern about leaks. The structure of the informal ICA, a more “agile” intelligence product that’s come in vogue only recently, allowed Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to create a “hand-picked” team of analysts that included the likes of Peter Strzok, the senior FBI counterintelligence official who ran the investigation targeting Trump. Brennan couldn’t secure unanimity even within this group, as Admiral Michael Rogers of the NSA and at least two senior CIA Russia experts refused to sign off on the conclusion that the “influence campaign” was undertaken to help Trump. Even James Comey didn’t endorse this crucial idea until mid-December, 2016. In fact, the FBI leaked statements to the contrary to the New York Times days before the election.

*

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: Former CIA directors George Tenet (left), and John Brennan (center), and Gina Haspel (right) at the funeral of George H.W. Bush in 2018

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

 

 

Over the past four months I have carried out my daily morning scan of the major online news websites increasingly concerned over what I would be seeing given the mainstream media’s reluctance to report honestly and the persistent management by government propaganda mills of what is leaked to the journalists.

News regarding what is taking place with Russia-Ukraine suffered initially as the war turned sharply in Moscow’s favor late last year, so much so that the likely outcome is only being challenged on neocon dominated sites like American Enterprise Institute, Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the National Review. President Joe Biden and team are now only struggling to raise $61 billion for Volodymyr Zelensky to prolong the conflict through the US election later this year so Biden can appear to be a strong “wartime” president fighting hard to defend the United States from the threatening Red Hordes. That the money will essentially drop down the hole of Ukrainian corruption seems to bother no one in the White House, but the game goes on with Biden saying

“This bipartisan bill sends a clear message to Ukrainians and to our partners and to our allies around the world: America can be trusted, America can be relied upon, and America stands up for freedom. We stand strong for our allies. We never bow down to anyone, and certainly not to Vladimir Putin. So, let’s get on with this….Are [we] going to side with terror and tyranny? Are [we] going to stand with Ukraine, or are [we] going to stand with Putin? Will we stand with America or – or with Trump?”

The president is also currently pumping the line that he is somehow saving or protecting “democracy.” The fact that Ukraine, banning political parties and even religious groups and the Russian language, is no democracy does not seem to impact on the narrative. And don’t forget how the Zelensky government recently murdered American journalist Gonzalo Lira for his exercising freedom of the press!

Biden argues that standing by America’s “allies,” even when they are not actual allies, is essential to maintain confidence in the United States and its leadership mission to create a “rules based international order” and thereby save the world. Beyond Ukraine, there is, of course, America’s “best friend” and “greatest ally” Israel which also is no democracy as Palestinian citizens have limited rights, with those living on the Israeli army occupied West Bank having effectively no protection from being arrested arbitrarily or even shot on sight by rampaging soldiers and settlers, who fear no consequences for killing and robbing Arabs because there are no consequences.

The bombing of Gaza into the stone age continues with hardly any coverage in the mainstream media as if it is an atrocity that will disappear from the collective conscience if no one refers to it in spite of the rows of dead women and children. The US and European media meanwhile blithely report every new “Hamas atrocity” promoted by the habitually lying Israeli Army (IDF) as if it were the truth while Biden is pulling out the stops to provide the cash ($14 billion) and weapons to enable the IDF to kill more Palestinians while at the same time mock-mourning the slaughter of the innocents that is taking place. The ghastly death toll is a direct result of Joe’s lack of any action to force the Israelis to change course, which he has the leverage to do with a phone call to Benjamin Netanyahu threatening to cut off the cash, arms and political support. But the administration has made plain that it has no intention to do anything like that.

But even given all of that excitement last week there is one story that stands out, the video of former Secretary of State and CIA Director Mike Pompeo in Israel grinning and dancing with celebrating Israeli soldiers, who presumably have just returned from Gaza after having had the pleasure of blasting a few more score of civilians, including a large percentage of children.

The Israeli Army’s latest stunt is to position snipers and tanks around the last functioning major medical facility in Rafah district in the south of Gaza, the Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis. The Palestinians trying to survive in Gaza were previously ordered by Israel to go to Rafah where they would be “safe” but it was a self-serving lie and the military then proceeded to bomb and shoot civilians, even when they were trying to surrender, and also destroying infrastructure like hospitals and schools to make the area uninhabitable. The army in Gaza’s snipers have now joined in the fun by shooting doctors and patients inside the building and on the grounds to force Nasser Hospital to evacuate and shut down. They followed up on the shooting gallery by storming the hospital, allegedly in search of “hostages.” It is all part of what is developing as Netanyahu has announced that the ground invasion of Rafah will soon begin even though the encaged Palestinians, who are already starving due to the Israeli blockade of humanitarian aid, have nowhere to go and many more thousands will die one way or another.

As a taste of what is to come that is even more bizarre than what has already transpired, Israel’s “most moral army in the world” has now also gone into the entertainment business. It has begun to invite groups of Israeli civilians into detention centers and prisons that have been holding West Bank Palestinian prisoners as well as detainees from the Gaza Strip. The civilians are able to observe the detainees, stripped to their underwear, and laugh and jeer as the men are being beaten, humiliated and tortured, with many of the viewers also allowed to film what is happening on their own cell phones to share with their friends and families. Mike Pompeo, who is a Christian Zionist of dispensationalist persuasion, believes that the former Palestine belongs to the Israelis because it says so in the Bible, which he has carefully “studied.” He also, while Trump’s Secretary of State, declared that the US no longer regards the illegal Israeli settlements on the West Bank as “illegal” and he similarly approved of the Israeli annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights as perfectly acceptable under international law, which it is not. Wonder what Mike as a self-identified pious Christian thinks about all those dead and mutilated Palestinian babies if he ever chooses to think about it at all?

Also in the running for god-awful narrative of the week was a piece claiming that the successful first step by way of a majority vote in the House of Representatives to bring about the richly deserved impeachment of Department of Homeland Security’s ghastly Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Thursday was the result of an “antisemitic conspiracy theory” because he is a “Sephardic Jew,” not due to his own incompetence which he has been demonstrating regularly for the past three years. The deep hole of depression that I crawled into as I watched the fat twerp Pompeo cavorting while the midget Mayorkas touted his Jewish credentials drove me to rethink the whole issue of US foreign and national security policy. I came to the conclusion that the players are caricatures and it should not be taken seriously and should instead be regarded as a comedy routine, something like Monty Python but terribly lethal and without the intelligence and wit of John Cleese, Eric Idle, Michael Palin and Graham Chapman.

To be sure the Biden administration can always be counted upon to produce a laugh, particularly when it brings on the clowns named Anthony Blinken, Victoria Nuland, Karine Jean-Pierre and Jake Sullivan. There has been a lot of funny stuff lately, most particularly the chatter about a solution to the Palestinian genocide, even though Biden seems quite comfortable to let the Israelis finish their ethnic cleansing of Gaza before anyone looks for a place willing acquire two million more stateless and homeless Palestinians. Former presidential aspirant and totally owned Zionist stooge Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida has already declared that no Palestinians should be allowed into the US as refugees as they are “antisemites.”

Nevertheless, Biden and Blinken’s State Department want to come up with some kind of formula, if only because the worldwide blowback due to the White House’s unflinching support for Israeli brutality has begun to have consequences as it constitutes complicity in crimes against humanity. Some kind of limited sovereignty, disarmed for sure, allowed to Palestine is envisioned but Netanyahu and his political allies, long opposed to a two-state solution, have recently repeatedly rejected proposals for any Palestinian sovereign entity. Israel is even now using its formidable lobby and international press/narrative control to work assiduously against any diplomatic recognition of a Palestinian state by individual countries or as a full member at the UN. Not surprisingly, the greatest effort to keep things on track is being directed against voices raised in support of Palestine in the United States. Biden is listening to be sure and is having both Blinken and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan carefully coordinate every step the administration takes with the Israeli Minister for Strategic Affairs and former ambassador to Washington Ron Dermer. Even though Israel and Netanyahu definitely hold the whip hand, the president is nevertheless inevitably looking over his shoulder and is fearful of alienation of voters with the national election coming up if the carnage in Gaza continues. Not for the first time the endless farce of US internal politics will likely at least somewhat influence what eventually takes place in countries six thousand miles away. And given Biden’s propensity to avoid doing the right thing, one can be pretty sure that the result won’t be pretty!

*

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].

Featured image is from TUR

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

A number of Freedom Convoy protesters who had their bank accounts frozen by the Trudeau Government’s invocation of Emergencies Act have sued the Prime Minister and Finance Minister, Chrystia Freeland.

The development comes just weeks after a Federal Court judge ruled that Trudeau’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act, which gave the government unprecedented power, was a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Two lawsuits were announced on Wednesday, the first of which was announced by lawyer Keith Wilson.  

BREAKING: On the 2-year anniversary of the Federal Government illegally invoking war measures against its citizens and targeting key protestors in Ottawa by freezing their bank accounts, today Tamara Lich, Chris Barber, Tom Marazzo, Danny Bulford and other protestors who were targeted by @JustinTrudeau and @cafreeland have filed lawsuits against the Federal Government,” he stated on X.

“Sec. 24 of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms gives Canadians the right to sue their government for damages when Charter rights are violated.”

Wilson further stated that the lawsuits seeks $2 million in damages for each plaintiff.

Hours later on Wednesday’s Valentine’s Day — the two year anniversary that Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act — a second class-action lawsuit consisting of twenty plaintiffs was announced, this time by Loberg Ector LLP, a law firm based out of Calgary, Alberta.

Loberg Ector’s Facebook account stated that

“The Plaintiffs in this action seek compensation and related relief arising from the unjustified and unconstitutional actions of the Liberal government, as well as the actions of certain police agencies and Canadian financial institutions who followed the unlawful orders of the Liberal government, and other defendants who participated in or promoted these actions.”

Tamara Lich, one of the main organizers of the 2022 Ottawa protest, celebrated the day by wishing social media users a “Happy Emergencies Act Day!”

“I hope you all look back and fondly remember how your government shot you with rubber bullets and tear gas for your own good!”

*

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 TCS


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why Does Israel Destroy Hospitals?

February 16th, 2024 by Dr. Paul Larudee

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Hospitals are prime strategic targets of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. The Nasser hospital in Rafah is the only major one still standing, along with a handful of smaller ones. All the rest have been destroyed, along with many of the patients and medical staff. Many have been slaughtered, while the helpless have been left to die, like the premature babies in their incubators, simply abandoned to the inevitable.

Doctors and other personnel have been taken captive for an unknown length of time. Even the Nasser hospital is no longer functioning, having been taken over by Israeli soldiers, and all its patients and medical staff expelled. Its existence as a structure is a mere technicality. It is no longer a hospital, and it wouldn’t be the first to be exploded into yet another pile of rubble. 

These attacks are not random, nor are the ones against bakeries, schools, and infrastructure, including water, sewage and electricity. Although more than half of all the buildings in Gaza are now rubble or unusable, the ratio for hospitals is much higher. Why? 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims that his objective is to destroy Hamas, but he is in fact destroying everything but Hamas.

He knows perfectly well that Hamas is not using the hospitals, nor any of the other places laid waste by the Israeli military, armed with inexhaustible US munitions. To the extent that he even bothers to use Hamas as an excuse, few believe him anymore.

If he wants to find Hamas, he knows where they are: deep underground, in hundreds of miles of their armored and fortified hi-tech tunnels.

The 10,000 tons of bombs dropped on Gaza thus far have not even been aimed at Hamas or the tunnels. Israel is casualty averse, and they know that fighting Hamas leads to casualties that will hurt Netanyahu’s popularity, already in the cellar. This is why their target has been the entire population of Gaza. Massive killing of Palestinian civilians, more than 2/3 of them women and children, make it look like he is accomplishing something.

This helps to explain the hospitals. If there is no place to treat the wounded and the sick, more Palestinians die. If your real target is the entire Palestinian population, this is an effective way to do it.

Destroying hospitals has a multiplier effect upon the death toll. Furthermore, it is mainly the hospitals that compile the statistics of Palestinian dead and wounded for the Gaza Ministry of Health. If there are no hospitals, more people will die anonymously, reducing the evidence of genocide. 

The multiplier effect of hospitals on the death toll also works for water, sewage, shelter, fuel, and of course food. The removal of such facilities and provisions causes deaths that tend not to be included as war dead. If Netanyahu’s objective is to decrease – or entirely eliminate – the inhabitants of Gaza, these are much more effective ways to do it. Granted, Zyklon-B might be even more effective, but there are limits to what even Netanyahu might be willing to use.

This is not speculation. Netanyahu and most of his government have publicly declared their intentions. Quotes and videos of their genocidal purpose have been used by South Africa’s attorneys to win an injunction from the International Court of Justice.  Netanyahu is running out of options. Hamas presented its ceasefire/peace proposal, which (as predicted) is unacceptable to Israel, because it fails to advance Israel’s plans for either territorial expansion or ethnic cleansing, or both. 

Israel is losing the combat war in Gaza, thanks to the brilliant Hamas strategy of 1) making itself impervious to air bombardment, 2) an ability to manufacture its own weapons locally, designed specifically for Israeli systems, and 3) impeccable training of fighters capable of acting in small units, with intimate knowledge of both their enemy and Israeli weapons systems, as well as their own. Israel is not prepared to take significant casualties among its own population, and apparently its 5000-6000 mercenaries are not prepared to go on suicide missions.

That leads, once again, to genocide as the only strategy. That’s why Netanyahu is planning to up his game by destroying Rafah city, the tiny pen into which he has herded most of the population, swelling its numbers some 400%, most of them in tents or under tarpaulins providing flimsy protection from the rain and cold.

An Israeli attack will probably yield a lot more casualties per day than heretofore, to which Netanyahu can point with pride among his dwindling followers.

But the US can’t appear to condone such actions, so its humanitarian-minded president has asked his Israeli counterpart to provide an evacuation plan for the civilians. Netanyahu has agreed, and when asked where they can go, he points to newly bombed out expanses in what used to be the neighboring city of Khan Younis. Now his friend, Genocide Joe, can rest easy. ICJ? No problem. Israel still has time to submit its progress report to the Court on ending its “plausibly genocidal” actions.

*

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 Larudee is a retired academic and current administrator of a nonprofit human rights and humanitarian aid organization. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Dr Suleiman Qaoud surveys the damage at the Rantisi Specialist Hospital, part of the Nasser Medical Complex in Gaza City, following Israeli missile attacks on November 6, 2023 [Abdelhakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera]

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

In a compelling piece of live television, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was recently confronted by a COVID-19 vaccine injury victim during an unscripted question and answer session. Describing the pain and trauma he suffered, audience member John Watt told the Prime Minister how he had been left with no help at all after the vaccine caused him to develop a heart condition. Already under pressure over his links to a hedge fund that has seen massive returns from an investment in COVID-19 vaccine maker Moderna, Sunak was like a rabbit caught in the headlights.

Broadcast on the GB News channel during what had been billed as a ‘People’s Forum’, the incident occurred while Sunak was being posed a mostly innocuous series of questions by members of a studio audience. But the atmosphere quickly changed when Watt stood up and demanded that the Prime Minister look him in the eyes. Stating that he knows people who have had limbs amputated as a result of COVID-19 vaccines, Watt asked why he had had to set up a support group to look after those affected.

Visibly furious, Watt also asked Sunak why tens of thousands of British COVID-19 vaccine victims had been left to rot. Telling the Prime Minister that the country’s so-called ‘Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme’ was not fit for purpose, he said that in Scotland alone more than 30 thousand people have had adverse reactions to the shots. Tellingly, Watt’s contribution was given an enthusiastic round of applause by the assembled audience.

Predictably, Sunak’s response largely avoided Watt’s concerns. Despite claiming that he was very sorry to hear about Watt’s circumstances, it was quickly clear that straight answers to his questions would not be forthcoming. As Sunak’s evasiveness became apparent, Watt interrupted saying that he and other victims had been silenced on social media. “We are the most silenced people in this country,” he said.

The event then briefly descended into chaos with another vaccine-injured audience member speaking up and the television program’s presenter desperately trying to regain control over the situation. Despite being told that the Prime Minister would look at his concerns, Watts will have heard little to reassure him.

Sunak’s Alleged Links to Moderna

The reasons behind Sunak’s failure to address this issue properly are not simply down to politics, as he has recently been facing scrutiny over his connections to a hedge fund, Theleme Partners, which has seen substantial gains from an investment in COVID-19 vaccine maker Moderna. A co-founder of Theleme Partners before entering politics in 2013, Sunak says his involvement with the fund is managed through a blind trust, meaning he supposedly has no knowledge or control over its investments. Nevertheless, questions persist regarding whether he personally benefited from the dramatic rise in Moderna’s share price during the pandemic.

Despite repeated criticism, however, Sunak maintains he is unaware of any financial gains. But with publicly available evidence indicating that the Theleme Partners investment in Moderna is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, concerns over potential conflicts of interest have continued.

Only rarely are senior politicians confronted by the victims of COVID-19 vaccines. The fact that this latest incident occurred on live television makes it all the more remarkable. Realizing that the handling of the pandemic is coming under increased worldwide scrutiny, Prime Minister Sunak may be less keen on taking live unscripted questions in 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.

This article was originally published on Dr. Rath Health Foundation.

Executive Director of the Dr. Rath Health Foundation and one of the coauthors of our explosive book, “The Nazi Roots of the ‘Brussels EU’”, Paul is also our expert on the Codex Alimentarius Commission and has had eye-witness experience, as an official observer delegate, at its meetings. You can find Paul on Twitter at @paulanthtaylor

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from DRHF

War Emerging Increasingly as Existential Threat

February 16th, 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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

War has always been a source of immense human distress. What is more important to point out is that its capacity to cause distress and destruction has been increasing in very dangerous ways.

The World Report on Violence and Health, published by the WHO, has provided the following information on deaths caused by war and conflict during the last five centuries—

  • 16th century—1.6 million
  • 17th century—6.1 million
  • 18th century—7.0 million
  • 19th century—19.4 million
  • 20th century—109.7 million

Of course population has also been increasing but the almost six-fold increase from the 19th to the 20th century is deeply disturbing. This figure indicates that over a million perished per year on average during the 20th century in wars and conflicts. What is more, this figure may not include all of the mortality caused by many indirect impacts of wars and conflicts. 

As the Brown University’s estimates for the ‘War on Terror’ of the 21st century have made clear, if indirect impacts of war are included then mortality can be many times more than the deaths caused directly by war and conflict.

These estimates have stated that the ‘war on terror’ claimed about 0.9 million lives directly, but if indirectly caused mortality is included then this figure rises much more menacingly to 4.5 million. In other words, in this context, indirectly caused deaths are about four times the directly caused deaths. This figure does not include all the countries ravaged by the war on terror, and needs updating too.

This is a reminder that the enormous death toll of the 20th century is being maintained in the 21st century, more or less, if we add up the mortality of all the dozens of wars and conflicts of the world during the first 23 years of the 21st century.

What is more disturbing is that talk of the possibility of the third world war and a nuclear war has been heard more during the last two years than in the several decades preceding this, largely due to the possibility of a direct conflict between the USA/NATO and Russia, taking off from the ongoing proxy war in Ukraine, and to a lesser extent the possibility of a direct war between the USA and China. An even broader war with NATO, a few Asian allies and possibly Australia on one side and the ‘axis’ of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea on the other side has also been discussed as a more distant possibility which, however, cannot be entirely ruled out, even though it would surely be a complete disaster.

Einstein, when asked about what a third world war would look like responded that he does not know how the third war would be fought, but the fourth one would be fought with stones. He was referring of course to the reality of wars becoming so destructive that the third world war would in fact ruin the world almost entirely.

Wars have become even more destructive since Einstein spoke these words, and their destructiveness appears destined to increase further, as more and more resources and human ingenuity are being diverted to increase destructive capabilities instead of constructive ones, even though millions and millions remain deprived of even basic needs and the requirements of ecological repair and rehabilitation are perhaps the most urgent.

Hence while the 20th century witnessed a six fold increase in war and conflict related mortality compared to the 19th century , the 21st century may witness something unique and unprecedented in the already highly destructive history of war and conflict—it may witness wars with the capacity of wiping out, in terms of direct and indirect impacts, most of the life on earth and almost the entire human life, apart from disrupting very badly the basic life-enabling and life-nurturing conditions of the planet.

This would be the inevitable result if only 10 per cent of the existing stockpile of nuclear weapons are used. However even more destructive weapons of mass destruction are being developed, and due to a relentless quest for dominance that appears to be blind to all its grave dangers, the biggest military and economic powers are more frequently seen to be on the verge of direct confrontation and war.

