Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Kiev ‘Made Dummy Missile’ for Provocation With ‘Dirty Bomb’ Over Chernobyl Zone

Samizdat – 26.10.2022

MOSCOW – The Kiev regime has already completed technical preparations for a provocation with a “dirty bomb,” having prepared a dummy missile, which is planned to be filled with radioactive material, a source familiar with the situation told Sputnik.

“Experts from the Yuzhmash plant have already made a dummy missile of the Iskander system, the head cluster part of which is planned to be filled with radioactive material, and then ‘shot down’ by Ukrainian air defense forces over the exclusion zone of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in order to declare a Russian launch of a nuclear charge,” the source said.

He clarified that the model of the Iskander missile was made on the basis of a projectile from the Tochka-U missile system.

“After the dummy is shot down, the Kiev authorities intend to show the Western and Ukrainian media fragments of the mockup and electronics of the alleged Iskander missile in order to convince the Western public of Russia’s guilt,” the source said.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | , | Leave a comment

US scales back plan for Russian oil price cap – Report

Samizdat | October 27, 2022

President Joe Biden’s administration has reportedly been forced back to the drawing board on its plan to cap international prices for Russian oil, having failed to secure enough commitments to control how much Moscow is paid for the bulk of its crude exports.

The US and the European Union will likely have to settle for a “loosely policed” pricing cap, enforced by fewer buyers and at a higher price than envisioned, Bloomberg News reported on Wednesday, citing unidentified people familiar with the plans. The original goal was to drastically reduce Russia’s oil revenue – the latest effort to punish Moscow for its military offensive in Ukraine – by imposing a strict price lid to which a broad “buyer’s cartel” of nations would adhere.

Instead, only G7 nations and Australia have committed to honoring the price cap, Bloomberg said, attributing failure of the original plan to investor skepticism, volatile financial markets and efforts to tame inflation around the world. The cap level also might need to go higher than a previously targeted range of $40-$60 per barrel.

Biden’s administration has denied that its plan would fall short of throttling Russian oil revenue. “The White House and the administration are staying the course on implementing an effective, strong price cap on Russian oil in coordination with the G7 and other partners,” White House National Security Council spokeswoman Adrienne Watson told Bloomberg in a statement.

Russian officials have said the country won’t sell oil or other commodities under price caps or unprofitable market conditions. Nor will Moscow supply energy to nations that adopt trade policies contradicting the terms of their existing oil and natural gas contracts, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandr Novak said earlier this month. A cap on crude wouldn’t be viable because prices are driven by the global supply-demand balance, he added.

The G7 price cap is scheduled to go into force on December 5, along with an EU ban on imports of seaborne Russian crude. Reuters reported last week that after December 5, Russia would still be able to ship the vast majority of its oil exports at market prices because it would have ample access to tankers and other services. The outlet cited a US Treasury official as saying that between 80% and 90% of Russian oil would continue to flow to buyers outside the cap mechanism.

Russia would have access not only to its own oil tankers, but also to Chinese and Indian ships, Reuters added. Traders and insurance companies from Russia, Asia and the Middle East would provide the necessary transactional services. Brent crude, a leading international oil benchmark, is currently selling for around $95 per barrel.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Criminal Neglect’: CDC Knew COVID Vaccine Could Cause Myocarditis in Young Males Months Before Telling the Public

By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | October 25, 2022

Two months after COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out to the U.S. public, a statistically significant vaccine safety signal for myocarditis in males ages 8 to 21 appeared in the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) — but CDC officials waited another three months before alerting the public, according to a new study.

The study, “Delayed Vigilance: A Comment on Myocarditis in Association with the COVID-19 Injections,” by Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., and Brian Hooker, Ph.D., P.E., was published on Oct. 17 in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research.

In an interview with The Defender, Hooker, chief scientific officer for Children’s Health Defense, said:

“This important paper shows that a strong, statistically significant vaccine adverse event ‘signal’ for myocarditis in males 8 to 21 years of age was seen on the VAERS database as early as Feb. 19, 2021, just two months after the release of the COVID-19 vaccine to the U.S. public.

“Instead of sounding the alarm regarding this signal, CDC officials buried the connection between COVID-19 vaccination and myocarditis until May 27, 2021. By this date, over 50% of the eligible U.S. population had received at least one mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

“Withholding this type of information is criminal.”

According to researchers at the National Organization for Rare Disorders, myocarditis can result from infections or may result directly from a toxic effect such as a toxin or a virus. “More commonly the myocarditis is a result of the body’s immune reaction to the initial heart damage,” researchers said.

Severe myocarditis can permanently damage the heart muscle, possibly causing heart failure.

In their study, Jablonowski and Hooker recorded and analyzed the increasing incidence of myocarditis as it progressively became a statistically significant “signal” in VAERS, the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

“It [myocarditis] became a discernible measure of harm over time, and here we show when it became statistically significant in the week of February 19, 2021,” the authors explained.

Only two months later, the VAERS data from the week of April 23, 2021, showed that the discerned level of myocarditis in young men following COVID-19 vaccination had increased to an extreme statistical level.

Generally, p-values less than .05 are considered to be statistically significant — meaning the observed result cannot reasonably be attributed to chance — and p-values less than .01 are considered to be very statistically significant.

