Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Tucker Carlson Says Boris Johnson Wants $1Mln to Discuss Ukraine Conflict

Sputnik – 21.02.2024

WASHINGTON – US journalist Tucker Carlson said that former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson wants $1 million from him to talk about the Ukraine conflict in the wake of Carlson’s recent interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“It gets out that we’re doing it [interviewing Putin], and I’m immediately denounced by this guy called Boris Johnson … So I put in a request for an interview with Boris Johnson,” Carlson said in an interview with TheBlaze. “Finally, one of his advisers gets back to me and says, ‘He will talk to you, but it’s going to cost you a million dollars.’ He wants a million dollars.”

Johnson’s adviser said the former prime minister would be willing to explain his position on Ukraine for the six-figure fee, Carlson said.

In November 2023, Ukraine’s former chief negotiator with Russia, David Arakhamia, said Johnson talked Kiev out of signing an agreement with Moscow to end the conflict in spring 2022. Johnson has previously denied the accusations.

Johnson could not have traveled to Ukraine without consulting the United States, Putin said earlier this month.

Putin did not request $1 million to participate in an interview, Carlson noted, adding that Johnson is “a lot sleazier” than Putin.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | 1 Comment

How I established anti-Zionist views should be protected under UK law

By David Miller | Press TV | February 20, 2024

In a landmark judgement on February 5, the Bristol Employment Tribunal handed down its decision that I had been wrongfully dismissed from my position as Professor of Political Sociology at the University of Bristol.

In addition, the court found that the reasons given by the university for sacking me – that some Zionist students had been offended or claimed to feel ‘unsafe’ – were untrue.

The court determined instead that I had been dismissed for my anti-Zionist views.

And in the most significant element of the case, the court also ruled  – for the first time in the UK – that anti-Zionist views as set out by me in court filings are protected as a philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010.

The judgment stated:

The claimant succeeds in claims of direct discrimination because of his philosophical belief contrary to section 13 Equality Act 2010.

It went on:

The claimant’s anti-Zionist beliefs qualified as a philosophical belief and as a protected characteristic pursuant to section 10 Equality Act 2010 at the material times.

What this means is both that anti-Zionist views are declared by the court not to be racist and that they are “worthy of respect in a democratic society”, which is the language used in the Equality Act.

What was the anti-Zionist position I espoused and the court endorsed as protected?

First, I defined Zionism in a neutral way as an ideology that holds that a state for Jewish people ought to be established and maintained in the territory that formerly comprised the British Mandate of Palestine.

Zionists, of course, agree with this ideology. But, as the judgement put it:

[The Claimant’s] belief that Zionism (as he defines it) is inherently racist, imperialistic and colonial is based on the claimant’s analysis that it “necessarily calls for the displacement and disenfranchisement of non-Jews in favor of Jews, and it is therefore ideologically bound to lead to the practices of apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide in pursuit of territorial control and expansion.”

The Employment Tribunal accepted that these ideas reached the level of coherence and cogency required of protected philosophical belief.

Among the specific statements made by me, for which I was sacked, were:

“The enemy we face here is Zionism and the imperial policies of the Israeli state”;

“It’s not just a question of being allowed to say, ‘Zionism’s bad’ or ‘Zionism’s racism’ – which, of course, we should be allowed to say because it is. But it’s not just a question of that; it’s a question of how we defeat the ideology of Zionism in practice.”; and

“Zionism is and always has been a racist, violent, imperialist ideology premised on ethnic cleansing. It is an endemically anti-Arab and Islamophobic ideology. It has no place in any society”.

These views are now to be regarded as protected anti-Zionist statements with no connection to anti-Semitism.

As the judgment stated:

“The Claimant explained, in his witness statement, that his opposition to Zionism is not opposition to the idea of Jewish self-determination or of a preponderantly Jewish state existing in the world, but rather, as he defines it, to the exclusive realization of Jewish rights to self-determination within a land that is home to a very substantial non-Jewish population.”

The case therefore establishes a very important precedent that will surely be relied upon and built upon in future employment cases.

And it declares to employers everywhere – that no matter how loudly Zionists scream and shout – it is not permissible to sack anti-Zionists for their views, which are henceforth protected in law.

Furthermore, the judgment drives a coach and horses through the long-promoted Zionist talking point that anti-Zionism is the “new antisemitism”.

This is a view that underpins the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Working Definition of Antisemitism, which must now be put to serious question.

I hope and believe that in the future this will be seen as a turning point in the battle to end the racist and genocidal ideology of Zionism.

But how did I win this case? A key element was that the witnesses provided by the University of Bristol did not support the case the university was making.

Indeed they fatally undermined it.

The concessions made by the University of Bristol witnesses were firstly by Professor George Banting, a retired Dean of the Faculty of Biomedical Sciences.

Under cross-examination, he was shown the university policy on investigations which emphasizes getting to the truth and testing evidence.

He was then taken through example after example where he admitted he had not properly taken into account the evidence that I and my team had submitted and he admitted that he had, in effect, treated the evidence from the Zionist student activists credulously, even though there was plenty of evidence that they had provided contradictory or false evidence.

Banting caused some amusement in court when toward the end of his testimony he disclosed that he was something of an anti-Zionist himself:

“I would be more aligned with the position that Professor Miller puts forward in terms of Zionism being a racist ideology and settler colonialism.”

Similar admissions were made by Professor Jane Norman the Dean of Health Sciences at Bristol. She admitted that she lacked knowledge of the Zionist movement and of sociology, subjects where she acknowledged I was more knowledgeable than she was.

She had claimed in her letter of dismissal that the Union of Jewish Students was simply a faith society and thus by inference not Zionist – a case that stretched credulity, but which also indicated her partiality.

She also reluctantly admitted that she had not properly analyzed the contending evidence in the case in her written decision to sack me. Norman has subsequently been promoted to the second top job at the University of Nottingham.

These concessions were enough to show that I had been wrongly dismissed.

