Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

China warns US against Taiwan visits

RT | May 23, 2024

US lawmakers must end any visits to Taiwan and adhere to the One-China policy, or be ready to face the consequences, Beijing’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Wang Wenbin, said during a press conference on Thursday.

His comments came in response to a statement by the chairman of the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, Michael McCaul, who announced on Tuesday that he would not be deterred by China’s threats and would lead a US delegation to Taiwan, which he called a “dearest friend and partner and ally” of Washington, at the end of the month.

Beijing considers the self-governing island to be an inalienable part of China, and has been pushing towards a peaceful reunification, vehemently condemning any separatist movements that seek Taiwanese independence.

Wang said Beijing firmly opposes any form of “official exchanges” between Washington and Taipei, and urged US representatives against interfering in the island’s affairs in any way and under any pretext.

He added that the warning extends to the US Congress, whose representatives are an “integral part of the US government” and should therefore abide by the One-China policy officially acknowledged by Washington and only maintain cultural, commercial, and other unofficial relations with the island.

If Congress members do visit Taiwan, Wang warned that it would be interpreted as a “serious violation” of the One-China principle, an attempt to damage China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and a “seriously wrong signal” for Taiwanese separatist forces.

“If the US insists on its own way, it must be fully responsible for the consequences,” Wang stressed.

Meanwhile, the Chinese military announced on Thursday that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has kicked off a series of joint drills near Taiwan to serve as “punishment” for separatist forces seeking independence and as a “stern warning” against any external forces aiming to interfere in China’s internal affairs.

The exercises are said to involve the PLA’s army, navy, air force and rocket force, all of which will carry out drills in various areas around Taiwan, focusing on combined sea-air combat-readiness patrol, battlefield control and joint precision strikes.

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , | 1 Comment

The Closing of the Internet Mind

The definition of online freedom has been depressingly constricted over the last thirty years

By Aaron Kheriaty, Debbie Lerman, Andrew Lowenthal, and Jeffrey Tucker | The American Mind | May 22, 2024

You have surely heard that your search results on Google (with 92 percent share of the search market) reflect not your curiosities and needs but someone or something else’s views on what you need to know. That’s hardly a secret.

And on Facebook, you are likely inundated by links to official sources to correct any errors you might carry in your head, as well as links to corrections to posts as made by any number of fact-checking organizations.

You have likely also heard of YouTube videos being taken down, apps deleted from stores, and accounts being canceled across a variety of platforms.

You might have even adjusted your behavior in light of all of this. It is part of the new culture of Internet engagement. The line you cannot cross is invisible. You are like a dog with an electric shock collar. You have to figure it out on your own, which means exercising caution when you post, pulling back on hard claims that might shock, paying attention to media culture to discern what is sayable and what is not, and generally trying to avoid controversy as best you can in order to earn the privilege of not being canceled.

Despite all the revelations regarding the Censorship Industrial Complex, and the wide involvement of government in these efforts, plus the resulting lawsuits that claim that this is all censorship, the walls are clearly closing in further by the day.

Users are growing accustomed to it, for fear of losing their accounts. For example, YouTube (which feeds 55 percent of all video content online) allows three strikes before your account is deleted permanently. One strike is devastating and two existential. You are frozen in place and forced to relinquish everything–including your ability to earn a living if your content is monetized–if you make one or two wrong moves.

No one needs to censor you at that point. You censor yourself.

It was not always this way. It was not even supposed to be this way.

It’s possible to trace the dramatic change from the past to present by following the trajectory of various Declarations that have been issued over the years. The tone was set at the dawn of the World Wide Web in 1996 by digital guru, Grateful Dead lyricist, and Harvard University fellow John Perry Barlow, who died in 2018.

Barlow’s Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, somewhat ironically written in Davos, Switzerland, is still hosted by the Electronic Frontier Foundation that he founded. The manifesto waxes lyrical about the liberatory, open future of internet freedom:

Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.

We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I address you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself always speaks. I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.

Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. You have neither solicited nor received ours. We did not invite you. You do not know us, nor do you know our world. Cyberspace does not lie within your borders. Do not think that you can build it, as though it were a public construction project. You cannot. It is an act of nature and it grows itself through our collective actions.

And so on it went with a heady, expansive vision–tinged perhaps with a dash of sixties utopian anarchism–that shaped the ethos which drove the building of the Internet in the early days. It appeared to a whole generation of coders and content providers that a new world of freedom had been born that would shepherd in a new era of freedom more generally, with growing knowledge, human rights, creative freedom, and borderless connection of everyone to literature, facts, and truth emerging organically from a crowd-sourced process of engagement.

Nearly a decade and a half later, by 2012, that idea was fully embraced by the main architects of the emergent app economy and the explosion of smartphone use across the world. The result was the Declaration of Internet Freedom that went live in July of 2012 and garnered a great deal of press attention at the time. Signed by the EFF, Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, and other liberty-focused organizations, it read:

To be sure, it was not quite as sweeping and visionary as the Barlow original but maintained the essence, putting free expression as the first principle with the lapidary phrase: “Don’t censor the Internet.” It might have stopped there, but given the existing threats coming from growing industrial cartels and the stored-data marketplace, it also pushed openness, innovation, and privacy as first principles.