By the week of April 23, 2021, Jablonowski and Hooker saw a p-value of less than 0.0001 (p<0.0001).

“At that p-level, a contrast as great as the one observed in the VAERS data would be expected to occur fewer than one time in 10,000 similar experimental drug trials,” they said.

“That statistic was obtained when 43.78% of the U.S. population had received at least one [COVID-19] injection — 31.20% had received all of those injections available to them or pressed upon them, and 12.58% had received one or more of the COVID-19 injections but not all of them.”

Despite this safety signal, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on May 10, 2021, expanded the Emergency Use Authorization of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to individuals as young as 12 years old, and the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices voted to recommend that all that persons age 12 or older get the vaccine.

Around the same time, the CDC’s V-safe post-vaccination data collection tool began accepting entries from adolescents ages 12-15 years. A few weeks later, the CDC finally acknowledged publicly that there may be an association between mRNA COVID-19 vaccination and myocarditis.

“On May 27, 2021, the CDC published on their website ‘Myocarditis and Pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination,’ (an announcement that is no longer available at the time of this writing; however, see Das et al., 2021),” the authors said.

“However, the important point we want to underscore here is that the general public was apparently coming to the realization of the particular life-threatening dangers of myocarditis at a time after 50.56% of the U.S. population had already received one or more up to the limit of all available COVID-19 injections — 42.25% had received the complete series of shots and 8.31% had received some but not all of them.”

“Why the irreversible delay in vigilance?” they asked.

The CDC’s choice — “whether by intention or neglect of the unfolding evidence” — to not warn the U.S. public of possible widespread harm from the mRNA COVID-19 until May 27, 2021, “when 50.56% of the U.S. population had already been injected, some of them multiple times” could be characterized as “criminal neglect.”

Jablonowski and Hooker concluded:

“From February 19, 2021, the signal in VAERS data was already loud and clear after only 14.23% of the U.S. population had been administered at least one of the injections. Subtracting that group from the 50.56% who had taken the risks associated with the shots by May 27, left 36.33% of the U.S. population (or roughly 120 million people) in the dark about the known adverse outcomes, including the irreversible damage of myocarditis, associated with the COVID-19 injections.”

VAERS data show 24,371 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis between Dec. 14, 2020, and Oct. 14, 2022. Of those cases, 1,333 reports occurred among 12- to 17-year-olds, 47 reports occurred among 5- to 11-year-olds and 5 reports occurred among 6-month-olds to 5-year-olds.

The CDC uses a narrowed case definition of “myocarditis” that excludes cases of cardiac arrest, ischemic strokes and deaths due to heart problems that occur before one has the chance to go to the emergency department.

While reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed, the system has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.


Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, War Crimes | , , | 1 Comment

More Anti-Semitism?

Or is it all just a bit of self-serving theater?

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • OCTOBER 25, 2022

A midterm national election will be taking place in the United States in two weeks. American voters will, at least to a certain extent, be expressing their approval or disapproval on major issues like management of the economy and immigration, though they will curiously have no one to vote for if they are appalled by the nuclear brinksmanship that the Joe Biden administration has been engaging in with Ukraine and Russia. One can blame the propaganda machine in Washington supported energetically by the mainstream media for that, as the acceptable Ukraine narrative presented to the public has drowned out nearly all the alternative arguments for a much less aggressive foreign and national security policy. Tulsi Gabbard, who recently resigned from the Democratic Party over its woke-ness and also its war policy, was one of the only politicians who dared to speak out against the prevailing bipartisan desire to “get Russia.”

Another issue that has oddly enough surfaced amid the current political turmoil has been the concern over what is being described as anti-Semitism, which is, according to those who stand to gain from that perception, reported to be “surging” worldwide. Anti-Semitism is the gift that keeps on giving for the Israelis and their rabid band of diaspora supporters, but it is particularly entrenched in the United States where it goes by the generic and relatively inoffensive label the “Israel Lobby.” Recent articles citing what are called anti-Semitic incidents, as defined by groups like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), have guaranteed that there will be no serious media coverage of Israeli atrocities directed against the Palestinians as any criticism of Israel is considered to be ipso facto anti-Semitism. The shooting of Palestinian children by Israeli soldiers is at an all-time high, occurring almost daily, but one would not know that from reading the New York Times or the Washington Post, which together celebrate Israeli/Jewish victimhood by ignoring that country’s war crimes and focusing instead on alleged conspiracies against Jews. One would certainly without a doubt find multiple articles all about the alleged anti-Semitic remarks recently attributed to Donald Trump, Kanye West and Mel Gibson.

Donald Trump is not known for his precision in the use of the English language, particularly when he is expressing something complicated. Trump’s recent “warning” to American Jews would be comical, but it also reveals much about both the perception and the reality of Jewish power in the US as well as the role of Jews as dominant political donors entrenched in both political parties. Trump posted his comment on his Truth Social network on October 16th: “No President has done more for Israel than I have. Somewhat surprisingly, however, our wonderful Evangelicals are far more appreciative of this than the people of the Jewish faith, especially those living in the US. Those living in Israel, though, are a different story — highest approval rating in the world, could easily be P.M.! US Jews have to get their act together and appreciate what they have in Israel — Before it is too late!”

