Aletho News


US and UK troops train to ‘pacify Russian civilians’

RT | November 12, 2022

US and UK military forces have held a joint exercise to practice interoperability and test their latest gadgets and combat techniques on terrain similar to the “Ukrainian steppe,” reportedly including war-gaming on how they would “pacify” mobs of angry Russian-speaking civilians.

The ongoing drills are being held in California’s Mojave Desert as part of the Pentagon’s “Project Convergence”, which was expanded this year to include participation by allies Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK.

The troops, including an elite British infantry regiment, practiced “lessons learned” from the Russia-Ukraine conflict while training on open desert landscapes deemed “similar to the flat terrain of the Ukrainian steppe,” the UK’s Times newspaper said.

The drills took place at Fort Irwin, a sprawling US Army base that includes realistic-looking mock villages built with the help of Hollywood set designers. In years past, Arabic and Afghan speakers were hired and brought in from the Los Angeles area to play the part of civilians. This time around, with the Russia-Ukraine conflict raging in Eastern Europe, most of the civilians were played by Russian speakers.

“The fake civilians even have their own social media networks – “Fakebook” and “Twatter” – on which they whip up an unruly mob by reporting any examples of US troops behaving poorly,” the Times said. “The soldiers must then pacify the crowds.”

The exercise marked the first time that members of the UK’s new Ranger Regiment deployed alongside the US 75th Ranger Regiment, according to a UK government statement. It allowed troops to test advanced technology – such as artificial intelligence, robotics and new drones – while practicing information-sharing procedures with their allies.

For instance, swarms of drones identified targets and British rocket launchers fired at enemy positions spotted by US F-35 fighter jets, the Times said. UK defense procurement minister Alex Chalk said the exercise demonstrated the progress that the British Army is making as a “more lethal, agile and expeditionary force, through key collaboration with our longstanding international allies and partners.”

Russia isn’t alone in drawing the attention of Western military planners. The Pentagon has identified China as the top threat to US national security. An earlier stage of Project Convergence simulated a conflict breaking out on a Pacific island.

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | 1 Comment

COVID-19: The Evidence revisited – summer 2022

What have we learned?

Health Advisory & Recovery Team | November 10, 2022

It is now two and a half years since the first lockdown and eighteen months since HART published its paper COVID-19: an overview of the evidence. Over the last few months, we asked all the original authors to go back and review their articles and update with relevant publications, revising their conclusions as appropriate. These chapters spelled out either evidence of harms from the pandemic policies or theoretical concerns.

A year later the evidence is coming in and it is damning.  This ‘updates’ series will hopefully form part of HART’s evidence to the Independent Review.

Without an introspective ability to learn from its collective mistakes, societies run the risk of causing irreparable damage to themselves. HART came together as a grass-roots organisation in late 2020 to challenge what we thought were a series of incorrect prevailing narratives, specifically the alleged efficacy of novel interventions (both of the pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical varieties) and a lack of careful consideration of their collateral harms. Why did Parliament not ask these questions before meekly surrendering power to HM Government for a two-year period back during the early panic in March 2020? How did age-old disease management principles get tossed to one side in favour of hocus-pocus measures based on ‘science’ that was anything but settled?

We do not claim to have got everything right and we have continued to probe and challenge our own thinking. HART remains a broad church and we encourage debate and discussion from a wide range of disciplines — how else will we learn?

But we will not stand by while those in authority — and their cheerleaders — censor and stifle this debate, brush aside some of the occurrences of the last few years with a breezy “never mind” while at the same time rushing to impose the next set of half-baked, inappropriate, economically damaging or downright harmful measures that got dreamed up in a think tank or focus group. It must be possible to do better than this. Our children’s futures depend on it.

We invite you to read the updated chapters of our initial evidence review:

  1. Variants of SARS-CoV-2 and the Futility of Border Closures
  2. Natural vs vaccine immunity: which is safer or more protective?
  3. Zero Covid – an impossible dream
  4. Living with Covid: What does this mean for those in adult social care?
  5. Masks do more harm than good
  6. Ethical considerations of the COVID-19 response updated
  7. Lockdowns: the evidence revisited
  8. COVID-19 vaccination in children – major ethical concerns remain
  9. The ONS Infection Survey: a re-evaluation of the data
  10. Vaccine Certification – a trojan horse for digital ID?
  11. Why are so many treatment options still being ignored?
  12. What has changed regarding asymptomatic spread?
  13. Covid policies and harms to children updated
  14. The Psychological Impact of the Government’s Communication Style and Restrictive Measures

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

Department of Homeland Security CISA

US Government Office of Medical Censorship and Propaganda

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH | Courageous Discourse | November 11, 2022

The US Department of Homeland Security (HSA) is conducting medical censorship while hiding in plain sight. The website for the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has resources to engage vigilante “disinformation” police to assist HSA in their mission of silencing opinions on COVID-19 and pandemic response. The main stated target is disinformation defined as information deliberately created to mislead, harm, or manipulate a person, social group, organization, or country. Their toolkit allows any user to use “products” and tailor them with official logos to spread the government propagandized message:[i]


These Toolkit resources are designed to help State, local, tribal and territorial (SLTT) officials bring awareness to misinformation, disinformation, and conspiracy theories appearing online related to COVID-19’s origin, scale, government response, prevention and treatment. Each product was designed to be tailored with local government websites and logos.

Download and share these resources—talking points, FAQs, outreach graphics, and posters—to help spread awareness.”

The toolkit directs well-intended users to use images, talking points, and documents to deliver a message. There is only ONE source of trusted information — you guessed it — state and local agencies who rely upon the CDC!

So, the picture is becoming more clear on how the US government operationalized a propaganda campaign on its own people from the very beginning of the COVID-19 crisis. They took these steps:

1) establish a single source of truth — the CDC,

2) weaponize CISA to declare “disinformation” their target,

3) enlist a legion of volunteer deputies without any official authority or accountability to operate within social media and all walks of life, giving public service messages telling Americans the CDC is the only trusted source of information. The converse of this assertion–anything else must be considered untrue and up for being nailed as “misinformation,” “disinformation,” or “malinformation.”