As the judgment put it: “The claimant succeeds in his claim for unfair dismissal pursuant to section 98 Employment Rights Act 1996”

But both Banting and Norman also conceded other points that fatally compromised the university case.  The university and specifically Professor Norman had claimed that the reason I had been sacked was because Zionist students had been offended or felt ‘unsafe’ as a result of hearing my anti-Zionist views.

But they both confirmed under cross-examination by the British Palestinian barrister Zac Sammour that the key reason that I was sacked was precisely because of the anti-Zionist content of my views and not my comments about Zionist student groups.

This was enough to show that I had been dismissed specifically for my anti-Zionist views.

But the most dramatic moment was when the university’s Deputy Principal Professor Judith Squires took the stand. Squires is a professor of political theory by background, so should be more familiar with the issues under discussion.

She has been prominent at the University of Bristol in its responses to the Black Lives Matter movement and the call for divestment in relation to slavery.

She can be seen here delivering a speech in which she calls for the “eradication” of racism, a position which, as I said at the tribunal, I wholeheartedly endorse. As the most senior witness from the university she, of all people, had to support the overall university case that my views were not “worthy of respect in a democratic society”.

And Squires did from the outset, but immediately after she was asked if she thought that my views were views ‘akin to Nazism’. She seemed confused by the question as if she had not realized that affirming the university case entailed this position.

But she eventually agreed. At that moment she was lost.

My barrister proceeded to demonstrate that by asking about a hypothetical case where Anglo-Saxons in Britain forced 75 percent of non-Anglo-Saxons to leave and go and live in Cornwall or Wales, then denied the remaining 25% rights in jobs, education and voting, would that be racist? “Yes”, said Professor Squires.

And he went on if no non-Anglo-Saxon could return, but any Anglo-Saxon, anywhere in the world, could come and live in Britain. Would that be racist? “Yes” And, the barrister went on would it be wrong for a Professor to say that Anglo-Saxonism is racism? And that it should be opposed?  “No”, said Professor Squires.

The University of Bristol, in other words, undermined and eventually destroyed its own case in court.

David Miller is the producer and co-host of Press TV’s weekly Palestine Declassified show. He was sacked from Bristol University in October 2021 over his Palestine advocacy. 

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | 1 Comment

Jailed Without Charge: Layan Kayed, West Bank student jailed for campus activism

By Humaira Ahad | Press TV | February 20, 2024

On the morning of June 7, 2023, Layan Kayed was sleeping peacefully in her room when Israeli soldiers appeared out of nowhere and ferociously banged on the door of her house in the occupied West Bank.

In a frightened state, Kayed’s father rushed through the gateway as the heavily armed regime soldiers stormed inside the house, seizing all the electronic gadgets and arresting the 26-year-old Kayed.

Kayed, a master’s student at the Birzeit University in occupied West Bank, had been an anti-occupation activist for years. She was first arrested in 2020 when she spent 16 months in different Israeli jails.

During her recent arrest, the young Palestinian activist was subjected to brutal custodial interrogation and was prevented from meeting her lawyer, according to reports.

In a message to her family during her first detention facility, Kayed said her relationship with prison is “that of a constant attempt to tame us and alienate us.”

In 2020, Kayed was arrested while crossing Za’tara military checkpoint, south of the city of Nablus. The Israeli soldiers handcuffed her, shackled her legs, and made her sit in an open area for hours.

She was later transferred to Hasharon prison of the Israeli regime.

The regime snatched from her the right to celebrate an important day of her life. She was arrested just before receiving her bachelor’s degree certificate.

“I was arrested at one of the checkpoints that separates my home from Birzeit University while I was in the family car with my mother on my way to the university to accept my (Bachelor of Arts) certificate,” the young Palestinian student was quoted as saying.

“After my arrest, I was left outdoors at the Zaatara Israeli military checkpoint for eleven hours, handcuffed and shackled. I was subjected to sexual insults, constant swearing, and verbal abuse from the Israeli male criminal inmates, under the watch of the Israeli guards who did not intervene.”

After her release from prison following her first arrest, Kayed narrated the inhumane treatment she was subjected to in Israeli prisons, similar to what other Palestinians have narrated over the years.

“One never received any sunshine and was fully monitored by security cameras around the clock.”

Kayed was kept in a cell with cameras fixed all around the room, violating the privacy of the young woman. She was not even provided a jail uniform and had to borrow clothes from an inmate.

The toilet she was forced to use was without a ceiling and a door, the Palestinian activist said.

On March 3, 2021, Ofer military court sentenced her to 16 months in prison in addition to a fine of 6,000 shekels. In the ruling, the military judge cited a previous ruling by the military appeals tribunal which stated that student wings of organizations deemed unlawful should not be underestimated, referring to the prosecution of students who belong to university unions, as they constitute a threat to “security”.

The Palestinian rights campaigner believes that the issue of Palestine is not just limited to Palestine but has worldwide reverberations.

“As a Palestinian people, we are facing the Zionist entity, which is organically linked to all imperialist interests in the region and the world. This means that the conflict with the Zionist project is not limited to the land of Palestine,” Kayed was quoted as saying.

The student bodies in Palestine have been advocating the total boycott of the apartheid regime.

Layan Kayed during an event at her university before her arrest. (X)

“In addition to boycotting Israel in all respects…, and launching pressure campaigns on governments and their pro-Israel policies, such as arms sales, trade exchange, or policies that adopt the Israeli discourse, we see that fighting injustice and oppression anywhere is part of our struggle against Israel,” she said.

“Israel actively contributes to supporting oppression around the world. Israel is a laboratory for weapons, surveillance, and military technologies, which it exports to oppressive governments around the world,” the student activist maintains.

In 2021, following Kayed’s first arrest, the UN working group on arbitrary detention said that the young Palestinian woman’s arrest was arbitrary, highlighting that it lacked a legal basis, and was carried out in breach of international human rights law.

The case was referred to the special rapporteur on violence against women and the working group on discrimination against women and girls.

Arbitrary detention is a form of administrative detention that is being used as one of the key tools by the regime to oppress Palestinians. Since October 7, Israel has dangerously increased its use of arbitrary detention across the occupied West Bank.

While Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank are subjected to civilian law, Palestinians have to face military laws. Military courts of Israel prosecute Palestinian children as young as 12.

As per the figures given by Military Court Watch, an NGO that monitors the treatment of Palestinian children in Israeli jails, 95 percent of military court cases result in convictions.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Subjugation - Torture | , , , | Leave a comment

Settlers burn through West Bank village under army protection

(Photo credit: AFP)
The Cradle | February 20, 2024

Israeli settlers rampaged through the occupied West Bank village of Burqa, northwest of Nablus, on the evening of 19 February, attacking homes and destroying vehicles under the protection and coordination of the Israeli military. 

Settlers threw Molotov cocktails at several Palestinian homes as Israeli troops shut down all main roads to the village. 

Palestinian news agency WAFA reported that Israeli troops “did nothing to stop the colonists’ attack,” adding that Israeli forces used large amounts of tear gas and prevented ambulances from reaching the wounded. 

Earlier on Monday, Israeli settlers, with the help of troops, fenced off a tract of Palestinian-owned land south of Jerusalem with barbed wire to occupy it. 

Settler violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank has surged to all-time highs under Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. It has escalated even further since Operation Al-Aqsa Flood and the Gaza war. 

Palestinians have been subject to increasing levels of forced displacement since the war began. 

Since October, over 1,000 people – including hundreds of children – have been forced by settlers and Israeli army soldiers to abandon their homes, according to the UN.

Additionally, more settlers are being armed. Thousands of weapons have been handed out to settlers in the occupied West Bank under an initiative sponsored by the Israeli National Security Ministry. 

According to Israeli watchdog NGO Peace Now, Israeli settlers established a record-breaking 26 outposts in the occupied West Bank in 2023. The report correlates the rise in unlawful settlement construction with the Jewish supremacist policies of the Israeli government.

Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank are illegal under international law. 

Nonetheless, the Don’t Buy Into Occupation (DBIO) civil society organization highlighted in December that European financial institutions have provided billions of dollars to support settlement construction in the occupied West Bank over the past few years. 

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

The ‘two-state solution’ is a distraction; the problem is Zionism

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | February 20, 2024

The problem in Palestine-Israel is not the absence of a Palestinian state, but Zionism. What is the use of a Palestinian state, if the racist, exclusivist ideology of Zionism continues to define Israel, and impose that definition on the Palestinians?

This ideology calls for the racial purity and dominance of Jews in Palestine, at the expense of the native inhabitants of the land, of course. To achieve this, millions of Palestinians have had to be forced into exile, and hundreds of thousands needed to be killed, wounded or incarcerated. Neither two states nor even one state is possible if Zionism is not entirely defeated: not revamped, not “fixed”, but eradicated.

As Palestinians are being killed in unprecedentedly large numbers in Gaza, western politicians are waking up to the necessity of a viable, independent Palestinian state. But why now? After all, it was these very politicians and their governments that either defended the Zionist state or remained silent as Israel thwarted every possibility of peaceful co-existence with the Palestinians. Theirs is not a moral awakening, but a distraction, to appear — at least before their own people — to be proactive, while Israel is systematically destroying the Palestinian people.

The Israeli war against the Palestinians in Gaza is “the first genocide in the history of humanity that is [being] livestreamed on television,” said former UNRWA spokesman Chris Gunness. The genocide is worsening now that Palestinians are starting to die from starvation, while an even larger number are dying from disease and polluted water, aside, of course, from those being blown up or shot and killed by Israel.

For the likes of Britain’s Foreign Secretary David Cameron to talk about the British government’s recognition of a Palestinian state as “absolutely vital” for “long-term peace” is bewildering, to say the least. Those struggling to survive daily are hardly concerned about yet more empty western promises and “recognition”.

The genocide underway in Gaza tells us that the issue is not merely political, but also ideological.

And, while western leaders speak of “long-term peace”, Israel entrenches its system of violence and apartheid. “There cannot be a situation in which children and women approach us from the wall,” said Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir on 12 February. “Anyone… must receive a bullet.”

In Gaza, the violence is far more sickening. Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor reported on the same day that “groups of ten to twenty Israeli civilians at a time were permitted to watch and laugh while filming Palestinian prisoners and detainees in their underwear” as they were tortured and abused by Israeli soldiers.

There can be no rational political justification for any of this. All of it — the language of genocide, the genocide itself and the threats of committing a greater genocide — is rooted, not in a rational political theory, but in Zionism.

The problem keeps getting worse because we refuse to address it head-on. In fact, many are doing the exact opposite. For example, western governments have passed — or are passing — laws equating criticism of Zionism with anti-Semitism. Even Facebook wants to ban the use of the term “Zionist” if it is used in a context that is critical of Israel.

When Israeli Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu threatened, on 5 November, to drop a nuclear bomb on Gaza, he was condemned by many merely for his inappropriate language, not the act itself. Yes, some Israeli officials also criticised Eliyahu, but only for damaging Israel’s international reputation.

The Israeli minister, however, was not simply talking out of anger. He meant it, because Israel’s behaviour in Gaza since then has demonstrated that such willingness to kill Palestinians en masse actually exists. Zionists are ready to do anything for their ideology to survive, and that survival is wholly dependent on the erasure of the perceived enemy; not “erasure” in an intellectual, political or even cultural sense, but the actual physical destruction of the Palestinians.

The ethnic cleansing of Palestine, known as the 1948 Nakba, was a serious attempt at achieving that goal. But since the “enemy”, the Palestinian nation, survived and continues to resist and demand its collective rights, the ethnic cleansing of them is today back on the mainstream Israeli political agenda.

This ongoing Gaza war is, to date, the most serious attempt to destroy the Palestinian people. This is why Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right government want to carry on with the killing and destruction. They want to continue the slaughter, and thus the extermination of the Palestinians, because they are fully aware that this is an historic opportunity to finish the job that previous Zionist leaders did not complete 75 years ago.