Again, this outlook defined an era and elicited broad agreement. “Information freedom supports the peace and security that provides a foundation for global progress,” said Hillary Clinton in an endorsement of the freedom principle in 2010. The 2012 Declaration was neither right-wing nor left-wing. It encapsulated the core of what it meant to favor freedom on the Internet, exactly as the title suggests.

If you go to the site internetdeclaration.org now, your browser will not reveal any of its contents. The secure certificate is dead. If you bypass the warning, you will find yourself forbidden from accessing any of the contents. The tour through Archive.org shows that the last living presentation of the site was February 2018.

This occurred three years after Donald Trump publicly advocated that “in some places” we have to talk about “closing up the Internet.” He got his wish, but it came after him personally following his election in 2016. The very free speech about which he made fun turned out to be rather important to him and his cause.

Two years into the Trump presidency, precisely as the censorship industry started coalescing into full operation, the site of the Declaration site broke down and eventually disappeared.

Fast forward a decade from the writing of the Internet Declaration of Freedom. The year is 2022 and we had been through a rough two years of account takedowns, particularly against those who doubted the wisdom of lockdowns or vaccine mandates. The White House revealed on April 22, 2022 a Declaration for the Future of the Internet. It comes complete with a parchment-style presentation and a large capital letter in old-fashioned script. The word “freedom” is removed from the title and added only as a part of the word salad that follows in the text.

Signed by 60 nations, the new Declaration was released to great fanfare, including a White House press release. The signatory nations were all NATO-aligned while excluding others. The signatories are: Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cabo Verde, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Estonia, the European Commission, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, North Macedonia, Palau, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Trinidad and Tobago, the United Kingdom, Ukraine, and Uruguay.

The core of the new declaration is very clear and represents a good encapsulation of the essence of the structures that govern content today: “The Internet should operate as a single, decentralized network of networks – with global reach and governed through the multistakeholder approach, whereby governments and relevant authorities partner with academics, civil society, the private sector, technical community and others.”

The term “stakeholder” (as in “stakeholder capitalism”) became popular in the nineties as distinct from “shareholder” meaning a partial owner. A stakeholder is not an owner or even a consumer but a party or institution with a strong interest in the outcome of the decision-making by the owners, whose rights might need to be overridden in the broader interests of everyone. In this way, the term came to describe an amorphous group of influential third parties that deserve a say in the management of institutions and systems. A “multistakeholder” approach is how civil society is brought inside the tent, with financing and seeming influence, and told that they matter as an incentive to woke-wash their outlooks and operations.

Using that linguistic fulcrum, part of the goal of the new Declaration is explicitly political: “Refrain from using the Internet to undermine the electoral infrastructure, elections and political processes, including through covert information manipulation campaigns.” From this admonition we can conclude that the new Internet is structured to discourage “manipulation campaigns” and even goes so far as to “foster greater social and digital inclusion within society, bolster resilience to disinformation and misinformation, and increase participation in democratic processes.”

Following the latest in censorship language, every form of top-down blockage and suppression is now justified in the name of fostering inclusion (that is, “DEI,” as in Diversity [three mentions], Equity [two mentions], and Inclusion [five mentions]) and stopping dis- and mis-information, language identical to that invoked by the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the rest of the industrial complex that operates to stop information spread.

This agency was created in the waning days of the Obama administration and approved by Congress in 2018, supposedly to protect our digital infrastructure against cyberattacks from computer viruses and nefarious foreign actors. But less than one year into its existence, CISA decided that our election infrastructure was part of our critical infrastructure (thereby asserting Federal control over elections, which are typically handled by the states). Furthermore, part of protecting our election infrastructure included protecting what CISA director Jen Easterly called our “cognitive infrastructure.”

Easterly, who formerly worked at Tailored Access Operations, a top secret cyber warfare unit at the National Security Agency, coined the queen of all Orwellian euphemisms: “cognitive infrastructure,” which refers to the thoughts inside your head. This is precisely what the government’s counter-disinformation apparatus, headed by people like Easterly, are attempting to control. True to this stated aim, CISA pivoted by 2020 to become the nerve center of the government’s censorship apparatus–the agency through which all government and “stakeholder” censorship demands are funneled to social media companies.

Now consider what we’ve learned about Wikipedia, which is owned by Wikimedia, the former CEO of which was Katherine Maher, now slated to be the head CEO of National Public Radio. She has been a consistent and public defender of censorship, even suggesting that the First Amendment is “the number one challenge.”

The co-founder of Wikipedia, Joseph Sanger, has said he suspects that she turned Wikipedia into an intelligence-operated platform. “We know that there is a lot of backchannel communication,” he said in an interview. “I think it has to be the case that the Wikimedia Foundation now, probably governments, probably the CIA, have accounts that they control, in which they actually exert their influence. And it’s fantastic, in a bad way, that she actually comes out against the system for being ‘free and open.’ When she says that she’s worked with government to shut down what they consider ‘misinformation,’ that, in itself, means that it’s no longer free and open.”

What happened to Wikipedia, which all search engines privilege among all results, has befallen nearly every prominent venue on the Internet. The Elon Musk takeover of Twitter has proven to be aberrant and highly costly in terms of advertising dollars, and hence elicits vast opposition from the venues that are on the other side. That his renamed platform X even exists at all seems to run contrary to every wish of the controlled and controlling establishment today.