Don’t be surprised if FOIA-obtained documents demonstrate CISA and CDC were operating as partners in established campaigns with social media, mainstream television, print media, corporations, schools, and every aspect of life. Nothing can be more dangerous to public health. Directing all trust to a single source of medical information that is not contemporary, has no regular schedule of review or public briefings, is not transparent with data (e.g., the withheld V-Safe dataset), and has woefully lagged on major scientific developments (contagion control, testing, vaccine safety).

It’s a mind-blowing reality that our government agencies, in a planned and coordinated manner, have operationalized a plan to control information and spread propaganda in order to influence behavior. They pitted agencies against citizens and individuals against one another and set social media as the main battleground. The CDC and DHS CISA should be prime targets of US Senate and Congressional Investigations into our disastrous pandemic response.

[i] DHS CISA Publication: “We’re in This Together. Disinformation Stops With You.”

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Why Did the Left Fail So Utterly to Resist the Global Biosecurity State?


The question that continues to confuse socialists almost to the same degree that it delights their political opponents is why the Left today – not only in the U.K. but across the West – continues to collaborate so willingly and unquestioningly with the authoritarian programmes and regulations of the emerging Global Biosecurity State. As the imminent implementation of Digital ID, Central Bank Digital Currency, Universal Basic Income, Environmental and Social Corporate Governance criteria (ESG), Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response, Social Credit, Smart Cities, and all the other programmes of Agenda 2030 are demonstrating, the New World Order being forced upon us outside of any democratic process is capitalist in its economic infrastructure, fascist in its governmental, juridical and ideological superstructure and totalitarian in its aims. So why do those who, however mistakenly, self-identify as of the political Left continue to be its noisiest and blindest cheerleaders?

If, by the Left, we mean in the U.K. the Labour Party and those trades unions, political organisations and pressure groups that advocate voting Labour every time there’s an election, then the U.K. Left has little or nothing socialist in its principles, politics or practices. For those of us who read its policies and oppose its actions in town halls and local authorities, Labour is irrefutably and even openly a party whose political philosophy is founded in the principles of neoliberalism. This is, perhaps, most demonstrably evident in its collusion in the marketisation of human needs such as housing and the financialisation of those markets by global capital. Moreover, anyone who has knocked around the Left as I have also knows that, whatever its so-called ‘Left-wing’ elements and organisations argue between elections, when it comes to supporting or opposing the policies and practices of Labour in government at municipal or local authority level, they all toe the party line, keep silent and vote Labour.

It has come as no surprise to me, therefore, that the U.K. Left, including not only Labourites but the wide diaspora of people who call themselves ‘Leftists’ and even ‘socialists’, have become fervent ideologues of the biosecurity state. But it’s not, as the followers of Friedrich Hayek argue, because of the inherent authoritarianism of socialism that leads it to impose a totalitarian social model at the first opportunity. There is (it can’t be repeated too often) little or nothing socialist – in the Labour Party nothing, in its affiliates and fellow travellers little – about the policies or practices of the U.K. Left. Even those small groups and independent organisations that are openly critical of Labour have adopted the U.K. Left’s almost universal support for biosecurity restrictions, remain indifferent to the immiseration and suffering of the U.K. working class they are causing, and steadfastly refused to join the millions of U.K. workers who protested against their imposition in the spring and summer of 2021. They instead uncritically accepted and adopted the Government and corporate media’s dismissal of those workers as ‘far-Right conspiracy theorists’.

Undoubtedly, the political naivety of the Left disposed it to welcome the imposition of the regulations and programmes of the biosecurity state in March 2020 as the triumph of the common good over government incompetence and ‘Right-wing’ greed. But that was nearly three years ago, and naivety has become bad-faith and denial in the face of the vast apparatus of global biosecurity that’s been constructed around, between and within us. That doesn’t mean, however, that the Left now regrets its collaboration, which of course continues today, or that it hasn’t obstinately confined its protests to the erasure of our rights and freedoms being enacted by the wave of new legislation introduced in 2022 on the back of 582 coronavirus-justified Statutory Instruments, without admitting any relationship between them. The betrayals and duplicities of the Left are legion, but many socialists are still asking how it came to this.

What all the Left shares – and the origin of its otherwise inexplicable collusion with the implementation of the U.K. biosecurity state – is a decades-long infiltration by the neoliberal ideologies of multiculturalism, political correctness, identity politics and, most recently, the orthodoxies of woke. In some organisations, the infiltration is marginal and exists, under the umbrella of ‘intersectionality’, in an uneasy and usually unexamined co-existence with the slogans – if not the practices – of socialism. In others, such as the Labour Party and its affiliates, what socialist principles they may once have had have been entirely replaced by the values and orthodoxies of these relatively new ideologies, which have manifested themselves in such youthful, energetic and well-funded movements as Momentum, Black Lives Matter, Extinction Rebellion, Just Stop Oil and now the masked-up, jacked-up advocates of the Global Biosecurity State. These are all (whatever they may say themselves) pro-capitalist movements, hostile to the working class – which they consistently and casually denounce as ‘racist’ – and directly if not openly opposed to socialism. It’s by their principles that the Left has operated for some time in the U.K. as in all the former neoliberal democracies of the West.

It can’t be long before we see a similar movement, funded by the same or even more powerful billionaires, formed to support the next stage in the U.K. biosecurity state. This includes the adoption of a Universal Basic Income for those impoverished by lockdown, spiralling inflation, rising energy prices and the mass digitalisation of white-collar jobs by the Fourth Industrial Revolution. And like its predecessors, this movement of the Covid-faithful will claim a position on the U.K. Left by criticising the Conservative Government’s response to this or the next ‘crisis’. In doing so, it will help create an even greater consensus among U.K. youth and ‘liberals’ in the middle-classes for increased online surveillance, stricter laws, harsher sentences, more intrusive technologies of public control and greater police powers to enforce them. As we saw most publicly in the counter demonstrations organised across Canada during the blockade against vaccine mandates in February 2022, the Left didn’t hesitate to align itself with the Government of Justin Trudeau and the riot police he deployed, denounced truckers as ‘white supremacists’ and every other insult in the woke handbook, while waving placards telling working men and women facing unemployment and destitution at the hands of the biosecurity state to ‘check their privilege’.