Indeed, Israel perceives the ongoing offensive as going beyond the geographic confines of the tiny Gaza Strip. It is a war on Palestinians everywhere. If Israel succeeds in subduing Gaza, it will turn immediately to the West Bank, then to the 2.1 million Palestinians who are Israeli citizens.

It is important to recall that, before the current war, the Israeli incitement against Palestinians was focused mostly on the West Bank, with the declared aim of annexing over a third of that occupied region, at least. There was also a major official Israeli campaign to curtail the rights of Palestinian Arabs inside Israel and incite hatred against them. This campaign is rooted in history but has become far more apparent following the Unity Intifada (uprising) of May 2021.

It was then that Israel realized that the “division” of the Palestinians was largely political, and that, as a nation, they remain strongly connected. That is why Ben-Gvir lobbied, even before he was given a ministerial position in December 2022, to have a National Guard tasked with “restoring governance where needed”. If Gaza falls, all Palestinians in the rest of Palestine will become the new target for Israeli violence, ethnic cleansing and, if necessary, genocide.

Reducing all of these issues to that of finding creative political solutions that would merely sell false hopes to the Palestinian people is not only ignorant, or devious, but also a diversion from the real problem: Israel’s ideology of Zionism.

This, like all racist colonial ideologies, operates with a zero-tolerance approach to its relationship with the natives of colonised land: Zionism and Zionists must dominate through ethnic cleansing and genocide. For “long-term peace” to take place, this pernicious ideology must be consigned to the history books.

READ ALSO: Gaza women, girls being strip searched, raped by male Israel soldiers, UN warns

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | 7 Comments

US once again vetoes UN resolution for Gaza ceasefire

Press TV – February 20, 2024

Unsurprisingly, the United States has once again vetoed a UN resolution that calls for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.

Israel’s great benefactor used its veto at the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday to block the draft prepared by Algeria.

It was the third time Washington has opposed such a resolution since Israel ignited its bloody war machine in Gaza in early October.

Representatives of 13 countries at the 15-member Security Council voted in favor of the resolution. Britain abstained.

The Palestinian envoy to the United Nations Riyad Mansour condemned the US veto as being “absolutely reckless and dangerous.”

“The message given today to Israel with this veto is that it can continue to get away with murder,” he said in a statement to the Security Council.

US says Gaza ceasefire ‘wishful and irresponsible’

In remarks to the Security Council after the US wielded its veto power, US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza was “wishful and irresponsible.”

She claimed that such an action by the United Nations could stifle diplomatic efforts to broker an agreement between Hamas and Israel for a pause in the war.

“Colleagues, over the past few weeks, we have made incredibly clear that the resolution before the council would not achieve the goal of a sustainable peace, and may in fact run counter to it,” Thomas-Greenfield said.

Before the vote, Amar Bendjama, the Algerian ambassador to the UN, told the Council, “A vote in favor of this draft resolution is support to the Palestinians right to life.”

“Conversely, voting against it implies an endorsement of the brutal violence and collective punishment inflicted upon them.”

The US had already threatened it would block the Algerian-proposed resolution.

Washington, instead, has been actively pushing for a temporary ceasefire in Gaza to facilitate the release of Israeli captives held by the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas.

Israel’s savagery in Gaza began on October 7, 2023, after Hamas carried out the historic surprise Operation Al-Aqsa Storm against the occupiers.

So far, the regime has killed more than 29,000 people, mostly women and children, and injured about 70,000 others in Gaza.

Washington has since supplied the regime with more than 10,000 tons of military equipment.

The United States vetoed similar UN draft resolutions for a ceasefire in October and December.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Dutch court denies Russia’s appeal of $50bn Yukos award

RT | February 20, 2024

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal on Tuesday dismissed Russia’s latest legal challenge in the high-profile Yukos case and upheld the enforcement of a $50 billion award to the former shareholders of the now-defunct oil company.

Energy giant Yukos, once owned by ex-oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, collapsed in 2006 after the company failed to pay billions of dollars in back taxes. The latest ruling concerns a decade-long trial at the International Court of Arbitration in The Hague, which, in 2014 ruled that Russia had violated its international obligations by taking steps to bankrupt the massive oil company in the early 2000s. Moscow has insisted that the dispute with the shareholders was outside the jurisdiction of any foreign court.

According to a statement on Tuesday by the Amsterdam court, Russia’s claim that the shareholders had committed fraud during the arbitration proceedings was made too late. It further said that even if the claim had been considered, it would not have changed the verdict on the arbitration award. “The conclusion is that the arbitration awards remain in force,” the statement reads.

Back in 2014, the arbitration tribunal ordered Russia to pay $50 billion in compensation to the former controlling shareholders of Yukos: Hulley Enterprises and Veteran Petroleum based in Cyprus and Yukos Universal based in the Isle of Man. The Dutch Supreme Court later overturned the ruling.

The ex-shareholders, who claim that the Russian government drove the company to bankruptcy for political reasons, later initiated proceedings in several jurisdictions, including the US.

The private company Yukos was formed after a controversial auction of state assets following the fall of the Soviet Union and quickly became one of the world’s most valuable companies.

The founder of the oil and gas giant, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was once Russia’s richest man. However, he was arrested and charged with fraud in 2003 and was imprisoned until 2013. His claim that his arrest was politically motivated is widely accepted by the Western media.

Moscow denies the charges and says that foreign courts did not consider that national laws governing fraud and other wrongdoing might have been broken. In 2020, Russia’s Constitutional Court ruled that Russia could refuse to pay any settlement imposed by the Dutch judges. The basis for the arbitration is the terms of the Energy Charter Treaty, which Moscow signed but never ratified.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

China tells Ukraine it ‘does not sell lethal weapons’ to conflicting sides

RT | February 20, 2024

The Chinese foreign minister has told his Ukrainian counterpart that Beijing remains neutral in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and will not sell weapons to either side. Wang Yi and Dmitry Kuleba met at the 60th Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

The talks were the first high-level encounter between Beijing and Kiev since Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky proposed a meeting with Chinese Premier Li Qiang at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January – a request that was reportedly rejected.