The fact is that President Donald Trump was second to none when it came to pandering to Israel even when that country’s interests do real damage to the United States, though his claim that he is so popular in Israel that he could be elected Prime Minister is absurd. He is not a Jew and could not even emigrate to Israel even if he chose to do so. As president, he moved the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, he accepted brutal Israeli settlement and control of the Palestinian West Bank, approved of the Israeli annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights, and ignored repeated Israeli war crimes using US provided weapons. Nevertheless, the response from the usual suspects was immediate, with the ever-vigilant Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL calling the Trump comments both insulting and disgusting while his colleague Oren Segal goes one step further, claiming that the statement has “shattered” a general feeling of safety among American Jews. Ukraine-born Jew and Trump critic former US Army officer Alexander Vindman also joined in with a predictable “Trump is executing the fascist playbook to turn his mob on Jews.”

On the following day, the White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre also denounced the remarks. She said that “Donald Trump’s comments were antisemitic and insulting both to Jews and our Israeli allies.” She also observed that Trump had consistently “aligned with extremist and antisemitic figures. And it should be called out.” To further establish her bona fides as a true-blue friend of the Jewish state, she also announced that Israeli president Isaac Herzog would visit Biden in Washington on October 26th, presumably to give the US president his marching orders. In a subsequent statement, she said the visit would serve to reaffirm “the enduring partnership and friendship” between the two nations.

It should be noted that the Trump remarks were criticized immediately by Jewish leaders and many others for including the suggestion of “dual loyalty,” alleging that diaspora Jews often have their primary allegiance to Israel, not to the country where they live. Others also criticized Trump for lecturing American Jews on their own religious obligations. Of course, the rage exhibited by the leaders of Jewish organizations reflects the fact that many American Jews do have what one might call “dual loyalty.” A Pew Research survey released in 2021 found that 45% of Jewish adults in the US viewed caring about Israel as “essential” to what being Jewish means, with an additional 37% saying it was “important, but not essential.” Only a small minority of 16% said caring about Israel was “not important.”

More recently, additional comments by Trump revealing a lack of understanding of Jewish hyper-sensitivities have surface as part of a clear attempt to damage Republican prospects for the upcoming election. Of course, Donald Trump is whistling in the wind if he seriously interested in getting Jewish voters to cast their ballots for him or for the GOP. Jews overwhelmingly vote liberal. An estimated 75% of Jewish voters supported Joe Biden in 2020 and that is unlikely to change no matter what Trump says or does for Israel as the Democratic Party is, if anything, as completely in the Jewish/Israeli pocket as are most of the Republicans. Much of the rhetoric is really about money, with Jewish donors constituting a majority of financial supporters of the Democrats as well as significant supporters of pro-Israel Republicans. Trump ally casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, now deceased, reportedly contributed $100 million to the GOP electoral coffers in 2016-2020 and was the force driving the move of the US Embassy to Jerusalem.

Music mogul Kanye West, who is being compared to Adolf Hitler, has also come under fire after complaining about Jewish control over the media relating to his various enterprises while actor Mel Gibson, due to appear as a witness in the sexual battery trial of disgraced film producer Harvey Weinstein, was also denounced for his reportedly expressed dislike of Jews, meaning that he would not be impartial in the evidence he provides since Weinstein is a Jew.

So, when in doubt, call something anti-Semitic and it will make the problem go away. The United States uniquely has an Ambassador whose sole responsibility as the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism (SEAS) is to go around the world seeking to expose anti-Semites. Israel routinely uses the Jewish diaspora and its vast wealth to buy up or leverage the media, to corrupt politicians at all levels, and to propagate a narrative that always depicts Jews sympathetically as perpetual victims. That narrative relies on the so-called holocaust and the slogan “never again” to generate the moral authority and outrage that makes the entire otherwise unsustainable imposture work. And work it does. The Israel Lobby’s campaign of vicious character assassination, smearing and blacklisting against those who defend Palestinian rights is not a response to any real anti-Semitism. That twenty-four state governments’ have passed Israel Lobby promoted legislation requiring their workers and contractors, under threat of dismissal, to sign a pro-Israel oath and promise not to support the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement is not a response to anti-Semitism. That is the real story, all about the maintenance of Jewish and Israeli power in America and the abuses that are derived from that, and it has nothing to do with genuine anti-Semitism.

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 inform@cnionline.org.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | 6 Comments

Is Ukraine a “proxy war”?

By Noah Carl | October 26, 2022

Critics of America’s policy toward Ukraine have accused it of waging a “proxy war” against Russia. Such critics include various Western commentators, as well as Russia itself. In April, the Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov claimed, “NATO, in essence, is engaged in a war with Russia through a proxy”.

Yet when a reporter put this accusation to Joe Biden, he said it’s “not true”. What’s more, the Ukrainian government compiled a list of individuals who “promote narratives consonant with Russian propaganda”, and specified that such narratives include: “A proxy war between NATO and Russia is taking place on the territory of Ukraine”.

One problem with the line taken by Biden and the Ukrainian government is that it isn’t just critics of US policy that have used the term “proxy war”.