This largely middle-class, neoliberal Left, which today constitutes a homogeneous force of compliance across the biosecurity states of the West, did not suddenly become devotees of the restrictions and programmes imposed due to a justification of a major threat to public health that never existed. On the contrary, the Left is the Church in which these Covid-faithful have been raised, their guiding religion and cultic practices formed by the same radically conservative beliefs. To state again what should be obvious to all: no-platforming, cancel culture, misogyny disguised as trans-rights, policing of speech and opinion, and all the other symptoms of this woke ideology did not emerge from a politics of emancipation, class struggle or wealth distribution. They emerged from, and are advocates for, authoritarian practices of censorship, suppression of debate and punishment of non-compliance that are culturally inseparable from the technologies of surveillance and control developed by finance capitalism to police and protect its borders. These are not the borders between the nation states that finance capitalism straddles like a colossus and across which the Global Biosecurity State now controls our movements to a degree hitherto unimaginable to the children of multiculturalism. They are rather the borders between, on the one hand, the international corporations and offshore jurisdictions through which global capital flows, and on the other, scrutiny by and accountability to what remains of the public sector in those nation states.

Far from the Left being, as some have claimed, under some form of collective hypnosis or programming – presumably from the propaganda of the Right – it is from the Left that we hear the most Puritanical demands for displays of public virtue, for the harshest punishments to be imposed on unbelievers in the new faith of biosecurity. There is a direct line of ideological influence between the Black Lives Matter slogan that ‘silence is violence’, the ‘rebels’ groomed by Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil offering themselves for arrest, and the ideologues of ‘Zero-Covid’ denying human rights to those who refuse to comply with the dictates of the Global Biosecurity State.

Just as, for the past century and more, trades unions under Labour’s duplicitous leadership have repeatedly sacrificed U.K. workers to the interests of U.K. capital, so the Left has handed over U.K. youth to the U.K. biosecurity state. To claim that this corporate, technocratic, authoritarian, repressive, violent and totalitarian ideology has anything in common with the emancipatory aims of socialism shows just how little the ideologues of the Left know or care about socialist politics, socialist principles or socialist practices, except insofar as it exists to suppress any organisation that attempts to enact them.

Indeed, with such willing compliance from the Left, is there any need anymore for the ideologues of capitalism to extol its supposedly unique ability to defend our freedoms? The declarations of a New World Order made at the concurrent meetings of the World Economic Forum and the World Health Organisation this May strongly suggest not. As an ideological principle, ‘freedom’ is well and truly off the political agenda today. Fascism – although, as Orwell predicted, imposed under another name (‘biosecurity’, ‘Net Zero’, ‘stakeholder capitalism’ etc.), no longer under the authority of a sovereign leader but of new international technocracies like the World Economic Forum and World Health Organisation, and in this country appearing in a slimy Anglicised form — is the new common good to which all of us are being compelled to sacrifice our human rights, our privacy, our bodily autonomy, our freedoms. And the truth the Left continues to refuse to face up to is that none of this could have been achieved with such speed and ease without its collaboration.

But is that all? Can so momentous a historical failure, which may one day equal that of the failure of the Left to defeat the rise of fascism a century ago, be attributed entirely to the ideological erasure of socialism not only from the parliamentary parties and political organisations of the Left but also from the ideology of its membership and fellow travellers? If the psychological structure of fascism is the pull between an almost childlike obedience to the imperious forms of authority that operate above the law, and a visceral hatred of the impoverished, the diseased, the ostracised and the criminalised, what can we say about the psychological structure of the Left in the West in 2022? Is the Left now, in effect, fascist? And if it is, was Hayek right, after all, about socialism being a stepping stone to fascism?

The answer to both these questions must be ‘no’: not only because the past 40 years of neoliberalism in the West have witnessed the outsourcing of public services to the private sector and deferral of economic policy to central banks and international financial institutions; but also because the division of the political spectrum on which Hayek’s argument rested into Left and Right – with social democrats and socialists, respectively, one and two steps to the Left, and liberals and conservatives one and two steps to the Right – no longer has any descriptive purchase on the political paradigm of the Global Biosecurity State.

The orthodoxies of woke ideology have been employed by self-styled ‘liberal democracies’ under some of the most authoritarian and anti-working-class governments in recent history – including those of Boris Johnson in the U.K., Emmanuel Macron in France, Mario Draghi in Italy and Karl Nehammer in Austria – in order to subordinate the Left to the Global Biosecurity State. ‘Subordinate’ is perhaps the wrong word, because, at the same time, notionally Left-wing governments – including those of Pedro Sánchez in Spain, António Costa in Portugal and Magdalena Andersson in Sweden – as well as Left political parties in opposition such as U.K. Labour, have been just as ready to embrace the Global Biosecurity State on the woke principles of safety, censorship and a paternal state. And, of course, liberal and conservative governments – including those of Olaf Scholz in Germany, Mateusz Morawiecki in Poland, Alexander de Croo in Belgium, Mark Rutte in the Netherlands, Sanna Marin in Finland and Kyriakos Mitsotakis in Greece – have long since made woke orthodoxies the foundation of their political platforms, and rapidly deployed them in their opportunist response to the coronavirus ‘crisis’.

This unity of response by the notionally politically differentiated governments of European nation states, together with their willing subordination to the new technocracies of global governance, has demonstrated – hopefully once and for all – that Left and Right no longer exist as positions within the new biopolitical paradigm of the West.

One could argue that they haven’t for some time. Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister of the U.K. and one of the West’s most influential ideologues of neoliberalism, whose New Labour party did so much to close the Overton Window, replaced Left and Right with what he called ‘Open and Closed’, with the former in favour of neoliberalism, multiculturalism and globalisation, and the latter with protectionism, cultural conservatism and anti-immigration. In this new political spectrum, in which so-called ‘openness’ more accurately describes the ideology of the Left, the socialist values of political emancipation, economic equality and wealth redistribution have been removed altogether, with the middle-classes enjoined to openness and the working class dismissed as closed. Of course, with the current revolution of Western capitalism into the Global Biosecurity State, ‘open and closed’ have taken on very different meanings, with the ‘open’ advocates of neoliberalism now demanding lockdown, the imposition of ‘vaccine’ passports as a condition of travel and mandatory medical intervention as a condition of employment, and the ‘closed’ workers defending their rights and freedoms.