Wang Yi told Kuleba that China will not “add fuel to the fire,” seek to profit from the fighting, or “sell lethal weapons in conflict zones,” according to a readout from the Foreign Ministry. “Even if there is only a glimmer of hope for peace, China will not give up its efforts,” Wang Yi added.

In 2022 the US imposed sanctions on several businesses in China that Washington accused of helping the Russian military. China has refuted US claims that it was considering arming Russia. Ukraine has long been seeking China’s support for a 10-point peace plan, proposed by Zelensky last November, which Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has dismissed as “a senseless ultimatum to Russia, aimed at protracting hostilities.” The plan includes the restoration of Ukraine’s 1991 borders.

Since the outbreak of the conflict in February 2022, China has consistently called for a political resolution, and proposed a peace plan of its own last year, demanding a ceasefire and talks. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said the peace initiative presented by China could be taken as a basis for a settlement with Ukraine.

Beijing has resisted Western pressure to impose sanctions on Moscow, while boosting economic cooperation with Russia. Chinese customs data shows that bilateral trade grew 26.6% last year, reaching a record $240 billion.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

The U.S. Is Planning for the Aftermath of Ukraine War

By Sonja van den Ende | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 20, 2024

The prominent think tank for U.S. policymaking recently published a long report on the so-called aftermath of the war in Ukraine.

Washington and its NATO allies have to admit that the U.S. is losing another proxy war together with its satellite states of Europe. Previously they lost in Afghanistan (after more than 20 years, a second Vietnam), also recently in Syria and Iraq, and now in Ukraine.

Even so-called “Russia experts” in Europe admit that Ukraine is losing.

“I do not rule out that Ukraine will lose the war this year. Europe has misjudged the Russian army,” says Belgian “Russia expert” Joris van Blade to De Standaard.

Russia has the initiative again and the Russian people are not going to stop the war, he thinks. “We have missed historic opportunities to make Europe safer.”

According to the Rand study, two scenarios are possible: a so-called “hardline” or a “softline” postwar. Of course, the U.S. prefers a softline postwar outcome, where they still have room for manipulation and possible coup d’état and Balkanization (partition) of Russia just like they did in former Yugoslavia. According to Rand, the U.S. military presence in Europe has increased to around 100,000 personnel since the start of Russia’s Special Military Operation in February 2022.

The United States deployed attack aviation from Germany to Lithuania; Patriot air defense systems from Germany to Slovakia and Poland; and F-15 tactical fighters from the United Kingdom to Poland. In addition, European countries are sending F-16s to Romania, as the Netherlands recently indicated. These F-16s are capable of attacking Russian cities. Washington characterized these deployments as part of a wartime surge to deter Russia from expanding its aggression beyond Ukraine to attack U.S. allies in Europe.

Leaders in Europe are almost hysterical. One after another, they proclaim that Russia is going to invade Europe, starting with Moldova, the Baltic States, and Poland. The Netherlands, Germany, and France are warning their people to expect an attack from Russia, as is Sweden, which recently joined NATO.

The population is being frightened by the unhinged rhetoric of their politicians. Conscription must be reactivated and Germany even has a concept ready to recruit migrants (about 1.5 million serviceable men) and entice them to get a passport.

European leaders are also concerned about the upcoming elections in the U.S. after Republican contender Donald Trump made comments suggesting he would quit NATO and let Europe fend for itself. They are worried that the U.S. might abandon them.

During a recent NATO conference in Brussels, a lot of war rhetoric was spoken. “We live in an era where we have to expect the unexpected,” said Dutch NATO Admiral Rob Bauer. Meanwhile, the Danish and German defense ministers have warned of a potential war with Russia within five years.

The U.S. and European leaders assume the “hardline” scenario is likely in the next few years. They proclaim through their mouthpieces in the corporate-controlled news media that Russia is becoming much more “risk-acceptant”. Therefore, it is calculated that a hardline approach may increase NATO’s ability to deter purported Russian aggression.

It’s that time of year again for the hawkish Munich Security Conference, in Bavaria, Germany. This is the forum where President Putin provoked alarm when he gave his famous speech in 2007, making it clear that the unipolar world was over and a multipolar world would emerge in the foreseeable future. Putin’s prognosis caused much chagrin for Western leaders.

This year’s theme at Munich is animated by Trump’s supposed undermining of NATO. The appeal for support from the U.S. has become more urgent among some European politicians. Ukraine lacks weapons and ammunition, they openly say. Russia is sometimes five times superior on the battlefield. In addition, a U.S. support package worth around $60 billion was approved by the Senate last week but the Republican-dominated House of Representatives could reject it – and so far it looks like it will.

Europe, in turn, would not be able to fill this gap and, therefore, Ukraine will lose the proxy war for the U.S. and the West.

In addition to the presence of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, the European leaders and lobbyists will also use the opportunity in Munich to lobby Republican Senators and Representatives to support Ukraine (with money). Nowhere outside the U.S. can you find as many American politicians in one place as at the Munich Security Conference this year.

Zelensky’s participation in the conference had been expected for some time but had not yet been officially confirmed.

Last year, he opened the most important meeting of Western politicians and experts on security policy via video address. Now he is taking part in person for the first time since the Russian Special Military Operation began almost two years ago. He is afraid for his position; he is losing the proxy war on behalf of the U.S. and EU/NATO.

The actor-President of Ukraine Zelensky desperately wants to secure future European support.

U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris is attending the Munich conference instead of Joe Biden. Rumors are circulating in the Western media that Biden’s cognitive condition has deteriorated even more and he is unable to come. If Biden wins the November presidential election, will Harris become the next president upon his inevitable retirement during a second term? That’s probably the intention.

As President Putin said, he would rather have Biden than Trump as the winner. In his diplomatic way, he said that Biden is an “old school” politician, meaning of course that a Democratic government with Biden/Harris is easier to understand and estimate than Trump, who is capricious and unpredictable.

These are the facts: the presumed hegemony of the Western states is falling to pieces. The “Collective West” is losing its wars. Their status and economies are in a downward spiral, even before the Special Military Operation.