In an article claiming that “many Russian soldiers have to flee, surrender, or die” and “the more and faster the better”, the political scientist Eliot Cohen stated, “The United States and its NATO allies are engaged in a proxy war with Russia.”

Likewise, the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, Philip Breedlove – who has called for boots on the ground in Ukraine – stated, “I think we are in a proxy war with Russia. We are using the Ukrainians as our proxy forces.”

And in an interview calling for the US to provide “as much aid as necessary” to Ukraine, former CIA Director Leon Panetta stated, “We are engaged in a conflict here. It’s a proxy war with Russia, whether we say so or not.”

Okay, you might say, but those individuals were using “proxy war” in a purely technical sense. Although the US is not an active participant in the conflict, it is arming one of the participants. So calling the conflict a “proxy war” is just a statement of fact (even if it might technically qualify as spreading Russian propaganda).

When critics accuse the US of waging a “proxy war” what they really mean is that the US is using Ukraine to weaken Russia, regardless of whether this serves the interests of Ukrainians (or Europeans for that matter). For example, perhaps Ukrainians would be better off if the US had engaged in diplomacy with Russia before the war.

It’s certainly not a stretch to imagine the US would wage a “proxy war” of this kind. The Reagan Doctrine was all about building up the US military and arming anti-communist guerrillas in order to overwhelm the Soviet Union and, ultimately, win the Cold War. This included arming both religious and political extremists.

But we don’t have to go back to the eighties. In 2019, the RAND corporation published a report on strategies to “overextend and unbalance” Russia. The report identified “providing lethal aid to Ukraine” as one that would “exploit Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability”. (Interestingly, it concluded that any increase in aid would need to be “carefully calibrated” to avoid provoking “a much wider conflict”.)

Screenshot from ‘Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground’.

RAND is almost entirely funded by the US Government, which appears first on its list of clients. So the fact that it would publish a report like this indicates that, even before Russia’s invasion, US decision-makers were interested in using Ukraine to weaken their geopolitical adversary.

As Senator Adam Schiff explained in 2020, “The United States aids Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here.”

Since Russia’s invasion, various other commentators have hinted – or in some cases explicitly stated – that America has goals other than securing Ukraine’s territorial integrity. Here’s Thomas Friedman’s account of what a “retired senior European statesman” told him:

The goal of Ukraine is to win, he said. The goal of the European Union is a bit different. It is to have peace … The U.S. is far away, and for the U.S., he added, it is not the worst thing to keep the war going to weaken Russia and make certain it doesn’t have the energy for any other adventures.

Two months into the war, Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin was asked how he would define America’s goals in the conflict. He began by saying what you’d expect him to say: “We want to see Ukraine remain a sovereign country”. He then went slightly off-script: “We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine.”

According to the New York Times, some officials “cringed” and Biden called Austin to “remonstrate” him for the comment. “But officials acknowledged that was indeed the long-term strategy.

A couple of weeks later, the political scientist Hal Brands really let the cat out of the bag – in a piece titled ‘Russia Is Right: The U.S. Is Waging a Proxy War in Ukraine’. He wrote:

The war in Ukraine isn’t just a conflict between Moscow and Kyiv, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently declared. It is a “proxy war” in which the world’s most powerful military alliance … is using Ukraine as a battering ram against the Russian state … Lavrov is one of the most reliable mouthpieces for President Vladimir Putin’s baseless propaganda, but in this case he’s not wrong. Russia is the target of one of the most ruthlessly effectively proxy wars in modern history.

“The key,” Brands noted, “is to find a committed local partner — a proxy willing to do the killing and dying”. You then “load it up with” arms so that it can inflict “shattering blows” on your adversary. “That’s just what Washington and its allies are doing to Russia today.”

Similar sentiments were echoed by Congressman Seth Moulton in an interview with Fox News. “At the end of the day, we’ve got to realise we’re at war,” Moulton stated. “And we’re not just at war to support Ukraine. We’re fundamentally at war – although somewhat through a proxy – with Russia. And it’s important that we win.”

Likewise, when Congressman Dan Crenshaw came under fire from “America First” conservatives over his support for Ukraine, he tweeted: “Yeah, because investing in the destruction of our adversary’s military, without losing a single American troop, strikes me as a good idea. You should feel the same.”

Crenshaw didn’t bother paying lip-service to high-minded concepts like democracy, sovereignty or territorial integrity. He just came out and said we’re “investing in the destruction of our adversary’s military”.

Critics have consistently disparaged US policy as “fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian”. But in July, Senator Lindsey Graham – a long-time Russia hawk – said almost exactly that. “I like the structural path were on here,” Graham explained. “As long as we help Ukraine with the weapons they need and the economic support, they will fight to the last person.”

Critics found further justification for their cynicism in a recent Washington Post article, which revealed the following. “Privately, U.S. officials say neither Russia nor Ukraine is capable of winning the war outright, but they have ruled out the idea of pushing or even nudging Ukraine to the negotiating table.”