Indeed, insofar as the residual polarity between Left and Right has served to divide opposition to the biosecurity state, with compliance depoliticised as obedience to medical ‘measures’ issued by supposedly non-political technocratic advisory boards (whether SAGE or the WHO), the collaboration of Left and Right has facilitated the imposition of the biopolitical paradigm of the state. Just as Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom allowed neoliberals to reduce politics to economics – most famously expressed in Thatcher’s slogan that “There Is No Alternative” (TINA) – the sanctimoniously repeated mantra of the Covid-faithful that the coronavirus crisis is ‘above politics’ is the dream of a post-political totalitarian world in which, whatever party is elected to administer its dictates, the state and its powers remain at the disposal of the same international organisations of global governance.

The Left of today, therefore, is not fascist, but neither is it socialist in any recognisable sense of the term. As the more than two-and-a-half years since March 2020 have demonstrated more clearly than any other recent event in the history of the West, the Left is a residual but still functioning political form of the power of the nation state to assimilate, through the spectacles of parliamentary democracy and street protest, the potentially subversive elements of society into the homogeneous political order, in order to protect the productive forces of the economy from the increasingly frequent crises of finance capitalism. The coronavirus ‘crisis’, and the collaboration of the Left in constructing the Global Biosecurity State, is the demonstration of this function.

Simon Elmer is the author of The Road to Fascism: For a Critique of the Global Biosecurity State, from which this article is an excerpt.

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Book Review, Civil Liberties, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Progressive Hypocrite | , , | Leave a comment

Australian Media: “Majestic Princess cruise with 800 COVID-19 patients set to dock in Sydney”

Three years later and the press is still reporting cruise ship outbreaks like they matter. I just want everything to stop being so stupid.

eugyppius: a plague chronicle | November 11, 2022

Somehow cruises are still a thing, which people are still somehow doing.

Specifically, around 4,600 people are currently aboard the Majestic Princess as she approaches Sydney. Among the amusements provided them by the wise administrators of Princess Cruises is apparently a rigorous antigen testing regimen, doubtless because passengers and crew alike believe this is hygienic and responsible, even though none of them, if challenged, could defend their bizarre compulsion or explain its benefits in any way at all. Alas, idiocy has consequences, and suddenly around 800 testees turn out to have SARS-2 antigens in their mucus. This is now a newspaper story in multiple languages, because everything has to be extremely, unbearably stupid all the time now.

According to press reports, some of these 800 people feel mildly unwell, while others feel totally healthy. Nobody is dying or seriously ill in any way. Regardless of anybody’s actual medical condition, all 800 have been confined to quarters, while the rest of the passengers have been required to don masks, and – I swear this is real – “crew members have been advised to wear full PPE.”

Australian news also notes that “The Majestic Princess has been ranked by NSW Health as a tier three risk level,” which sounds extremely terrible. They report further that “there are no plans to prevent any unwell passengers from disembarking” when the ship arrives at port tomorrow morning, and if you can detect a little regret behind those words, perhaps it’s because 800 positive passengers represents a staggering 4% increase in the current case count of New South Wales.

Some days I am very optimistic that the pandemic at least is behind us, and then I stumble across a story like this one, and I basically want to abandon all of civilisation and take up residence by myself on a desert island somewhere. While the most intrusive pandemicist policies have died an ignominious death, the toxic and idiotic cultural attitudes that supported them are still alive and well, and waiting – just waiting – to seize the levers of policy once again.

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | 6 Comments

FBI Lobbying Congress For New Laws That Allow Them To Pursue Children As “Domestic Terrorists”

By Eric Striker | The Main Street Tribune | November 5, 2022

The FBI is calling on Congress to pass laws giving federal agents greater authority to prosecute children in relation to what it categorizes as domestic terrorism, according to the Bureau’s recently released Strategic Intelligence Assessment and Data on Domestic Terrorism.

The report, which was presented to lawmakers last month, focuses primarily on the alleged threat landscape regarding what federal officials have dubbed “Domestic Violent Extremism,” or DVE.

The assessment points out that federal domestic terrorism investigations grew to record highs during the relevant year of analysis, largely due to the mass classification of Donald Trump supporters arrested for entering the US Capitol on January 6th, 2021 as Domestic Violent Extremists.

Tucked away in the 44-page report’s “Legislative Initiatives” section, the Department of Homeland Security and FBI contend that existing federal law sets the bar for arresting and prosecuting juvenile investigative targets too high:

“The FBI is actively working with DOJ on some broader legislative initiatives that can benefit both federal investigations and prosecutions, including those relating to DT. For example, there are ongoing discussions about adjusting legislation in response to the challenges in disrupting juvenile threat actors via federal law enforcement actions. We will inform and work with the Congress in the event we identify any critical gaps in our authorities that may have negative effects on our ability to accomplish our mission.”

The topic of “disrupting juvenile threat actors via federal law enforcement actions” is not extrapolated upon further, but a recent forum featuring intelligence operatives from multiple agencies revealed the depth of the FBI’s fixation on children it perceives as holding a domestic violent extremist political ideology.

At an October 24th discussion hosted by the Homeland Security Experts Group (HSEG) — a privately controlled information sharing consortium overseen by former DHS secretary, PATRIOT Act co-author and Israeli citizen Michael Chertoff — the assistant director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division Robert Wells stated that many children his agency identifies as DVE’s are not breaking any federal or state laws, but he believes they still require law enforcement intervention.

Wells goes on to state that the FBI is currently working with its Behavioral Analysis Unit to analyze children who are expressing a belief or sentiment that does not violate any laws in order to formalize a procedure for federal agents to take it upon themselves to intervene in their lives.