Hence this writer has been arguing consistently for quite some time that the present time is not just for incremental reform (although even that would be welcome) but instead for bravely and steadily moving towards a no-war future. In such a future scenario, no soldier or officer or armed forces (army, air force or navy) would suffer any loss of job or income but would merely be diverted, with some training, towards jobs relating to ecological rehabilitation of land and oceans, to preventing and reducing disasters and to various kinds of rescue ad life-saving efforts.

*

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 Man over Machine, A Day in 2071, Protecting Earth for Children, Earth without Borders and Planet in Peril. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Israel Lays Siege to Gaza Hospital as Rafah Stares Death in the Face

February 16th, 2024 by Maureen Clare Murphy

Weaponising Antisemitism: The Gift That Keeps on Giving

February 16th, 2024 by Antony Lerman

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Thousands of Israelis gathered in Jerusalem on 28 January for a far-right conference.

It called for the Jewish resettlement of the Gaza Strip and the transfer of the population living there, described dubiously using the euphemism “a legal way to voluntarily emigrate them”.

Featuring as key speakers were prominent extremist government leaders. This included Itamar Ben-Gvir, the national security minister from the Jewish Power Party, and finance minister Bezalel Smotrich from the Religious Zionist Party.

Their scheme, which members of the far-right Israeli government were floating from the earliest days of the Gaza war, constitutes ethnic cleansing.

Any Palestinians remaining in Gaza would be subjected to the extension into the territory of the state-sanctioned apartheid prevailing in pre-1967 Israel, post-1967 West Bank and the Golan Heights.

This genocidal plan was hailed by Likud’s tourism minister Haim Katz as an “opportunity to rebuild and expand the land of Israel”.

‘Antisemitic Bias’

This signified a comprehensive rejection of the 26 January decision of the UN’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) that “Israel must take action to prevent genocidal violence by its armed forces” and “prevent and punish” the incitement to genocide.

It was also an endorsement of the flood of accusations of antisemitic treatment of Israel that the ICJ decision provoked. First out of the blocks were Israeli government representatives. The court displayed “antisemitic bias”, they declared.

Leaders of the J7, the large US Jewish Communities’ Task Force Against Antisemitism, concurred. The ICJ has been “captured by antisemitic propaganda”, wrote Jewish Chronicle editor Jake Wallis Simons in the Telegraph.

Such a deployment of weaponised antisemitism to deflect criticism of Israel’s responses to the Hamas 7/10 attacks on Jewish settlements and Israeli army units beyond the security fence on the eastern side of the Gaza strip was evident even as news of the atrocities was still emerging.

And reaction to the ICJ decision came as no surprise. After all, this is a gift that keeps on giving—using past experience of anti-Jewish persecution to neutralise criticism of, and generate sympathy for, the Jewish state—and is decades old.

Propaganda Offensive

As I have analysed in my book Whatever Happened to Antisemitism? this ploy is remarkably adaptable to practically any Israeli violation of the human rights of Palestinians.

It was deployed from the first day to describe Hamas’s motives, and continuously since then to undermine and deflect demands for an immediate ceasefire.

Within hours, in what had all the hallmarks of a coordinated propaganda offensive, Israeli government officials and politicians were calling the attacks “pogroms” and characterising the events as the “deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust”.

And these descriptions continue to frame public discourse and understanding of the 7/10 events.

Pogrom is a Russian word referring to violent attacks by local non-Jewish populations on Jews in the Russian Empire and in other countries in the 19th century. They were perpetrated by the powerful oppressor against the weak and vulnerable.

However grotesque, Hamas’s attack was precisely the opposite: “an unprecedented display of anti-colonial violence”, wrote Tareq Baconi in a comment for Al Shabaka, the international Palestinian think tank.

It was an attack on what was always a vulnerable target that symbolised the anti-Palestinian racist regime, the powerful Israeli state, driving subjugation of Gaza’s population.

‘Trick We Always Use’

As for the Holocaust comparison, such apocalyptic language distorts and trivialises the Nazi genocide of Jews.

The late outspoken and respected head of Israel’s then most left-wing party Meretz in the 1990s, Shulamit Aloni, candidly condemned it “as a trick, we always use it. When from Europe somebody is criticizing Israel, then we bring up the Holocaust.”

If we compare the weaponisation of antisemitism then, when it was still in its infancy, with its dimensions today, we find that the role the Holocaust is shamelessly made to play in whitewashing Israeli apartheid and justifying ongoing dispossession and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians has become increasingly significant.

The institution through which this was made possible is the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and the “working definition” of antisemitism it adopted in 2016, known worldwide simply by the organisation’s acronym: IHRA.

Irrespective of what’s in the definition, who would question something disseminated by a body with ‘Holocaust Remembrance’ in its name? Especially since the definition’s promoters virtually decreed that it was sacreligious to do so.

And yet most of the examples of antisemitism the definition contains serve the purpose of justifying the curtailing of the right of Palestinians to speak publicly about their experiences of ethnic cleansing and ongoing dispossession, and do nothing to protect Jews from real antisemitism.

Protected Behaviour

Even before 7/10, standard antisemitism narratives characterised Palestinians as almost exclusively associated with terrorism.

Today, “Palestinian” and “Hamas terrorist” are often seen as synonymous. Therefore, to suggest Palestinians might be deserving of rights, sovereignty, and solidarity is itself an expression of support for violence against Jews, writes the journalist and academic Natasha Roth-Rowland.

Preventing this and fighting it when it happens “essentially posits Israeli state violence—ethnic cleansing, mass incarceration, extrajudicial killing, land theft—as a form of protected behaviour because it is being carried out by Jews”.

As some plausibly argue, one manifestation of the redefinition of antisemitism as anti-Zionism is that antisemitism is no longer about “who hates Jews”, but “who Jews hate”.

Anti-Zionism

The continued success of weaponisation relies on a distorted and instrumentalised view of Jewish history: the notion that, on the one hand, antisemitism is eternal and unchanging, and yet on the other, anti-Zionism is the ‘new antisemitism’.

Either way, the politicised anti-antisemitism organisations constantly encourage people to believe that antisemitic annihilation is just around the corner.

The first, eternalist understanding of the Jewish past, described as the lachrymose view, ignores antisemitism’s contingent and historically specific forms.

As for anti-Zionism, nothing could be more Jewish. Jews were the first anti-Zionists, overwhelmingly remained so until the Second World War, and hundreds of thousands remain anti-Zionist to this day.

However, it serves Israel’s interests to continue to cultivate the view that Jews everywhere are equally and eternally vulnerable, even though Zionism was supposed to bring Jew-hatred to an end.

When so many seem to welcome being milked for sympathy because of doubtful claims of ever-rising antisemitism, why not continue to instrumentalise the discourse of Holocaust and pogroms as clear and present dangers?

For Israeli leaders, every military confrontation, every battle with Hamas or Hezbollah is on behalf of the ‘Jewish people’. Never mind that making no distinction between the state of Israel and Jews worldwide is an antisemitic belief according to the IHRA.

Ephraim Mirvis, the British United Synagogue’s chief rabbi, certainly hadn’t read the script when he praised the Israeli soldiers committing genocide in Gaza in the name of eradicating antisemitism, as “our incredible heroic soldiers”.

Could it be any more obvious that weaponised antisemitism is a clear and present danger for Jews not calling for equal rights for all from the river to the sea?

*

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.

Antony Lerman is a Senior Fellow at the Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue, Vienna, and Honorary Fellow at the Parkes Institute for the Study of Jewish/non-Jewish Relations, Southampton University. He is the author of Whatever Happened to Antisemitism? Redefinition and the Myth of the ‘Collective Jew’ (Pluto Press 2022) and The Making and Unmaking of a Zionist: A Personal and Political Journey (Pluto Press 2012).

Featured image: Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. (Photo: Valeriano Di Domenico / WEF)

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Dear President Biden:

Do you not have a conscience when it comes to the genocide in Gaza?

I have read countless anecdotes of your genuine empathy for human suffering during your decades of public service. Does the slaughter of more than 28,000 Palestinians in Gaza—primarily children and women—not stir your conscience? More than 50,000 injured, hundreds of thousands without access to medical care, thousands buried under the rubble, millions of displaced and starving Palestinians cowering from the terror unleashed by the IDF and its patron the United States of America. Does it not awaken a glimmer of mercy or compassion in your hardened soul? Does it not create even a minute breach in your “unwavering” support of Israel?

Do you not have a moral compass when it comes to the genocide in Gaza?

I recently read a profile that described how your father educated you and your siblings about the Holocaust over the dinner table:

“My dad taught us about the horror of the Shoah,” Biden explainedlast month at a Hanukkah celebration, repeating a well-worn tale. “It awakened in me and my brothers and sisters and our children a sense… that this can happen again.”

Sadly, Mr. President, “It”—another holocaust of Palestinians—is not only happening before our very eyes, you, Sir, are one of the two key perpetrators of this genocide. As U.S. citizens and taxpayers, we also share the guilt of being complicit in this atrocity. But for your unwavering military, diplomatic, monetary, and moral support to Israel, the genocide would cease immediately. Mr. President, the culpability lies squarely on your shoulders and those of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who was emboldened by your unquestioning “embrace” of the horrors visited upon the Palestinians. You have failed to call for a permanent cease-fire.

Do you not have any personal sense of dignity or for the office of President of the United States?

Netanyahu publicly and defiantly disparages your suggested solutions and efforts to put an end to the genocide in Gaza. A human with any sense of self respect and dignity would interpret that as a grave insult, especially given the decades of your personal friendship and support demonstrated for the State of Israel. Despite Netanyahu spitting in your face, you publicly refuse to condemn the virulent hate and violence perpetrated by the politicians and military of the State of Israel. Personal dignity aside, Israel’s actions are demeaning to the office of the President of the United States. The United States ensures the very existence of Israel in the region with billions if not trillions in taxpayer-funded military and other aid since its founding in 1948. When pro-Palestine protesters use the chant “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” it is deemed genocidal by Zionists. However, when Netanyahu states that “the state of Israel has to control the entire area from the river to the sea” in direct contravention of your proposed two-state solution, why do you not take umbrage at this willful flouting of your guidance as POTUS?

Have you lost your political acumen, or do you genuinely not care to be reelected?

I am a lifelong Democrat. Yet, I actively support the #AbandonBiden movement in the 2024 presidential election and will continue to support it and not cast my vote for you in November 2024 unless you call for a cease-fire now! As one of the longest-serving politicians in public service, how have you lost sight of the political peril that awaits you in November? Polling suggests that a majority of Americans, especially Democrats, support a cease-fire now. I am just a layperson. I am certain your staffers in the executive branch and your reelection campaign have apprised you of the risks associated with not standing on the right side of history. Billions across the globe now get information about this unfolding genocide directly on their digital devices. The days of rationing government-controlled messaging through mainstream media to the public about major world events is over.

You have become as reviled a figure as Netanyahu in the eyes of billions across the globe for butchering innocent Palestinian civilians. I urge you to reset your moral and political bearings and use the leverage of being POTUS and a staunch supporter of Israel to negotiate a permanent cease-fire in Gaza. I joined the hundreds of thousands of protesters in Washington D.C. on Nov 4 demanding a cease-fire now. I marched with them to the gates of the White House to convey our horror and opposition to this unfolding genocide. Sadly, the killing of innocent civilians has continued over three more months. History repeats itself incessantly. It would be tragic if your commendable political legacy is marred by your inability to bring about an immediate cessation of the suffering of innocent Palestinians and the war in Gaza. Let Gaza not be akin to LBJ’s Vietnam.

I trust your inherent goodness and compassion will prevail. I trust the conviction and courage you have so ably demonstrated in championing for the public good will compel you to take affirmative and immediate action to stop the genocide in Gaza. One does not have to share a faith to have empathy for the dying and the suffering Palestinians. Our shared humanity must make us champions for Peace.

[From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.]

*

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.

Kalindi Bhatt is a CPA by training with a long career in accounting and finance. She cares deeply about human rights, the environment, and social justice. Bhatt hold a JD and LLM in Environmental Law from the Pace University Elisabeth Haub School of Law and is an advocate and volunteer for progressive policy and peace.

Featured image: People sheltering at the Saint Porphyrius Orthodox church which was hit by an Israeli airstrike on Thursday, killing 18 including several children [Abdelhakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera]

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Introduction

The Washington foreign policy establishment is on the precipice of making yet another strategic blunder.

The Senate is poised to ram through the Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity (REPO) for Ukrainians Act. This legislation will provide the president the authority to confiscate Russia’s frozen sovereign assets in the United States and transfer them to Ukraine for its reconstruction.

Confiscating Russia’s sovereign assets is an act of economic war. Seizing and transferring these assets to Ukraine may make Washington feel virtuous, but it will not bring peace. Passage of this bill will only reinforce the view of hardliners in Moscow that Russia’s war lies not just with Ukraine, but really with the United States and the West. Any hope that the United States and Russia could work toward stabilizing or improving relations will subsequently be destroyed.

There is no justification for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but enacting this bill will make peace less likely. Ukrainians have courageously defended their country for nearly two years, but even Ukraine’s former top military commander General Valery Zaluzhny admits the war is now a stalemate.

Russia’s frozen assets could be used as a bargaining chip during negotiations, but once Congress provides the president the authority to seize Russian assets, there will be immense political pressure on him to carry out the policy to avoid looking weak. President Biden was recently pilloried by the media and members of my party for returning frozen Iranian assets in exchange for five American hostages. He is unlikely to make that decision again.

Confiscation will only convince Moscow that there is no negotiated settlement to be had with Ukraine. The result will be a destroyed Ukraine. More Ukrainian soldiers and civilians will die, and more cities and towns will be turned to rubble.

History is replete with examples of economic warfare turning into violent hostilities. Many historians believe the U.S. embargo of 1807, which was intended to punish France and England for their aggressions at sea, led to the War of 1812. Likewise, FDR’s decision to freeze Japan’s sovereign assets and implement an embargo on oil and gasoline exports led to Tokyo’s decision to attack Pearl Harbor.

The past teaches us the folly of embracing every proposed act of revenge. U.S. senators are duty-bound to ask whether our actions will ensure American security and prosperity. In regard to the REPO Act, the Russians already answered that question for us. Moscow says they will retaliate in kind against the United States and our allies, with some estimates claiming upward of $288 billion in Western assets that Moscow could confiscate.

Nicholas Mulder, an assistant professor of history at Cornell University, highlights the danger of the “destabilizing precedent that western countries would set by seizing assets to end a war they are not openly involved in.” Professor Mulder states that such an action “would broaden the coercive actions that states could take for disputes to which they are not a direct party.”

Confiscating Russia’s assets will also certainly convince other countries, including China, that the United States can no longer be trusted as the guarantor of the global economy. They will seek to move away from the dollar and hold their reserves in other currencies. This process of de-dollarization will be an unmitigated disaster as it will degrade America’s financial strength and ensure the prosperity Americans have come to expect is no longer attainable.

In addition, this bill will hand the Russians another tool to fuel resentment against the United States. American leaders speak of a “rules-based international order” but the theory that the United States can confiscate the assets of another country we are not at war with is legally dubious.

Professor Mulder argues that “economic reprisals are the prerogative of injured states, not of third parties.” Rather than compel respect for international law, our actions will demonstrate to our adversaries that we are flouting it. This bill will be used by the Kremlin to show the world that while Washington demands that others follow the rules, we are happy to break them whenever we see fit.

In a multipolar world, Washington can no longer expect to act with impunity, particularly when dealing with a nuclear power. We understood the serious dangers our country faced during the Cold War. But three decades of repeated foreign policy disasters proves that Washington’s foreign policy establishment is badly broken.

A good way to start on the road to fixing that broken foreign policy is rejecting this disastrous bill.

*

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.

Sen. Rand Paul is the junior Senator from Kentucky, and a Republican. He is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Featured image is from RS

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

February 16th, 2024 by Global Research News

Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin Interview: What President Putin Really Said

Peter Koenig, February 12, 2024

The World Economic Forum’s “Frankensteinization” of the Entire World. Hollywood’s “Predictive Movies”

Peter Koenig, February 13, 2024

Kiev Regime Sharply Divided: Just Killed French Mercenaries. False Flag Operation Intent on Framing Russia? President Macron Cancels His Trip to Ukraine

Drago Bosnic, February 14, 2024

Zelensky Preparing to Flee the Country, Warns Ukrainian Opposition Leader

Ahmed Adel, February 10, 2024

NATO Confirms that Ukraine “War Started in 2014”. “Fake Pretext” to Wage War against Russia? To Invoke Article 5 of Atlantic Treaty?

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 11, 2024

A “False Flag” Operation to Justify The Israel-U.S. Genocide against the People of Palestine

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 9, 2024

Video: Vladimir Putin Interviewed by Tucker Carlson. History of Russia, Ukraine. Denazification. Diplomacy, the U.S. Dollar. Peace Initiatives. Transcript

Pres. Vladimir Putin, February 9, 2024

The Handcuffed Presidents of the United States. “Israeli Lobby Recipients”.

Dr. Dina Y. Sulaeman, February 12, 2024

COVID-19 Vaccine-associated Mortality in the Southern Hemisphere

Prof Denis Rancourt, February 13, 2024

Take Note: “Whom the Gods Would Destroy They First Make Mad”. Psychotic Warmongers

Julian Rose, February 13, 2024

Prime Minister of Slovakia Links COVID-19 Vaccines to Cardiovascular Deaths

Paul Anthony Taylor, February 10, 2024

Israel’s Rafah Ground Invasion – Zionist War Against Islam Is About to Explode

Joachim Hagopian, February 13, 2024

Neuroweapons and the Worldwide “Battle” to Control of Human Brains. Must be Stopped Immediately

Mojmir Babacek, February 13, 2024

What Was COVID Really About? Triggering A Multi-Trillion Dollar Global Debt Crisis. “Ramping up an Imperialist Strategy”?

Colin Todhunter, February 15, 2024

Fluoride on Trial: A Chemical Too Big to Fail. Global Research News Hour

Michael Welch, February 10, 2024

Elections in Pakistan. Victory of Imran Khan’s PTI Party

Junaid S. Ahmad, February 10, 2024

Media Propaganda Machine’s Laughable Meltdown Over Putin Interview. “Tucker is Getting A Lot of Flak”

Drago Bosnic, February 12, 2024

Opposing the COVID Juggernaut with Rational Medical Thinking. Dr. Peter Canaday

Dr. Emanuel Garcia, February 13, 2024

Having a COVID-19 mRNA Vaccinated Nurse in the Household Can be Fatal for Their Loved Ones

Dr. William Makis, February 14, 2024

“Let Them Eat Dirt”. Israel has Given Palestinians in Gaza Two Choices. Leave or Die. Chris Hedges

Chris Hedges, February 12, 2024

Turbo Brain Cancer Due to University COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates in the United States

By Dr. William Makis, February 15, 2024

Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines cause Turbo Brain Cancers, which, in my estimation are in the Top 3 Turbo Cancers caused by mRNA jabs.

Australia: When Scott Morrison Met Nemesis

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, February 16, 2024

The inconspicuous rise of Morrison heralded a bankrupt political culture, one of smeary gloss, smug grabs on complex issues, the insufferable slogan, the intelligence shaving brochure, the simplifying statement about worlds complex and abstract.

Inflation Is Increasing in America. Latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) Report: The ‘Soft Landing’ Plane Is Still Circling.

By Dr. Jack Rasmus, February 15, 2024

For months the mainstream media and Washington Pols have been pushing the metaphor that the US economy is a plane on its final approach to a ‘soft landing’. Soft landing is defined as inflation steadily coming down to the Federal Reserve’s goal of a 2% price level AND does so without provoking a recession.

Lower Your Blood Pressure with This Simple Exercise

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, February 15, 2024

For the 48.1% of U.S. adults with high blood pressure, learning how to do simple isometric exercises, including wall sits, may offer a natural strategy for relief. In fact, a systematic review and meta-analysis of 270 randomized controlled trials looked at the effects of multiple types of exercise, including aerobics, high-intensity interval training (HIIT), resistance training and combined training, on blood pressure.

BRICS and the Global South Cooperation

By Prof. Abdullahi Shehu and Prof. Maurice Okoli, February 15, 2024

Despite the plethora of multilateral institutions, multipolarity has become a cliché as member states forge new alliances to address perceived injustices in the existing system.

Resistance to Foreign Wars Is a Broad Public Demand in the US

By Karsten Riise, February 15, 2024

The US establishment is finally starting to come around to the fact, that Americans don’t want to die for the whole world. This is demonstrated by an article today (15 February 2024) in the New York Times – the mouthpiece of the liberal Neocon war state.