You might say that using Ukraine to weaken Russia is something worth doing, as Dan Crenshaw evidently believes. But at this point, it can scarcely be denied that America is engaged in a proxy war.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | 2 Comments

China Urges US to Stop Spreading Myth About Alleged Chinese Threat: Foreign Ministry

Samizdat – 26.10.2022

BEIJING – China calls on the United States to stop spreading the outdated theory of the Chinese threat and better engage in building a new concept of mutually beneficial cooperation, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said on Wednesday.

“China is a partner and an opportunity for the development of all countries, not a challenge or a threat,” Wang told a briefing.

China urges Washington to try to build a new concept of openness, inclusiveness, and mutually beneficial cooperation, and do more to promote world peace and development, Wang added.

Earlier in the day, US President Joe Biden and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak agreed during a telephone conversation to jointly respond to challenges from China.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Norwegian PM for restoration of contacts with Russia: “Nothing good in isolation”

By Ahmed Adel | October 26, 2022

Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store said that Western countries should not isolate Russia and should instead establish direct communication with Moscow to resolve the exceptionally difficult situation in Ukraine. However, Norway, a NATO member, is also one of the leading countries to oppose Russia through sanctions and support for the Ukrainian military.

“There is nothing good in isolating Russia. It is alarming that today we have so few contacts and direct communication with Russia,” Store told the Norwegian parliament on October 25.

This is an especially surprising statement since Norway has donated 4,000 M72 anti-tank weapons to Ukraine, as well as an air defence system, 22 self-propelled artillery vehicles, long-range rocket artillery and armoured vehicles. Norway will also donate the Black Hornet micro-drone system and Hellfire missiles, and will also train Ukrainian soldiers in Britain.

Although Norway is following Washington and Brussels in supporting Ukraine and acting hostile to Moscow, perhaps there is a realization setting in Oslo that the war will not end with the Ukrainian military capturing Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporozhye from Russia. By coming to such a conclusion, the only realistic option left is to call for direct communications with Russia, something the West cut in the false belief that sustained isolation and economic pressure would make Moscow capitulate and end its military operation in Ukraine.

This was of course a naïve belief since the Kremlin has for years attempted to resolve the situation in Donbass through negotiations and discussions, something that Kiev, with the West’s support and backing, never supported. Moscow was forced to take matters into their own hands to protect the Russian-speaking minority from Kiev’s fascistic policies. Although Moscow has taken the military approach, it is still open to honest and open dialogue, but of course with different demands since the situation on the ground has significantly changed.

According to the Norwegian prime minister, the lack of dialogue with Moscow undermines the possibility of reaching a peaceful settlement in Ukraine. He also added that the current political situation was the most difficult since World War II, and it is for this reason as well that communication channels must reopen.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly warned the West that Russia could not be isolated, and this is reflected in the fact that several major countries, including China, India and Brazil, have vocally opposed the idea of imposing unilateral sanctions on Moscow and called for the continuation of dialogue in the interest of peaceful world development.

Sanctions against Russia have led to disruptions in logistical and financial operations and to a spike in energy prices worldwide, pushing many European governments to resort to contingency measures. At the same time, Brussels has been looking for alternatives to Russian natural gas as it has pledged to end its dependence on energy supplies from Russia, thus making Norway all the more important to the EU.

The Scandinavian country is now the EU’s leading natural gas supplier, overtaking Russia. It is not forgotten that the Nord Stream pipelines leaks corresponded with the opening of a new pipeline from Norway to Poland. Although Norway is being heralded as a saviour for energy-struggling Europe, it has been criticised for essentially war profiteering.

“There is no question that the fallout from the war is making Norway richer. The state is a major player in the oil and gas industry. All told, Oslo expects to bring in about $109 billion from the petroleum sector this year — $82 billion more than in 2021. Much of that will go to the country’s sovereign wealth fund, a national nest egg worth more than $1 trillion,” The Washington Post reported.

Andreas Bjelland Eriksen, state secretary at the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum, denied that Norway is profiting off the war, stressing that high energy prices “hurt Norway too.” He noted that gas exports to Europe are up 8 percent year over year. “Europe sees that, and it sees that we are a good partner,” Eriksen added.

In this way, Norway has essentially become a big winner from the war in Ukraine as it has now become the main supplier of natural gas to Europe despite charging astronomical prices. However, this is not reflected on ordinary citizen life as Norway is not immune from the effects of the self-sabotaging anti-Russia sanctions.

Complementing the higher electricity bills arriving every month, Norwegians are also experiencing higher prices for almost everything else. State statistics bureau SSB (Statistics Norway) recently reported an 11.3 percent rise in transport costs, a 12.1 percent rise in food and non-alcoholic drinks, an 8.7 percent rise in hotel and restaurant bills and a 7.6 percent rise in prices for household items and maintenance. Norway’s biggest bank, DNB, also reported that its customers are now spending much less money on expensive items.

It is for this reason that Norway, despite making record profits in the energy sector, wants dialogue with Moscow to reopen so that there can be an alleviation in the cost-of-living crisis and other sectors of the economy. Nonetheless, Oslo itself makes little contribution to peace efforts as it maintains anti-Russia sanctions and continues to train, fund, and supply the Ukrainian military.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Property in German town to be confiscated for asylum seekers

Free West Media – October 26, 2022

So far it has been dismissed as a malicious “conspiracy theory” that living space for asylum seekers would end up being confiscated in Germany. But this “theory” is sadly coming true. In the Bavarian district of Fürstenfeldbruck, not far from Munich, it is being implemented.