We have traveled a very long way from the vision of John Perry Barlow in 1996, who imagined a cyberworld in which governments were not involved to one in which governments and their “multi stakeholder partners” are in charge of “a rules-based global digital economy.” In the course of this complete reversal, the Declaration of Internet Freedom became the Declaration for the Future of the Internet, with the word freedom consigned to little more than a passing reference.

The transition from one to the other was–like bankruptcy–gradual at first and then all at once. We’ve traveled rather quickly from “you [governments and corporate interests] are not welcome among us” to a “single, decentralized network of networks” managed by “governments and relevant authorities” including “academics, civil society, the private sector, technical community and others” to create a “rules-based digital economy.”

And that is the core of the Great Reset affecting the main tool by which today’s information channels have been colonized by the corporatist complex.

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , | Leave a comment

From COVID-19 to Campus Protests: How the Police State Muzzles Free Speech

By John & Nisha Whitehead | The Rutherford Institute | May 21, 2024

The police state does not want citizens who know their rights.

Nor does the police state want citizens prepared to exercise those rights.

This year’s graduates are a prime example of this master class in compliance. Their time in college has been set against a backdrop of crackdowns, lockdowns and permacrises ranging from the government’s authoritarian COVID-19 tactics to its more recent militant response to campus protests.

Born in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, these young people have been raised without any expectation of privacy in a technologically-driven, mass surveillance state; educated in schools that teach conformity and compliance; saddled with a debt-ridden economy on the brink of implosion; made vulnerable by the blowback from a military empire constantly waging war against shadowy enemies; policed by government agents armed to the teeth ready and able to lock down the country at a moment’s notice; and forced to march in lockstep with a government that no longer exists to serve the people but which demands they be obedient slaves or suffer the consequences.

And now, when they should be empowered to take their rightful place in society as citizens who fully understand and exercise their right to speak truth to power, they are being censored, silenced and shut down.

Consider what happened recently in Charlottesville, Va., when riot police were called in to shut down campus protests at the University of Virginia staged by students and members of the community to express their opposition to the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Palestine.

As the local newspaper reported, “State police sporting tactical gear and riot shields moved in on the demonstrators, using pepper spray and sheer force to disperse the group and arrest the roughly 15 or so at the camp, where for days students, faculty and community members had sang songs, read poetry and painted signs in protest of Israel’s ongoing war in the Palestinian territory of Gaza.”

What a sad turn-about for an institution which was founded as an experiment in cultivating an informed citizenry by Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, champion of the Bill of Rights, and the nation’s third president.

Unfortunately, the University of Virginia is not unique in its heavy-handed response to what have been largely peaceful anti-war protests. According to the Washington Post, more than 2300 people have been arrested for taking part in similar campus protests across the country.

These lessons in compliance, while expected, are what comes of challenging the police state.

Free speech can certainly not be considered “free” when expressive activities across the nation are being increasingly limited, restricted to so-called free speech zones, or altogether blocked.

Remember, the First Amendment gives every American the right to “petition his government for a redress of grievances.”

Along with the constitutional right to peacefully (and that means non-violently) assemble, the right to free speech allows us to challenge the government through protests and demonstrations and to attempt to change the world around us—for the better or the worse—through protests and counterprotests.

If citizens cannot stand out in the open and voice their disapproval of their government, its representatives and its policies without fearing prosecution, then the First Amendment with all its robust protections for free speech, assembly and the right to petition one’s government for a redress of grievances is little more than window-dressing on a store window—pretty to look at but serving little real purpose.

After all, living in a representative republic means that each person has the right to take a stand for what they think is right, whether that means marching outside the halls of government, wearing clothing with provocative statements, or simply holding up a sign.

That’s what the First Amendment is supposed to be about: it assures the citizenry of the right to express their concerns about their government to their government, in a time, place and manner best suited to ensuring that those concerns are heard.

Unfortunately, through a series of carefully crafted legislative steps and politically expedient court rulings, government officials have managed to disembowel this fundamental freedom, rendering it with little more meaning than the right to file a lawsuit against government officials.

In more and more cases, the government is declaring war on what should be protected political speech whenever it challenges the government’s power, reveals the government’s corruption, exposes the government’s lies, and encourages the citizenry to push back against the government’s many injustices.

Indeed, there is a long and growing list of the kinds of speech that the government considers dangerous enough to red flag and subject to censorship, surveillance, investigation and prosecution: hate speech, conspiratorial speech, treasonous speech, threatening speech, inflammatory speech, radical speech, anti-government speech, extremist speech, etc.

Clearly, the government has no interest in hearing what “we the people” have to say.

Yet if Americans are not able to peacefully assemble for expressive activity outside of the halls of government or on public roads on which government officials must pass, or on college campuses, the First Amendment has lost all meaning.

If we cannot stand peacefully outside of the Supreme Court or the Capitol or the White House, our ability to hold the government accountable for its actions is threatened, and so are the rights and liberties that we cherish as Americans.

And if we cannot proclaim our feelings about the government, no matter how controversial, on our clothing, or to passersby, or to the users of the world wide web, then the First Amendment really has become an exercise in futility.

The source of the protest shouldn’t matter. The politics of the protesters are immaterial.

To play politics with the First Amendment encourages a double standard that will see us all muzzled in the end.

The power elite has made their intentions clear: they will pursue and prosecute any and all words, thoughts and expressions that challenge their authority.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, this is the final link in the police state chain.

If ever there were a time for us to stand up for the right to speak freely, even if it’s freedom for speech we hate, the time is now.

ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at staff@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Israel places $760m ammunition orders with Elbit Systems in 2023

Palestine Action activists who threw red paint at Israeli Arms manufacturer Elbit Systems doorstep in London on May 20, 2022 were arrested. [Vudi Xhymshiti – Anadolu Agency]
MEMO | May 23, 2024

The Israeli Ministry of Defence placed approximately $760 million worth of ammunition orders with the defence giant Elbit Systems throughout 2023, according to a company statement released yesterday.

Many of these orders, which were not detailed by Elbit Systems, are part of a surge in procurement deals from local companies following 7 October.

However, Israeli occupation forces had already started purchasing ammunition from Elbit Systems before the ongoing war, including a $60 million order for 155mm ammunition in August 2023. By November, the Ministry of Defence reported making thousands of purchases totaling $1.64 billion from local companies.

Although the $760 million in ammunition contracts were placed in 2023, Elbit Systems indicated that the orders will be completed over a two-year period.

“As previously reported by the Company, since the beginning of the Swords of Iron war [the Gaza conflict], Elbit Systems has experienced a material increased demand for its products and solutions from the Israel Ministry of Defense compared to the demand levels prior to the war,” the company said.

It added that future developments were “difficult to predict” but noted that the heightened demand for its products could lead to “generate material additional orders.”

Moreover, the Israeli Ministry of Defence had requested a delay in the closure of an Elbit Systems factory in central Israel due to urgent need for increased armament production for the army.

Elbit Systems, a weapons manufacturing company, has long been accused of being complicit in the Israeli onslaught against the Gaza Strip. It is the largest Israeli military manufacturer and produces 85 per cent of the country’s land-based equipment as well as 85 per cent of drones used by the Israeli Air Force.

Since 7 October Israeli has killed more than 35,700 Palestinians — mainly children and women — and wounded nearly 80,000 others. More than seven months into the Israeli onslaught, vast swathes of Gaza lay in ruins amid a crippling blockade of food, clean water and medicine.

Israel stands accused of genocide at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which, in January, issued an interim ruling that ordered it to stop genocidal acts and take measures to guarantee that humanitarian assistance is provided to civilians in Gaza.

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Washington Digs In Deeper on Its Support for Israel

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • MAY 23, 2024

Judging by developments over the past several weeks, it would appear that nothing going on in Washington matters quite as much as defending Israel no matter what the Jewish state does. The White House and its befuddled leader President Joe Biden are obsessed with every twist and turn of the Israel and media shaped narrative, basing it on two key words “terrorism” and “antisemitism.” It plays out like this: Israel is a victim of terrorism from enemies seeking to destroy it and those who criticize the Israeli “self-defense” response are motivated by nothing less than antisemitism. It is also being claimed ludicrously in Washington that Israel is fully capable of investigating itself if war crimes actually were committed, something that it never has done, note particularly the lack of any follow-up in cases involving the recent killing of American citizens.

The necessity to support what are obviously parts of a suspect exculpatory narrative has administration clowns like Karine Jean-Pierre, Matthew Miller, John Kirby and Antony Blinken falling over themselves trying to explain developments using arguments which are frequently clearly based on lies. Sometimes the lies are huge, like the Blinken claims that the US foreign policy does not favor Israel and treats everyone the same, or that a thorough State Department investigation has failed to sustain the claims that Israel is engaging in war crimes to possibly include genocide.

The United States is also reflexively turning on any institution or government that has managed to anger Israel and its vitriolic psychopath leader Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The recent decision by Norway, Ireland and Spain to recognize Palestinian statehood brings to 145 the number of countries now taking that step. The move infuriated Netanyahu who summoned those countries’ ambassadors and called it a “reward for terror.” One wonders if the US will follow suit and either break diplomatic relations with those three otherwise friendly and even allied countries or in some other fashion punish or sanction them. That terrorism often operates in two directions and Israel has been a cruel, racist and capricious occupying power seems to have escaped the attention of the Washington punditry which is only engaged in finding in Israel a perpetual victim innocent of all charges.

And then there is the recent declaration by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague that it would be seeking warrants relating to possible war crimes for Netanyahu and his Defense Minister Yoav Gallant as well as the leader of Hamas Yahya Sinwar, plus his deputies Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh. This produced a scream of anguish from the White House which first argued that the ICC has no jurisdiction as Israel, like the US, is not a signatory to the Rome Treaty that founded the court in 2002 even though Palestine is. Joe Biden also said on Monday that “Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence—none—between Israel and Hamas.” He backed up this legally irrelevant statement with the usual assertion that “we will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.” The court, in fact, was created to address war crimes and genocides that had escaped normal investigation and prosecution and the 124 signatory nations to it are empowered to arrest those named individuals who have outstanding warrants if they should happen to enter their jurisdictions.

The second argument being made both by Netanyahu and the Biden squeakers is that Netanyahu and Gallant are demonstrably government officials, not terrorists, while Sinwar and his colleagues are, meaning that different standards must be used to judge their actions. Of course, the Jewish state’s mass murder of 40,000 civilians by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and its deliberate use of starvation just might fit most people’s definition of terror, but apparently is not convincing to Israel, the US Congress, White House and the Zionist controlled mainstream media.