‘Drop the Charges,’ Says Amnesty Ahead of Key Julian Assange Hearing

By Brett Wilkins, February 15, 2024

Amnesty International on Tuesday renewed its call for the U.S. government to drop charges against jailed WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, whose final hearing before the United Kingdom’s High Court regarding his extradition to the United States is fast approaching.

Australia: When Scott Morrison Met Nemesis

February 16th, 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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

It was a night of terror in Rafah. Early Monday morning, the Israeli military rained bombs on the city in southern Gaza that borders Egypt. The ground shook, the sound of fighter jets dropping bombs so intense and persistent that some described it as a “fire belt,” a term Palestinians use to describe the prolonged targeting of nearby areas. At least 100 people were killed in the bombings, which some of Rafah’s inhabitants said were among the worst of the war.

They would know. Rafah is the last available refuge for at least 1.3 million Palestinians who have fled their homes since October. They have been repeatedly displaced from across the rest of the occupied territory, making their way to an area that the Israeli military had designated a “safe zone.”

An Israeli military official described Monday’s bombing as a “diversion,” part of an effort to rescue two Israeli hostages. The intense assault appeared to be a prelude to many more horrors to come, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Friday that a long-feared ground invasion of the city is imminent. He ordered a mass evacuation of civilians there — a prospect that is, simply put, impossible, given the number of displaced people currently in Rafah and the fact that there is nowhere left to go.

Since the beginning of the war, Rafah has transformed into a tent city that United Nations officials warned is a “pressure cooker of despair.” As the number of people killed, missing, or wounded during Israel’s four-month war recently topped 100,000, some 1.9 million people — more than 85 percent of Gaza’s population — have been internally displaced. The vast majority of them are crammed at the border with Egypt, where they face an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe that has been compounded in recent days by the uncertainty of Rafah’s viability as the last refuge in Gaza.

In the days preceding Monday’s assault, humanitarian and human rights organizations, as well as the U.S. government, had issued urgent warnings that a full-scale attack on the city would be the most devastating yet.

“This escalation would significantly exacerbate the ongoing genocidal acts perpetrated by the Israeli military and authorities against the Palestinian population in Gaza,” a coalition of Palestinian human rights groups warned last week, noting that the feared ground invasion would be in violation of the measures ordered by the International Court of Justice last month.

International Criminal Court prosecutor Karim Khan, meanwhile, issued a rare warning on Monday implying that the latest assault on Rafah might amount to war crimes under the court’s jurisdiction. It was a notable statement from Khan, who has mostly remained silent on Israeli actions during the current war in Gaza, and under whose leadership the ICC investigation into crimes committed in Palestine has largely stalled.

In recent days, as people currently seeking safety in Rafah braced for the incoming assault, a single question echoed across the city: “Where can we go?”

The prospect of more loss is unfathomable. Already, Palestinians are struggling to survive in Rafah, where food and water are scarce, and the city’s overburdened health infrastructure is on the brink of collapse. Even before Netanyahu announced the incoming invasion, life in Rafah had grown unbearable. In interviews conducted last month, people living in the city’s rapidly growing makeshift camps talked about all they had lost since October, their harrowing escapes and repeated displacements, and the uncertainty of their life in what has become the world’s largest refugee camp.

This satellite image provided by Planet Labs PBC shows the southern Gaza town of Rafah on Oct 13, 2023. The town is normally home to 280,000 people. But its population has swelled to over 1.5 million – roughly three quarters of Gaza's population -- as people flee fighting elsewhere in Gaza. Sprawling tent camps now dot the city. (Planet Labs PBC via AP)

This satellite image provided by Planet Labs PBC shows the southern Gaza town of Rafah on Jan. 14, 2024. The town is normally home to 280,000 people. But its population has swelled to over 1.5 million – roughly three quarters of Gaza's population -- as people flee fighting elsewhere in Gaza. Sprawling tent camps now dot the city. (Planet Labs PBC via AP)

The satellite images shows the southern Gaza town of Rafah on Oct. 13, 2023 (left) and Jan. 14, 2024 (right). The town is normally home to 280,000 people. But its population has swelled to at least 1.3 million as people flee fighting elsewhere in Gaza. Sprawling tent camps now dot the city. Photo: Planet Labs PBC via AP

Dreams Destroyed

Shahad Abu Hussein and Ahmed Qadouha were ready for their wedding. She had her dress and he his suit, and the expenses for the seaside wedding hall were already paid.

Abu Hussein was looking forward to moving into their new home, which Qadouha, who worked in a television repair shop in the Tel al-Hawa neighborhood of Gaza City, had saved for years to buy. She carefully packed clothes and accessories ahead of the wedding. “My fiancé and I were supposed to begin our life together,” she said. “I couldn’t wait for this day. I had picked out my wedding dress and was so excited to begin a life with Ahmed, in our own home.”

Israel’s war on Gaza brought those plans to an abrupt halt. Their wedding, once scheduled for October 12, is indefinitely postponed. Much of the life they had planned for no longer exists: Abu Hussein’s neighborhood was “completely wiped out,” she said. She fled with her family on the first day of Israel’s assault, taking only documents and basic necessities. She heard early on in the war that her family’s home had been severely damaged. “Everything I had prepared for my new home has likely been destroyed,” she said.

Abu Hussein had dreamed of becoming a lawyer. She had recently graduated from high school and had plans to enroll at Al-Azhar University in Gaza City. In November, the university was destroyed. Their wedding hall was another casualty of Israel’s bombs. Qadouha’s shop and the home he built to share with his future wife are also gone. “I worked very hard to save enough to pay for the house, the furniture, and the appliances. I spent years of my life working day and night for it, and my entire house was leveled to the ground,” he said. “All the work I did was for nothing.”

For some time, Abu Hussein and Qadouha thought they might have lost each other too. He fled the Sheikh Radwan neighborhood with some 130 members of his extended family, after Israeli forces ordered them to evacuate in October.

At first, Qadouha relocated to a refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip, but he was forced to once again move south as Israeli forces advanced. With most communication lines down because of the heavy shelling, the couple went days without knowing whether the other was alive. “I could not reach Shahad,” he said. “I was terrified that something would happen to her.”

It wasn’t until they both reached Rafah that they were reunited.

Still unmarried, they now live with a dozen relatives across from a U.N.-run school turned shelter for thousands of displaced people. Their nylon tent has been reinforced with wood and staples to give it a semblance of structure. They sleep on the ground, in the freezing cold. When it rains, the tent gets soaked, and they look for shelter along the walls of the school.

Even without the prospect of the imminent Israeli invasion of Rafah forcing them to flee once again, it’s hard for them to imagine what their future may hold.

“I cannot fathom that we might have to endure life in this tent for a long time,” said Qadouha. “I feel utterly helpless.”

Another Nakba

At a different encampment for displaced people on the other side of Rafah, 71-year-old Riyad Al Afghani shares another tent with some 30 other people, including his wife and one of his sons. Rafah, where they arrived in late December, was the last possible stop in a weekslong exodus that began when Israeli forces destroyed their home in Gaza City in November.

Before the war started, Al Afghani lived in a 14-floor building in Rimal, a buzzy neighborhood in Gaza’s most populated city, once dotted with high-rises and bustling with restaurants and shops and now reduced to rubble.

In mid-November, Israeli forces called one of Al Afghani’s sons and ordered him to evacuate. Later, Al Afghani also got a call. He told the soldiers that there were many women and children living in the building, but they told him to just leave, he said.

The Israeli military targeted the building that night, and the smell of smoke filled the air. “We fled the tower with children crying and women screaming,” he recounted. As they ran, Israeli snipers fired on them, killing one of the women in the group, a mother of eight, in front of her husband and children. “My son Muhammed carried her and buried her body,” Al Afghani recalled. They sought refuge at a neighbor’s home, where they spent a “terrifying” night as bombs and gunfire relentlessly pounded the area. “Entire neighborhoods were completely devastated,” Al Afghani said.

Another of Al Afghani’s sons, Abdullah, a father of five, was also killed during the November assault. Al Afghani has few details about the circumstances of his son’s killing, and he has not heard of his grandchildren’s fate.

Al Afghani and his family made their way south from Gaza City on foot. He had trouble walking so his son carried him for a while, but they eventually separated so his son and wife could escape faster. Al Afghani joined a different group of thousands of people walking toward the Egyptian border. For hours they moved through a landscape of residential buildings reduced to rubble, cement blocks and dead bodies all around them, he recalled.

As they crossed what the Israeli military had declared to be a “safe passage,” an Israeli tank opened fire at the group, even as they waved a white flag and clutched their ID cards. Later, Israeli soldiers stopped the group and made people stand apart from each other, then proceeded to call young men out, beat them, and arrest them, Al Afghani recalled, echoing reports made by many others in Gaza and documented by human rights groups.

Al Afghani eventually made his way to Rafah in late December, where he was finally reunited with his wife and son. But he’s heard nothing from or about his five daughters and their families, who stayed in Gaza City after Israeli forces began shelling and later invaded the city. Because Israeli strikes have led to frequent communications blackouts, it’s virtually impossible to get in touch with people in Gaza City.

“We are scattered, each member of my family is somewhere in the Gaza Strip,” he said. “I do not know if they are alive or not.”

In Rafah, he and his relatives have little access to food and water, and the sound of Israeli airstrikes nearby is terrifying — a relentless reminder that beyond Rafah, there is nowhere else for people to run. “The danger of being bombed is constant,” Al Afghani said. He can’t afford the exorbitant cost of crossing into Egypt, with smugglers asking for up to $10,000 per person. Even if he could, he doesn’t want to leave Gaza, where he has endured decades of Israeli occupation and several wars, although none more devastating than the current one. 

Al Afghani’s family, like that of many Palestinians in Gaza, is originally from Yafa, a city that is now part of Tel Aviv. They were expelled, along some 750,000 other Palestinians, in 1948, when Israel established a state by forcibly displacing Palestinians in a manner reminiscent of today’s effort to drive them into Egypt. Al Afghani was born a refugee, and as a teenager, he witnessed the 1967 war that culminated in the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. “I lived through 1967 at the age of 15; my father has told me about the Nakba, when the Israelis expelled him from Yafa in 1948,” he said. “Still, I have never witnessed anything more horrific and cruel than this current Israeli aggression. This is genocide.”

More Than Emergency

UNRWA, the United Nations agency that’s been the primary service provider for Palestinian refugees since shortly after the establishment of the Israeli state, has struggled to keep up with the enormous humanitarian crisis in Rafah and across Gaza since the beginning of the war.

Israel launched an aggressive lobbying campaign against the relief agency several weeks ago, leveling yet unproven accusations that several agency employees were involved in the October 7 assault on Israel. Israel’s Western allies took the bait and suspended their funding. But even before the cuts, the crisis in UNRWA-run centers was dire. 

There are 15 UNRWA shelters in Rafah, set up after previous Israeli assaults and each with a capacity of about 3,000 people — a fraction of the number they are accommodating now. At one of them, a former school building with 40 classrooms that now houses some 25,000 people, the director described an untenable situation.

“We are not in a state of emergency; we find ourselves in a situation best described as a catastrophe,” said the director, who requested anonymity out of fear of being targeted by Israel.

“All the centers combined can only house 45,000 people. This falls significantly short of the over 1 million and a half people displaced from across the strip.”

Already before this week’s bombings, the crisis had forced agency staff to make dramatic decisions. At the beginning of the war, the director noted as an example, UNRWA allocated half a can of meat for each displaced person. Today, one can has to be shared among 10 people. “The conditions in the school are catastrophic,” he said. “The food we provide for the displaced is insufficient to cover even 5 percent of what they need.”

Only one doctor and one nurse are on site, and essential medicine is hard to come by, the director said. Despite that, they are doing their best to tend to people’s needs. At least 18 women have gone into labor while displaced at the school, the director said. Early on, the shelter’s staff drove them by ambulance to a hospital in Rafah, but as fuel grew scarce, many of them turned to donkey-drawn carts.

One of those women is Sahar, whose husband was killed in October while waiting in line to buy bread at a bakery Israeli forces bombed. Pregnant at the time, she fled to Rafah with her two children and made her way to the school, where she gave birth to a third. At the time, she had not heard from her parents and siblings since shortly after the war started. She now shares a classroom with 40 other women and children, and she was embarrassed because her baby wouldn’t stop crying. “I cannot find milk or diapers for him,” she said to the director.

He told her that the staff distributed one diaper at the time to stretch out supplies, but when Sahar came in, there were none left. “I’m sorry,” he said.

Sahar’s ordeal is a somber reminder that women and children are facing the brunt of Israel’s assault. They make up 70 percent of those killed, according to U.N. figures, and are at greater risk of starvation. “We can barely provide enough water for basic use,” the director said.

“I did eight years of training in disaster and crisis management but what we are currently enduring in Gaza, with Israel’s systematic destruction of the Gaza Strip, is beyond description,” he added. “No human can bear 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.

Iraq War: How the U.S. Contaminated Iraq with Depleted Uranium

February 16th, 2024 by Prof Souad N. Al-Azzawi

The following text was presented to the Kuala Lumpur International Conference to Criminalise War, Putra World Trade Centre, 28-31 October 2009.

For more than three decades [since 1991], the United States of America and the United Kingdom have been waging continuous wars on Iraq to occupy this oil rich country.

The armed forces of those two countries attacked civilians with different kinds of conventional, non-conventional, and banned weapons such as cluster bombs ammunitions, napalm bombs, white phosphorous weapons and depleted Uranium weapons.

Depleted Uranium (DU) is a radioactive and chemically toxic heavy metal. If ingested, inhaled, or it enters the human body through wounds or skin, it remains there for decades.

Within the human body the (DU) particles would be a continuous source for emitting alpha particles. With its toxic effects, published research & epidemiological studies have proved that it causes serious health damages to the human body. Some of the damage to the human body is to lymph tissue, kidneys, developing fetuses, neurological system, the bones, lung fibrosis, and an increase in the risk of many types of cancer and malignancies.

Hundreds of tons of (DU) expenditure have been fired & exploded on Iraqi highly populated areas like Basrah, Baghdad, Nasriya, Dewania, Samawa, and other cities.

Exploration programs and site measurements by Iraqi and non-Iraqi researchers all proved the existence of (DU) related contamination over most Iraqi territories.

Iraq’s Minister of Environment admitted in July 23, 2007 in Cairo that “at least 350 sites in Iraq are contaminated with (DU)”. She added that the nation is facing a tremendous number of cancer cases and called for the international community to help Iraq cope with this problem.

A few years after exposure to (DU) contamination, multifold increase of malignancies, congenital malformations, miscarriages, children leukemia, and sterility cases have been registered in suburb areas of Basrah and other surrounding areas. Similar problems appeared in Falluja, where illegal weapons were also used intensively in the 2004 attack of occupation forces on the city. More than two million of the Iraqi population died since 1991 because of the synergic multiple impact of using (DU) weapons, economical sanctions, and the destruction of the health care systems.

The economical sanction that were also imposed by USA and UK administrations deprived the children and people of Iraq their rights in food,  potable water, health care, sanitation and other life supporting necessities.

The USA and UK administrations have subjected the whole nation of Iraq for two decades to torture and slow death through the intentional use of radioactive weapons and the sanctions. The continuous and intentional use of radioactive weapons is a crime against humanity due to its undifferentiating harmful health effects on civilians in contaminated areas tens of years to come after the military engagements. The existence of (DU) radioactive contamination in the surrounding environment is a continuous source of exposure to low level radiation. This exposure can be considered as a systematic attack on Iraqi civilians in an armed conflict, according to Article 4 of the official regulations and Article 7 of the ICC.

This paper is submitted to present the facts and scientific evidence regarding the intentional use by the USA and UK of depleted uranium weapons against the people and environment of Iraq, in addition to the health consequences that have been result from them.

Introduction

The administrations of the United States of America and the United Kingdom have been continuously waging wars against Iraq since 1991.

The armed forces of these two administrations have been using different kinds and new generations of conventional, nonconventional, and illegal weapons like Napalm, cluster bombs, white phosphorous, microwave, and Depleted Uranium weapons [1][2][3][4] against the human population and the environment of Iraq. Invasion and occupation of Iraq proved to the world that oil flow is the main reason behind these criminal attacks.

As a result of using these weapons, with the economical sanctions that were also imposed on Iraq by the same administration more than two million Iraqi people died and the count continues.

In this paper, we present the consequences and damage resulting from the use of Depleted Uranium weaponry against Iraq, backed by scientific fact and research.

What is Depleted Uranium?

Depleted Uranium (DU) is a man-made, radioactive, heavy metal extracted from Uranium ore. Since (DU) is a byproduct of the Uranium enrichment process to produce spent fuel for nuclear reactors. Natural Uranium has an isotopic content of 99.274% of U-238 by weight, 0.072% of U-235, & 0.0057% of U-234 [5].

Due to its highly pyrophoric and spontaneously ignitable properties, the DU penetrator ignites on impact generating extremely high temperatures. As the projectile pierces, it leaves its jacket behind dispersing DU dust into the environment during the impact. The quantity of the aerosol production is proportional to DU mass within the projectile and the hardness of the impact.

It is estimated that up to 70%of DU in the projectiles to be aerosolized when on the impact DU catches fire [6]. The explosion generates high temperatures of (3000-6000) °C. The aerosols particles are smaller than 5µm in size [6]. These nano-particles act more like a gas than a particle. The DU aerosols remain windborne for an extended time and this is the most dangerous pathway on civilian population around the battlefield areas.

Depleted Uranium within the human body

There is empirical documentation that suggests that DU aerosols can travel up to 26 miles [5], others suggest even further distances. The full radiation effect of DU occurs six months after production [6]. One milligram of U-238 can give of 1, 07, 000 alpha particles in one day. Each alpha particle releases over 4 MeV (million-electron-volts) of energy. If swallowed or inhaled, this much energy will hit up to 6 nearby cells away in the organ [6]. Just 6-10ev (electron volt) is needed to cleave the nuclear DNA strand in the cell.

Dr. Rosalie Bertell, an epidemiologist with 30-years experience in the field of low level radiation explains DU potential harm to the human body [6]:

After inhalation (DU) nano-particle aerosols cross the lung-blood barrier and gain entrance to the cells. They create free radicals. As a heavy metal, DU toxicity attacks the proteins in the cell which normally fight the free radicals, and creates extra free radicals. This amount of free radicals creates total oxidative stress in the human body. This stress causes failure to protective enzymes, leaving cells vulnerable to viruses and mycoplasmas, damage to cellular communication system and the mitochondria.

As a heavy metal, DU replaces the magnesium in the organ’s molecules that normally function as antioxidants, and causes the destruction of the body’s repair mechanisms. Consequences of this destruction are chronic diseases and tumors. Free radicals can also totally disrupt the folding process and manufacturing of the molecule proteins which is sequenced by DNA and manufactured by the RNA. Some of the diseases resulted from misrouted proteins include cystic fibrosis, diabetes insipidus and cancer. [6]

Amassing and accumulation of misfolded proteins leads to neurodegenerative diseases, Parkinson’s Diseases and early onset Alzheimer’s disease. In these diseases, amyloids are formed from protein fragments and dysfunctional proteins and that “Misfolded proteins” are the central pathogenic mechanism.

Gulf War veterans have manifested many of the symptoms of these neurodegenerative diseases.[6]

Other health effects of DU within the human body are:

–           Lou Gehrig’s disease is twice as commonly diagnosed in Gulf War veterans as expected.

–           Immune and Hormonal system damage

–           Disturbance of thyroid function

–           Mycoplasmas invasion into human cells.

–           Initiation or promotion of cancer

–           Tetratogenic toxicity which causes mental retardation, congenital malformations.

–           GW veterans were twice-three times as likely to report children with birth defects as their counter partner who did not serve in the first Gulf War.

–           Miscarriages

Dr. Hari Sharma, formerly of the University of Waterloo, tested the urine of some US, UK and Canadian veterans as well as Iraqi civilians from Basra and Baghdad.

Using 24hr urine samples, his isotopic analysis revealed a range of DU in the sample of (81-1,340) nanogram. Results showed that two of the three Iraqis from Al Basra had 147 – 426 nanograms respectively in their urine. Also it showed that 2 out of 5 Iraqis from Baghdad have DU in their urine

Other Important Scientific Evidence:

•           Dr Alexandra C. Miller and her team at the Armed Forces Radiological Research Institute, Bethesda, MD and the University of Paris, France used human cell models (the human Osteoblast cell HOS) to evaluate the carcinogenic potential of DU in vitro through assessing morphological transformation, genotoxicity [7] (chromosomal aberration), mutagenic (HRRT Ioci) and genomic instability.