The FBI and Department of Justice’s war on domestic terror has been racked with controversy. Critics hold that the FBI and Department of Justice are using the pretense of fighting terrorism as a means towards the end of suppressing political opposition.

1,000 page report released earlier this week by Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee details allegations of bias, incompetence, rampant corruption and statements made by several FBI whistleblowers that the Bureau’s campaign against “domestic terrorism” is nothing more than a naked political crackdown against Constitutionally protected right-wing and religious beliefs.

Among the specific charges made by over a dozen conscientious FBI agents, they contend that they were compelled by supervisors to manufacture fraudulent domestic terrorism data in order to justify increasing the federal government’s power to crush legitimate political activity the powerful people disagree with.

The civil liberties question of whether FBI agents have the legal right to monitor or interfere in the activities of minors who are not breaking any laws was not examined in its official assessment, nor was it raised in discussions hosted at the HSEG conference.

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | 14 Comments

Feds Scramble To Hide Role Of Oath Keeper’s Informant In January 6th “Insurrection”

By Eric Striker | The Main Street Tribune | November 11, 2022

A bombshell New York Times report has revealed that Greg McWhirter, the Vice President of the Oath Keepers who helped lead the group’s presence on January 6th, is an FBI informant.

Federal officials worked hard to hide McWhirter’s status as a Confidential Human Source (CHS) in the seditious conspiracy trial of Oath Keeper’s leader Stewart Rhodes and his associates, presenting their asset in public filings as a mere “witness” instead.

In a furious November 8th filing, federal prosecutors accused defense attorneys of illegally disclosing confidential discovery about McWhirter to the press. It appears that the actual way McWhirter’s status was leaked was through a clerical error by DC court employees, who accidentally published the sealed document on the docket.

Federal officials have been suppressing information on the role their assets and agents played in inciting violence at the Capitol by having them testify as witnesses in cases related to January 6th.

McWhirter, a black Sheriff’s deputy in Montana, rose through the ranks of the Oath Keepers thanks in part to his existing contacts with law enforcement as well as his race. Rhodes regularly showcased McWhirter’s black heritage as evidence that he is not racist.

The infiltrator has also courted public controversy for other legally dubious stunts over the years. During the 2016 election, he called on members of his militia to patrol voting sites in order to discourage election fraud. In a more recent incident, he aided the FBI in attempting to manufacture an Oath Keeper’s conspiracy to kill members of Antifa in Portland as retaliation for the anarchist murder of Aaron Danielson.

Following the events of January 6th, McWhirter bought a gun shop and immediately began offering steep discounts on ammo and weapons to militia members, with implications that they had to prepare for civil war.

The defense for Rhodes, et al, was planning to call McWhirter as a witness in order to expose his role as an agitator. Yet, as the FBI informant boarded the plane to travel to his scheduled court appearance, he suffered heart trouble and could not testify. He is only 40-years-old.

On social media, many are speculating that federal agents either induced his emergency health issue with drugs or, more plausible, worked with him and his physician to fake the whole thing. In light of this curious coincidence, Rhodes’ defense was forced to rest its case without being able to cross examine the agent provocateur.

This is not the first irregular development in the trial. Witnesses Rhodes’ defense planned to call who were slated to tell the court that the defendants were innocent of plotting violence at the Capitol had FBI agents visit their homes right before they were scheduled to testify. The FBI agents told them that they would legally incriminate themselves and be prosecuted if they spoke in Rhodes’ defense. This intimidation tactic proved effective, leading to witnesses taking the fifth amendment when called, much to the shock and frustration of the defense.

McWhirter was not the only person working for the FBI inside the Oath Keepers. Another black member, Abdullah Rasheed, was also exposed in court for providing information on the group’s inner workings to federal agents in the run up to January 6th.

In addition to this, the FBI appears to be preparing to thwart expected Congressional inquiries into domestic counter-terrorism operations. Journalist Julie Kelly recently reported that Christopher Wray is rushing to replace the head of its Washington Field Office, Steven D’Antuono, who has led agents in using controversial tactics across the country to entrap persons with right-wing political beliefs of all types in fictitious terror plots.  D’Antuono suddenly announced his retirement despite his recent lucrative and prestigious promotion, which will make it difficult for Congress to question him on his actions under the color of law in the last three years.

The Oath Keeper’s trial, which to date is the most serious and high profile prosecution of all January 6th cases, will soon be going to jury deliberation.

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , , | 6 Comments

Pentagon exploits post 9/11 laws to wage ‘secret wars’ worldwide: Report

The Cradle | November 9, 2022

A report released last week by the New York University School of Law’s Brennan Center for Justice details how the US Department of Defense (DoD) has been allowed to covertly deploy troops and wage secret wars over the past two decades in dozens of countries across the globe.

Among the nations in West Asia affected by these so-called ‘security cooperation authorities’ are LebanonIraqSyria, and Yemen; however, they also include many African and Latin American nations.

Known as ‘security cooperation authorities,’ they were passed by the US Congress in the years following the 11 September attacks, and are a continuation of the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), a piece of legislation that has been stretched by four successive governments.

According to the report, the AUMF covers “a broad assortment of terrorist groups, the full list of which the executive branch long withheld from Congress and still withholds from the public.”

Following in this tradition, the ‘security cooperation authorities’ being abused by the Pentagon are Section 333 and Section 127e of Title 10 of the United States Code (USC).

Section 333 authorizes the US army to “train and equip foreign forces anywhere in the world,” while Section 127e authorizes the Pentagon to “provide support to foreign forces, paramilitaries, and private individuals who are in turn supporting US counterterrorism operations,” with a spending limit of $100,000,000 per fiscal year.

However, thanks to the vague definition of ‘support’ and ‘training’ in the text of these laws, both Section 333 and Section 127e programs have been abused to target “adversarial” groups under a strained interpretation of constitutional self-defense; they have also allowed the US army to develop and control proxy forces that fight on behalf of – and sometimes alongside – their own.

As a result of this, in dozens of countries, these programs have been used as a springboard for hostilities, with the Pentagon often declining to inform Congress or the US public about their secret operations under the reasoning that the incidents are “too minor to trigger statutory reporting requirements.”