Interestingly, as a side issue, since the United States is complicit in the war crimes being committed by Israel due to its funding and arming Netanyahu’s war, it too might wind up charged by the ICC. It would be a real wake-up call and might make many Americans, including myself, very happy to see Biden and Blinken in a prison cell! And by implication the ICC’s charges are also an indictment of Israel’s other Western allies. If Netanyahu is guilty of murder, extermination and deliberate starvation of civilians, so are those who arm and fund Israel while giving it political protection. That includes not only Joe Biden, but also Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer in Britain and other Western European leaders who are sitting on the fence and regretting the death rates while also providing arms to Netanyahu. For Washington, however, unlike its European allies, given that there is a real potential threat against the US political leadership, a very sharp response has been triggered. Twelve GOP Senators have issued a threat letter to the court that stated that the US would sanction justices and other staff working for ICC as well as their families, including blocking their ability to travel to or through the United States and going after their assets. It ended with “You have been warned!” Several other bills are also currently moving through Congress that will directly challenge the authority and mission of the court, all being done to protect Israel.

And there’s more. Israel, which is frequently described as a “great US ally,” which it is not, and a “democracy,” which it is also not, is currently ranked in opinion polls as the most despised country in the world followed by the United States, which is rated as the country most likely to start a major war. The US, through direct Treasury transfers and various other “charity” gimmicks and trade subsidies, gives Israel, a tiny country, a huge $10 billion or so per year. This year, to fund the war, the flow has been closer to $30 billion and Biden has vowed that his mission is to keep Israel “secure” even if it means having to ignore the Constitution of the United States by engaging in a war that is not declared and which did not develop from a demonstrable threat to the United States or its vital interests. Israel, hardly a vital US interest in the real world, was completely capable of destroying Gaza without US help, it just would have had to spend its own money to do so.

The power of the Israel Lobby is such that, not only are Americans denied the truth by a twisted war narrative, critters in Congress are coming out of the woodwork to see what they can do to help “America’s greatest ally!” Bills in Congress include one particularly bizarre one that would legalize deporting to Gaza student-protesters who are arrested or detained while out demonstrating “pro-Hamas,” which is inevitably described as the felony referred to as “material support of terrorism!” The Republicans in Congress are currently taking the lead in launching legislation to benefit the Israelis, including some schemes that are so strange (or illegal) that they are worth noting. On May 17, legislation was introduced and referred to the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. Cosponsored by two Republicans, Chief Deputy Whip Guy Reschenthaler of Pennsylvania and Ohio Representative Max Miller, H.R. 8445 went largely under the radar to provide direct support for those wishing to serve in the Israeli army. Miller is Jewish and Reschenthaler appears to be a Christian Zionist.

The Congressmen are proud of what they have done. “Over 20,000 American citizens are currently defending Israel from Hamas terrorists, risking their lives for the betterment of our ally,” said Reschenthaler in a recent statement. “This legislation will ensure we do everything possible to support these heroes who are standing with Israel, fighting for freedom, and combating terrorism in the Middle East.”

“As our closest ally in the Middle East continues to defend itself against terror, many brave Americans have decided to lend a hand,” added Miller. “I’m proud that this legislation extends important protections to those Americans who chose to risk their lives in the fight against terror.”

What H.R. 8445 aims to do is make a series of amendments to programs that ordinarily have only been available to active duty, reserve or National Guard members of the US military — the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) and Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA). These amendments would do something absolutely unprecedented in extending the benefits provided by these programs to American citizens serving in a foreign military, in this case that of Israel.

The SCRA grants American servicemembers “legal and financial protections against default judgments in civil legal cases, reduces interest rates on any pre-service loans to a maximum of 6 percent, and provides protections against home foreclosures. USERRA ensures US servicemembers are covered by relevant “civilian job rights and benefits for veterans, members of reserve components, and even individuals activated by the President of the United States to provide Federal Response for National Emergencies.”

In effect, H.R. 8445 is a measure designed to provide federal government legal and financial protections to US citizens serving with the Israeli military in both Gaza and on the West Bank. Mostly consisting of dual national settlers from the United States, there are more than 23,000 US citizens serving in the IDF as of February 2024. Some Israeli army reservists living in the US have also been summoned back to Israel to fight. Twenty-one Americans in IDF units have been killed inside Gaza, another one died along Israel’s northern border with Lebanon, and another was killed in Jerusalem while serving in Israel’s border police.

This number of American-Israeli soldiers is in part fed by the presence of an estimated 600,000 Americans living in areas that are under Israeli control, prior to October 7th. These settlers tend to be political hardliners supportive of the Netanyahu government’s war crimes and they often commit war crimes themselves directed against the local Palestinian population.

Pro-Israel sentiment runs deep in the White House but seemingly even more so in the GOP. Some Americans were rightly shocked when Representative Brian Mast of Florida shortly after the Hamas attacks on October 7th, arrived on the floor of the House of Representatives wearing his Israel Defense Forces (IDF) uniform. “As the only member to serve with both the United States Army and the Israel Defense Forces, I will always stand with Israel,” Mast wrote in a post on X, alongside several photos of him wearing the uniform.

Mast is a bit confused since as a US Congressman he is supposed to “always stand with America.” He should be impeached and shown the door, but, alas, there is little or no patriotic spirit in the federal legislature, which only asks itself “What have I done today for our good friend and ally Israel.” And worse might be coming. It is reported that “House Speaker Mike Johnson said on Wednesday that he’s ready to move forward with formally inviting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress but he’s waiting on Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to sign on.” Another Bibi victory parade in front of a cheering US Congress could be coming right up! It is the ultimate tragedy for our times that a war criminal should be thus glorified and many are beginning to think that the “wag the dog” relationship will inevitably lead to nuclear war triggered by the reckless Jewish state that will inter alia destroy the United States of America. It is definitely something worth thinking about it!