Published data of the results have demonstrated that DU exposure in vitro to immortalized HOS cells is neoplatically transforming, mutagenic, genotoxic, and induces genomic instability. Other results showed:

–           Exposure to embedded DU pellets could induce leukemia in mice.

–           Internalized DU resulted in significant increases in the mutagenic frequency in the Lac gene in the tests of the exposed mice.

–           Internalized DU resulted in the development of bladder carcinoma in 75% of all animal exposed within 90 days of initial DU exposure.

As we can see all these results suggest that long-term exposure to internalized DU could be critical to the development of neoplastic disease in humans.

•           Pub. Radiation Protection Dosimetry Schroder, Heike 2003. A molecular biologist conducted research about the chromosomal aberration on white blood cells of 16 British Gulf War veterans of 1991. The veterans have suffered from symptoms ranging from headache, to chronic fatigue, depression, muscle and joint pains, impaired short-term memory and other cognitive defects. [8]

The results showed that the mean frequency of their blood cells chromosomal aberrations is 5-fold elevation higher than the control blood samples. This strongly indicated previous exposure to ionizing radiations.

The intercellular distribution of the Dicentric and  Centric ring chromosomes indicates significant over dispersion on the group level for the veterans who served in the Gulf War. Dic and CR are a known consequence of non uniform irradiation on the human body. [8]

•           Dr. Huda Ammash, Professor of Molecular Biology in Baghdad University and her team [9] conducted and published the results of genetic hematological analysis for a group of individuals living in DU contaminated areas in southern Iraq. Blood tests for the (47) individuals who lived in Basrah contaminated areas and another 30 as a control group. The control group individuals lived in Baghdad.

–           Blood tests showed that 21% of the studied individuals in Basrah group suffered a reduction in hemoglobin concentration of (9-13) g/d.

–           The blood packed cell volume (PCV) test results showed that 25.5% of Basrah studied group showed abnormal (PCV) rates of (30-39)% less than the normal rate.

–           Total white Blood Cells count (WBC) results showed that 8% of the individuals in the Basrah study group with (WBC) less than normal which is (4000)c/ml or higher than normal rate (1100)c/ml.

–           Compound chromosomal changes in the lymphocytes of periphal blood of the individuals of Basrah studied group had been found at a ratio of (0.1118)% which is significantly higher than that of the control group.

–           The ratio of dicentric and ring centric chromosomal abnormality fraction was found to be (0.04479) which is higher than ordinary ratio chromosomal damages where mostly in male veteran individuals. One case was for a 13 year old young boy at the time of the exposure in Al-Zubair contaminated area.

•           Rita Hindin, et al [5] published a paper “Teratogenicity of Depleted Uranium aerosols: A review from an epidemiological perspective” in which they stated that animal studies firmly support the possibility that DU is a teratogen. They also concluded that the human epidemiological evidence is consistent with the increased risk of birth defects in offspring of persons exposed to DU.

•           For further scientific evidences by Iraqi researchers, check: ”Depleted Uranium Contamination: Iraq: An overview” (Global Research)

Contaminating Iraq with Depleted Uranium

The USA and UK armed forces used Depleted Uranium ammunition for the first time in the history of their wars during the Gulf War of 1991. About one million bullets, projectiles, and missiles were fired along the highway from Kuwait to Basrah then up to Nasriya and other Iraqi cities. About 60-65% of this ammunition and expenditure were fired within Iraqi territories, Figure 1 shows areas where DU expenditure have been used in the Gulf War of 1991 [11].


Figure 1 areas where DU expenditure have been used in Gulf War 1991.

Figure 2 represents a photo of the Iraqi army artilleries and vehicles destroyed on that highway by (DU) weaponry [12].

Figure 2: Iraqi army artilleries that have destroyed using DU on Highway

As stated previously, as soon as DU projectiles hit the target, it will ignite with a huge explosion that generates Depleted Uranium oxide aerosols. Mixing height of the aerosols in the atmosphere gets to 250m [13]. Area of Basrah War Zone and highway warzone [10] [14] were calculated to be around 2400km2. This area was the major continuous source of DU aerosols and contaminants to surrounding areas years to come.

Types of Depleted Uranium contaminants in the studied areas were:

1.         Destroyed tanks and artilleries.

2.         DU projectiles shells (exploded and unexploded)

3.         DU shrapnel’s (different sizes)

4.         Deposited DU particles

5.         Deposited DU oxide aerosols

Modeling mechanisms of spreading of DU pollutants from the source to surrounding populated areas were done by the Environmental Engineering department of Baghdad University [10] [14] [15]. The results of modeling spreading of pollutants through different environmental pathways to human population suggested that total calculated annual body dose received from DU aerosols inhalation pathway for the period from 1991-1996 in Basrah warzone was between 0.1768 Sv and 0.2309 Sv [10] (for a person both in normal or active duty respectively). Compared to normal background annual effective dose people should receive of 2.4 mSv only. In the highway warzone, these values came up to 0.4425 Sv and 0.577 Sv [14] respectively.

DU Contaminated Dust Storms In Iraq

Spreading and dispersion of DU contamination to surrounding areas also occurs through wind storms, dust storms, sandstorms, and rainstorms. Mechanisms of surface migration of DU radionuclide’s in soil include [16]:

–           Siltation, creeping, and suspension from contaminated soil to atmosphere.

–           Suspension and re-suspension of deposited DU aerosols are the most dangerous and critical pathway of transfer and spreading from source to the human population.

DU nano-particles through this mechanism stay suspended in the atmosphere for tens of days. With each dust storm a new DU attack on the civilians within populated cities occurs. Published data indicate a significant increase in the frequency of annual dust storms in both Iraq and Kuwait areas [17]. The first 8 months of 2009 witnessed 20 dust storms, as declared by the Iraqi Minister of Health [18]. Figures (3) and (4) show sites of these dust storms.

DU contaminated dust storms can be considered as new systematic attacks by USA armed forces, on civilians, since it adds an extra harmful radioactive dose received by the people internally and externally.

The USA and UK administrations should be held responsible for exposing a whole nation to the risk of continually receiving high radioactive and toxic persistent contaminants such as DU.

Cumulative effects of these additional doses add additional risk to residents of these areas. Intentional denial and cover up of the types, locations and amounts of DU ammunitions by the US and UK armed forces prevent Iraq from taking any precautionary measures to reduce exposure to additional radioactive doses.

To understand how persistent these pollutants are; Soil and dust samples from areas near NL Industries site in Colonie, NY, USA proved containing DU after more than 20 years of the closure of these DU manufacturing industries [19].

A total of 5 to 10 metric tons of DU dust and aerosols settled from air on soil, rooftops, and other surfaces near the plant during its operation. The plant was closed in 1984 and contaminated soil was removed. In 2006, twenty-two years later, dust samples that had been collected from residents in the area proved the existence of DU significantly above the clean up standard. People working near NL Industries also tested positive for DU in their bodies. Results of these tests are being published in the international journal “Science of the Total Environment” [20].

If we compare this case study with Basra DU contamination where (320 tons of DU * 0.65 in Iraqi territories * 0.6 aerosolized) we end up with about 114.80 metric tons of DU aerosols spreading through winds to huge inside Iraq and the Gulf countries’ areas, then pre-suspension of these contaminants to larger areas with each dust and sand storm that hits the area.

In 2003, it is estimated the US & UK armed forces used about (700-800) tons of DU [21]. The aerosolized portion of this amount is about 420 metric tons, a quantity large enough to cover the soil of the whole country after the dispersion of plumes with the previously mentioned mechanisms.

DU Contamination Casualties in Iraq:

Epidemiological studies in contaminated areas indicated a drastic rise in the incidences rate of malignancies amongst children to be far more noticeable from 1995 onward, namely a four times increase than prior to 1991, the distribution of this increase specifically in contaminated areas west of Basra City [22].

Moreover, the shift in Leukemia to younger children supports the criteria of biological plausibility specificity and is consistent with findings of correlating such incidents to exposure to ionized radiations [23].

Also a six fold increase in congenital malformations among births in Basra City since 1995 onward, have been registered [24]. Congenital heart diseases and chromosomal aberrations have been also reported.

Another crime of the occupation forces is the destruction of the evidence targeting the Iraqi research centers related to this issue.

Two decades of suffering, pain, and human life losses, the Minister of Environment in Iraq finally announced in 2007 the disaster of DU contamination in Iraq. She pointed out that more than 300 sites have been contaminated with these radioactive weapons [25]. She also called for the Japanese authorities and the international community to help Iraq with coping with the drastic increase of cancer incident rates [26].

To prove our case: Kuwait DU waste & wreckage from Gulf wars are shipped back to be dumped in USA.

After 18 years, Kuwait required US dept. of defense to remove the DU contaminated wreckage from their land [21]. Over 6,700 tons of contaminated soil, sand and other residues were collected and shipped back to the USA for burial by American Ecology at Bios, Idaho.

The US administration and pentagon officials still insist that DU has no significant health hazards, if so, why would they have to ship back their dirty radioactive wreckage back home from Kuwait?

Stand of the International Community on DU Weaponry

The Hague and Geneva conventions and its protocols and subsequent treaties clearly declare that weapons which cannot discriminate between civilians and military or combatants are prohibited from not only use but also from manufacture and sale [27].

The Nuremberg principles were incorporated into the Charter of the UN, a treaty which is supposed to be “Supreme Law” in the USA. When the American Administration ratified it, the 7th principle declares that “Complicity with a crime against Humanity is a war crime”.

UN resolutions since 1996 called DU weaponry “incompatible” (i.e. illegal) under existing humanitarian law and human rights [UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/27 and additions; E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/38 and E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/35] [28].

Uranium radiation hazards are covered up and misrepresented through the obsolete models of risk and derived standards of allowable exposure set by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP).

This model was derived from invalid assumptions due to secrecy and cover up about the health effects of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs then, around the cold war developments of nuclear power and weapons [28].

The ICRP risk model was built from studies of the atomic bomb survivors, which overlooked the effects from the internal radiation source and ignored cancer that in some cases takes decades to appear.

It was certainly developed before the DNA and the human genome knowledge existed the way it does to date.

Cover-ups and deception are expected from American and UK administrations the perpetrators of all radiological wars and illegal weapons, which should face liability for war crimes, military and civilian casualties, as well as contamination of the environment.

The US has refused to disclose information about DU during the invasion military operations of Iraq in 2003, and did not let UNEP team study DU contamination Iraq [29].

With the great efforts of anti-nuclear weapons groups, NGO, peace organizations and international figures, the call of these organizations to ban the all Uranium weapons, including DU, have earned very good momentum especially among the NATO countries.

–           On March 23rd, 2007, the Belgian Chamber Commission on National Defense voted unanimously in favor of banning the use of DU ammunitions and armor plates [30].

–           On November 1, 2008, a UN committee passed a resolution with an overwhelming majority, highlighting concerns over the military use of Uranium. The resolution entitled “Effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing Depleted Uranium 1” urges the UN member states to re-examine the health hazards posted by the use of Uranium weapons [31].

–           Another historic sentence was pronounced on January 13, 2009 by a court in Florence, Italy asking the Italian Ministry of Defense to compensate Gianbattista Marica with Euro 545,061, a parachutist who was deployed in Somalia for eight months in 1993. The sentence is very important because it states “the casual link between the presence of depleted uranium and the illness (cancer) of the Soldier” [32]. The courts statement includes the report of technical consultant who maintains that there is a causal link between the Hodgkin Lymphoma developed by the soldier and the exposure to DU.

–           In September 2009, a British jury at Smethwick Council House ruled that DU was likely cause of death of Gulf War veteran Stuart Dysan in June 2008. Dyson had been a Lance Corporal with the Royal Pioneer Corps and had cleaned tanks after the 1991 Gulf War. He developed colon cancer that killed him last year [33].

The European Parliament on 22nd of May 2008 passed its fourth resolution against the use Uranium weapons. MEP’s have called for EU and NATO-wide moratorium and global ban [29].

Concluding Remarks:

1. The US and UK administrations have been using Depleted Uranium weapons against the civilian population and the environment of Iraq since 1991.

2. Laboratory studies and scientific evidence prove the link and causal relationship between exposure to Depleted Uranium and the increased risk of inducing neurodegenerative diseases, immune and hormonal system damage, initiation or promotion of cancer, Tetratogenic Toxicity which causes mental retardation and congenital malformations, miscarriages, and sterility.

3. Intentional denial and refusal of the US and UK administrations to release any information about the types, locations, and amounts of DU weapons that have been used against Iraq have caused additional radioactive doses, and health damages to the people in contaminated areas. Both administrations should be held responsible for this crime.

4. The drastic increase of cancer incidences in Iraq since 1995 to date and the DU related diseases like congenital malformation, miscarriages, etc, are all attributed to the use of prohibited weapons including Depleted Uranium.

5. DU contaminated areas all over the country are continuous source of radioactive pollution. Without cleaning and other measures, resuspension of these contaminants with each dust and sand storm can be considered as systematic attacks by the US and UK armies on civilians in an armed conflict.

This is a crime against humanity to its undifferentiated harmful health impacts on civilians long times to come after the military operations (Article 4 of the official regulations and Article 7 of ICC).

Notes

1. Simon Helweg-Larsen, “Irregular Weapons Used against Iraq”. ZNET http://www.znet.org/welser.htm ,April 2003

2. Sarah Meyer. “What Kind of Incendiary Bomb Was Used Against People in Iraq” http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=1226  November 14, 2005.

3. Steven D. “US Army Admits Use of White Phosphorus as Weapon”. Daily KOS.

4. Scott Peterson Remains of Toxic Bullets Litter Iraq, May 18, 2003, Christian Science Monitor.

5. Rita Hindin, Doug Brugge, and Bindu Panikkar, “Teratogenicity of Depleted Uranium aerosols: A review from an epidemiological perspective ” Environmental Health: A Global Access Science Source 2005. http://www.ehjournal.net/info/instructions/

6. Rosali Bertell “Depleted Uranium: All the questions about DU and Gulf War Syndrome are not yet answered”. International Journal of Health Service 36(3), 503-520, 2006

7. Alexandra C. Miller, Mike Stewart, Rafael Rivas, Robert Marlot, and Paul Lison, “Depleted Uranium” internal contamination: Carcinogenisis and Leukeinogenisis in Vivo. Proc. Am Assoc Cancer Res. Volume 46, 2005.

8. Chroder, H. et al. “Chromosome aberration analysis in peripheral lymphocytes of Gulf War and Balkans War veterans”. Radiation Prot. Dosimetry. Vol. 103(3) 2003 (PP. 211-219).

9. Ammash, H., Alwan, L., and Maarouf, B.,”Genetic hematological study for a selected population from DU contaminated areas in Basra.” Proceeding of the conference on the effects of the use of DU weapons on human and environment in Iraq, Baghdad, Iraq 2002.

10. Al-Azzawi, S. N. and Al-Naemi, A. “Assessment of radiological doses and risks resulted from DU contamination in Basrah war zone.” Proceeding of the conference on the effects of the use of DU

11. Gulf War Resource Center “Primary Areas of DU Expenditure”, USA, 1999.

12. Turnley, P.; News Week Magazine; (January-20), 1992.

13. Neboysha, L. “Environmental Impact on Humans During the Gulf War”, Communications between Professor Neboysha and Professor Sharma, 1999.

14. Al-Azzawi, S., and Al Naemi, A., 2002, “Assessment of radiological doses and risks resulted from DU contamination in the highway war zone in Al-Basra governorate”, proceedings of the conference on the effects of the use of DU weaponry on human and environment in Iraq, March 26-27 2002, Baghdad, Iraq.

15. Al-Azzawi, S. et al, “ Environmental Pollution Resulting from the Use of Depleted Uranium Weaponry Against Iraq During 1991, World International Conference on DU, Hamburg, Germany, 2003 http://www.grassrootspeace.org/wuwc_reader2_science.pdf  – p.41

16. Al-Heli, W.M. “Effects of DU Weapons on Air and Soil Pollution in Southern Iraq”, M.Sc. Thesis in Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Baghdad, Iraq. 1998.

17. Draxler R. R., et al, “Estimating PM10 Air concentrations from Dust storms in Iraq, Kuwait and Kingdom Saudi Arabia. Atmospheric Environment” vol35:4115-4330.

18. Middle East Online, “Draught steals Iraqi’s nutrition”, September 1st 2009

19. ICBUW, “Robert shows New Yorkers Contaminated with DU over 20 years after exposure” http://www.banddepleteduranium.org/

20. William, D. “Hazards of Uranium Weapons in the Proposed War on Iraq” full report.. The Eos life resources center. Oct, 2002.

21. ICBUW, “Statement by the DU positive testees” http://www.banddepleteduranium.org/

22. Yaqoub, A., et.al., 1999, “Depleted Uranium and health of people in Basrah: an epidemiological evidence; 1-The incidence and pattern of malignant diseases among children in Basrah with specific reference to leukemia during the period of 1990-1998”, the medical journal of Basrah University (MJBU), vol.17, no.1&2, 1999, Basrah, Iraq.

23. Yaqoub, A., Ajeel, N., and Al-Wiswasy, M., 1998, “Incidence and pattern of malignant diseases (excluding leukemia) during 1990-1997”, Proceeding of the conference on health and environmental consequences of DU used by U.S. and British forces in the 1991 Gulf War, Dec. 2-3, 1998, Baghdad, Iraq. http://www.irak.be/ned/archief/Depleted%20Uranium_bestanden/DEPLETED%20URANIUM-3-%20INCIDENCE.htm

24. Al-Sadoon, I., Hassan, J., and Yaqoub, A., 1998, “Incidence and pattern of congenital anomalies among birth in Basrah during the period 1990-1998”, Proceeding of the conference on health and environmental consequences of DU used by U.S. and British forces in the 1991 Gulf War, Dec. 2-3, 1998. http://www.irak.be/ned/archief/Depleted%20Uranium_bestanden/DEPLETED%20URANIUM-1-%20INCIDENCE.htm

25.  RIA Novoski “Iraqis blame US depleted Uranium for surge in cancer”

26.  Tokyo Newspapers “Iraqi Minister of Environment Appeals to Japanese Government for Assistance in Dealing with DU contmination”. September 10th 2008 http://www.tokyo-np.co.jp

27. Proceeding of World Uranium weapons conference 2003, Hamburg, Germany. Page 192

28. Protr Bein “Uranium Weapons cover-ups in our midst”. Proceedings of world Uranium Weapons conference, 2003, Hamburg, Germany.

29. David Goliath “The Adversary’s Tactics and Effectiveness”. Proceedings of world conference, 2003 Hamburg, Germany, Page 204.

30. William Van Den Panhuysen. “Belgium Bans Uranium Weapons and Armor”. ISBUW, March 24, 2007.

31. ICBUW, “UN First Committee Passes DU Resolution in Landslide Vote” Nov. , 2007 http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/

32. Stefania Divertito “Historic sentence in Florence, Italian court recognizes the link between cancer and Depleted Uranium”. 13th Jan. 2009 http://www.peaclink.it

33. ICBUW, DU was a likely cause of dead Gulf Veteran’s cancer”. Sept. 11, 2009 http://www.bandepleteduranium.org

34. ICBUW “European Parliament passes far reaching DU resolution in landslide vote”, May 22, 2008. http://www.bandepleteduranium.org

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

For months the mainstream media and Washington Pols have been pushing the metaphor that the US economy is a plane on its final approach to a ‘soft landing’. Soft landing is defined as inflation steadily coming down to the Federal Reserve’s goal of a 2% price level AND does so without provoking a recession.

However, as revealed by the inflation statistics in the US Labor Department’s latest Consumer Price Index (CPI), the ‘soft landing’ plane is clearly stuck circling the airport!

The government’s just released January 2024 Consumer Price Index report shows not only that prices are stuck at a level (i.e. ‘circling’?) where they’ve been since last summer 2023, but January’s CPI report  shows signs of prices even beginning to rise once again.

Moreover, if one lifts some of the questionable assumptions and methodologies used to estimate inflation in the CPI, inflation may be even higher than officially reported. Perpetually circling for months, the soft landing plane may even be running out of gas.

The CPI is one of several government price indices. The other two are the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index and the GDP Deflator Index. These latter are produced by the Commerce Department. The PCE typically estimates inflation only two thirds to three fourths the price level provided by the CPI, using different assumptions and methodologies than the CPI.

Having said that, let’s look at the January CPI report (after which Part 2 of this article will show why even the CPI undershoots inflation and why the PCE and GDP Deflator undershoot even more). 