“Researchers and reporters uncovered Section 127e programs not only in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also in Cameroon, Egypt, Kenya, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Somalia, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen,” the report highlights.

Researchers also point out that defense authorities “have given little indication of how [they] interpret Section 333 and 127e.”

Even more concerning, and ignoring the damage caused by these ‘anti-terror’ laws, the US Congress recently expanded the Pentagon’s security cooperation authorities, particularly with Section 1202 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

Section 1202 allows the US army to allow “irregular warfare operations” against “rogue states” like Iran or North Korea, or “near-peers,” like Russia and China.

The report comes at a time when the US army and its proxy militias are accused of illegally occupying vast regions of Syria and Yemen, looting oil from the war-torn countries, just over a year after their brutal occupation of Afghanistan ended. Moreover, a former US official on Tuesday revealed that anti-Iran militias are being armed in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region (IKR), where both the CIA and the Mossad are known to operate.

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Enough: Why Western Leaders, Populations Call for Halting Money Flow to Ukraine

By Ekaterina Blinova – Samizdat – 11.11.2022

On November 10, Hungary blocked €18 billion in EU financial aid to Ukraine, triggering a wave of criticism from the bloc’s leadership. Budapest said that it has had enough of joint EU borrowing initiatives. Meanwhile, protesters in Italy and other EU nations have called for arms to stop being sent to Ukraine and for lifting anti-Russia sanctions.

“I’m not surprised the Hungarians and the Italians and others will go their own way. They have every right to do that,” Joe Siracusa, US politics expert and professor of history and diplomacy at Curtin University, Australia, told Sputnik. “There’s going to be more of it. And I think every nation in Europe is going to do what they think they have to do to survive the winter and to get on with life. I mean, they’re not committed to a life and death blueprint. Europe’s not going down the rabbit hole because somebody wants to support [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky. And I think Zelensky really expects this to happen.”

The European Commission (EC) proposed an $18 billion aid package for Ukraine on November 9 that was expected to come into effect in 2023 to help cover Ukraine’s budget needs. That assistance was meant to come in the form of highly concessional loans, disbursed in regular installments.

Ukraine is running a budget deficit of up to $5 billion per month, as per the nation’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, with the country’s defense spending jumping five-fold to $17 billion for the first seven months of 2022.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Ministry of Economy admitted last month that the country’s real GDP fell by as much as 40% in the second quarter of 2022. The full year contraction of Ukraine’s economic output is expected to reach 35%, according to the World Bank. To cap it off, Ukraine’s financial officials forecast that inflation could hit 40% at the beginning of 2023, morphing into nothing short of hyperinflation. Kiev does not have money to cope with the financial crunch, but instead of joining Russia at the negotiating table, it urges its Western backers to give it more.

The EC’s latest generous offer came as US officials continued chastising their European allies last month for not delivering enough to Kiev. According to the US press, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on multiple occasions called upon her international peers to ramp up both the speed and amount of money going to Ukraine. In addition to that, Yellen reportedly raised the issue at a private meeting with European Commission Executive Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis and European Economy Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni at the International Monetary Fund.

Eventually, Brussels agreed to fork out, but Hungary upset the EC’s bid on Wednesday: the money cannot go to Kiev without the full backing of all 27 EU countries because of the bloc’s budget rules. “We will certainly not support any kind of joint EU borrowing in this field,” Hungary’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó told a Hungarian newspaper. Budapest justifies its decision by the fact that it has already spent hundreds of millions of euros to support health, education, and cultural institutions in Ukraine. In addition to that, Hungary earlier supported the EU’s joint borrowing during the COVID pandemic, “and that was more than enough,” Szijjártó underscored.

Brussels, Berlin, and other European capitals subjected Budapest to criticism, while some mainstream media outlets pinned the blame on Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who, according to them, has repeatedly neglected EU norms and wooed Russian President Vladimir Putin in the past.

Protest Movement Growing in EU, Sentiment Changing in US

Still, the problem is that it’s not just Hungarian politicians who are opposing the bloc’s continuous financial and military aid to Ukraine and sweeping sanctions on Russia at a time when inflation and recession are engulfing the Old Continent.

During the past weekend in Rome, an estimated 100,000 Italians took to the streets, calling on the government to stop sending weapons to Ukraine. The rally was reportedly organized by trade unions, numerous Catholic associations, and peace groups.

On November 9, Greek workers in Athens conducted a day-long strike backed by unions, such as the General Confederation of Greek Workers and ADEDY, protesting against soaring inflation and skyrocketing energy prices, which rose dramatically after the EU joined Washington’s energy embargo against Russia.

Earlier, in September, around 70,000 people protested in Prague, Czech Republic, urging their government to maintain direct gas contracts with Russia in order to overcome the unfolding energy crisis.

The European Parliament acknowledged in October that almost 50% of Greeks and 43% of Italians said they want anti-Russia sanctions to be lifted. At the same time, a survey by Eupinions, an independent platform for European public opinion, indicated that less than 40% of Italians approve of Rome supplying weapons to Kiev.

The backlash is not limited to Europe, as US Republican lawmakers who are projected to take control of the House in January 2023 have clearly signaled their dissatisfaction with the growing burden of spending on Ukraine. On October 18, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy made it clear that the House GOP won’t give a “blank check” to Kiev if Republicans win the lower chamber in November.

“Republicans will win the House of Representatives,” said Siracusa. “They’re in control of the purse. If you don’t control the House, and all you need is 218 votes, you don’t need a red wave, you don’t need a 30, 40 seat majority. All you need is one vote. And they got 218. And they can make sure that the House of Representatives, where all money bills originate, will not give Ukraine another penny. Winning the House is more important than winning the Senate. It’s in the House of Representatives that the Constitution guarantees that money will originate – money bills. So the House is very, very important. And Congressman Kevin McCarthy is going to be very, very important after this. But I think the mood in America has changed. There is no doubt in my mind, there is going to be a Republican victory in the House.”