The politicians and the elites who stand behind them, the World Economic Forum (WEF) and other semi-international organizations (usually Western-oriented) want to compensate for this historic loss of the unipolar world with a new system, away from fossil energy, ostensibly for the climate, but actually to try to weaken and isolate Russia by destroying its economy based on copious oil and gas resources.

European so-called leaders, in fact, “vassals” of the U.S., have slavishly followed the agenda of creating a new Cold War, which could turn into a hot war. Instead of betting on diplomacy, they have chosen the path of war, in contradiction to the (Western) UN Agenda 2030, where Western countries have forced this agenda on the Global South. This agenda also states that we must strive for peace and prosperity for everyone. So it is yet another lie from the Global West, or rather the empire of lies, which is now submerged in its own lies.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Canada Announces Supply of Over 800 Drones Worth $95Mln to Ukraine

Sputnik – 20.02.2024

Canada will send more than 800 multi-purpose SkyRanger R70 drones worth over $95 million to Ukraine, the Canadian government said on Monday.

“Today, the Honourable Bill Blair, Minister of National Defence, announced that Canada will donate more than 800 SkyRanger R70 multi-mission Unmanned Aerial Systems to Ukraine. These drones, valued at over $95 million, will help Ukraine as it fights bravely to defend itself amongst Russia’s illegal and unjustifiable full-scale invasion,” the government said in a statement.

The statement added that since the start of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine in February 2022, Canada allocated over $9.7 billion in assistance to Ukraine, including $2.4 billion in military aid.

Western countries have been providing military and financial aid to Kiev since the start of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine in February 2022. The Kremlin has consistently warned against continued arms deliveries to Kiev, saying it would lead to further escalation of the conflict. In April 2022, Russia sent a diplomatic note to all NATO countries on the issue of arms supplies to Ukraine. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has warned that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine will become a legitimate target for Russian strikes.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , | 1 Comment

Brazilian Biosecurity Threatened: Oxitec and the New Dengue Outbreak

By Raphael Machado | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 19, 2024

The latest news about Brazil with international repercussions deals with a new outbreak of dengue fever, which has already affected more than 360,000 people and caused the death of at least 40. The case is notorious enough to have warranted a visit from Tedros Adhanom, Director-General of the WHO, who said that the outbreak in Brazil was part of a global phenomenon.

Without claiming a connection, but honesty requires us to remember that this visit comes just a few days after Mr Adhanom declared in Davos, at the World Economic Forum, the imminence of “Disease X”, which would require restrictive measures at a global level, as well as an upsurge in the fight against “disinformation”.

In the light of the investigations and findings of Russian Ministry of Defence experts regarding the Ukrainian and international activities of Western biolaboratories, however, it may be relevant to take a closer look at some facts that unfolded a few years ago in Brazil.

According to the British company Oxitec’s own official sources (oxitec.com), billions of genetically modified mosquitoes have been released since 2011 with the aim of combating the spread of diseases such as dengue, zika and chikungunya, which periodically re-emerge and affect hundreds of thousands of Brazilians.

The operation is based on manipulating the genes of male Aedes Aegypti mosquitoes (the carrier and transmitter of these diseases) so that the offspring of their crossbreeding with normal female mosquitoes have stunted or defective development, which would eventually lead to the eradication of the mosquitoes and, consequently, dengue fever.

The first tests, such as those carried out in the city of Jacobina in Bahia, pointed to an 85 per cent rate of genetically modified eggs among the entire mosquito population in the city, which was read as a demonstration of the experiment’s success.

However, we saw the result of this optimism in 2019, when the journal Scientific Reports pointed out that experimentation with the Aedes Aegypti mosquito may have created a “supermosquito”. According to the publication, 18 months after the end of the aforementioned experiment, the genetic alterations of the transgenic mosquitoes were already present in the native insect population. Even in neighbouring districts and regions where no genetically modified mosquitoes were released, the mosquitoes had mixed genes.

It was conjectured at the time that these mosquitoes might be more resistant to insecticides and poisons. Doctor Lia Giraldo da Silva Augusto, an environmental health researcher and former member of CTNBio, said she believed there had been lobbying to favour the British company – which was facilitated by the fact that the company dealt directly with town halls in extremely poor cities.

She also denounces the fact that there was no long-term monitoring and that only short-term results were used to press for the commercial release of the transgenic mosquito.

This is not the first controversy involving Oxitec.

The citizens of Florida, more specifically the Florida Keys, have been fighting a battle for more than 10 years against the release of billions of genetically modified mosquitoes. According to various social organisations, such as the Florida Keys Environmental Coalition, there is no evidence that GM mosquitoes limit the spread of diseases such as dengue, not least because there has been no independent study. Oxitec also claims that the results of its studies into the environmental and human impact of its transgenic mosquitoes is “confidential information”.

In 2018, for its part, the Cayman Islands government cancelled Oxitec’s project to spread transgenic mosquitoes after widespread popular pressure, supported by questions about the plan’s effectiveness and safety. The NGO GeneWatch UK released a report at the time, based on documents released by Oxitec itself, which indicated the ineffectiveness of the method used to suppress the mosquito population and prevent the spread of diseases such as dengue, Zika and chikungunya.

Despite these controversies and criticism from citizens’ groups concerned about the risks of Big Pharma manipulating nature for profit, Oxitec is still pushing ahead with projects in Panama, Djibouti, Uganda and the Marshall Islands, at least.

But who is really behind Oxitec? The British company was acquired in 2015 by the U.S. corporation Intrexon (which in 2020 changed its name to Precigen), which in 2020 sold Oxitec to the venture capital company Third Security LLC, which specialises in biotechnology.

Intrexon/Precigen has Third Security itself as its largest shareholder (38.87 per cent), with the other main investors being Germany’s Merck KGaA and the U.S. companies Patient Capital and BlackRock.

The transgenic mosquito project, however, has the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as its main backer, and Bill Gates himself has been one of the main spokespeople for this idea of fighting mosquito-borne diseases through transgenic mosquitoes.