January 2024 Consumer Price Index

The CPI slices and dices inflation in many ways. Its aggregate number is called the All Items CPI-U. It’s the summary of price changes for all the goods and services estimated by the CPI. All means around 450 or so of the most often purchased by households. There are literally millions of goods and services in the US economy but households’ budgets are almost totally spent on the CPI’s 450 or so ‘basket of goods and services’ that are mostly purchased by households.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

The All Items category is then broken down into what’s called ‘Headline’ inflation and ‘Core’ inflation.  Since food and energy (i.e. gasoline, natural gas, electricity, fuel oil, groceries, food at home, food away from home, etc.) are goods that tend to fluctuate a lot, subtracting food and energy from All Items results in what’s called ‘Core’ inflation. Add back in food and energy goods and that’s ‘Headline’ inflation.

Another important break down of ‘All Items’ is Goods vs. Services inflation. The Goods sector of the economy is roughly 20% of GDP (Construction—residential and commercial—is about 8% of GDP and Manufactured goods about 12%). All the rest (80%) of the US economy is Services. So Services contributes a bigger part of the overall CPI and inflation.

So what does the latest January 2024 CPI report show us for ‘All Items’, ‘Headline’, ‘Core’ and the important sub-categories of Goods vs. Services inflation?

The most important takeaway from the January CPI is the ‘All Items’ rate of inflation last month is at the same level that it was seven months ago in June 2023—that is, inflation continued to rise at the same 3% annual rate of change in January 2023 that it was in June 2023!

To continue the ‘soft landing’ metaphor, what that means is the Inflation plane had entered its ‘downward leg’ from January 2022 to January 2023, slowing from a 7.5% annual rate increase at the start of 2022 to 6.4% a year later in January 2023. It then slowed further the following six months from January 2023 to June 2023, from the 6.4% to 3%.

Thereafter, since last June 2023, it has plateaued at a 5,000 foot level above the US economy airport, where it’s been circling ever since. 

Peeling the onion of the ‘All Items’ aggregate indicator, and considering just ‘Core’ inflation—i.e. ‘All Items’ minus energy and food prices—It’s a similar picture: Core inflation has also been stuck, at around 3.9%-4% since October 2023.

Slicing ‘All Items’ yet another way, into Goods vs. Services inflation what the latest January CPI stats further reveal is that since October 2023 Services inflation has also been stuck, in this case in roughly the 5% range. 

In other words, except for gasoline and some food prices, the CPI has not slowed in the last seven months. The plane has not landed but just keeps circling! 

And it may be running out of gas as well.  The latest CPI stats, on a month to month change basis, suggest the rate of inflation may now have started to rise again last month. Unadjusted for seasonality (i.e. the actual price changes), January’s CPI stats show a month to month rising trend for the CPI as follows: 

  • October 2023: 0.0%
  • November 2023: -0.2%
  • December 2023: -.0.1%
  • January 2024: +0.5%

Within the January numbers were some worrisome trends: Services inflation nearly doubled in January compared to December (0.7% vs 0.4%); food prices did double (0.4% vs 0.2%) with grocery prices rising the fastest in the entire previous twelve months. Meanwhile shelter costs rose from 0.4% to 0.6% for January with its biggest component, Rent, rising the fastest in nine months.  And other services like hospital and airlines, the prices of which had slowed in 2023, surged again in January.

Forces pointing to higher gasoline and energy Goods inflation in the coming months are appearing as well. The business media in US and abroad report that global crude oil supply problems are mounting—at a time when typically in the spring oil refineries also shut down for maintenance and consumers begin to drive more.

The Goods vs. Services Inflation Conundrum

To sum up thus far: if CPI reports for the past seven months show Services prices are stuck at 5%, Core prices at around 4%, and All Items stuck at 3%. Those numbers suggests Goods prices—gasoline and some food prices—have indeed come down. The January CPI report shows that Goods prices have been either flat or slightly negative over the past twelve months.

But Services inflation remains stuck at around 5% for months now. The main culprits in continuing Services inflation have been Rent services which have consistently been responsible more than half of all the CPI services price increases for several months; Day Care services; Sporting and Entertainment events prices; Auto Repairs; and Auto Insurance services which have risen by 20.6% over the past year. In addition, hospital services costs are now surging anew and rising at the fastest rate since 2015.

So why have Goods (especially gas and food) inflation significantly abated over the past year while the Services price level has barely done so?

There are several explanations. Here’s a couple:

Fed Interest Rates Are Increasingly Inefficient 

Federal Reserve interest rate hikes since 2022 have clearly had an effect on Goods inflation—i.e. on energy and food and some other commodities. But so may have other economic forces.

The US economy has slowed due to rate hikes. But so has the global economy slowed. Which has had more impact on dampening demand for oil, commodities and thus US energy related goods prices in general? US rate hikes or slowing global economy? And what about food/grocery prices?  Prices for milk and eggs surged in 2021-22 but have since come down. However, processed foods like bakery goods and other processed items like juice and beverages have not. They’re still rising at more than 20% annual rate? The difference likely lies in the fact that milk and eggs are produced locally and are not monopolistic; processed foods are monopolistic and dominated by a handful of companies. That strongly suggests corporate price gouging is going on in the processed foods sector of food prices. Recent media and government are now also talking about ‘shrinkflation’ (a hidden price hike by lowering content) which suggests evidence of processed food corporations’ price gouging as well. 

2021-22: Supply Driven Inflation

The big problem in Goods inflation that emerged initially back in 2021 was domestic US and global ‘supply chains’. As this writer discussed back then (see my ‘The Anatomy of Inflation’ Counterpunch article of June 23, 2022), what drove inflation to its 9.1% peak were mostly Supply side forces—i.e. supply chains exacerbated by price gouging by monopolistic US corporations jacking up prices as the US economy reopened in the summer of 2021 from the Covid shutdowns. That’s a topic to which mainstream economists and politicians have paid too little attention of late. 

Productivity also collapsed in 2021-22 falling to the worse levels since 1947, which in turn raised business unit labor costs that many companies simply passed on to consumers in higher prices. Like supply chains and price gouging, that too was basically a supply matter.

Inflation at the time in 2021-22, in other words, was thus largely supply—not demand—driven.

The Covid shutdown of 2020-21 was a major shock to much of the US economy, especially supply. Workers laid off did not immediately return. Some businesses like railroad companies found it convenient and profitable not to brink all their workers back but to run on more profitable skeleton crews. Other businesses did not immediately or fully ramp up production once the economy began to reopen in the summer of 2021. They at first waited to see if the reopening could be sustained. But once the economy began to successfully reopen by late summer 2021 many services businesses tried to recoup lost revenue by rapidly raising prices (a typical example was the Airlines companies and Hotels which clearly price-gouged consumers with record prices for travel in 2021-22). 

The Covid shutdowns restructured labor, product and financial markets in ways still not fully understood by economists or policy makers. Fiscal and monetary stimulus measures in particular did not work very well or efficiently (a topic for another article). A given amount of monetary and fiscal stimulus simply did not produced an expected magnitude of real economic recovery.

A dramatic fact of the past two years US economic recovery has been its tepid growth rate. In 2020-21 the Federal Reserve pumped $5 trillion into the US banking system and directly to investors via its QE program. Congress provided an additional $4 trillion in government spending and tax cuts. That’s $9 trillion in combined stimulus! About twice that provided in 2008-10 What has resulted, in the first two years 2022-23 after the economy reopened in 2021 was a growth rate in GDP terms of a mere 2.1% in 2022 and unimpressive 2.5% in 2023.

In short, a mountain of $9T fiscal-monetary stimulus resulted in a molehill of GDP recovery!

Overlaid on the supply problems that emerged in 2021 and which lingered into 2022 was global commodity prices surging in 2022-23 as a consequence of the Ukraine war and US Russian (and China to lesser extent) sanctions policies and the Ukraine War.

All these factors contributed to the primarily supply side driven inflation of 2021-22. Those supply forces were only partially abated by the demand depressing policies of the Federal Reserve after it began raising rates.

And now since mid-2023 Fed rate hikes have stopped. And with it so too have Services inflation decline. Fed rate hikes to 5.5% appear to have little effect on Services inflation. So how high might interest rates have to go to have an effect? A little history as follows might give some idea.

Volcker’s 1980-82 Solution vs. Powell’s 2022-23

Despite US inflation’s largely supply side character, in 2022 US politicians and the Federal Reserve decided the strategy to address supply side inflation would be to depress consumer demand in the US economy.  The Federal Reserve set out to attack consumer demand to dampen inflation. Its main tool was raising interest rates and the Fed commenced in 2022 to raise rates at the rapidest pace in decades. The idea was to create enough unemployment that would reduce wage incomes and thus consumption spending to bring down demand and theoretically prices in turn. In other words: even if the main drivers were Supply side (which the Fed can do nothing about) the strategy was to make households pay the price to abate inflation by depressing household wage incomes and consumption demand. So the Fed raised interest rates to 5.5% over the course of 2022-2023.

After all, the same rate hike to compress demand strategy worked under Reagan in 1981-83 when Paul Volcker was Fed chair. 10%+ annual CPI inflation at the time was lowered via Fed rate hikes that attacked the Goods sector, raised unemployment, and subsequently depressed wage incomes and consumption. It was a demand side approach to price reduction—employed to address a Supply side inflation problem back then as well. Nevertheless it worked. Prices came down, but only after the Fed raised rate to more than 15%! A deep recession  in 1982-83 followed the Fed rate hikes of 1980. But that was then. The US economy has changed dramatically since. It doesn’t work that way anymore. Indeed, monetary policy hardly works at all.

As in 1980-82, Powell’s Fed rate hikes in 2022-23 have succeeded in dampening goods prices but have NOT succeeded this time around in bringing down services prices very much, as the CPI data for the past seven months clearly shows.  Goods inflation has indeed come down, but services prices remain stuck at levels of last summer 2023 now for months and may be rising once again. So why is it that four decades later monetary policy (rate hikes) has not succeeded as it did in 1980-82 in reducing the price level very much?

In his December 2022 press conference following the Fed’s commencing to raise rates, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell indicated the Fed’s strategy in 2023 would be to continue raising rates. He specifically cited his main goal of bringing Services prices down, adding for that more unemployment was needed in Services in order to lower Services consumption. That was the Fed’s inflation strategy for 2023. But that strategy—and lower Services prices—didn’t happen. 

Contradictions of Fed Monetary Policy 

Halfway into 2023 Powell stopped raising rates. But why? Why didn’t he continue raising rates and stopped halfway through 2023?  There are several possible answers, but as this writer has argued before, perhaps the main reason was the crisis that emerged concurrently in the US regional banking system in March 2023.  Raising interest rates even higher would have exacerbated that regional banking crisis. So Powell raised rates for the last time in May-June 2023 after the Regional Bank Crisis erupted that March 2023.

By doing so the Fed decided to trade off reducing Services and Core inflation further in 2023 in order to prevent further exacerbating regional bank instability. Powell apparently has placed his bet on assuming the already 5.5% interest rate level will prove sufficient over time to eventually, if albeit slowly, bring down Services. Thus far it hasn’t. Services sector unemployment and Services consumption has not abated. Powell has lost his bet. Services prices are ‘stuck’ at 5% and Core at around 4% now.

What this scenario suggests is that the US and global economy has changed in fundamental ways since the early 1980s. The US is a much more Services centric economy today compared to forty years ago. Services don’t respond as efficiently to rate hikes. In fact, nor does the economy in general, it appears. To put that in economists’ parlance: Services inflation has become ‘interest rate inelastic’.

That lack of real economy response to interest rates (i.e. the inelasticity) may be due in part to  the US economy becoming more ‘financialized’ today compared to 1981-83. What that means is Fed periodic liquidity (aka money) injections into the economy get redirected from going into real investment and flow relatively more into financial asset markets instead of the real economy. That makes Fed rate policy ‘inefficient’—i.e. more monetary injection is required to get an equivalent stimulus ‘bang for the buck’.

The converse is also true: Fed rate hikes have less effect on dampening inflation and slowing the real economy because it has become more financialized. Rate hikes simply don’t retract as much liquidity (money) from the economy as they used to. And even if they did it wouldn’t matter. Businesses (and consumers) today, fort years later, have access to alternative sources of funds besides bank lending, in the US and worldwide.  Or perhaps businesses and investors cut back on investing in the real economy first, before they consider reducing their investing in financial markets. After all, didn’t financial markets and profits boom during Covid while opportunities for investing in the real economy collapse?

The preceding paragraph suggests globalization may also be resulting in less effective Federal Reserve interest rate policy when it comes to rate hikes dampening inflation. Here financialization and globalization of the 21st century capitalist economy overlap.

Multinational corporations in particular aren’t limited by Fed interest rate hikes or levels when they need money capital to invest. They can go anywhere in the world for lower rates. That’s presuming they even bother to borrow from banks at all any more. Multinationals raise far more money by issuing corporate bond debt of their own. And they loaded up on bond issuance in the years of near zero Fed rates from 2009-2018 and then during 2020-21 when the Fed injected $5T more of virtually free money into the banks and directly to investors via QE. Corporations just issued mountains of bond debt prior to Covid that they didn’t even need and then just hoarded the cash throughout the pandemic. Or else redistributed the virtually free Fed money to their stockholders in buybacks and dividends and hoarded their own cash earnings. Once the Fed started raising rates in 2022 those rate hikes were irrelevant for many big businesses. They were flush with unspent cash from issuing bonds or new stock. Only the smallest businesses are impacted any more by Fed rate hikes, or rate cuts for that matter.

Some Conclusions

In conclusion, in terms of inflation, what all this means is Fed chair Powell will have to raise rates much higher than 5.5% if he wants to reduce Services and Core inflation sigsnificantly further. Maybe not as high as Paul Volcker’s 15% in 1981. But higher than the current 5.5% for sure.

However Powell won’t do either so long as Services inflation levels remain stuck at current levels. He’s decided he can live with that level of Services inflation, while betting perhaps rates kept at current levels may yet reduce inflation further over the longer run.

Powell won’t risk higher rates that will certainly exacerbate a regional bank crisis again, which by the way continues to deteriorate slowly and which now faces the threat of commercial property defaults coming in 2025-26, to which already unstable regional banks remain highly exposed.

He also won’t raise rates because the US economy is teetering on the brink of recession already. The US construction sector has fallen one-third and appears stuck at that level while the manufacturing sector has been contracting for the last nine months, according to the Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI). A deeper recession in 2024 would certainly not help the politicians. And regardless what apologists for the Fed say, Fed policies are politically a-tuned in election years.

So expect CPI and inflation to remain at levels largely similar to what they have for the past half year. Goods inflation will likely stay low (subject to uncertain oil prices).  Companies that can, will continue to price gouge. Rents and home prices, Insurance services, processed food items, select services will remain at current levels or even drift up further. So therefore will the CPI, fluctuating perhaps marginally around its January levels month to month.

However, as will be explained in a Part 2 sequel to this article, even reported CPI is a low- balled estimate of the price level, due to the many questionable assumptions and methodologies that go into its estimation of inflation.

So if the US economy plane does decide eventually to descend, its landing may be anything but ‘soft’.

*

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. Rasmus is author of the books, ‘Central Bankers at the End of Their Ropes’, Clarity Press, 2017 and ‘Alexander Hamilton and the Origins of the Fed’, Lexington Books, 2020. Follow his commentary on the emerging banking crisis on his blog, https://jackrasmus.com; on twitter daily @drjackrasmus; and his weekly radio show, Alternative Visions on the Progressive Radio Network every Friday at 2pm eastern and at https://alternativevisions.podbean.com.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Jan. 13, 2024 – Easton, ME – 35 year old Leann Kaiser 

 

 

“I’m Leann, a 35-year-old female who was recently diagnosed with a very large tumor on the left frontal and parietal lobes in the meninges of my brain. The tumor encases the sagittal sinus and is resting on the body of the corpus callosum and has created its own copycat bundle of collateral veins. I am no longer able to work very much at this time and will subsequently miss days of work due to the upcoming appointments in preparation for surgery.”

“I am a recent graduate of NMCC (2021-associates of arts) and UMFK (2023-bachelors of science), where I earned a 3.89 GPA at both schools, was consistently on the dean’s list, received special honors, recognition, and awards, and graduated as the top student in my program at both schools. I also still currently work part time for 5 hours, 2 days/week as a tutor at NMCC. Before this diagnosis, I was pursuing a career with the Aroostook Mental Health Center to become a substance abuse and mental health counselor for the Residential Treatment Facility in our area; however, these plans were put on hold in light of my recent diagnosis and need for emergency brain surgery”

 

“I believe this tumor is a direct result of the Covid vaccine, which I never wanted and immediately stopped getting shots of after I was no longer mandated to have it anymore by the school and would not have to worry about facing any consequences such as not being able to set foot on campus anymore if I didn’t have it. If the vaccine wasn’t the cause, I still believe that it may have significantly contributed to what happened.”

This all started last February when the saliva glands under either side of my jawline became swollen to the size of small eggs and created a few nodules along the midline of my throat/thyroid. It also created a vein that ran from the right gland all the way up to behind my right ear. While not painful, it was still very concerning and shortly after, I started waking up with top of the foot/calf cramps and was afraid to stretch my legs in the morning because of it. By May, I started waking up up to 3 times a night and had foot spasms lasting up to 3 minutes each time.

This progressed into conscious seizures that went up the entire right side of my body. These were involuntarily muscle contractions—spasms that would travel from my toes/foot to my calf/knee, then hip, and finally would end with my neck jerking to the right. This includes the involuntary contraction of different muscle groups in rapid succession, and all you can do is flail around during this time and wait for it to be over while your body becomes physically exhausted from the workout. Shortly thereafter, I not only experienced this several times a night, but occasionally during the daytime as well. The spasms and conscious seizures resulted in a condition called foot drop that alters your gait and ability to walk, so by June, I was tripping over my own toes, dragging my right leg behind me, lost the ability to run away from predators, experiencing muscle weakness and numbness in my leg and the outer two toes, had pain in the ligament down the outside of my leg, and I couldn’t go anywhere without shoes on because I needed to avoid stepping on my own dead toes—sustained pieces of useless meat that try to fold under themselves all the time. Constantly stretching to try to prevent or avoid spasms and seizures from coming on quickly became my new reality. In the case of conscious seizures, I can often feel what’s called an “Aura,” which is like a warning or a rush of fear and anxiety that washes over you before the seizure starts. I can no longer voluntarily turn my ankle to the left or right anymore, it sometimes kicks out when I walk or rolls to the side causing me to fall over, and the ligament frequently gives out at the knee, which sometimes causes my leg to become very bouncy if I put any weight on it. By July, I could tell that the poison had entered into my brain, and I started to get shooting headache-like pains throughout my head multiple times a day.

I also experienced many abnormal sensations throughout this whole time in several different places of my body, such as a burning sensation of nerves, and a permanently bruised spot that developed on my lower back/spine. I acquired intense episodes of vertigo in July also, that has persisted along with the swollen saliva glands and subsequent symptoms of foot drop. Episodes of vertigo cause me to get dizzy and almost blackout if I scooch down and stand back up too fast or if I turn around or to the side too abruptly, which doesn’t have to be very abruptly at all. More recently, I started losing my vision several times a day, with it going blurry or bright white, feeling like the pupils are dilated. The tumor is sitting on my vision center and in a place where it can cause physical and cognitive impairment, seizures, or memory loss. I’m very concerned about possibly going completely blind before I have the surgery, which is scheduled for February 20th, four days after my 36 birthday.

UMFK COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate 2022:

UMFK COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate 2021:

*

May 2023 – Analucia Cabanillas Cespedes was diagnosed with a Grade 3 gemistocytic astrocytoma on June 15, 2021, and a 7.5cm tumor was surgically removed.

She went on to pursue nursing school at University of Florida which mandated COVID-19 Vaccines (to be able to do rotations in the hospitals).

In May 2023 she was diagnosed with a new brain tumor, a Grade 4 Glioblastoma which is inoperable, has affected her mobility and has confined her to a wheelchair. It is “the size of a pear”.
April 28, 2023 – Athens, GA – 21 year old University of Georgia Senior student Liza Burke had brain bleed on March 10, 2023 while on vacation in Mexico, was diagnosed with a glioblastoma on her brainstem, and died 4 weeks later on April 28, 2023 (click here).
  • It doesn’t appear University of Georgia mandated COVID-19 Vaccines for their students but did mandate it for all employees including student employees
  • Should a University be legally liable for pressuring but not mandating?

Ed Dowd – England and Wales Cancer Deaths:

Image

My Take…

Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines cause Turbo Brain Cancers, which, in my estimation are in the Top 3 Turbo Cancers caused by mRNA jabs.