According to the US mainstream press, this stance is shared by many Republicans from the Make America Great Again (MAGA) camp. For their part, American Democratic progressives, who are also expected to maintain and, probably, expand their presence in the US Congress, recently voiced their opposition to Washington’s military involvement in Ukraine and called on US President Joe Biden to broker peace between Kiev and Moscow. Despite their flip-flopping with a letter addressing the president on the matter, the US press admitted that anti-war sentiments persist among the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC).

“I think the Republicans were hesitating before the election,” Siracusa said. “There’s only so much you can give to another nation before you empty out your own arsenal. And it was quite clear if there had been a big Republican victory, Marjorie Greene’s comment about there would be no more money for Ukraine, in fact she had a wonderful comment, she said that as far as she is concerned and a number of Republicans are concerned, Ukraine is not an ally and Russia is not an enemy. And that’s kind of where it’s headed.”

Moreover, a September survey by Data for Progress on behalf of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft indicated that roughly 60% of Americans would support the US engaging in diplomatic efforts “as soon as possible” to end the Ukraine standoff, even if that means Kiev having to make concessions to Russia.

West Cannot Fund Ukraine Indefinitely

One should admit that the US, UK, EU, and their close allies have committed a lot in terms of military, financial, and humanitarian aid for the Kiev regime, which says that all the money received so far has been burned through.

According to the Germany-based Kiel Institute for the World Economy, the US, EU, and several other countries committed a total of €93.73 billion ($93.62 billion) to Ukraine between January and October 2022, with the US being the most generous giver.

In addition to sending weapons and money to Kiev, the EU is also carrying the burden of accommodating Ukrainian refugees. The number of Ukrainian refugees taken in by the US is miniscule, amounting to only around 0.02% of the US population. Washington has taken fewer Ukrainian refugees (100,000) than Poland (1,365,810), Germany (1,003,029), the Czech Republic (427,696), Italy (159,968), Turkey (145,000), Spain (140,391), and the UK (122,900), according to the UN data.

The cost of housing Ukrainians in Europe is considerable, especially amid swirling inflation and the accompanying economic slowdown. According to the Kiel Institute, for some nations the cost of housing Ukrainian refugees has exceeded their overall aid to Ukraine. For instance, Estonia is spending more than 1.2% of its GDP on aid to Kiev and housing Ukrainian refugees. Latvia and Poland’s cumulative aid also exceeds 1% of their GDP.

Meanwhile, Eurozone inflation hit a new historic high of 10.7% in October, according to preliminary data, with Brussels already admitting that the bloc is heading to a recession at the end of this year.

It raises the question whether European governments will halt their help to Ukraine, as Biden’s State Department is continuing to pressure them into exhaustive spending regardless of the bloc’s economic difficulties. Speaking to a US broadcaster in the aftermath of Election Day, Zelensky warned against reducing Washington’s aid to Kiev, insisting that it’s the only way to keep Europeans sending money to Ukraine. Still, it’s unclear where exactly the money goes, with millions of dollars and euros vanishing in the fog of the conflict.

Siracusa does not rule out that the US will be the first to suspend the money flow to Kiev, which even the Biden administration does not consider grateful enough.

“I think at the end of the day, Americans will call a halt to it,” said Siracusa. “And I think a number of Ukrainians will exhibit some resentment to the aid given to them, because they’ll say it wasn’t enough. I think Zelensky wanted the Americans to pick up their monthly public service and army salaries. He wanted $5 billion from the American people, heard him say it, to keep Ukraine going. What country is going to pay for soldiers and public servants endlessly? The idea of the United States Treasury printing money, $5 billion a month, to pay for Ukrainian civil service or public service, that’s nuts, that’s unrealistic thinking.”

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , | 5 Comments

Political West using Ukraine to probe, discredit Russian military

By Drago Bosnic | November 11, 2022

After Moscow was forced to intervene in Ukraine and launch its counteroffensive against NATO aggression, the political West got an unprecedented opportunity to probe the Russian military, test and observe its capabilities. All of this provides invaluable insight into the doctrine of the Eurasian giant’s armed forces, which would help NATO optimize its military power to match Russian capabilities. Naturally, this is nothing out of the ordinary in comparison to any other conflict in known history. However, both sides are working on misleading the other by either concealing their actual military strategy and doctrine or providing false information which could give them both tactical and strategic advantages in the future.

For its part, NATO is providing the Kiev regime with unprecedented ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) capabilities, which has been of prime importance for its forces. Without them, the Neo-Nazi junta troops would’ve had a much harder time against the Russian military. What’s more, NATO expected Russia to play all its cards (short of direct confrontation with the belligerent alliance) in tackling this issue, particularly by using its extensive experience and capabilities in electronic warfare. In doing so, Moscow would’ve gotten several months of key advantages over the Kiev regime forces, but it would also provide NATO with crucial data on how this spectrum of its battlefield capabilities worked. This would then be used by the belligerent alliance to gain an important insight and create counters, possibly tipping the strategic balance of power to its advantage.

It’s precisely this scenario that Russia is trying to avoid, which is why it decided to show only a fraction of its capabilities. This is certainly affecting the performance of the Russian military, but since the High Command sees the intervention against the Kiev regime forces as a local operation, this is considered a fair trade-off. Simply, letting NATO gain too much knowledge of the Russian military strategy and doctrine would be a much bigger problem in the long-term. What’s more, NATO’s overreliance on its ISR advantage might as well create a false sense of security and push its military planners into thinking that Russia doesn’t have counters to these capabilities. However, in a possible confrontation, Russia would certainly destroy much of NATO’s ISR assets, leaving the belligerent alliance with much less battlefield information to work with than it currently has access to.

Still, the present situation is providing NATO with a better opportunity to hurt Russia than engaging in a direct clash ever could. Apart from using the Kiev regime forces as cannon fodder, the political West is also conducting a full-spectrum war against Moscow, involving economic and financial sanctions, incessant information warfare, cyber operations, etc. The aim is to make Russia’s life as hard as it could possibly be, with hopes of eventually turning it into a giant North Korea. The end goal is clear – a coup which would bring a more “cooperative” government to power in Moscow. And this prospect isn’t even in the realm of conspiracy theories anymore as several high-ranking US officials said so themselves, including the US President Joe Biden.

