Interventionist Hypocrisy on U.S. Deaths in Afghanistan
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | April 21, 2021
I’m always fascinated by the sacrificial mindset that interventionists have toward the lives of U.S. soldiers who they want to do the intervening. A recent example is Brett Stephens, a columnist for the New York Times. In an op-ed entitled “Abandoning Afghanistan Is a Historic Mistake,” Stephens writes:
The U.S. has lost fewer than 20 service members annually in hostile engagements in Afghanistan since 2015. That’s heartbreaking for those affected, but tiny next to the number of troops who die in routine training accidents worldwide.
Yes, it’s heartbreaking and the number of deaths might be “tiny” compared to other things but the point that Stephens is making, whether he realizes it or not, is that it’s worth sacrificing the lives of those 20 men every year for the indefinite future.
The important question is: What are those soldiers being sacrificed for? According to Stephens, they are being sacrificed to prevent the Taliban from retaking control over Afghanistan. He points out that if the Taliban end up winning Afghanistan’s civil war, that will mean tyranny for the Afghan people.
Is the prevention of tyranny for the Afghan people worth sacrificing 20 U.S. soldiers per year indefinitely into the future? Indeed, is it worth sacrificing even one U.S. soldier to accomplish that goal?
Stephens would say yes. He says the prevention of a Taliban victory is that important.
But there is one big problem with Stephens’s reasoning: his own personal commitment to the cause. After all, if preventing a Taliban victory is so important, what is Stephens doing here at home? There is nothing to prevent him from traveling to Afghanistan and offering his services to the Afghan government to assist it in prevailing over the Taliban.
Stephens is only 47 years old. There are plenty of men in the Afghan army that are that age. Why does he choose to remain here at home living a cushy life writing for the New York Times instead of traveling to Afghanistan and helping the U.S.-installed regime prevail in the conflict?
There is one simple reason: Stephens places a higher value on his cushy life here at home than he does on preventing a Taliban victory over there. He’s not willing to give up what he has here at home to risk his life by traveling to Afghanistan and offering his services in order to prevent a Taliban victory.
But when it comes to the lives of those 20 soldiers a year, that’s a different story. In Stephens’s internal ranking of values, the lives of those soldiers are of secondary value compared to preventing a Taliban victory.
We saw this interventionist mindset, of course, during the Vietnam War, when more than 58,000 American men were sacrificed to prevent the communists in North Vietnam from prevailing in that country’s civil war. Interventionists said (and still say) that sacrificing those 58,000-plus American men sacrifice was worth it. In fact, if interventionists had had their way, American soldiers would still be in South Vietnam today, being sacrificed to prevent a communist takeover of South Vietnam.
There are lots of bad things that happen around the world. But that doesn’t mean that American soldiers should be sacrificed to prevent them. If interventionists are outraged over bad things that happen in the world, let’s just let them travel overseas to risk their lives to right the wrongs.
My hunch is that Stephens is one of those people who exhorts everyone to thank the troops for their service and sacrifice. I wonder how many U.S. soldiers can see through this interventionist hypocrisy, especially after 20 years of official lies and deception surrounding the U.S. war on Afghanistan.
As demand for natural gas skyrockets in booming China, Russia says it’s ready to meet Beijing’s needs
By Jonny Tickle | RT | April 21, 2021
China’s fast-growing economy has an insatiable need for natural gas, and Russia is ready to heavily ramp up its cross-border supplies. That’s according to Viktor Zubkov, the chairman of Russian energy giant Gazprom.
As things stand, gas is sent from Far-Eastern Yakutia to China through the Gazprom-operated Power of Siberia pipeline, which first became operational in December 2019. Its construction secured another economic partnership for Moscow, while its gas connections to Europe face increasing resistance.
On Wednesday, when speaking to Moscow news agency TASS, Zubkov revealed that China’s demand for gas increases every two years at the rate of the entire capacity of the Power of Siberia pipeline, which transports 38 billion cubic meters every year.
According to Zubkov, China has already become the largest importer and the third-biggest consumer of natural gas globally.