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | 2 Comments

Israeli occupation forces storm Al-Awda Hospital, force medical crews to evacuate

Palestinian Information Center – May 23, 2024

GAZA – The Israeli occupation forces (IOF) stormed Al-Awda Hospital in the northern Gaza Strip, forcing doctors and healthcare professionals to evacuate and detaining dozens on Thursday morning.

The IOF had besieged the medical facility in the Jabalia refugee camp for four days, blocking ambulances and all access for humanitarian groups. During the siege, Israeli tanks attacked the hospital multiple times with projectiles and machine guns.

Leaving their patients behind, a mass exodus of doctors, nurses and paramedics were ordered to walk westwards on foot to seek safety and shelter.

According to the Awda Health and Community Association, there are still 14 employees, 11 wounded civilians and two women taking care of children.

The Awda Association said that the administration of the hospital refused to evacuate the wounded unless there were ambulances to transport them.

In last December, the IOF had besieged the same hospital for 18 days, during which they bombed some of its floors and killed three of its medical employees.

No hospitals are currently operating in northern Gaza.

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Hamas: AP news report necessitates US apology to the resistance

Palestinian Information Center – May 23,2024

GAZA – The Hamas Movement said on Wednesday the press reports refuting the Israeli allegations that Palestinian resistance fighters committed sexual violence on October 7 is a new slap in the face of those promoting these baseless allegations.

This came after the Associated Press published a press report on Wednesday in which it confirmed that Israel’s allegations were not true and deliberately fabricated.

Hamas confirmed in a press statement that these allegations were used for the purpose of demonizing the resistance, and to hide the resistance’s humanitarian behavior and good treatment of Israeli prisoners who were detained in Gaza.

The Movement pointed out that the AP report is added to many international media and human rights reports that refute the Israeli allegations, proving they are mere lies and blatant fabrications.

Hamas said that all these reports require US President Biden and other officials in some European countries to apologize and stop repeating false accusations against the resistance and the Palestinian people.

The Movement called on Ms. Pramila Patten, the UN Special Envoy for Sexual Violence in Conflict Areas, to re-evaluate and review her report in which she accused the Palestinian resistance of committing sexual violence, after relying on Israeli narratives proven to be based on no professional investigation into those alleged crimes.

The AP revealed in a report published on Wednesday that many of the stories about sexual assaults on October 7 turned out to be untrue, quoting an Israeli volunteer who claimed that sexual assaults occurred during the October 7 attack as saying that he did not fabricate stories, but rather interpreted what he saw in a wrong way, indicating that he corrected that later.

The Israeli government and media claimed that Hamas fighters beheaded children and committed violations such as rape, but Hamas denied the matter and published video clips showing its fighters dealing with children in a friendly manner.

Another video clip showed Al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas, releasing a woman and her two children at the Gaza border.

The AP indicated that the religious non-governmental organization “ZAKA”, which was responsible for collecting bodies following the October 7 attack, admitted several months later that the stories that went viral on Hamas sexual assaults during the attack were incorrect.

A member of the Hamas political bureau, Ezzat Al-Resheq, said in a statement in English, “The world will realize the lies and falsity of the Israeli narrative that spreads misleading information about alleged atrocities committed by the Palestinian resistance.”

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Deception | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US pressing EU to curb Chinese exports

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. © Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images
RT | May 23, 2024

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has urged the EU curb cheap imports of Chinese green technology in what could push the bloc toward a trade war with the Asian country.

During a visit to Frankfurt on Tuesday, Yellen reiterated recent claims that China’s excess production capacity threatened both American and EU companies.

“China’s industrial policy may seem remote as we sit here in this room, but if we do not respond strategically and in a united way, the viability of businesses in both our countries and around the world could be at risk,” Yellen told reporters at the Frankfurt School of Finance and Management.

Yellen argued in favor of 100% tariffs, which are seen by many economists as protectionist and a potential trigger for wider trade wars with China. Last week, US President Joe Biden announced the quadrupling of import duties on Chinese electric vehicles to over 100% and a doubling of semiconductor duties to 50%.

In her remarks in Frankfurt, the Yellen told EU leaders it would be “more forceful to communicate to China as a group.”

The comments come a week after the Biden administration hiked tariffs on $18 billion in Chinese goods including electric vehicles, batteries, semiconductors, steel, aluminum, critical minerals, solar cells, ship-to-shore cranes, and medical products, while retaining tariffs on over $300 billion in goods imposed by the previous administration of Donald Trump.

The EU, which sells a greater share of exports to China than the US, has been pursuing a policy of “de-risking” rather than decoupling. However, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen hinted on Tuesday that the EU would join the US in imposing tariffs on Chinese goods.

“Should [it] be confirmed what I suspect, that such [Chinese] subsidies exist, then I can guarantee that the level of the duties we would impose is correspondent to the level of damage,” she said referring to an EU investigation into alleged state subsidies into the automotive industry in China.

Beijing has said it will retaliate against any tariffs with potential duties on products including French brandy, EU wine and dairy products.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, during his recent two-day trip to China, suggested that the US had imposed tariffs on Chinese-made EVs because they had improved in quality.