The local CSU District Administrator Thomas Karmasin has refused to use gymnasiums as “refugee” accommodation. But the existing public accommodation is running out in the face of exploding numbers of asylum seekers. Karmasin therefore wants to have public and private properties confiscated in order to accommodate the newcomers. The first efforts have already started.

Karmasin said in a statement that immigration policy was a federal matter. As in 2014 to 2016, during the last “refugee” crisis, he refused to make school gyms available again.

This development is likely to put affected locals under severe stress in forcing a show of solidarity with Ukrainians or Senegalese accommodated in their apartments and single-family homes.

In a recent SZ interview, sociologist Karin Scherschel who is pro-migration, warned that election campaigns should not be fought on the subject of migration “because it always creates a mood”. If Scherschel had her way, the immigration debate would be ignored.

With authorities now confiscating homes, the matter is certain to create a volatile mood.

According to a so-called general clause under police law, people in Germany who are threatened with homelessness may be accommodated in empty apartments or hotel rooms, even against the will of the owner. Before doing so, the authorities must have exhausted all other possible options.

It is probably only a matter of time before these state encroachments will also extend to private residential property everywhere.

In Stuttgart, 100 tenants were given notice because the homeowner wanted to offer his house to the city for refugees. And in a Bavarian retirement home, the inhabitants were forced to move to higher floors so that young migrants could be accommodated on the ground floor.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation (OECD) assumes that the number of people moving to Germany by the end of the year will exceed the figure of more than two million from 2015.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | 1 Comment

New African Generation Has Decided to Refuse Western Domination – African Activist

Samizdat -26.10.2022

Pan-Africanist political leader and activist Kémi Séba has spoken to Sputnik about Africa’s role in the world and its relations with Russia. He believes that it is not for the West to decide whom Africa builds ties with.

Pan-African activist Kémi Séba, present at the Second International Youth Forum “Russia-Africa: What’s Next?” held on October 24-26 in Moscow, in an interview spoke to Sputnik about the role of Africa in the new world order.

“In this multipolar world, we are witnessing an upheaval in the sense that a new African generation, of which I am a part, has decided to take its destiny into its own hands and to refuse the domination of the West in order to assume its own destiny,” he said.

According to Mr. Séba, “Africa can become a new center of gravity.”

‘Africa is the Sole Messiah of its Destiny’

Having not forgotten the tenets of colonialism, Africa rejects “the neo-liberal Western dictatorship of the Western elite.” The anti-French manifestations that are taking place in several countries on the continent prove that.

“The French government is so arrogant and so negrophobic that it thinks that the protests that are taking place today are just the result of Russian manipulation generating anti-French sentiment. They are so convinced that everything they do is good that they are unable to accept that the colonized people will eventually want to revolt. It is not the Russians who have created this feeling. It is we who created it,” Kémi Séba explained.

He further added: “Africa is the sole Messiah of its destiny.”

Partnership with Russia

According to Mr. Séba, “it is not up to the West to determine with whom Africa should build strong relationships.”

“We want to build relationships with nations that are opposed to Western hegemony. Russia is one of them. But it is not the only one, there is Venezuela, Cuba, China, Turkey, and Iran. They are all part of the challenge process.”

As for the presence of Russian flags, the activist also sees it as “a kind of protest, a provocation of the African peoples because they know that Russia is now a country hated by the Western elites.” “But this does not mean that Russia is our Messiah. We are the Messiahs of our own.”

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Ukraine Peace Talks: Pathetic U-Turn by 30 Dems & Curious Case of Jeffrey Sachs

By Ekaterina Blunova – Samizdat –  26.10.2022

On Tuesday, the progressive caucus of the US House of Representatives made an abrupt U-turn and withdrew their letter to US President Joe Biden, which urged him to engage in direct talks with Russia and broker peace between Kiev and Moscow. What’s going on in the Democratic camp?

“Not only was the letter a case of too little, too late, the so-called progressive signatories to the statement made themselves look even more pathetic in its immediate withdrawal,” Max Parry, an independent US journalist and geopolitical analyst, told Sputnik.

“While the letter was a refreshing first step, the Democrats who signed it became victims of the very same McCarthyist political atmosphere they have created in Washington, where any detente or rapprochement with Moscow is criminalized. Instead of digging in their heels and standing by what they said, the 30 lawmakers immediately caved to the political pressure of being branded Putin apologists and retracted the statement. They made it clear their loyalties lie with the party establishment and not with the American people, who are fed up with the Biden administration’s disastrous handling of the war and the economy,” he emphasized.

The American journalist believes that the motivation behind the letter was a response to growing fatigue among the US public regarding the ongoing standoff in Ukraine, “not to mention several recent public incidents of Democratic lawmakers being protested by their own constituents over their vote to arm Kiev which went viral on social media.”

According to Parry, US polls indicate growing support for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict. On September 27, a survey, conducted by Data for Progress on behalf of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, indicated that nearly 60% of Americans would support Washington engaging in diplomatic efforts “as soon as possible” to end the conflict in Ukraine, even if that means Ukraine having to make concessions to Russia.