At present, the Ukraine crisis is slowly entering a new phase. While the mainstream propaganda machine is portraying the Kiev regime forces as “making spectacular advances, liberating many towns and villages, and forcing Russian forces to retreat,” the political West is trying to bring the Kiev regime to the negotiating table and buy some more time before the winter season gets worse, giving Russia a significant strategic advantage as the European Union struggles with energy prices and supplies.

By maintaining the image of Neo-Nazi junta troops supposedly “winning” against the Russian military, the political West is trying to convince its populace that financing the Kiev regime is justified, despite the economic and financial fallout. For its part, Brussels is doing everything it can to reduce gas consumption as it can neither afford additional US LNG shipments, nor does it have the necessary storage capacity. The alternative – buying more Russian natural gas – is considered “geopolitically sensitive”.

In addition to conducting the economic siege of Russia, the political West also needs to find ways to continue supporting the ever-cash-hungry Kiev regime. The fallout of these policies has been affecting Western and other global economies for months, resulting in ever-growing unrest and frustration among hundreds of millions around the world, particularly in the EU, whose member states are now bearing the brunt of the suicidal anti-Russian policies.

The detached policymakers in the political West think that this strategy is working, while ignoring the consequences for their own citizens. Dissent is being suppressed by accusing anyone who questions these policies of being “pro-Russian”. Worse yet, refusing to openly support the Neo-Nazi junta in Kiev is now a mortal sin, regardless if the person in question is a public figure or a regular citizen.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | 1 Comment

US admits provoking Russia in the Arctic

By Lucas Leiroz | November 11, 2022

A US special forces’ representative admitted that the US actions in the Arctic are a kind of provocation against Russia, revealing how Washington deliberately poses international security risks with its anti-Russian plans.

The irresponsible US attempts to “dissuade” Moscow and stop the alleged Russian “expansionist behavior” would be some of the reasons why Washington is deliberately initiating provocative military maneuvers in the Arctic Circle, according to Lawrence Melnicoff, commander of the European Special Operations Command. Melnicoff commented on NATO’s initiatives in Europe and the sending of troops to Norway, where military units are currently being trained for combat in arctic weather and conditions.

For him, this is part of a strategy focused on “provocation without escalation”, which Washington would be using against Russia. The commander believes that Russia has expansionist ambitions in the European space and that it may even already be planning attacks against targets in the US allied countries, which supposedly “justifies” NATO’s actions in the region to “complicate” Russian plans.

“We are intentionally trying to be provocative without being escalatory (…) We’re trying to deter Russian aggression, expansionist behavior, by showing enhanced capabilities of the allies (…) It complicates Russian decision-making because we know that they’re targeting very, very large specific aggregations of allied power, [such as] Ramstein Air Base, RAF Lakenheath, things like that (…) If worse comes to worst and somebody takes out these power hubs, we can forward-project precision artillery fire across the alliance with our partners”, he said during a recent interview to US media.

As expected, the officer did not mention any evidence of his claims about such Russian “expansionist” intentions. Arguing the existence of Russian plans to hit European targets is something particularly serious and that could never be said in the absence of clear and concrete evidence. In fact, Melnicoff’s statements appear to be just an attempt to make the destabilizing American action “acceptable” in the eyes of the public opinion, considering that the aggressiveness of NATO’s maneuvers has significantly intensified.

On 9 November, NATO forces carried out a military drill in northern Norway about 500km from Russia’s Murmansk region. A long-range missile was launched in mid-air from a C-130 strategic transport aircraft. The test was the first successful one of the so-called “Rapid Dragon”, a modern weapons system developed for C-130 and C-17 aircraft, making them capable of launching Lockheed Martin AGM-158 JASSM cruise missiles against targets in long distance.

Apparently, this new missile system is NATO’s current bet to improve its tactical capability in Arctic warfare. In recent years, the US intensification of activities in the North Pole has taken place alongside a real race by the military industrial complex to modernize US forces in that region. Historically, Russia is the military power with the greatest presence in the Arctic. China has also shown growing interest in the zone and has developed special forces to operate there. And it is precisely in this scenario that NATO tries at all costs to enhance its maneuvers.

In this regard, in October, the US government published its “National Strategy for the Arctic Region”, which sets out the terms for the next 10 years of US military policy for the North Pole. The document urges an even more significant boost in US maneuvers in the Arctic, with Washington definitely seeking a position of military dominance in the Arctic similar to that of Russia and China. For this, the US counts on the strong support of NATO partners – and it is precisely to encourage these partners to support US plans that it is “interesting” to spread unfounded alarmist narratives about the “Russian threat”, as Melnicoff is doing.

In fact, acting provocatively against Moscow only tends to make the American plans more difficult. In the midst of the global security crisis, Russia is unwilling to tolerate more threats in its strategic surroundings. If American provocations increase, the Russians, who already have military hegemony in the Arctic, will respond by intensifying activities in the north, which will make the American plans to elevate its relevance in the Arctic more complicated, leading the recently announced National Strategy to failure.

Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in social sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , | 2 Comments

Roosevelt’s War to Unite the World

Tales of the American Empire | November 10, 2022

Americans are taught their nation fought World War II to free Europe from Nazi tyranny, but historical accounts prove otherwise. President Franklin Roosevelt continued President Woodrow Wilson’s effort to unite all nations under a world government based in New York. Creating a United Nations under American control required destroying the growing German and Japanese empires, dismantling the huge British and French empires, and weakening the growing Soviet Union. Roosevelt had no interest in fighting the Germans to win the war quickly. He wanted Germany and the Soviets to destroy each other while he expanded his United Nations to rule the world.


Related Tale: “Everyone Lost in World War II”;…

Related Tale: “The Anglo-American War on France”;…

Related Tale: “The Madness of Operation Torch”;…

Related Tale: “An Invasion of Sicily in 1942?”;…

Related Tale: “Poland Lost World War II”;…

Related Tale: “The Disastrous Liberation of the Philippines”;…

November 11, 2022 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , , | Leave a comment