He suggested that Washington wanted to prevent strong competitors from entering the American market, and described the US approach as “unfair competition.”

Chinese officials have repeatedly denounced US trade and tech policy, describing it as “economic bullying.”

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

UK ‘fueling flames’ of Ukraine conflict – China

RT | May 23, 2024

The UK and its allies should stop “fueling” the Ukraine conflict instead of shifting the blame onto others, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said on Thursday. His comments came after London accused Beijing of providing “lethal aid” to Russia in its military effort against Kiev.

UK Secretary of State for Defense Grant Shapps claimed on Wednesday that Russia and China are “collaborating on combat equipment for use in Ukraine.” Shapps further alleged that he has “new evidence” provided by the US and British intelligence services which shows “lethal aid is now flying from China to Russia.”

Responding on Thursday Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang said Beijing “condemns the groundless and irresponsible smear campaign against China by British politicians,” noting that Shapps’ remarks have not been supported by Washington. Speaking at a daily White House press briefing on Thursday, the US national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said Washington had not seen evidence of China directly providing weapons to Russia.

“It is the UK, not China, that is adding fuel to the flames on the Ukrainian issue… As early as two years ago, Russia and Ukraine were close to reaching an agreement on ending the conflict, but it was precisely because of the hurdles placed by the UK and other parties that the conflict continues to this day,” Wang stated. He urged London to rethink its own role in the conflict instead of “attacking China without reason.”

Wang reiterated that Beijing has “always stood on the side of peace and dialogue,” and vowed that China will continue its work to promote a diplomatic solution for the conflict.

Beijing has adhered to a policy of neutrality on the Ukraine conflict, and has firmly rebuffed Western calls to impose sanctions on Russia, opting instead to boost trade with its neighbor. This has led to accusations from the UK and its NATO allies that Beijing is fueling Russia’s military effort by supplying it with dual-use components that can be used for weapons production.

Beijing has repeatedly denied the accusations, stating that Russia and China have a right to trade. Wang earlier accused the West, which itself supplies the bulk of Kiev’s military equipment, of hypocrisy. He suggested that the US, UK, and other Western powers should work on bringing Russia and Ukraine to the negotiation table, instead of “shifting the blame” onto China for the continued hostilities.

Moscow has consistently spoken out against Western military aid for Kiev, arguing that it merely prolongs the conflict without changing its eventual outcome. During an official visit to China earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin issued a joint statement with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in which they reiterated their stance that the Ukraine conflict “must be resolved by political means.”

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Leave a comment

America’s Constitutional State of Emergency

Perpetual Presidential Emergency Powers and the Undermining of the Constitutional Balance of Power

By Dennis Kucinich | The Kucinich Report | May 23, 2024

More than 23 years ago, George W. Bush, Jr. signed  Presidential Proclamation 7463 declaring that a “national emergency exists by reason of the terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center, New York, New York, and the Pentagon, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.”

The White House has demonstrated, in several administrations, both Democrat and Republican, “threat inflation” for the sake of spending endless money on wars, and manipulating fears to hold on to power to continue to spend endless money on even more wars in the ultimate protection racket.

As a result, the constitutional system of checks and balances is being obliterated in favor of an Imperial Presidency, and, as the Constitution is eroded, so too, are our liberties.

The recent chipping away at our First Amendment and Fourth Amendment rights can be traced directly to the psychology of a “State of Emergency,” which licenses shredding of freedom.

Presidents no longer ask Congress for explicit permission to go to war, as the Constitution requires, under Article 1, Section 8.  Courts have held that once Congress appropriates money for wars, that is  tantamount to congressional approval.

The increased spending for war has militarized our culture, proliferates enemies, creates violence at home and abroad.

We must break this cycle of fear, the endless wars and the emergency powers for Presidents who are not accountable to the Congress, which is directly elected by the people.

Those of us who witnessed the events of 9/11, up close, or from a distance, will never forget the imminent danger, the fear, the grief, the loss, the uncertainty that gripped us in those days. Nor will we forget those whose lives were sacrificed, or those who gave their lives in service to humanity on that day, or those who died following long-term illnesses which began during and after the attacks 23 years ago.

That is why it may surprise some that on September 7, 2023, President Joe Biden proclaimed, “I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency previously declared on September 14, 2001, in Proclamation 7463, with respect to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.”  

23 years later and trillions upon trillions of dollars spent to “make us safer” and we are still in a “State of Emergency,”  facing the same terror threats?  

America has been in and continues to be in a State of Emergency which has endowed the Presidency with broad powers and undermined the Constitutional role of Congress, while placing presidential emergency declarations on par with congressional declarations of war, under Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.  Presidents from Bush, Jr., to Biden have all capitalized on declarations of a state of emergency.

Congress is a co-equal branch of government. America’s Founders did not design the Congress to be subordinate to the Presidency, but strong presidents and weak Congresses have created that condition.

According to Congressional Research Service (CRS), there are 106 laws which further empower the executive branch following a presidential declaration of a “National Emergency.”  The Brennan Center for Justice has identified a total of 136 expanded executive powers.  