The tragic story of University of Maine at Fort Kent student Leann Kaiser is unique and very important because it has these elements:

  1. She was forced to take COVID-19 Vaccines due to illegal COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates forced on her by the University, where she attended a Bachelor of Science program.
  2. She believes the COVID-19 Vaccines, which she didn’t want, caused her brain cancer or contributed to it.
  3. She provides imaging of her brain tumor.

It is very rare that we get a clear story of forced vaccination, with the vaccine victim realizing the damage done by the vaccines, and then photographic evidence of the Turbo Cancer itself.

*

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


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lower Your Blood Pressure with This Simple Exercise

February 15th, 2024 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Simple isometric exercises, including wall sits, offer a natural strategy to lower blood pressure

Out of multiple forms of physical activity, isometric exercise came out on top as “the most effective mode in reducing both systolic and diastolic blood pressure”

Broken down to individual exercises, wall squats (isometric) were the most effective for reducing systolic blood pressure while running (aerobic) was most effective for reducing diastolic blood pressure

About eight minutes of isometric training three times a week may be enough to significantly lower blood pressure

Wall squats, planks, glute bridge and the overhead hold are examples of simple isometric exercises you can do virtually anywhere

*

For the 48.1% of U.S. adults with high blood pressure,1 learning how to do simple isometric exercises, including wall sits, may offer a natural strategy for relief. In fact, a systematic review and meta-analysis of 270 randomized controlled trials looked at the effects of multiple types of exercise, including aerobics, high-intensity interval training (HIIT), resistance training and combined training, on blood pressure.

While all were beneficial, isometric exercise came out on top as “the most effective mode in reducing both systolic and diastolic blood pressure.”2 It turns out that static contraction of muscle as you hold your body in one position, i.e., isometric exercise, may offer blood pressure benefits that some other types of more dynamic movement don’t.

Isometric Exercises Improve Resting Blood Pressure

When it comes to exercise recommendations to lower blood pressure, cardio aerobic-type exercises typically come to mind. But, according to researchers from Canterbury Christ Church University, this is outdated advice based on older study data that excludes HIIT and isometric exercise.3

The meta-analysis, which included clinical trials that analyzed the effects of exercise for two weeks or more on resting blood pressure, found all types of exercise led to significant reductions in resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure. However, the greatest reductions occurred after isometric training.4

The top number of your blood pressure measurement, the systolic, is a measurement of the maximum pressure inside your arteries as your heart contracts. The bottom number, the diastolic, is a measurement of the pressure in your blood vessels when your heart is not contracting. Both numbers are important in determining how much damage may occur over time to your blood vessels and other organ systems.

Effectiveness based on the “surface under the cumulative ranking curve” (SUCRA) values for systolic — which refers to the mean probability of being the best for lowering your systolic blood pressure — placed isometric exercise in the No. 1 slot with an effectiveness rating of 98.3%, followed by combined training (75.7%), dynamic resistance training (46.1%), aerobic exercise training (40.5%) and high-intensity interval training (39.4%).5

In rank order, the analysis found significant reductions in resting systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure:

  • Isometric exercise (–8.24/–4.00 mmHg)
  • Combined training (–6.04/–2.54 mmHg)
  • Dynamic resistance training (–4.55/–3.04 mmHg)
  • Aerobic exercise (−4.49/–2.53 mmHg)
  • High-intensity interval training (–4.08/–2.50 mmHg)

Broken down to individual exercises, wall squats (isometric) were the most effective for reducing systolic blood pressure while running (aerobic) was most effective for reducing diastolic blood pressure. Overall, however, isometric exercise worked best for lowering both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Study author Jamie O’Driscoll told The Washington Post:6

“Our main message is that actually engaging in exercise is fantastic and any exercise might reduce your blood pressure. But if you’re an individual who is currently exercising to the guidelines and you’re still having a bit of difficulty reducing that blood pressure and you want to avoid going on medication, perhaps isometrics is an additional mode to complement the exercise you’re already doing.”

What Are Isometric Exercises?

Isometric exercises are low-impact movements that involve holding a position so the same muscle length is maintained, tiring out your muscles to fatigue.7 “Any kind of an exercise that is holding tension in any position which doesn’t involve dynamic movement is generally isometric exercise,” study author Jamie Edwards told The Washington Post.8 In other words, static contraction defines isometric exercise, examples of which include:9

In addition to blood pressure benefits, isometric strength exercises may help strengthen joints better than dynamic strength training,10 and it’s useful for reducing pain while increasing range of motion and functional ability in people with knee osteoarthritis.11 Isometric training is also beneficial for relieving neck pain, improving joint mobility and improving neck dysfunction.12

Past research similarly revealed that isometric resistance training reduces systolic blood pressure by nearly 7 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure by close to 4 mmHg. Performing isometric handgrip exercise also significantly reduces systolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure, offering another accessible tool for blood pressure health.

As the scientists explained in the journal Medicine, “Low- to moderate-intensity isometric handgrip exercise can be performed anywhere, requires relatively inexpensive equipment, and does not elicit the same level of cardiovascular stress as aerobic exercise.”13 As for how isometric exercise lowers blood pressure so effectively, The Washington Post reported:14

“Isometric exercises effectively lower blood pressure because contracting a muscle and holding the position temporarily reduces blood flow to that muscle, O’Driscoll said. When you release that contraction, blood flow through the muscle tissue increases. This produces important signals that prompt blood vessels to relax more and creates less resistance to blood flow, which ultimately reduces blood pressure, O’Driscoll said.”

Eight Minutes of Isometric Exercise, Three Times a Week

How much isometric exercise is necessary to lower blood pressure? Isometric exercise training programs often use protocols involving four, two-minute contractions separated by one to four-minute rest intervals. The sessions are done three times a week.15 In other words, about eight minutes of isometric training three times a week may significantly lower blood pressure.

A wall sit is one straightforward option that can be easily done in two-minute increments, followed by two minutes of rest and repeated four times. The entire workout is then repeated three times each week. “On average, a regular isometric routine of wall sits lowered systolic blood pressure (the top number) by 10 mmHg and diastolic pressure by 5 mmHg, according to the research,” The Washington Post reported.16

Meditation Exercises Also Lower Blood Pressure

On the topic of low-impact forms of exercise that are useful for maintaining healthy blood pressure, meditation exercises, particularly qigong, are useful for lowering diastolic blood pressure in people with elevated levels,17 while research shows meditation may also help lower blood pressure with just three months of practice, while at the same time decreasing psychological distress and increasing coping ability among young adults.18

Another group of researchers conducted a meta-analysis involving 13 studies on meditation and yoga for blood pressure health. Blood pressure decreased in response to both meditation and yoga, and meditation appeared to be particularly useful in decreasing the blood pressure of subjects older than 60 years.19

The calming effect of meditation has also been shown in numerous studies to benefit blood pressure. In a 2019 study published in the Journal of Human Hypertension, mindfulness meditation was evaluated for its effects on not only blood pressure but also anxiety, stress and depression.

For an eight-week period, participants engaged in mindfulness training for two hours a week, or participated in a control group involving health education talks. The meditation group had lower blood pressure monitoring values after the intervention, and were also less judgmental, more accepting and less depressed than the control group.20

Practicing “mindfulness” means you’re actively paying attention to the moment you’re in right now. Rather than letting your mind wander, when you’re mindful, you’re living in the moment and letting distracting thoughts pass through your mind without getting caught up in their emotional implications.

What Else Works to Lower Blood Pressure?

If your blood pressure is running high, you need to restore your insulin and leptin sensitivity, and the following strategies are among the most effective for doing so:

  • Replace processed foods with whole, unprocessed organic foods.
  • Avoiding seed oils — It would be helpful to also eliminate seeds and nuts unless you have been on a low-LA (linoleic acid) diet for at least three years.
  • Optimize your vitamin D level.
  • Only use healthy fats — Sources of healthy fats to add to your diet include grass fed butter, raw organic dairy, organic pastured egg yolks, coconuts, coconut oil and macadamia nuts and grass fed meats. The best carbs to add would be ripe fruit that you tolerate well. But the key is to make sure your fat intake is below 30%, which you can determine with Cronometer. If you fail to do this, the carbs can convert to fat and change your cholesterol profile unfavorably.
  • Exercise regularly.

Optimizing your sodium to potassium ratio is also important. It’s generally recommended that you consume five times more potassium than sodium, but most Americans get the opposite ratio, eating two times more sodium than potassium. If you eat a lot of processed foods, which contain processed table salt, your sodium to potassium ratio is likely out of balance.

While conventional health care practitioners may suggest you remedy this by limiting salt intake, especially when it comes to lowering the risk of high blood pressure, focusing on increasing potassium is key. Research shows an association between higher potassium intake and lower blood pressure, regardless of sodium intake.21

To improve your ratio, eliminate processed foods, which are very high in processed salt and low in potassium and other essential nutrients. When using added salt, use a natural salt such as Himalayan salt. Further, eat a diet of whole, unprocessed foods, ideally organically and locally-grown to ensure optimal nutrient content.

This type of diet will naturally provide much larger amounts of potassium in relation to sodium. In my view the absolute best way to increase your potassium is by eating ripe fruit. Taking potassium supplements is not a good strategy and will simply not provide you with the benefits you are seeking. Other examples of potassium-rich foods include:22

Latest Obesity Drugs to Do Wonders for Blood Pressure — How Perfect

Eli Lilly’s obesity drug tirzepatide — brand name Zepbound — is being positioned as the latest breakthrough to lower blood pressure. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved tirzepatide to manage Type 2 diabetes in 2021, under the brand name Mounjaro, a direct competitor to semaglutide (Ozempic). It was then approved to treat obesity in 2023,23 competing with the popular weight loss drug Wegovy.24

Now, however, tirzepatide is being said to “do wonders” for blood pressure,25 after research published in the journal Hypertension26 found it led to an average 7.4 mmHg drop in systolic blood pressure among those taking the lowest dose. Those taking the highest dose had an average drop of 8 mmHg.27 In a statement from the American Heart Association, study author Dr. James A. de Lemos said:28

“Although tirzepatide has been studied as a weight loss medication, the blood pressure reduction in our patients in this study was impressive. While it is not known if the impact on blood pressure was due to the medication or the participants’ weight loss, the lower blood pressure measures seen with tirzepatide rivaled what is seen for many hypertension medications.”

The news came just days before an announcement by former director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tom Frieden called for high blood pressure to be the “focus of the next breakthrough”:29

“In 2023, the weight-loss drug Wegovy and similar medications were a scientific and cultural — and profit-making — breakthrough … But what if we had medications that cost 5,000 times less and are better at preventing heart attacks and strokes? And what if only 1 in 5 people who need these medications get them? That’s the situation with drugs to treat high blood pressure — and it needs to change.”

It seems to be the perfect setup to roll out the next “blockbuster” blood pressure medication, but tirzepatide can cause side effects ranging from nausea and diarrhea to hair loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease.30

It also causes thyroid C-cell tumors in rats and, according to the FDA, “contains warnings for inflammation of the pancreas (pancreatitis), gallbladder problems, hypoglycemia (blood sugar that is too low), acute kidney injury, diabetic retinopathy (damage to the eye’s retina) in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and suicidal behavior or thinking.”31

Given these significant risks, it’s important to remember that blood pressure can often be effectively lowered via lifestyle changes, including simple isometric exercises.

How to Perform 6 Popular Isometric Exercises

Getting back to isometric exercises, they provide a simple way to support healthy blood pressure while offering additional health gains. Best of all, you can do them virtually anywhere. If you’d like to give it a try, here are six examples of isometric exercises and how to perform them.

1. Wall squat and low squat — For the wall squat, stand with your back flat against a wall, then walk your feet about 1.5 feet (0.5 meter) out from the wall. With your feet shoulder-width apart, back flat against the wall and your abs tight, squat until your knees are bent at a 90-degree angle, or as low as you can comfortably go. Remain squatting for as long as you can, then stand back up by pushing up from your heels.

The low squat is similar, but here you’re not using a wall. Start by standing with your feet slightly more than hip-width apart. Keep your hands on your hips, or straight out in front of you. Push your hips back into a sitting position while bending your knees. Keep your spine long (don’t round forward). Hold for 10 to 30 seconds, then return to the starting position.

2. High plank and side plank — For the high plank, start in a kneeling pushup with your hands shoulder-distance apart. Straighten your knees, pushing down into the balls of your feet to raise your body into a high plank position, which looks exactly like the upward position of a pushup.

With your hands aligned with your shoulders and legs straight, engage your core and hold for 20 to 60 seconds, or as long as you can maintain proper form.

For the side plank, start out lying on your left side with legs straight (your hips, knees and feet stacked). Bend your left elbow and place your forearm on the ground under your shoulder. Push your left forearm into the ground to lift your torso and hips off the ground.

Engage your core to maintain your body in a straight line from head to heel. You can keep your right arm by your side or stretched up in the air. Hold for at least 10 seconds. Lower your torso down and switch sides.

3. Overhead hold — Using a suitable weight (based on your level of fitness) with both hands, engage your core and extend your arms above your head. Keep your arms fully extended and in line with your shoulders. Hold the weight steady over your head for 20 to 30 seconds.

4. Glute bridge — Lie on your back. Bend your knees so that your heels are about 12 to 16 inches from your behind. Keep your arms by your sides. Press into your heels, brace your core, and push your pelvis upwards by squeezing your glutes. Maintain the bridge position for 30 seconds without letting your hips sink.

5. Hollow-body hold — Lie on your back with your legs extended toward the ceiling, perpendicular to the floor. Squeeze your core to press your low back into the floor, then raise your head and shoulders a few inches off the floor while simultaneously lowering your legs as close to the floor as possible. Hold until you can’t hold any longer, then lower your head and shoulders to the floor.

6. Incline pushup hold — Place your hands on a sturdy surface, such as a bench or low table. Position your hands slightly wider than your shoulders. Walk backward until you’re in a pushup position, with your body weight supported on your hands and the balls of your feet. Engage your core and make sure your shoulders are not pushing up toward your ears.

Bend your elbows as in the downward motion of a pushup until your chest nearly touches the bench or table. Your arms should flare outward, forming 45-degree angles with your torso. Pause here and hold as long as you can, then step forward to stand up.

*

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.

Notes

1 U.S. CDC, Facts About Hypertension

2, 5 British Journal of Sports Medicine 2023;57:1317-1326

3, 4 Canterbury Christ Church University July 26, 2023

6, 8, 14, 16 The Washington Post January 30, 2024 (Archived)

7 Cleveland Clinic September 14, 2023

9 Vertimax 20 Isometric Exercises

10 Int J Sports Med. 2019 May;40(6):363-375. doi: 10.1055/a-0863-4539. Epub 2019 Apr 3

11 Cureus. 2021 Oct; 13(10): e18972

12 Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Sep 30; 101(39): e30864

13 Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Dec; 95(52): e5791

15 British Journal of Sports Medicine 2023;57:1317-1326., Screening and study eligibility

17 Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2017; 2017: 9784271

18 American Journal of Hypertension, December 2009

19 J Altern Complement Med. 2017 Sep;23(9):685-695. doi: 10.1089/acm.2016.0234. Epub 2017 Apr 6

20 J Hum Hypertens. 2019 Mar;33(3):237-247. doi: 10.1038/s41371-018-0130-6. Epub 2018 Nov 13

21 American Journal of Physiology — Endocrinology and Metabolism April 4, 2017

22 Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Potassium

23, 29 The Washington Post February 7, 2024 (Archived)

24 The New York Times November 8, 2023

25, 27 Gizmodo February 5, 2024

26 Hypertension February 5, 2024

28 American Heart Association February 5, 2024

30, 31 U.S. FDA November 8, 2023

Featured image is from Mercola

BRICS and the Global South Cooperation

February 15th, 2024 by Prof. Abdullahi Shehu

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Introduction

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1992 ‘the tectonic plates of geopolitics have been shifting’ and with current geopolitical tensions, including the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the Israeli-Hamas war, new alliances and potential rivalry among world powers seeking for influence in Africa and other regions of the world, ‘we may see the world becoming more multipolar’. Despite the plethora of multilateral institutions, multipolarity has become a cliché as member states forge new alliances to address perceived injustices in the existing system.

BRICS emerged from the Russia-India-China strategic triangle called RIC. The group that was promoted by Russia ostensibly to challenge the perceived monopoly or hegemony of the United States of America (USA), thus renewing old ties with India and fostering the newly discovered friendship with China. BRICS is the acronym denoting the emerging national economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The term was originally coined in 2001 as BRIC by the Goldman Sachs economist Jim O Neil in his report, Building Better Global Economic BRICs. (Global Economic paper No:66) then South Africa joined in 2010, leading to the transformation from BRIC to BRICS.

This paper examines the emergence and evolution of BRICS in the context of the current geopolitical situation and economic alliances for sustainable development.

It reviews the objectives of BRICS and discusses the relevance and attraction of the bloc in the 21st century, especially within the framework of Global South cooperation. The prospects, opportunities and challenges for meaningful and constructive partnership within the framework of BRICS are also examined. Our conclusion is that “the organization has struggled to have the kind of geopolitical influence that matches its collective economic reach.

It also embodies a synergy of cultures and explores a model of genuine multilateral diplomacy. Its structure is formed in compliance with the 21st century realities. Efforts within its framework are based on the principles of equality, mutual respect and justice”. Furthermore, “while the BRICS bloc can have significant influence, it will not be sufficient to make a revolution in the existing international relations”. 

The Relevance of BRICS in the 21st Century Multilateralism 

BRICS member countries share the desire for the world to accord them a larger role through their common platform for global reform. Although the framework of BRICS is more or less informal, that is, without a Secretariat as in the case of most multilateral organizations, the organization seems be assuming greater significance due to its philosophy and principles of equality. The major roles of BRICS are derived largely from statements issued at Summits. Over the years, BRICS has focused on highlighting the need for emerging powers to have a greater voice in global governance. In the wake of the global financial crisis, the joint statement by BRICS leaders in 2009 contained strong declarations on the importance of coordinating financial policy through the G20 and the need to reform international financial institutions to create “greater voice and representation” for emerging economies, including a more transparent process for leadership selection.

In the joint statement at the end of the third Summit in 2011, China and Russia reiterated the importance they attached to the status of India, Brazil, and South Africa in international affairs, and underscored the importance of their aspiration to play a greater role in the UN. By the fourth Summit held in New Delhi in 2012, BRICS stressed that its member countries represent 43 percent of the world’s population, signaling clearly their concern for more representation in global institutions. This position has been echoed in many subsequent communications.

While in 2010, the group was at the infant stage of its formation and could be easily dismissed as yet another inconsequential global institution, today, it is harder to say that the BRICS does not matter. The five countries have rapidly used the BRICS platform to signal to the world that the old twentieth-century institutions have to change. This signal transformed into action from 2012 as its diplomatic calendar continues to expand yearly, with a host of interactions to both coordinate policy positions, as well as expand official and people-to-people dialogue, generally on non-contentious global issues – climate change, transnational organized crime, etc. 

Additionally, it is interesting to note that what began with Summit-level gatherings and, separate meetings of Foreign Ministers, now include meetings Sectoral Ministers, Central Bank Governors, National Security Advisors, a Business Council, a Think Tanks Council, a Parliamentary Forum, a Cultural Festival, as well as a Friendship Cities and Local Governments Cooperation Forum. Among all the structural frameworks of BRICS, the creation of the New Development Bank (NDB), along with a Contingent Reserves Arrangement (CRA) has been adjudged the most significant after long-pending reforms of IMF and the World Bank failed to materialize. The NDB has since become fully operational, and recently, Egypt has joined the bank as a new member, while other countries, including Turkey are warming to do the same.

In accordance with the Charter, each member having equal voice have also contributed equal share of the $50 billion initial subscription capital. Similarly, while the governance structure emphasizes equal and rotational representation, the NDB operates from its Headquarters in Shanghai under the leadership of K.V. Kamath, a former CEO of India’s ICICI Bank as its first President. In April 2017, just under five years after the idea of the NDB came out of the Delhi Summit, the bank signed its first development loan agreement with Brazil.

The BRICS countries indeed have deepened their partnership over the past years, developing a real organization out of a mere idea, to prove its capacity to create new financial institutions with equal opportunities. Resulting from the removal of Russia from the global SWIFT payment system, the BRICS are working towards a new financial infrastructure, an alternative payment and internet networks to assert the multipolarity of the world economy. 

From all indications, the emergence of BRICS and the level of commitment it demonstrates in the pursuit of its goals of economic development among its members, has indeed, shown that BRICS has come to stay. Being founded on the principles of equality of member states, right of access to development funds, developing countries and emerging economies consider the relevance of BRICS as a global institution. Many countries will soon come to terms with BRICS due to the significant influence it commands on global socio-economic affairs in the build up to the emerging world order. One major characteristic identical to BRICS member countries revolves around their population, natural resource endowment and economic potentials.