“Surveys of the upcoming midterm elections also forecast the increasing likelihood of GOP gains in congress,” Parry continued. “Although US support for Ukraine has been mostly bipartisan, there have been far more vocal opponents of the Biden administration’s decision to arm Ukraine among Republicans than Democrats, most notably Marjorie Taylor Greene.”

On October 18, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy signaled that Republicans will not write a “blank check” for Kiev if they win back the House majority. According to US media, anti-aid sentiments are also strong among many Republican House and Senate candidates. If they win, the reduction of military assistance to Kiev is more than possible, as former US Senate candidate Mark Dankof told Sputnik on September 25.

While one needs to bear in mind that the anti-Russia consensus in Washington has long been bipartisan, 57 Republicans as recently as May voted against sending more lethal aid to Kiev, Parry underscored. Nonetheless, the independent journalist noted that this trend does not necessarily signal an upcoming departure from the Ukraine policy by the US.

“I am not convinced this will automatically materialize if the Republicans take back the House, because many of the purported adherents to Trump’s ‘America First’ agenda running for office are opportunists and based on historical precedent, some of those GOP lawmakers could turn back on their campaign pledges once they are in office,” he remarked.

When it comes to Democrats, “if they do indeed lose ground over the Ukraine war, it could lead to either a revival in the anti-war movement among the US left or a doubling down on the anti-Russian sentiment among Dems,” Parry presumed.

Jeffrey Sachs: Neoliberal Economist Turned Anti-NATO Rebel

The Dems’ latest flip-flopping on the Ukraine peace issue is not the only attempt at dissent on the left flank of the US political front. Renowned economist and Columbia University Professor Jeffrey Sachs has lambasted the Biden administration’s Russia strategy and urged Washington to mediate a peaceful settlement between Moscow and Kiev from the outset of the Russian special military operation to demilitarize and de-Nazify Ukraine.

“It was a welcome surprise to see a former neoliberal economist like Professor Sachs become an unexpected dissenting voice and critic of US policies as Washington continues to send a flow of arms to Ukraine,” said Parry.

In May 2022, Sachs wrote an op-ed urging the US to stop the conflict in Ukraine and insisting that the solution reached by Moscow and Kiev in March 2022 remains the only viable option for restoring peace. On June 27, the economist released an article eloquently titled “Ukraine Is the Latest Neocon Disaster,” again calling for peace negotiations and ending NATO’s eastward expansion towards Russia’s borders. On August 2, Sachs warned: “The government of Ukraine urges us not to negotiate, but to fight. This is a recipe for the destruction of Ukraine and the possible escalation to a nuclear war.”

Following the sabotage attack on Russia’s Nord Stream pipeline infrastructure in the Baltic Sea, Sachs pointed the finger at Washington as a potential culprit while speaking on air with a US mainstream broadcaster.

“The case of the recent political transformation of Professor Sachs is a curious one,” noted Parry. “After all, we are talking about one of the most prominent economic advisors to Western financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund. In particular, he was one of the preeminent economic aides to former communist governments in their transition to the free market and in the case of Russia, the economic reforms based on his ideas had devastating consequences when mass privatization and ‘shock therapy’ drove the Russian economy into a deep recession and plunged millions into poverty.”

The independent journalist emphasized that for Sachs to “now depart from US policy orthodoxies and criticize the demonization of Russia, even rightly pointing out that the US was the more likely candidate to have been behind the destruction of Nord Stream 2 pipeline, is simply stunning.”

Parry has drawn attention to the fact that Sachs’ “transformation” apparently started a few years ago, “when he criticized America’s dirty war in Syria in 2018.” “Now his ‘road to Damascus,’ or political conversion is complete,” the journalist added.

“Unfortunately, he is one among only a mere handful of public figures voicing opposition to NATO’s proxy war,” Parry continued. “Since the death of Stephen Cohen, America’s foremost scholar of Russian affairs, commentary on US relations with Moscow has been nothing short of monolithic, so the surprising calls for peace talks by Sachs were badly needed.”

“Once upon a time, there used to be something called the fairness doctrine in the media where there was some attempt to ensure that differing viewpoints were evenly reflected in news coverage of world events. Since February, there has been absolutely no attention given to the Russian perspective on the war whatsoever, nor any encouragement of dialogue and diplomacy allowed on major networks or newspapers. Even for corporate media, which has always been heavily biased toward the West, the lack of any diversity of opinions on this conflict is unprecedented,” Parry concluded.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , | 6 Comments

Finland to Allow for Deployment of NATO Nuclear Weapons on Its Territory, Reports Say

Samizdat – 26.10.2022

HELSINKI – Finland’s draft legislation on the country’s accession to NATO, which is almost prepared, does not contain any restrictions on establishment of military bases and deployment of nuclear weapons on the its territory, local newspaper reported on Wednesday, citing sources.

The legislation will allow for deployment of nuclear weapons of NATO countries and establishment of the alliance’s military bases on the territory of Finland putting no limits on NATO’s military presence in the country, according to the newspaper.

The draft legislation is expected to be considered by the Finnish parliament in two weeks, newspaper said.