“It will remain the most promising gas market for the foreseeable future as well,” he said. “We are sure that China needs additional gas supplies from Russia, and Gazprom is ready to supply them.”
He also noted that Chinese gas consumption is growing at an accelerated, ‘double-digit’ rate and in the next 15 years could double from its current level.
In recent years, Russia and China started to move closer economically, with both countries sending a large volume of exports across their shared border. Beijing is now Moscow’s largest trading partner, with bilateral trade exceeding $100 billion annually.
“Asia acts as a locomotive in the development of the global economy,” Zubkov concluded. “In 2020, the world economy faced its worst pandemic crisis in recent memory, and it was Asia, with its strong growth, that laid the foundation for a global recovery from the downturn.”
On April 13, Gazprom approved the analysis of a project to build the Soyuz Vostok gas pipeline through Mongolia to China, another route that would send more fuel to Asia.
Airlines Won’t Call Digital ID A ‘Vaccine Passport’ Because “It Carries Too Many Connotations”
By Steve Watson | Summit News | April 21, 2021
A report from Yahoo News notes that airlines won’t be calling the imminent vaccine passports by that name because “It carries too many connotations,” according to one aviation CEO.
The forthcoming ‘digital certificates’ that will show COVID-19 vaccination status won’t be referred to as vaccination passports says Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian, because that would turn people off.
Bastian declared that airlines are “more focused on a credential, travel credential, if you will, to indicate that you’ve been vaccinated and or tested based on the regulatory requirements.”
The CEO added that he expects “Either a vaccination or a test,” to be a requirement to travel, and airlines are “working with a number of technology providers to be able to facilitate that in an open source way.”
Right. A vaccine passport then.
That is exactly what the ID will be, but never mind, just call it something else to placate the sheeple and hope they remain only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
It’s the exact same policy that the UK government is adopting for the system which is slated not only for international travel but also domestically. We are also reliably informed that the vast majority of Brits are willing to accept vaccine passports in order to engage in basic day to day activities, and that they are willing to go along with the digital ID card system PERMANENTLY.
Recent surveys also indicate that almost half of Americans support the introduction of vaccine passports in order to get “back to normal.”
Airline consultant Mike Boyd warned that the companies “would rather not deal with this, but they need to express their points of view very carefully,” adding that creating a global protocol to enforce vaccine passports “could resemble a DMV [Department of Motor Vehicles] on steroids.”
The EU is already ensconced on the vaccine passport road, with a bloc wide ‘Digital Green Certificate’ system set to be rolled out in June.
Scientists Say Summer Covid Surge Is Likely – Pull The Other One
By Richie Allen | April 21, 2021
So-called experts are warning today, that the relaxation of coronavirus measures, means there will inevitably be a third wave of cases this Summer.
Professor Adam Finn, of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), said that all the modelling points to a rise in cases, because many adults have not yet been immunised.
Finn said that the UK was still vulnerable and warned that the dates for easing restrictions may have to be adjusted. Speaking to BBC Breakfast this morning, Finn said;
“The models that we’ve seen on JCVI clearly point to a summer surge in cases as the lockdown is relaxed, because there are still many people in the adult population who’ve not been immunised.
The sense that the problem is all over, I’m afraid is a flawed one, we’re still in a vulnerable situation, and there are still significant numbers of people who potentially could be harmed by this infection if this happens.”
In England, the next relaxation of lockdown restrictions is due on May 17th. From this date, people can meet in groups of up to 30 outdoors and six people or two households can meet indoors.
Adam Finn and his colleagues are scaremongering. They get away with it because of the corruption and ineptitude that is endemic in the UK media. The more that presenters fail to eviscerate these spoofers, the bolder they become. Their claims become more ridiculous too.
University College London reported three weeks ago that the UK has reached herd immunity against covid-19. The Office for National Statistics said last week that nearly one quarter of all deaths categorised as Covid-19 deaths were not caused by the virus. In reality of course, it’s a lot more than one quarter.
I’ve never said the virus is a hoax, but the pandemic is. There never was a pandemic. This has always been about the vaccine and the vaccine passports. Claims of Summer spikes and double mutant variants are nonsense. Don’t believe them. They’ve lied every step of the way.