Indeed, the outcome of the XV BRICS Summit, held in South Africa from 22 to 24 August 2023, with the theme: “BRICS and Africa: Partnership for Mutually Accelerated Growth, Sustainable Development and Inclusive Multilateralism”, may have added impetus to the traction of the bloc based on its motivating ‘commitment to inclusive multilateralism, support for comprehensive reform of the UN, including its Security Council; support for open, transparent, fair, predictable, inclusive, equitable and non-discriminatory rules-based multilateral trading system’

BRICS XVI Summit in Kazan, Russia

Russia currently assumes the leadership of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa plus five (5) new members (Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia) that ascended unto the association in January 2024.  

Until the forthcoming XVI summit next October, Russia has already lined up a comprehensive pack of activities aimed at building an appreciable image and direction, and creating a better future based on its historical developments and contemporary geopolitical realities for the association.

In an exclusive address to ….Russian President, Vladimir Putin outlined the main priorities for the Summit, with the theme: Strengthening Multilateralism for Equitable Global Development and Security. During the year, Russia plans to hold over 200 events in three key areas of BRICS cooperation: politics and security, economy and finance, as well as cultural and humanitarian contacts. The BRICS summit scheduled to take place in Kazan, the Russian Federation in October 2024, will be the culmination of Russia’s chairmanship.

One of the crucial tasks is to ensure the integration of new participants in the BRICS mechanisms without compromising their efficiency. To implement Johannesburg II Declaration, Russia will devise the modality of establishing the category of BRICS partner states and create a list of potential candidates to present the report at the Kazan summit.  In addition, Russia will contribute to the comprehensive implementation of the Strategy for BRICS Economic Partnership until 2025 and the Action Plan for BRICS Innovation Cooperation for 2021–2024.

As the first step, Russia plans to ensure that the decision adopted during the XV summit, held on August 22-24, 2023, in South Africa to expand BRICS membership becomes a reality, as a particularly important step to strengthen the position of BRICS which epitomizes the diversity of the multipolar world. Both Kremlin and the Foreign Affairs Ministry have indicated that more than 30 countries, have expressed interest in establishing close ties with BRICS.

The second step will see Russia hosting a number of major international cultural events, including the World Youth Festival, the Games of the Future which is a mix of physical sports and cybersports, and the sports games of the BRICS countries. Both games will be held in Kazan, capital of the Republic of Tatarstan (the Games of the Future in February, and the BRICS Games in the summer of 2024).

Already,  during a cabinet meeting on 26 January 2024, Putin had directed relevant government ministries and departments to draft proposals on expansion of cooperation with BRICS colleagues in the ‘climate area,  joint developments in the area of monitoring climatically-active gases and measuring the carbon balance of ecosystems, including the development of systems for collection and processing of data for estimation of human-caused and natural flows of greenhouse gases and other climatically-active elements’. 

The cabinet is also to develop mutual recognition of tools and technologies in this field by BRICS nations. Another area of work is laying the groundwork for development of joint technical scientific solutions aimed at easing the human impact on the environment, climate and adjustment of economies and the population of member states to climate changes. The order should be executed by June 3.

Certainly, in order for the forum to expand its geography even further, with the need to use the most advanced technologies for possible remote participation from anywhere in the world. And approach for consolidating BRICS scope of activities and as an explicit indication of collective team work under Russia’s presidency, Federation Council (the upper house of the Russian Parliament) Speaker Valentina Matviyenko has added her voice to BRICS 2024. For the first time within the Fourth Eurasian Women’s Forum from September 18 to 20 in St. Petersburg, Matviyenko proposed a special session on women – the BRICS Women’s Forum. She stated inter alia that “As part of the fourth forum, we plan to hold the BRICS Women’s Forum for the first time. This BRICS Women’s Forum will present both the results of existing projects and new initiatives, which will strengthen partnerships between the BRICS member countries, including on the women’s agenda,” 

Prospects an Opportunities for BRICS Expansion

In the latest BRICS summit, some of the observations and objectives were spelled out in the declaration:

“With the addition of six new members, BRICS now has 30 percent of the world economy within its collaboration, with a combined GDP of US$30.76 trillion. It also constitutes 40 percent of the world’s population. The necessity of expanding trade and investment among the BRICS member states and strengthening their relations was emphasized by the summit leaders. By 2050, leaders at the summit hope to account for 50 percent of the world’s GDP, which will fundamentally change the economic landscape.”

‘It is estimated that by 2040, the BRICS group will account for more than 50% of the global GDP, because enlargement within the BRICS plus framework through integration of a number of large countries will facilitate the achievement of about 50% of global production of goods and services’.

And,

‘in March 2022 experts from the IMF had warned that the heavy financial sanctions imposed on could threaten to gradually weaken the dominance of the US dollar, lead to a more multilateral international systems and encourage the emergence of small currency blocks based on trade among a certain group of countries. Already, it is noted that the BRICS countries have established a contingency reserve arrangement (CRA), a mechanism aimed at ensuring liquidity for member-states when they are confronted by short term balance of payment crises’.

In this regard, BRICS offers a model that motivates countries to join. Scholars have argued that the use of a single currency that is being contemplated or local currencies in trade exchange among members could be an effective counter balance to the monopoly or dominance of the US dollar. It is assumed that the dollar system, with its great deal of volatility, systematically undervalues the currencies of Third World countries’. In addition, ‘elevated interest rates and stronger dollar make it more expensive for for African countries to service dollar denominated debt, something that has pushed many countries into debt distress’. The fact that Egypt, Ethiopia and other countries of the Global South are joining BRICS could mean that they are gradually moving away from the dollar-based system of global trade, experts told the Jeune Afrique news magazine.  For Africa the use of the dollar in trade means that countries have no chance to trade with each other in local currencies, Elizabeth Rossiello, Chief Executive Officer of the Kenyan financial company AZA Finance, said. African nations are looking for new ways to raise money as global financial entities, such as the World Bank, fail to give sufficient attention to the continent, she stressed.

Characterized as a supra-global structure, BRICS “encapsulates the richness of multipolar world” and particularly embraces the developing Global South. BRICS is also attractive to developing countries because it can act as a buffer from US sanctions, Steve Hanke, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University, said. The countries of the global South see the association as a counterweight to the US-dominated global financial system, the analyst added.

That said, a number of experts note that the expansion of BRICS will not lead to the fragmentation of the global economy.

Adam Slater, lead economist for the Oxford Economics company, believes that the integration’s total share in global trade stands at a mere 3%. Meanwhile, former employee at the White House and the World Bank Harry Broadman thinks that joining BRICS has more of a political and symbolic meaning, not economic.

Nevertheless, Yaroslav Lissovolik, a former Chief Economist and Head of Research in Deutsche Bank Russia and former Advisor to Russia’s Executive Director in the International Monetary Fund and now the founder of BRICS+ Analytics – a think-tank that explores the potential of the BRICS+ format in the global economy, also argues that there is the strong expectation that BRICS will consolidate its role within the emerging geopolitical processes and global competition for Africa. China and Russia are currently making efforts to assert influence more aggressively, despite the challenges and obstacles, in cooperating with Africa.

According to Lissovolik, there are not too many economic mechanisms created thus far by the BRICS — the main economic contribution of the BRICS has been the creation of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA). The BRICS NDB is set to expand its membership to include more developing economies. There are also plans within BRICS to widen the mandate of the BRICS CRA to make it more effective in supporting member countries. What is lacking at this stage is a financial mechanism that would facilitate the payments in national currencies among the BRICS economies — discussions on the creation of such a mechanism (widely referred to as BRICS Pay) have been ongoing since 2017, but progress in this area has been moderate at best. Furthermore, the issue of the creation of a common currency or an accounting unit for all BRICS countries has also progressed slowly. (See BRICS+ Analytics website, October 2023)

Within BRICS, China and Russia will likely cooperate towards creating those financial and economic mechanisms that are lacking in the global economy. The purpose of BRICS is not to undermine any economy, as the leaders have made it clear that ‘they are not friends against someone but work in each other’s interests, to create alternative cooperative platforms for economic cooperation among countries.

 In the longer term, the African Union (AU) could also participate in the reconstruction and the reform of the main global institutions and fora such as the WTO, the G20 and the UN Security Council. In 2023, the AU became a member of the G20, and since January 2021 has been successful in advancing the project of Africa’s regional integration via the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). Again, the best way in which the BRICS could contribute towards the success of this regional integration project is via greater trade openness to African economies. The success of the AfCFTA would go a long way towards overcoming the limitations faced by Africa’s economy in terms of low intra-continental regional connectivity and trade.

Considered as the largest single continental market, the AfCFTA spanning 54 states over the next years has the huge potential to unite more than 1.4 billion people in a $2.5 trillion economic bloc. It is expected to boost intra-African trade by 52.3 per cent by 2025, increase Africa’s income by up to $450 billion by 2035, according to the assessment report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF supports expansion of BRICS to make use of the advantage of global integration, IMF Spokesperson Julie Kozack noted at a regular briefing for reporters. “We do welcome countries working together, finding ways to trade, to become integrated, so that more people can benefit from the gains of global integration.,” Kozack said. (See IMF briefings – Jan. 11, 2024)

Therefore, to a great extent, individual BRICS members and/or collectively would have direct focus on more integration and more global cooperation. It has the potential to generate a range of benefits through supporting trade creation, structural transformation, productive employment and poverty reduction. Further to that, the AfCFTA, without much doubts, opens up more various opportunities for both local African and foreign investors from around the world.

In the context of this article discussion, it is important to state that BRICS African members (Ethiopia, Egypt and South Africa) could be used as the gateway into the vast markets. BRICS has to necessarily leverage unto this and to deepen Africa’s trade integration and effectively implement the agreement through policy advocacy and strategy development. It could possibly utilize trade integration processes in close collaboration with the Regional Economic Communities and specialized African trade chambers across Africa.

Despite profound challenges, the AU member states are continuing to stride towards continental unity. Understanding this necessity, the 15th Summit in South Africa noted in its proceedings,

“The BRICS summit members agreed to extend their support for an African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA). The summit stressed the value of the political stability of the African continent in building market certainty. Leaders at the summit also explored potential ways and methods to strengthen communication and cooperation to expand AfCFTA. If successful, and if implementation moves ahead, such a move by the BRICS countries will help foster new dynamics of engagement, and on several other contemporary issues such as drug trafficking and terrorism…. The summit also discussed increasing population in BRICS countries and their increasing food security concerns. In order to improve food security, lower costs, and to achieve a carbon neutral economy, BRICS leaders favored the role of modern technology in advancing agriculture. They also hoped to make Africa a global food basket.”

Dr. Srinivas Junuguru, an Associate Professor, and Abhinaya Rayee, Woxsen School of Liberal Arts and Humanities, Woxsen University, Hyderabad, Telangana co-authored an article in which they stated that the enlarged association now constitutes 46% of the world’s population and 29.6% of the world’s GDP. And that BRICS aims to defend the interests of developing nations amid attempts by developed nations to impose their standards. With the potential for a new reserve currency, discussions within BRICS on settling international trade in local currencies are ongoing, challenging the dollar’s monopoly. The growth of BRICS is fostering a multi-polar world, creating opportunities for closer ties and collaboration between developing nations. However, concerns persist about the association’s cohesion, given the diverse allegiances of its members, particularly amid tense relations between India and China.

Challenges

The potentials and success story of BRICS notwithstanding, there are significant challenges towards actualizing its goals in a globalized economy. First, is the fact that the prosperity of the world is dependent on energy and market, and whereas BRICS has this comparative advantage to some extent because of Russia’s energy and India’s and Chinese markets, the growing rivalry between the United States and China, the two largest world economies poses significant challenge for the growth and prosperity of BRICS. 

Secondly, the dominance of the US dollar in the global financial system constitutes a significant challenge to the BRICS group, especially when it comes to introducing its own currency in financial institutions worldwide. Besides, the US dollar is also the dominant currency in the global stock markets, as well as markets of goods, bank deposits, funding of development projects and loans.

Thirdly, apart from Russia, all the other BRICS members have a strong connection with the West including China, through trade. It would therefore be difficult for countries to severe their financial ties with the US and West in general. China is the biggest exporter in the group and has enormous surplus, however, its currency, the Yuan, cannot favourably compete with the US dollar because it is not on the global markets. Despite China’s significant power in global trade, the Yuan accounts for less 2.5% of global transactions, less than the dollar share of about 40% and the Euro, which is at the level of 36%’.

With respect to the group’s goal of creating a single/common currency, they may connect with the country which has a low inflation rate, which is China. The challenge, however, is that they would need also a common monetary policy and perhaps a common regulator, which may not be in tandem with Brazil and India’s overall policies. China and India have been historical rivals, as India is antagonistic to China’s expansion in the South-East Asia and Pacific and; while India is close to the US or the West, so to say, China is a real or potential rival of the US in the global economy. At some point, it was thought that India was opposed to the expansion of the BRICS group contrary to the positions of Russia and China, the two big partners. 

Conclusion

 The BRICS, which academic experts referred to as a grouping of developing nations, initially focused on economic cooperation, has evolved into a significant player in global politics. The organization’s disposition as a competitor to the Western influence in the global economy and its pursuit of reforms align with the national interests of its members have gained traction and offered greater attraction and motivation for countries to join. With substantial contributions to global GDP, strategic placement, and influence in international trade and security, BRICS plays a crucial role. However, challenges include the lack of a formal charter for admitting new members and existing conflicts, such as those between China and India, which may hinder the association’s development. A collaborative approach between major members is crucial for BRICS to overcome internal conflicts and achieve its objectives. 

There are prospects, opportunities and challenges for such partnership within the framework of BRICS. However, “the organization has struggled to have the kind of geopolitical influence that matches its collective economic reach. It also embodies a synergy of cultures and explores a model of genuine multilateral diplomacy. Its structure is formed in compliance with the 21st century realities. Efforts within its framework are based on the principles of equality, mutual respect and justice”. Furthermore, “while the BRICS block can have significant influence, it will not be sufficient to make a revolution in the existing international relations”. Russian Federation has taken over the BRICS presidency for 2024 from South Africa and that will be a game changing incident in contemporary international relations.

*

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.

Abdullahi Y. Shehu is Professor of Criminology; former Director General of the ECOWAS Inter-Governmental Action Group against Money Laundering in West Africa, and former Ambassador of Federal Republic of Nigeria to the Russian Federation.

Professor Maurice Okoli is a fellow at the Institute for African Studies and the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences. He is also a fellow at the North-Eastern Federal University of Russia. He is an expert at the Roscongress Foundation and the Valdai Discussion Club.

As an academic researcher and economist with keen interest in current geopolitical changes and the emerging world order, Maurice Okoli frequently contributes articles for publication in reputable media portals on different aspects of the interconnection between developing and developed countries, particulary in Asia, Africa and Europe. With comments and suggestions, he can be reached via email: [email protected]

Professors Abdullahi Y. Shehu and Maurice Okoli are frequent contributors 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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

February 14, 2024

President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20500

President Biden:

We, the undersigned scholars at colleges and universities across the United States, are writing in the strongest possible terms to express our disapproval of your administration’s ongoing policy in Israel-Palestine, especially the Gaza Strip, and to advise a better way forward.

For over 120 days now, we have witnessed the staggering civilian casualties of Israel’s war on Gaza which has, on average, killed one child every eight minutes, killed two mothers every hour, and caused 10 children to lose one or both legs in Gaza every day. The decimation of medical infrastructure and the restriction of basic necessities including food and clean water by Israel’s blockade have left 1.1 million children threatened by malnutrition and preventable disease. Some 2 million Palestinians (85% of Gaza’s population) have been forced from their homes which, like every university in Gaza and some 390 educational institutions overall, have been largely demolished and reduced to rubble. Indeed, in 100 days, Israel dropped nearly 30,000 bombs and shells on Gaza—eight times more than the US used in Iraq in six years. The fact that this unprecedented carnage and destruction is being carried out with US weapons your administration has continued to provide to the Netanyahu government—without conditions, bypassing Congress to do so, and while blocking calls for a ceasefire—is indefensible.

We unequivocally condemn any attacks on civilians, whether they are Israelis or Palestinians or anyone else in the human family. Hence, we condemn all atrocities committed against Israeli civilians by Hamas or other armed groups on October 7, 2023. Moreover, we condemn any deliberate, callous, or grossly negligent acts of violence harming a single civilian—especially but not limited to children—anywhere in the world, at any time.

We therefore urge your administration to apply human rights, international humanitarian law, and US pressure consistently, not only when it comes to the attacks committed by Hamas or other militants on October 7, 2023, which killed an estimated 1,200 Israelis and foreign nationals, including 36 children. Upholding this basic moral and legal principle demands that American officials also condemn the Israeli military’s siege and bombardment of Gaza that has now killed over 27,000 Palestinians, including at least 10,000 children. Yet, Mr. President, you have not only failed to condemn the ongoing massacre in Gaza. You have enabled it.

When our political leaders fail to act or even speak out against the injustices of the age, we believe it is the responsibility of scholars, writers, artists, and other civic, educational, and moral leaders to break the silence. We also believe in speaking candidly and plainly to the US public, not mincing words, especially as the Israeli military has used on average more lethal force than any other conflict in the twenty-first century to decimate civilian life and infrastructure in Gaza, rendering the territory virtually uninhabitable.

Given the unprecedented scale, duration, and nature of Israel’s ongoing assault and multiple statements by Israeli officials conveying an intent to destroy all of Gaza under the pretext of destroying Hamas, there are substantial risks that genocide is unfolding in Gaza right now. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has found this charge plausible in its interim ruling on January 26, 2024 in South Africa v. Israel, and, more recently, a United States federal district judge has declared that “the current treatment of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip by the Israeli military may plausibly constitute a genocide in violation of international law.” These developments have only strengthened our resolve to speak out against atrocities taking place with US support in real time.

Mr. President, to save countless more lives, to prevent a spiral into wider regional war, and to disassociate the US and your administration from further complicity in gross human rights violations and war crimes, including the substantial risk of genocide, we urge you to take the following actions:

(1) Demand an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Israel-Palestine and an end to Israel’s blockade so that food, water, medicine, electricity, fuel, and other lifesaving necessities can reach Palestinian civilians facing starvation, disease, and exposure to the elements, to the scale of need. Furthermore, only with a ceasefire can aid teams rescue or recover the estimated 8,000 Palestinians trapped or dead under the rubble.

(2) Demand the peaceful release of all remaining Israeli hostages and Palestinian political prisoners through further negotiations. Many of the estimated 7,000 Palestinian prisoners and detainees currently held by Israel are children or adolescents, and a large proportion are being detained indefinitely without charge. We also note that the release of virtually all of the 110 Israeli hostages who have returned to their families alive thus far was secured by truce, negotiation, or prisoner exchange.

(3) Refrain from dismissing legal proceedings underway at the ICJ, and here we specify South Africa’s genocide case against Israel, which prominent US officials described as “meritless,” “counterproductive,” and “without any basis in fact whatsoever,” even before leading scholarly authorities on genocide submitted their testimony. Moreover, US spokespersons should avoid promoting Israeli government accusations which independent investigations have debunked or cast serious doubts upon. As scholars and educators, we cannot overstate the importance of accurate reporting and statements by US officials to help deescalate this conflict, to honor victims and bring an end to the violence, and to establish accountability for all crimes committed since October 7.

(4) Support the authority of the ICJ and the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate alleged genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes—including but not limited to extrajudicial killings, mass murder, sexual violence, hostage-taking, arbitrary detention and unlawful confinement, torture, wanton destruction of civilian infrastructure, and use of starvation—committed by all armed parties in Israel-Palestine from October 7, 2023 until the end of hostilities. Our federal Leahy Law demands that particular attention be paid to gross human rights violations carried out with US-provided weapons and to the attendantcivilian toll in Gaza, which leading humanitarian and human rights agencies, journalists, and academics—including multiple scholars of genocide and the Holocaust—warn may constitute war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Furthermore, as a signatory to the UN Genocide Convention and relevant legal protocols, the US must be ready to assist in the enforcement of existing and future ICJ and ICC judgments through the UN Security Council, including the ICJ’s provisional measures of January 26 ordering Israel to prevent a genocide against the Palestinians and to report on all measures taken to implement the Court’s orders within one month.