And this is where the “rabbit hole” gets deep. Bill Gates’ interest in controversial biological research programmes, including in Ukraine, is already well known.

In May 2022, for example, RT published a report by Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, head of the Radiological, Chemical and Biological Protection Force of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, in which the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation was implicated in a scheme to finance military biolaboratories in Ukraine – a scheme that also involves the participation of large pharmaceutical corporations, including the aforementioned Merck KGaA. In this scheme, medicines and vaccines would be tested on the Ukrainian population without meeting international safety standards, in order to reduce costs.

Igor Kirillov released another report in July 2023 that may be of interest to us. In this report, which is already the result of Russian investigations into Western biolaboratories in Ukraine, Kirillov emphasises the U.S. Department of Defense’s interest in studying mosquitoes that transmit infections such as dengue fever. He reiterates that Russia has evidence of dangerous experimentation with mosquitoes in special facilities, both in the U.S. and abroad, highlighting precisely Oxitec as a company with ties to the U.S. Department of Defence and capable of mass-producing infection vectors for dengue and other diseases.

Kirillov finally points to a correlation between the spread of the operations of these Western-linked biolaboratories and a growing incidence of unusual diseases in the territories in question.

With this, it is not our intention to launch empty speculations about Oxitec’s activities, but to emphasise the need for a strict Brazilian and Ibero-American biosafety policy that takes into account the Russian findings about the suspicious activities of biolaboratories linked to the U.S. government, the Bill&Melinda Gates Foundation and Big Pharma.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Superstition and taboo: Germany retreats into the Middle Ages as its economy declines

By Henry Johnston | RT | February 20, 2024

Bloomberg recently foretold the end of Germany’s days as an industrial power in an article that begins with a depiction of the closing of a factory in Dusseldorf. Stone-faced workers preside with funereal solemnity over the final act – the fashioning of a steel pipe at a rolling mill – at the century-old plant. The“flickering of flares and torches” and “somber tones of a lone horn player” lend the scene a decidedly medieval atmosphere.

Intentional or not in their inclusion of such evocative detail, the Bloomberg writers offer potent imagery for Germany – not only because the country is regressing economically but because its elites are increasingly guided by an atavistic force: the abandonment of reason.

As hard economic realities lay bare the futility of its utopian energy plan and the consequences of numerous terrible decisions mount, Germany is experiencing what Swedish essayist Malcom Kyeyune calls “narrative collapse.” The peculiar offspring of this, Kyeyune argues, is a turn toward ritual, superstition, and taboo. It is a malaise afflicting the entire West, but Germany is suffering a particularly acute case.

Kyeyune defines this as an occurrence “when social and political circumstances change too rapidly for people to keep up, the result tends to be collective manias, social panics, and pseudo-religious revivalist millenarianism.”

The abandonment of reason can be conceived of in various ways. Quite a lot of ink has already been spilled about the irrationality behind Germany’s fantastically improbable climate policy. Indeed, the quasi-religious verve with which this program has been rolled out speaks to something of a loosening of the country’s moorings. But as we will see shortly, the problem goes far beyond an attachment to unattainable policy goals.

Prominent German business executive Wolfgang Reitzle argued that for the government to deliver on its climate and energy policy, capacities for wind and solar power would have to be more than quadrupled, while storage and back-up capacities would have to be massively increased. Such a plan is “neither technically feasible nor affordable for a country like Germany,” Reitzle argues. What it is then, he concludes, “is simply insanity.”

Michael Shellenberger, in a piece for Forbes magazine in 2019, points out that the initial impetus for seeking to transition to renewables emerged from the idea that human civilization should be scaled back to sustainable levels. He cites German philosopher Martin Heidegger’s 1954 landmark essay ‘The Question Concerning of Technology’ and subsequent work by the likes of Barry Commoner and Murray Bookchin as espousing what emerged in the 1960s as a much more austere vision for the future of civilization.

Shellenberger concludes that the reason why “renewables can’t power modern civilization is because they were never meant to. One interesting question is why anybody ever thought they could.”

The cohort who suddenly began thinking they could is the German political and intellectual elite in the early 2000s. Gone was the bucolic environmentalism of the 1960s and in its place came an aggressive and utterly detached-from-reality agenda that was imposed with millenarian fervor.

Before circling back to the idea put forth by Kyeyune – that the German elite is now mired in superstition due to the onset of narrative collapse – we must back up for a moment and examine what animated Germany prior to Bloomberg’s flickering flares and melancholy horn.

Modern Germany has long been an object of admiration for the West’s liberal elite, upheld as the ideal incarnation of the post-Fukuyama ‘history-has-ended’ world where liberal democracy triumphed and ideological conflict is a thing of the past. Germany, a nation with a penchant for militarism and authoritarianism, had expurgated its past sins and humbly assumed its place in the grand liberal order, magnanimously refusing to translate its economic prowess into bullying of others.

The country’s status was enhanced even further when the US and UK went off the rails, as the elite saw it, with the populist rebellions of Donald Trump and Brexit. Germany, with its staid, consensus-driven, common-sense politics, was the ‘adult in the room’, in stark contrast to the Anglosphere.

Meanwhile, its economy was humming. The hyper-globalization of the 2000s played right into Germany’s hands. It was a confluence of propitious global circumstances. China was growing at astronomical rates and needed cars and machines – Germany provided both. The expansion of the EU into Eastern Europe opened up new markets for German exports. Germany was prospering and its success was an important driver of economic development across Europe.

All of this helped foster what was perhaps the primary trait of the German elite during this time: a supreme confidence. It was this confidence that led Angela Merkel to famously assert “wir schaffen das” (“we can do this”) when confronted with the task of assimilating over a million migrants. It was the same confidence that led to the idea of jettisoning both nuclear power and coal at essentially the same time, an announcement that was met with a certain disbelief but also awe. “If anyone can do it, it’s the Germans,” was a commonly heard response.

However, the last few years have witnessed a shaking of that assuredness and unraveling of the prevailing narratives as Germany’s vaunted stability and prosperity have been challenged and the benevolent globalized world that nurtured it began fading. But narrative collapse, like many other forms of collapse, at first happens slowly and at the margins before being catapulted forward by some trigger into its more rapid terminal phase.