Covid’s IFR just keeps DROPPING
By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | April 21, 2021
With every new study, with every new paper, the “deadly” pandemic gets less and less, well, deadly. The most recent data review, published in late March, puts the infection fatality ratio (IFR) at 0.15%.
That is, once again, pretty much the same as a normal flu season.
The new paper is the work of Dr John Ioannidis, whom you likely remember. He is an eminent epidemiologist and statistician who publicly urged the need for “good data” last spring.
Do you remember last spring? The blissful days of never having even heard of “infection fatality ratio”? (I do. Fondly.)
The phrase really rose to prominence last year, after the World Health Organization (WHO) announced the IFR of the scary new virus was 3.4%.
This is not, in and of itself, especially high. But it is significantly higher than most cold/flu viruses.
Around the same time, somebody (or multiple somebodies) actually edited the Wikipedia page of the Spanish Flu, to change its IFR and make it seem like Covid was just as dangerous. Who did this remains a mystery, although why has become fairly obvious.
At the time, many experts (such as those listed in our 12 Experts article) predicted the actual IFR of “Covid” would be much, much lower than the WHO’s estimate, and that this would become clear as new data were gathered.
Dr John Ioannidis was one of the most vocal on this point, he was featured on our list and was also the first interview in the Perspectives on the Pandemic series. All the way along he has urged the need for cool heads and good data. His first a study, last April, found the REAL IFR of Covid19 was 0.27%. Then he did another in October that found it may be even lower at 0.2%.
And now, this most recent study found 0.15%. Right in line with seasonal influenza (which has, conveniently enough, dropped off the face of the planet).
That’s a reduction of 95% of the WHO’s estimate, in less than a year. It’s also right along the same lines as the WHO’s (accidental) admission, made last October, that around 10% of the world had likely been exposed to the virus, rendering an IFR of roughly 0.14%.
And remember to bear in mind the ridiculous way national governments collate their so-called “Covid deaths”. Even with the official death statistics being “substantial overestimates” the IFR is still low. Very low.
Now, let’s couch this with all the usual disclaimers: Yes, the virus may not ever have been isolated, and thus has not as yet been proven to exist. And yes, even supposing it does exist, it has not been proven to cause the disease known as “Covid19”.
But, increasingly, the distinction between “no virus” and “a virus that isn’t dangerous” seems entirely moot, doesn’t it?
As the real IFR of Covid is revealed to be lower (and lower, and lower) than the original estimates, it moves further and further into line with the basic background risk of just being alive.
Still, don’t forget to take that experimental gene-therapy “vaccine”. We don’t know if they’re completely safe yet, because long-term trials won’t finish for two years, and the technology has never been used on humans before, but still… you’ve only got a 99.85% chance of survival without it.
As chemical weapons watchdog’s credibility crumbles, OPCW member states strip Syria’s voting rights
RT | April 21, 2021
Syria has been stripped of most of its rights at the global chemical weapons watchdog for alleged breaches. The OPCW stands accused of suppressing facts reported by its own inspectors in Syria for political purposes.
The vote to penalize Syria took place on Wednesday at the conference of the states that are parties to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague. Syria was punished for allegedly violating the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), of which the OCPW is the guardian, based on reports by the special Investigation and Identification Team (IIT).
The penalties were imposed at the proposal of France and backed by Western nations who helped pass it overwhelmingly by 87 to 15, with 34 abstentions out of 136 countries taking part.
The mechanism was created last year and was authorized to name perpetrators of chemical weapons attacks. It has on several occasions accused Syria of CWC infractions. Damascus sees the IIT as a “propaganda tool” used by countries seeking to topple its government, and says its reports cannot be considered scientific, as a Syrian representative said at the conference prior to the vote.
The concern is shared by some other countries, including Russia and China. The Chinese representative reminded on Wednesday that the IIT has remarkably less rigorous standards for collecting evidence than the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) did. The JIM was tasked with investigating incidents of alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria before the ITT.
“The IIT, instead of conducting on-site investigations, gave credence to samples provided by the so-called ‘non-government organizations,’ heeded the opinions of the so-called ‘external experts’ and interviewed the so-called ‘witnesses in third countries’,” Ambassador Jian Tan said, stressing that the work of the IIT went beyond the mandate under the CWC and couldn’t guarantee impartiality of the results.
Skepticism about the IIT and the OPCW in general has been growing among member states since 2019, when the organization was accused of covering up evidence discovered by its own inspectors after an incident in the Damascus suburb of Douma, which happened in April 2018. The US, the UK and France swiftly responded to the highly-publicized incident with retaliatory missile attacks against Syria.
The watchdog’s final report in 2019 all but accused Damascus of dropping chlorine gas canisters on the area as part of its effort to capture it from jihadist forces. But several whistleblowers came up after the report’s release with documents and testimonies indicating a different scenario.
They said the evidence collected by a JIM mission on the ground pointed to possible staging of the scene to blame the Syrian army. The OPCW allegedly suppressed the contradictory evidence and brought in external experts, who helped it arrive at the conclusions favorable to the three countries, which launched the strikes at Syria.
The OPCW leadership responded to the allegations by painting the whistleblowers as rogue elements disgruntled at the organization and ignoring calls for a rigorous scientific examination of how the final report on Douma was penned. Western governments and media treat their testimonies as a conspiracy theory peddled by Russia.
However this attempt to brush aside the dissenting voices seems to be hurting OPCW’s credibility. Earlier this month, members of the UN Security Council held an informal meeting to discuss the issue, and during the events India for the first time openly criticized the watchdog’s recent Syria reporting issued under the IIT mechanism.
As an OPCW state party, India expects the organization to conduct “impartial, credible and objective investigation into any use of chemical weapons,” in line with the convention principles, Indian envoy K. Nagaraj Naidu said. “The current report falls short of these expectations”.
The report in question details three alleged chemical weapons attacks in the town of Ltamenah in March 2017, which the IIT attributed to the Syrian Air Force. It updates an earlier version explaining OPCW’s findings, which was released last year and which New Delhi didn’t publicly comment on.
India was among the countries that voted against the creation of the IIT, citing its concerns over ‘mandate creep’. It abstained in July 2020, when the OPCW Executive Council voted to condemn Syria for IIT-reported use of chemical weapons.
Syria joined the OPCW in 2013 and declared massive stockpiles of chemical weapons, which were subsequently destroyed. The move was taken after Washington said it was considering military action against Syria after an alleged chemical weapons attack. The OPCW received the 2013 Nobel Peace Prize for bringing Syria into the CWC fold.
Another case of “vast fraud” in Israel’s ever-shady binary options industry
By Kathryn Shihadah | Israel-Palestine News | April 21, 2021
The Times of Israel disclosed today that the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed charges against SpotOption, an Israel-based binary operations company, alleging that it used “deceptive and manipulative” tactics to commit global fraud.
According to the SEC, SpotOption (more recently known as Spot Tech House Ltd) has defrauded US investors alone out of more than $100 million – worldwide, the number runs into the billions – offering products and services to brokerage firms which then marketed binary options worldwide.
The brokerage firms themselves, and SpotOption, were (covertly) the counterparties for all trades. That is, whenever an investor lost money, brokers and SpotOption made money.
SpotOption amassed partners by boasting of huge potential profits, as “the average investor lost 80% of their investment within five months.”
According to the SEC’s complaint, SpotOption served as a one-stop shop for “white label partners” who wished to start a binary options website. These partners directly marketed binary options to investors around the world without telling them that they were the counter-parties on all investor trades. In other words, the websites, and SpotOption, made money when investors lost money.
Its two largest shareholders, Malhaz Pinhas Patarkazishvili (also known as Pini Peter) and Ran Amiran are also named in the complaint.
Subsidized by Israeli government
Even as Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu urged a worldwide ban on binary options, and after the Israel Security Authority banned the practice in Israel, the Israeli government was giving taxpayer money to SpotOption to enable it to expand its operations to China.
Times of Israel adds:
The fraudulent binary options industry flourished for over a decade, from 2007, until it was outlawed by the Knesset in 2017…Many of the Israeli firms have since relocated overseas and continued the scam.
Israel has not prosecuted any of the thousands of employees of the binary options industry. The US Department of Justice has prosecuted several key individuals, notably including Lee Elbaz, the CEO of Yukom Communications Ltd. who was sentenced to 22 years in prison in 2019. Her bosses, Yossi Herzog and Kobi Cohen, have both been indicted, and are still at large.
Israel official calls for executing Palestinian protesters in Jerusalem
MEMO | April 21, 2021
Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem, Aryeh King, yesterday called on Israeli police to execute Palestinian protesters who take to the streets of the holy city at night, Shehab news agency reported.
He proposed a change in police policy regarding dealing with protesters and stop using traditional means to disperse them.
According to the Israeli TV Channel 7, King said that shooting the protesters “is the only way which can end the night protests phenomenon.”
Police “do not save any efforts to prevent these demonstrations which were aggravated by the start of Ramadan,” he added.
King, Israeli newspaper Haaretz said, is best known for settling Jews in occupied East Jerusalem and evicting Palestinian families from the city’s Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood.
Biden & Harris are crass opportunists for branding the US as systemically racist while standing on George Floyd’s grave
By Micah Curtis | RT | April 21, 2021
After the guilty verdict in the trial of Derek Chauvin, President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris wasted no time in labelling America racist. This exploitation of a shocking death is thoroughly distasteful.
Although there is likely to be an appeal, Derek Chauvin has been found guilty of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter in relation to the death of George Floyd. Justice has been served. But, clearly, justice is not enough for the heads of the executive branch of the United States government.
Immediately after the verdict was handed down, President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris held a press conference where they delivered a verdict of their own. They framed the very country that they serve as racist, and made clear that the only way to address this is to pass legislation.
“We still must reform the system,” said Harris. “America has a long history of systemic racism,” she claimed, adding that it’s “holding our nation back from realizing our full potential.”
Biden was in agreement. He said systemic racism “is a stain of our nation’s soul, the knee on the neck of the nation’s black Americans.”
Strong words. But let’s keep something in mind here. Both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have spent pretty much their entire careers within the United States government, in one way or another. It seems to me they’re a little too comfortable with getting a paycheck from this supposedly ‘racist’ country.
What I find most insulting is the absolute ignorance of what happened in court. Race was not established as a factor in the death of George Floyd. The scary part about Floyd’s death is that it could literally happen to anyone, and yet we have the leaders of the US acting as if race was unquestionably a factor.
I would be curious if any single member of their administration could show me any point within the trial which conclusively showed that the death of George Floyd was racially motivated. I have a feeling they wouldn’t be able to do it. And that’s what makes Harris and Biden’s comments doubly insulting. They don’t see George Floyd as a person. They see him as a pedestal.
Their speech covered the same themes put forward by Barack Obama during his presidency. The US is apparently a racist country, and the only cure is to pass the laws that they advocate. Never mind that by calling America a place that suffers from systemic racism, you are calling every single person you want to vote for that legislation racist. Never mind that you’re framing your own constituents as racist. All that matters is that you give them what they want, and maybe they’ll stop insulting you.
I feel horrible for George Floyd’s family. It’s one thing to lose a loved one. It’s another thing completely to have politicians across the country take this member of your family and use him to try to establish laws that wouldn’t have prevented his death in the first place. The absolute insincerity of it all is stomach churning.
Yes, there are lessons to be learned from this case and Chauvin’s conviction. But these are lessons for law enforcement in how to handle situations like they encountered with George Floyd in a better manner. There are also lessons to be learned about the importance of the right to life that is detailed within the Constitution. We should be discussing those, but instead an entire country is being branded as a racist because one bad cop is going to jail.
Biden and Harris need to be asked what they have been doing for the past few decades – other than leeching off our tax dollars – to address this supposed “systemic racism.” They have done very little to change things, and I have little doubt that they have no ability to change anything now. They can put the presidential podium on George Floyd’s grave if they want, but it won’t change how inept and shallow they have shown themselves to be as human beings.
Micah Curtis is a game and tech journalist from the US. Aside from writing for RT, he hosts the podcast Micah and The Hatman, and is an independent comic book writer.