(5) Immediately restore funding to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA). Not only is the US at risk of being complicit in the commission of genocide but it will also be violating its separate affirmative obligation to prevent genocide if the US does not take every measure at its disposal to ensure the implementation of the ICJ provisional measures, and here we specify the provision of humanitarian aid to the scale of need. As multiple humanitarian agencies and genocide prevention experts have expressly warned, the withdrawal of funding for UNRWA threatens to impede the provision of humanitarian aid in Gaza when food, water, and other necessities are already scarce, and thereby represents a shift “from potential complicity in genocide to direct involvement in engineered famine.” Such actions contribute to conditions likely to result in the destruction of the Palestinian people in whole or in part—in other words, genocide.

(6) In light of our domestic and international legal obligations, immediately halt the transfer of weapons, munitions, and other military equipment to any parties of the conflict in Israel-Palestine. This freeze must apply not only to the Israeli government and Hamas, but to any armed groups and private citizens in Israel-Palestine including the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Golan, until the atrocities of October 7, 2023 and since have been thoroughly and impartially investigated by the ICJ and/or the ICC; and until sufficient mechanisms are in place to ensure against continued and future violations of US and international law.

We are not alone in our concerns. In mid-October 2023, over 300 US legal scholars warned your administration about the dangers of supporting PM Netanyahu’s open-ended war on Gaza, including foreseeable war crimes and a humanitarian catastrophe in the making. On November 8, signaling unease, 26 United States Senators (to be copied on this letter) requested assurances from you on the legality and viability of Israel’s military operations in Gaza—including the safety of Israeli hostages and Palestinian civilians—and whether the fight against Hamas would not “produce the same strategic mistakes as many US military operations over the past few decades.” And on December 11, leading US humanitarian agencies described the unprecedented catastrophe generated by Israel’s air strikes and blockade of Gaza’s population—half of whom are children, all of whom face the prospect of starvation and fatal diseases if they survive what you have yourself characterized as Israel’s effectively indiscriminate bombing campaign.

Mr. President, with all due respect, there is simply no explanation that PM Netanyahu—or you—could offer to justify this ongoing massacre and weaponization of humanitarian aid against the people of Gaza. You must heed these warnings, which have emanated even from within your own administration. As scholars and educators, we object in the strongest possible terms to the collective punishment of Palestinians, including the use of starvation as a war tactic and the recent suspension of US support for UNRWA, a lifeline for Gaza’s 2.2 million people. Such grossly disproportionate policies are not only cruel and immoral. They are unlawful and will not enhance the security of Israelis, Palestinians, or Americans. We hold, therefore, that the path to peace is not and cannot be through killing, starving, displacing, or ethnically cleansing Palestinians. The path to peace requires meaningfully recognizing not only the human rights and aspirations of Israelis, but the equal human rights and aspirations of Palestinians to freedom, self-determination, and safety, as well.

Finally, we call on you as our President to demand that care and vigilance be extended to all threatened and vulnerable communities here in the United States. Protecting our Jewish, Arab, and Muslim students, and our Palestinian and Israeli students, is not a zero-sum game. They are intertwined responsibilities for us, and so should it be for you and Congress. Hence, we reject antisemitism as we reject anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, and anti-Muslim prejudice and any other form of racism, bigotry, or hate speech, on and off our campuses. We also reject the weaponizing of antisemitism to silence legitimate criticism of Israeli state policies and those speaking up for Palestinian human rights. Ultimately, a just and peaceful resolution between Palestinians and Israelis is the only way to heal the tensions and polarization tearing apart college campuses, including university administrations, and rippling across US society at large.

As academics, we place a premium on the advancement of just, peaceful, and collaborative resolutions to shared problems, based on credible evidence, critical inquiry, and social responsibility. We expect the same of our leaders. And as long as you are President of the United States of America, we expect nothing less of you.

Sincerely,

3,700+ Signatories and growing. For current signatories, click here.

***

University and college faculty, instructors, fellows, and research associates anywhere in the United States can sign this open letter.

Click here to add your signature.

*

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: Photo by UNICEF/El Baba, Children at a shelter for the displaced, Gaza.

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The US establishment is finally starting to come around to the fact, that Americans don’t want to die for the whole world.

This is demonstrated by an article today (15 February 2024) in the New York Times – the mouthpiece of the liberal Neocon war state.

Mr. Trump and his advisers reject the label isolationist in favor of nationalist, saying that given the changes around the world since the fall of Communism, it is time to rethink American priorities for a new era. NATO and other alliances, they say, no longer represent U.S. interests.

“The old idea of NATO’s collective defense needs to be reassessed,” Russell Vought, a former budget director for Mr. Trump who now serves as president of the Center for Renewing America, told The Financial Times. “We have a narrower view of our interests than Estonia would like us to have.” 

Not for Europe.

But Europe and NATO are just the first point of contention, where Americans say “No – we won’t die for you”.

The fact that Americans don’t want to die for the rest of the world applies everywhere:

Not die for Israel.

Not die for Ukraine – not for Lithuania, not for Finland.

Not die for Taiwan.

Tellingly, the left of US politics has silently backed Obama and Biden in their foreign war projects – the left has kept silent and even backed US support for Nazi-Ukraine.

The revolt against dying for the world comes from the populist center and right of US politics. Trump is the harbinger and focus point of US resistance against starting, participating, paying for, and dying in endless foreign wars. Trump is not the creator of US nationalism and hate against foreign intervention. Trump is also not the creator of US popular tiredness with NATO. From left to center and right, Americans are fed up with foreign wars, with Americans paying billions and dying for nothing.

Don’t make the mistake of putting all this on Trump.

Resistance to foreign wars is now a broad popular issue across US politics.

What a gift to the world!

Europeans must learn themselves to live with Russia. Jews in Israel must learn to live with Palestinians and the region they live in. Taiwanese must learn to find a solution with Beijing.

It’s called responsibility and freedom.

*

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 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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

On February 13, the DNC-dominated Senate adopted a $95.3 billion “aid” bill that includes both the Kiev regime and Israel. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives already announced its opposition to the bill, as Speaker Mike Johnson openly said that he does not plan to bring it to the floor.

The GOP is furious at the troubled Biden administration, as the bill gives $60 billion (around 65%) to the Neo-Nazi junta. In the meantime, the situation at the southern border is deteriorating by the day, putting additional pressure on Texas, which is now backed by over half of American states. The Republicans are insisting that the border crisis should take priority, while the Democrats are far more focused on effectively causing WW3 due to their deranged foreign policy framework.

Even when the GOP showed some readiness to find common ground in combining the “aid” bill with their proposition to secure the border, the DNC kept insisting on the “aid” taking priority. This made it impossible to come to an agreement, so the US Congress is now effectively paralyzed as its two chambers are at each other’s throats. House Speaker Johnson and former president Donald Trump criticized the bill, insisting that the United States should “stop providing foreign aid unless it is in the form of a loan”. It should be noted that the Senate’s decision was partially bipartisan, as 22 of the 70 votes in favor were Republicans, including their Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, while 29 votes were against the bill. However, this is of little comfort for the Democrats, as the House opposes it.

President Joe Biden is further antagonizing the GOP by insisting that “a minority of the most extreme voices in the House should not be permitted to block the bill”. Thanks to the current (“current” being the last half a decade, at least) state of Biden’s mental health, somebody should probably tell him that it’s neither a minority nor is it extreme, so it will be extremely difficult “not to permit them” anything. The GOP’s countless shortcomings notwithstanding, it’s a fact that they’ve shown at least some level of realpolitik in regard to the border crisis, as well as several other key issues that the United States is facing on a federal level. Biden tried baiting the House with a claim that “Russia would jeopardize other US allies” in case the Kiev regime is defeated. However, that had very little effect.

For its part, the Kiev regime seems happy. Its frontman Volodymyr Zelensky thanked the Senate and “every US Senator who has supported continued assistance to Ukraine as we fight for freedom, democracy and the values we all hold dear“. Now that you’ve finished laughing, it should be noted that the Neo-Nazi junta certainly has reasons to be content with this, for the time being, at least. Zelensky also said that the bill “means that life will continue in our cities and will triumph over war”, which is essentially an admission that the US will continue financing the state apparatus of the Kiev regime while its own is effectively falling apart due to over half of American states and most federal institutions being on the opposing sides. It’s virtually a given that millions of Americans are flabbergasted by this.

And indeed, who could possibly blame them? They’re furious that other countries take priority when it comes to the distribution of their own tax money. However, Zelensky insists that this will “help” Americans. He said that the bill

“brings just peace in Ukraine closer and restores global stability, resulting in increased security and prosperity for all Americans and all the free world”.

It would be very interesting to see Zelensky explain how exactly giving dozens of billions to one of the world’s most corrupt regimes “helps” Americans, much less the world. Quite the contrary, many would argue that continued support for the Neo-Nazi junta is bringing us much closer to a global conflict between the most heavily armed powers in human history, without even taking into the continued general instability.

While the DNC will have a very difficult task pushing the bill’s adoption by the House, if they succeed, the so-called “Ukraine aid” would effectively be codified and even made into an impeachable offense. This is extremely important for the neoliberal and neocon warmongers in Washington DC as it would force any future president to comply with the bill. This can be seen as a way of using the system to ensure that Democrats’ decisions are not legally overturned by any future potentially non-DNC administration. Thus, no wonder that Trump is so opposed to the bill. His skepticism toward America’s current global security architecture extends even to NATO itself, let alone the Kiev regime. Namely, Trump thinks that the belligerent alliance is relying too much on the US military.

Thus, he’s demanding all member states to “pay up”, a clear reference to the fact that most of their military spending amounts to less than 2% of their GDP. In other words, Trump wants NATO countries to allocate more money to finance their armed forces. It can only be expected that he’ll be extremely opposed to giving dozens of billions to a foreign regime, much less one that Trump himself sees as firmly “pro-Swamp”. In addition, Johnson effectively stated that the bill would not pass the House, meaning that its chances are very slim to none. What’s more, they are further antagonizing the Democrat-run Senate and the Biden administration by pushing against other federal institutions that they see as hostile. Namely, on February 14, the House impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

According to Zero Hedge, more than 10 million illegal immigrants have entered the US under his tenure, effectively doubling the migrant population. With a vote of 214-213, Mayorkas is the first cabinet official to be impeached in approximately 150 years. Mayorkas was accused of demonstrating a “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” and “breaching the public trust”. Formed in the post-9/11 era, the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) is one of the most powerful federal institutions, enjoying possibly the highest level of freedom to act and even supersede many other federal agencies. Mayorkas himself has repeatedly stated he will not step down even if impeached. He reiterated his willingness to ignore the impeachment just last week when the previous vote took place.

*

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Amnesty International on Tuesday renewed its call for the U.S. government to drop charges against jailed WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, whose final hearing before the United Kingdom’s High Court regarding his extradition to the United States is fast approaching.

Assange’s February 20-21 hearing before the High Court will determine whether the Australian journalist—who has been imprisoned in London’s Belmarsh Prison since April 2019—has exhausted all of his U.K. appeals and will be extradited to the United States, where he has been charged with violating the 1917 Espionage Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for publishing classified U.S. military documents and files on WikiLeaks over a decade ago.

“The risk to publishers and investigative journalists around the world hangs in the balance. Should Julian Assange be sent to the U.S. and prosecuted there, global media freedoms will be on trial, too,” said Julia Hall, Amnesty International’s expert on counterterrorism and criminal justice in Europe.

“Assange will suffer personally from these politically motivated charges and the worldwide media community will be on notice that they too are not safe,” Hall added. “The public’s right to information about what their governments are doing in their name will be profoundly undermined. The U.S. must drop the charges under the Espionage Act against Assange and bring an end to his arbitrary detention in the U.K.”

Among the materials published by WikiLeaks are the Afghanistan and Iraq war logs, which revealed U.S. and coalition war crimes, many of them leaked by American whistleblower Chelsea Manning. Perhaps the most infamous of the leaks is the so-called “Collateral Murder” video, which shows U.S. Army attack helicopter crews laughing as they gunned down a group of Iraqi civilians that included journalists and children.

While the soldiers and commanders implicated in the materials published by WikiLeaks have largely enjoyed impunity, Manning served seven years in prison before her sentence was commuted by outgoing U.S. President Barack Obama in 2017. Meanwhile, Assange faces up to 175 years behind bars if found guilty of all charges against him.

According to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Assange has been arbitrarily deprived of his freedom since he was arrested in December 2010. Since then he has been held under house arrest, confined for seven years in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London while he was protected by the administration of former Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa, and jailed in Belmarsh.

In 2019, Nils Melzer, then the U.N. special rapporteur on torture, said Assange was showing “all symptoms typical for prolonged exposure to psychological torture.”

In a development related to Assange’s case, a federal judge earlier this month sentenced Joshua Schulte of New York to 40 years in prison in part for giving WikiLeaks “Vault 7,” a series of documents detailing the CIA’s surveillance and cyberwarfare activities and capabilities.

On Monday, the CIA—which during the Trump administration mulled assassinating Assange—invoked its state secrets privilege in a bid to block a lawsuit by the publisher’s attorneys. The suit alleges that CIA operatives “blatantly violated” the rights of lawyers and journalists visiting Assange in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London by conducting unconstitutional searches and seizures of their electronic devices.

Acclaimed U.S. film director Oliver Stone released a video over the weekend to draw attention to protests on “Day X”—what Assange supporters are calling his upcoming hearing—and Assange’s continued “illegal detention.”

“The world needs to be reminded, and so does Julian,” said Stone. “He’s one of us. He’s more than that, he is the collective us. If he goes down a part of each one of us goes down.”

In New York City, activist and political satirist Randy Credico, host of “Julian Assange: Countdown to Freedom”on WBAI radio and the Progressive Radio Network, will be co-piloting billboard trucks with “Free Assange” messages until the London hearing, according to CounterPunch.

Meanwhile in France, Russian artist Andrei Molodkin is attracting global attention for threatening to destroy a collection of works by artists including Picasso, Rembrandt, and Andy Warhol that he has amassed if Assange—who suffers from a host of health issues—dies in prison.

[From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.]

*

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.

Brett Wilkins is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

Featured image: Julian Assange at the Stop the War Coalition rally at Trafalgar Square, London, Oct. 8, 2011. (Haydn, Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

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.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The 12 February 2024 massacre and mass murder, wanton and purposeful shelling by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) of some 1.5 million Palestinians in or around the city of Rafah, south of Gaza – gateway to Egypt — was hardly reported by the mainstream media. In fact, what was first shock-reported, was hastily censored away – so that most of the world could not learn about this final Holocaust-stroke against Palestine in Gaza. 

The genocidal bombardment of southern Gaza of 12 February is comparable to the 1948 Nakba (“nakba” means catastrophe and refers to the violent displacement and dispossession of Palestinians, along with the destruction of their society, culture, identity, political rights).  

In a few minutes, it left at least 200 people, mostly children, women, and elderly dead, dismembered, pieces of flesh hanging from the ruins of earlier destroyed homes, schools, and hospitals.

In what appears to be a final act of ethnic cleansing, the Netanyahu Government through the atrocious Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) has announced and is proceeding with the total elimination of the Palestinian people from Gaza.

Egyptian President, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, has warned that Israel intends to open the border floodgates of Rafah in Southern Gaza to force-evacuate more than 1.4 million Gaza inhabitants, currently assembled and barely existing in unheard-of-conditions of misery and makeshift tent-cities, into Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula. Indeed, tent-cities have already been built in Sinai. Most likely under a clandestine agreement between al-Sisi and Netanyahu.

Netanyahu for the Israeli side confirmed this intention of mass-evacuation. 

As a precursor to this “final step” of ethnic cleansing, and according to an Al-Mayadeen correspondent in Rafah, Gaza, the Zionist occupation used US-funded and internationally banned incendiary missiles in its raids on the city of Rafah that resulted in the massacre of over 200 Palestinians, including mostly women and children.

“Search and rescue teams are still in the process of pulling martyrs’ bodies from under the rubble,” so says Al-Mayadeen.

Hamas states:

“In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful – The attack by the Nazi occupation army on the city of Rafah tonight (12 February), and its horrific massacres against unarmed civilians, including displaced children, women, and the elderly, which has so far resulted in more than 100 martyrs [latest reports, at least 200], is a continuation of the genocide and forced displacement attempts waged against our Palestinian people.

“The attack by the terrorist enemy army on the city of Rafah is a compounded crime, a deepening of genocide, and an expansion of the massacres committed against our people, given the tragic conditions experienced by this city due to the crowding of approximately 1.4 million citizens in it, and its streets turning into camps for the displaced, living in extremely difficult and harsh conditions due to the lack of the most basic necessities of life.

“The terrorist Netanyahu government and its Nazi army blatantly disregard the decisions of the International Court of Justice issued two weeks ago, which prescribed urgent measures including stopping any steps that could be considered acts of genocide.

The American Administration and President Biden personally bear full responsibility along with the occupation government for this massacre, due to the green light they gave to Netanyahu yesterday [Sunday, 11 February], and the open support they provide him with money, weapons, and political cover to continue the war of genocide and massacres.

“We call on the League of Arab States, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and the United Nations Security Council, to take immediate and serious action to stop the Zionist aggression and the ongoing genocide crimes against unarmed civilians in the Gaza Strip.” (Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas, Monday 12 February 2024)

*

The Silence of Complicity

Time and again, one may just wonder what strange and diabolical forces have beset Mother Earth? They seem to have grown not just much stronger over the past 4 years, but also become so abhorrent, without any values, no ethics, and no laws – just the rules-based orders, ideal for tyrants, made by the Dark Death Cult pretending to run the world – that it seems all those who in recent “ancient times” would have stood up to defend Human Rights, seem to conform in silent complicity.

One wonders, are today’s western “leaders” (sic-sic) still human? Not only do they all tolerate Israel’s democide of an entire nation, they encourage it, in the name of Israel’s right to self-defense. 

Following a blatant lie by Israel, namely that 12 or 13 UNRWA workers were discovered fighting for Hamas, the US and EU, as well as almost all EU members have stopped funding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). 

There is absolutely no evidence of any UNRWA collaboration with Hamas. Yet the words of Netanyahu’s count, even though evidence abound that they are most often full of lies to achieve a diabolical purpose.

UNRWA was the only agency that supplied Gaza with some food and water – little it was, when Israel would the UNRWA trucks cross the Rafah border from Egypt to Gaza, but better than nothing.

Now, that is gone too. 

The obedient WEF-implanted heads of state of most EU countries follow Israel / US orders to stop funding UNRWA. That also includes the non-EU but spineless Swiss government – a so-called neutral country. A joke.

Are these people, still worthy of being called humans rather than savages? Is this the way of the future? Is WEF’s Klaus Schwab, who implants these puppets as he proudly says “into governments around the world”, still human? These are legitimate questions.  

Does their complicity make them proxy murderers?

See also Chris Hedges, “Let them Eat Dirt!”.

A dehumanization of humanity, a robotization of humanity, may be well in process. Digitization of the brain – no feelings, no sentiments – pure brute execution of orders. See this, this and this.

*

For those who still do not believe that we are witnessing the beginning of a long war towards a “Greater Israel”, think again. 

On the very 7 October 2023, the day of the long-ahead planned attack by Israel with US complicity, executed by Hamas, Netanyahu said in about these words, “This is going to be a long war”.

Why would it be a long war, if not for a long-planned and Big Purpose – Zionist-founded Greater Israel for the Chosen People, taking up as much as 50% to 70% of what is currently called the Middle East?

This is the mere expansion of an already symbiotic relationship between the West mostly the US, and Zionist Israel.

The West is funding and arming Israel – to make their dream of a Holy Place for the Chosen People come through. In turn, Israel, under the aegis of Greater Israel and its sponsors, would become possibly the world’s second or third largest supplier of hydrocarbon, including the one trillion-plus cubic feet of gas off-shore of Gaza, belonging to Palestine – to be absorbed and stolen by Israel. 

The remaining Western population – after the WEF-led depopulation drive – would be energy-wise free from Moslem — and other designated enemies. 

That too is a dream. But it will not come true. Linear planning does not work. Dynamics and higher dimensions of spiritual awareness are bound to interfere. 

We are currently living in a tug of war between the forces of Darkness and Light. In the Age of Aquarius, the name of the new epoch, Light will overcome darkness. 

But when?

Time as we know it, is man-made. Outside of life, time does not exist, at least not as our human concept. Time and space merge as in quantum science. 

For those who live and must live in a time-bound world, time is of the essence – like for Palestine. 

Let us do whatever we can to bring about a massive spiritual awakening – so that the Age of Aquarius is helped and supported by the human spirit – and an epoch of Harmony and Peace may evolve.

*

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.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020). 

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.  

Featured image: Israeli airstrike on an apartment building in Rafah, the last refuge in southern Gaza. Photo credit: MENAFN