The emergency powers may not have been used explicitly but their use is authorized once a “National Emergency” is declared.  Among the emergency powers of the President, (as cited by CRS) without a need for congressional permission:

  • Executive ability to detail members of the armed forces to foreign countries, without congressional approval.
  • Undertake military construction.
  • Carry out military construction with NATO funds.
  • Order “Ready Reserve” to active duty for two years, without their consent.
  • Additional penalties for “gathering, transmitting or losing defense information.”
  • Lift prohibition on infectious medical waste being dumped in the ocean.
  • Seize, shutdown or appropriate broadcast stations.
  • Suspend laws concerning production and transportation of chemical, biological  and “warfare agents.”

We live in a forever state of emergency, with forever wars, forever fears, forever siphoning off our tax dollars.

Remember:

–    The Bush Administration lied when it claimed that Iraq was behind 9/11,  but proceeded to characterize Iraqis as terrorists in an attempt to justify killing one million Iraqi citizens.

–    Since 9/11, over $8 trillion dollars of our $34 trillion dollar national debt is attributable to wars which never had to be fought, wars which put the lives of America’s brave sons and daughters on the line.

–    The United States shelved diplomacy in favor of weaponry as a means of international relations.

–    At present the USA spends close to one trillion dollars a year for supporting a war machine and that nearly 60% of all discretionary spending goes for preparation for war.

–    The 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, (NIE) which was the (closely held) product of all US intelligence agencies, did not identify Iraq as a major threat, because it was not. The publicly available 2024 Annual Threat Assessment (ATA) of the U.S. Intelligence Community brings forth two paragraphs, out of a 41 page report, regarding “global terrorism.”

There was no discussion in the ATA of the basis for President Biden’s most recent declaration of a national emergency and the “continuing and immediate threats” even though the ATA report was being drafted at about the time that the President  continued the “National Emergency” in the name of a 23-year fight against “terrorism.”

The CATO Institute, whose pocket Constitution I carried with me during my years in Congress, suggests amending the National Emergencies Act to rein in Executive power by requiring congressional approval, and putting expiration dates on emergency powers.

Does the US have enemies?  Yes.  Should we be on our guard?  Yes.

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”

We should also be vigilant against government manipulating our love of country, playing with our fears, in order to control us, or to use us to support the continued erosion of our US Constitution and advance the malevolent ambitions of the military industrial complex, of which President Eisenhower warned in 1961.

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Militarism | | Leave a comment

Half of Moldovans Say Gov’t Policy on Gagauzia Wrong, Over 50% Distrust NATO – Poll

Sputnik – 23.05.2024

CHISINAU – Half of Modova’s residents consider the government’s policy toward the autonomous region of Gagauzia wrong, while more than half do not trust NATO, Moldovan social research company IMAS found in a fresh survey published on Wednesday.

Asked what they thought of the policy of the ruling Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) toward Gagauzia, 50% or respondents said it was wrong, 29% said it was right and 21% said they could not answer the question.

Respondents were also asked to evaluate their level of trust in various international institutions, including the World Health Organization, NATO, the European Parliament, the European Union, World Bank, the UN and others. Speaking of NATO, 18% said they had “little” trust, 42% said they had “no to very little” trust, 21% said they trusted the military alliance and only 9% said they trusted it a lot. Additionally, 2% of Moldovans said they they’d never heard of NATO and 8% said they could not give an answer.

The poll was conducted among 1,088 people from May 2-19 with a maximum margin of error of 3%. Its results were broadcast live on the Realitatea website.

Gagauzia, where most people speak Russian as well as Gagauz, a Turkic language, declared independence from Soviet Moldova in 1990 but was integrated into the newly-established Republic of Moldova in 1994. The Gagauz people are Orthodox Christians of Turkic origin. Gagauzia has traditionally favored rapprochement with Russia, while Chisinau has set a course toward European integration.

According to the country’s constitution, Moldova has neutral status, but from 1994 it has been cooperating with NATO, and with the accession to power of PAS, which is informally led by President Maia Sandu, military exercises involving the US, the UK, German and Romanian military have become more frequent. Sandu has told local media that Moldova should continue discussing rapprochement with NATO, as this allegedly helps strengthen the country’s defense capabilities.

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | 1 Comment

Georgian PM accuses EU of ‘blackmailing’ him with assassination threat

Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze. © Tobias SCHWARZ / AFP
RT | May 23, 2024

Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze has claimed that a European commissioner told him he could end up suffering the same fate as Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, who survived an assassination attempt last week.

In a Facebook post on Thursday, Kobakhidze said that the unnamed commissioner warned him during a recent phone call that the West would take “a number of measures” against him if his government pressed ahead with a law requiring foreign NGOs in Georgia to disclose their funding.

“While listing these measures, he mentioned: ‘you see what happened to Fico, and you should be very careful’,” he wrote.

Fico was shot multiple times as he met with supporters outside a government meeting in the town of Handlova on May 15. He was rushed to hospital, underwent emergency surgery, and is currently recuperating from his injuries. His would-be assassin – a 71-year-old poet who allegedly disagreed with Fico’s suspension of military aid to Ukraine – has been charged with attempted murder.

Georgia’s parliament passed the ‘Transparency of Foreign Influence Act’ last week. The law requires NGOs, media outlets, and individuals receiving more than 20% of their funding from abroad to register as entities “promoting the interests of a foreign power” and disclose their donors.

While the act has been vetoed by Georgia’s pro-Western president, Salome Zourabichvili, parliament is expected to override the veto.

May 23, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | 2 Comments

« Previous Entries