The newspaper also noted citing its sources in the Finnish government that during negotiations with the bloc in July Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto and Defense Minister Antti Kaikkonen pledged to avoid any restrictions regarding the country’s participation in military activity of the alliance in the national legislation.

On May 18, three months after Russia launched its military operation in Ukraine, Finland and Sweden submitted their NATO membership applications, abandoning decades of neutrality. With 29 out of 30 NATO members having formally ratified the agreements on Finland and Sweden’s accession, both countries are now in talks with Turkey to allay concerns over their alleged support of organizations designated as terrorist by Ankara.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , | 1 Comment

Who benefits from Kakhovka dam destruction?

By Drago Bosnic | October 26, 2022

In recent weeks, the Kiev regime has been accusing Russia of planning to destroy the Kakhovka hydroelectric dam on the Dnieper River, which would unleash a devastating flood across most of the Kherson oblast (region) and the surrounding areas.

The dam, which measures 30 meters in height and is approximately 3.2 km long, was built in 1956 on the Dnieper River as part of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant. It holds a massive 18 km³ water reservoir which also supplies water to Russia’s Crimean peninsula. The reservoir is also crucial for the functioning of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant as it supplies water to the essential cooling systems. The volume of water in the reservoir is comparable to the Great Salt Lake.

Destroying the strategically important dam, which is now part of Russia, would have catastrophic consequences, as it would unleash a devastating flood downstream. Experts estimate this would create a giant wave of devastating floodwater up to five meters in height, almost immediately flooding an area of more than five kilometers around the dam. The wave would need only two hours to reach the city of Kherson. The destruction of the dam’s floodgates would also destroy the crossings used by the Russian military and possibly trap the large Russian contingent on the west bank of the Dnieper River. However, most alarmingly, this would also result in the total destruction of dozens of settlements in the region and possibly cause hundreds or even thousands of civilian casualties, as it would not be possible to evacuate everyone in time.

Last Tuesday, Russian Army General Sergei Surovikin, the newly appointed commander of all Russian forces engaged in the special military operation, stated that the relevant intelligence clearly indicates the Kiev regime forces are preparing a massive strike on the dam. He confirmed that the Neo-Nazi junta troops had already used the US-supplied HIMARS in a major strike during which the Russian military managed to intercept several precision-guided rockets. On October 21 alone, at least five separate rocket attacks were repelled by Russian air defenses.

“We have information on the possibility of the Kiev regime using prohibited methods of war in the area of the city of Kherson, on the preparation by Kiev of a massive rocket strike on the Kakhovka hydroelectric dam,” Surovikin warned.

The Kiev regime officials rejected the allegations and stated that “they were a clear sign” that Moscow supposedly planned to attack the dam and then blame the Neo-Nazi junta. On October 20, the Kiev regime frontman Volodymyr Zelensky said that Russia had allegedly placed explosives on the dam and was preparing to destroy it, a move he compared to the use of weapons of mass destruction.

“I informed the Europeans today, during the meeting of the European Council, about the next terrorist attack, which Russia is preparing for at the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant. Destroying the dam would mean a large-scale disaster,” Zelensky stated. He went on to claim that blowing up the dam would also destroy the water supply to Crimea and “thus show that Russia had accepted that it could not hold onto the peninsula.”

Kirill Stremousov, the Deputy Head of the Kherson oblast (region), stated that the Kiev regime’s allegations that Russia had placed explosives on the dam were false. The authorities of the Kherson oblast are working on evacuating as many civilians as possible, since the Kiev regime forces are escalating attacks on residential areas. On the evening of October 20, Neo-Nazi junta troops targeted civilians fleeing to the eastern bank of the Dnieper River. The ferry crossing near the Antonov bridge (damaged by the Kiev regime forces) was struck, resulting in at least 4 civilian casualties, while dozens of others were wounded. Local administration reports that the US-made HIMARS MLRS was used to destroy the ferry.

At least 12 cluster munition rockets were fired, most of which were intercepted by Russian air defenses, significantly reducing the number of casualties. Since HIMARS is a precision-guided system, the possibility of miscalculation on part of the Kiev regime forces is extremely unlikely. This leaves us with one conclusion – the civilians were the target.

Local authorities are working round the clock to evacuate everyone, as civilians living on the west bank of the Kherson oblast are exposed to direct attacks by the Kiev regime forces. As the Neo-Nazi junta troops are also shelling the Kakhovka power plant, located approximately five kilometers from the town of Novaya Kakhovka, the civilians are also directly exposed to the aforementioned flood which would be the inevitable result of the destruction of the dam.

All the while, the Kiev regime keeps insisting that Russia will destroy the dam, ignoring both logic and the situation on the ground. As Zelensky himself stated, destroying the dam would halt the water supply to Crimea. Although he stated that this means Russia gave up on Crimea, such claims are comically illogical, given that Russia had successfully been tackling the issue of water supplies to the peninsula for nearly a decade, as the Kiev regime cut the water supplies back in 2014.

In addition to trapping its own troops on the west bank of the Dnieper River, as the flooding would make it impossible to evacuate anyone, the destruction of the dam would also devastate the areas which are already under Russian control. Thus, the question remains, who actually benefits from blowing up the Kakhovka dam?

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | War Crimes | , | Leave a comment