What was happening at the margins was that the economic model that sustained Germany over the past two decades came under increasing strain as China moved up the value chain and began importing less of Germany’s manufacturing output; it had also become a competitor in the automobile market. Meanwhile, Germany’s economy largely failed to diversify and has been slow to embrace innovation.

Likewise, doubts about the prospects for the energy transition had begun creeping in, again at the margins, long before the events of 2022. Germany has made little progress toward its 2030 emissions target, and it is laughably far behind in its aim of putting 15 million electric vehicles on the road by 2030. It has had to delay plans for the phase-out of coal, and in fact even as of 2021 coal still accounted for a quarter of electricity output. In other words, rather than effecting an actual transition, Germany had merely set up a clean energy system that ran parallel to the dirty one. The clean one spoke to the narrative while the dirty one still powered much of the country. This could not help but plant the seed of the cognitive dissonance that would later assume such bewildering proportions.

Nevertheless, it was undoubtedly the start of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022 that has precipitated the cascade of failure we see now. Certainly, Germany has made many poor decisions during this time, not the least of which was its headlong plunge into supporting the US-led proxy war against Russia. Relatedly, watching Russia’s sanctions-ridden economy rebound and return to growth – while their own economy struggled – defied everything the German elites would have imagined. That in itself is a narrative-shaking development.

But perhaps more important than the particular economic and political setbacks has been a sense that the benevolent, familiar world of recent decades is receding ever faster and in its place is coming something ominous, as if from a strange and turbulent dream.

To quote Kyeyune again, it’s as if “the future that they were promised – and that they promised the rest of us – was one of continued Western progress, prosperity, and geopolitical dominance. But that’s looking less and less plausible, and they neither like nor understand the future that is coming into view.”

For the elites, the world is crumbling around them and nothing is playing out as they had desired, which has deeply shaken their confidence.

The quotes from public officials and business leaders offered in the Bloomberg piece are bleak and a far cry from the “wir schaffen das” confidence of a few years back.

Stefan Klebert, the CEO of a company that has been supplying manufacturing machinery since the late 19th century, said: “To be honest, there is not much hope. I’m not really sure if we can stop this trend. Many things have to change quickly.”

Finance Minister Christian Lindner told a Bloomberg event earlier in February: “We are no longer competitive. We are getting poorer and poorer because we are not growing. We are falling behind.”

Volker Treier, foreign trade chief at Germany’s Chambers of Commerce and Industry, remarked: “You don’t have to be a pessimist to say that what we’re doing at the moment won’t be enough. The speed of structural change is dizzying.”

The last quote, a lament about the speed of structural change, is particularly telling and makes us recall Kyeyune’s assertion that when social and political circumstances change too rapidly for people to keep up, strange flora can sprout.

This sense of no longer being able to control events and the fear this has engendered have bred a sense of impotence among the European elites – a sort of ‘deer frozen in the headlights’ paralysis – with Germany at the vanguard of this. No longer confident that their actions can produce certain desirable outcomes, the elites have shed their sophisticated modern veneer and technocratic sensibility and retreated into symbolism and superstition.

In a way this should come as no surprise. It is an age-old human response to the lack of control – think about rain dances instead of irrigation – that once again confirms the words of George Bernard Shaw that “the period of time covered by history is far too short to allow of any perceptible progress in the popular sense of evolution of the human species. The notion that there has been any such progress since Caesar’s time is too absurd for discussion. All the savagery, barbarism, dark ages and the rest of it of which we have any record as existing in the past, exists at the present moment.”

As a result of this, actions, emptied of their utilitarian contents, come to be seen as inherently meaningful only if they conform to the prevailing superstitions and carry the necessary symbolism. The policies being pursued are thus detached from reason in the sense that they are no longer evaluated or even undertaken with an expectation of a particular outcome – in fact, the outcomes are often quite the opposite of the presumed intention, leading to all manner of absurdities.

The EU’s rush to approve an absolutely token package of sanctions by February 24 – the anniversary of the beginning of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine – is not being carried out with the slightest expectation that a motley assortment of obscure companies and third-tier public officials coming under EU sanctions will achieve any policy aims. The entire value of the endeavor is in its symbolism. Because the symbolism is ‘correct’ the action becomes important.

Germany’s Green Party, a leading voice both in the fanatical climate program and the anti-Russia camp, has in the last two years promoted policies that have directly led to an increase in the burning of coal in the country. This is certainly not an outcome the party would have ever lobbied for. But its actions no longer have anything to do with specific desired outcomes; rather they exist entirely in the mist-filled world of symbolism and, in the logic of this new age of superstition, are to be evaluated only in relation to their symbolic potency.

Kyeyune gives what may be the most vivid example of this principle at work. “Germany still has one functioning pipeline through the Baltic Sea but refuses to use it,” he correctly notes, referring to one line of Nord Stream 2 that was not damaged in the sabotage attack carried out in September 2022. “The problem is that the alternative approach to meeting its energy needs means buying liquefied natural gas… and some of this gas comes from Russia. In other words, Germany still buys natural gas from Russia, less efficiently and at a higher cost, in order to maintain a quasi-ritualistic prohibition against use of the pipeline.”

Meanwhile, he continues, a similar operation takes place with Russian oil, which is now sent to India or China to be refined before being imported by Europe. It is “as if the act of mixing it with other oil in a foreign refinery removes the evil spirits contained in it.” In other words, Russian oil must undergo some sort of purification process before it can enter the EU garden. European refiners, meanwhile, suffer, while all sorts of middlemen are enriched along the way, and consumers are left paying higher prices. There is not an ounce of economic logic to it – but we have now passed into a realm beyond economic logic.

Policies governing energy, the lifeblood of industrial civilization, are now subject to the tyranny of ritual, taboo, and superstition. Such is the predicament of the German elite as it seeks to navigate the country through a turbulent period of epochal transition. The abandonment of reason is quite a handicap in carrying out that job.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment