Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

EU disunited over $7-billion weapons delivery to Ukraine – Borrell

RT | May 28, 2024

There is still no agreement on a $7 billion (€6.6 billion) EU military aid package for Ukraine, the bloc’s foreign-policy chief Josep Borrell has said, according to remarks made to the press that were published on Tuesday.

The remarks follow a meeting this week of EU foreign and defense ministers focusing on the Ukraine conflict.

According to Borrell, there are “seven legal acts to be approved” in order to mobilize the billions in military aid under the Ukrainian Assistance Fund.

“This has not been possible [for] quite a long time because there is not [an] agreement for the consensus needed,” he explained.

“You know that we need unanimity – unanimity [has] not [been] there for months,” he admitted.

According to Politico, diplomats had hoped to have the new package ready ahead of this week’s meetings in Brussels but this didn’t happen due to resistance from Hungary.

Budapest has been a vocal critic of unbridled Western support for Ukraine and has refused to provide any military aid to Kiev, either directly or through the EU. Hungarian officials have repeatedly called for a ceasefire, insisting that EU sanctions against Russia have failed to undermine its economy and have instead boomeranged against the bloc.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said on Monday that his government remained committed to blocking the €6.6 billion military aid package, despite the “ruckus” among fellow EU foreign ministers.

According to Borrell, an EU plan to use profits from frozen Russian sovereign assets to buy weapons for Ukraine has also stalled due to resistance from Budapest.

Western nations have seized some $300-billion-worth of Russian assets, most of which are held in the EU. Brussels’ plan, which Borrell strongly supports, would provide some $3.25 billion (€3 billion) for Ukraine this year alone. Moscow has warned that it will retaliate, should its property be “stolen” by the US and its allies.

The EU and its member states have so far mobilized nearly $35 billion in military support for Ukraine, according to data published on the European Commission’s website. This includes over $6.5 billion under the European Peace Facility to support the delivery of military equipment.

In March 2024, the European Council established a dedicated Ukrainian Assistance Fund worth almost $5.5 billion.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Former Biden Homeland Security Official Criticizes Free Speech, Cites “Disinformation” Impact on Election Security

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | May 28, 2024

A former Biden administration official has declared that disinformation around elections is “becoming the norm rather than the exception.”

Samantha Vinograd, until recently of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), also asserted that these days, because of what she considers to be election disinformation, “there is an unprecedented level of physical threats” while the US information ecosystem is “incredibly vulnerable.”

Dramatic and alarmist statements like this may be necessary to justify the rest of Vinograd’s message, which in effect attacks free speech, as it is legally protected in the US.

Appearing on CBS, Vinograd – who was until last December Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Counterterrorism and Threat Prevention – warned that the First Amendment might protect free speech, but that engaging in free speech is apparently not “cost-free.”

The Face the Nation hosts framed the problem as, essentially, federal laws (the Constitution) protecting speech, but the damage being done at the state level – and then what states, who organize elections, can do to fix that “problem.”

Spreading lies about candidates, as they put it, was given as an example of legal, protected speech becoming an issue by having the ability to create “a threat at the state level” – and asked Vinograd who she thought was supposed to correct the situation.

Vinograd – who has been bouncing between various administrations (including those of Bush and Obama, and private companies like Goldman Sachs and Stripe before landing at Biden’s DHS) – seemed to suggest that Big Tech (i.e., social media companies) should be assisting the government.

The federal government said Vinograd, “should not be the omnipresent fact checker for the American people.”

And even though, according to her, the government is debunking information about elections that is deemed to be inaccurate, social media companies “should be thinking about what kinds of election disinformation violate their terms of service.”

It’s difficult not to take this as a not-so-veiled added pressure on social platforms to not only continue with censoring content but perhaps expand it in terms of what qualifies as election disinformation.

Either way, Vinograd is in favor of enlisting “every American” to help out as well (although it is not clear in what specific way), invoking even the concept of patriotic duty.

And Vinograd did not miss the opportunity to assert that election misinformation threats are now of such magnitude as to present a national security issue.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Russia’s Growing Media Influence in the World Sparks Alarm in the West

Sputnik – 28.05.2024

Russian broadcasters such as Sputnik may be outperforming their Western counterparts in terms of media coverage abroad, UK-based non-profit called Association for International Broadcasting (AIB) claims.

In its written evidence submission to the UK Parliament International Development Committee’s Inquiry into Future funding of the BBC World Service, AIB stated that “the global distribution of Russia’s international [media] operations is possibly greater than that of Western broadcasters.”

Sputnik and RT TV and radio services are being broadcast in many of the Global South countries – “including, but not limited to Venezuela, Syria, Mexico, Guatemala, India, Pakistan and South Africa” – and these media operations help Russia spread its influence around the world, AIB laments.

All this praise, however, should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt, seeing how the main purpose of the AIB’s document appears to be securing more British government funding for the BBC.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Russophobia | , , | 2 Comments

US says Israeli massacres in Rafah not to impact aid, policy

Al Mayadeen | May 28, 2024

The Biden administration merely expressed deep concern on Tuesday over a deadly Israeli airstrike in Rafah, Gaza, labeling it “beyond tragic.” However, despite the death and paramount destruction, officials stated that the recent massacres do not signify a major operation that crosses established red lines.

National Security Council spokesman John Kirby, addressing reporters at the White House, reiterated the declared Israeli claim that the bombing of refugee tents in Rafah, which was said to be a safe area, was a “mistake.”

“The Israelis have said this is a tragic mistake,” Kirby noted when asked if the weekend’s events constituted the “death and destruction” US officials had warned against, completely adopting the Israeli narrative without the slightest bit of due diligence.

Kirby emphasized the absence of a specific “measuring stick” or quota for such incidents but stressed the importance of avoiding a major ground operation in Rafah that could lead to extensive damage and significant loss of life. “We have not seen that yet,” he said, continuing to ignore the civilian deaths and practically saying they would only count in light of an invasion.

When questioned about whether recent ground operations in Rafah would lead to the US withdrawing military aid, Kirby affirmed, “I believe that’s what I’ve been saying here.”

Vice President Kamala Harris, speaking at a ceremonial event in Washington, called the Israeli airstrike on Sunday “beyond tragic,” after it caused a fire in a tent camp in Rafah, killing 45 Palestinians, many of whom were burnt to death.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | 1 Comment

Israel’s Mossad chief threatened ICC prosecutor and family in covert intimidation campaign

MEMO | May 28, 2024

The former head of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency, personally threatened Fatou Bensouda, the former chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), and her family in a series of covert meetings, the Guardian has revealed in a shocking report exposing the clandestine campaigns of the apartheid state to thwart ICC probes into war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Israeli leaders.

Several sources have revealed that Yossi Cohen personally threatened the ICC‘s then chief prosecutor, Bensouda, and her family in a series of clandestine meetings aimed at pressuring her to abandon her inquiry into possible war crimes committed by Israel against Palestinians in the occupied territories.

The covert campaign is said to have been authorised at the highest levels of the Israeli government, with Cohen using bullying, blackmail and intimidation tactics against Bensouda. Sources say Cohen raised questions about Bensouda’s security and that of her family in a menacing manner on at least three occasions between late 2019 and early 2021.

In one disturbing incident, Cohen allegedly showed Bensouda photographs taken covertly of her husband during a trip to London. On another occasion, he suggested that proceeding with a full investigation would be detrimental to her career. One source briefed on the meetings said Cohen told Bensouda:

“You should help us and let us take care of you. You don’t want to be getting into things that could compromise your security or that of your family.”

The threats were part of a coordinated smear campaign by Israel to undermine Bensouda, which also involved Mossad actively seeking compromising information on the prosecutor and her family members. The spy agency obtained transcripts of an apparent sting operation against Bensouda’s husband, which Israeli diplomats then unsuccessfully attempted to use to discredit her.

Bensouda was so alarmed by Cohen’s increasingly threatening behaviour that she took the extraordinary step of briefing a small group of senior ICC officials about the incidents. Three sources familiar with her formal disclosures said she revealed Cohen had pressured her on several occasions not to proceed with the criminal investigation.

Mossad’s targeting of Bensouda was just one part of a nearly decade-long covert “war” waged by multiple Israeli intelligence agencies against the ICC. Israel’s actions underscore the lengths it is willing to go to shield its citizens from prosecution for their involvement in war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Palestinian territories.

However, Cohen’s intimidation tactics ultimately failed to deter Bensouda or the court. In March 2021, she announced the opening of a formal investigation. The move infuriated the Israeli government, which had long opposed the ICC inquiry and even vowed to try to dismantle the court.

Bensouda began her work to open a war crimes investigation into Israel’s actions following the 2014 onslaught on Gaza, despite facing intense pressure and opposition from Israel and the US. In December 2019, the Gambian lawyer announced that she had concluded her preliminary examination and determined that all the statutory criteria under the Rome Statute had been met to open a formal investigation. This move was met with further condemnation and threats from Israel and the US, with the administration of former US President Donald Trump imposing sanctions on Bensouda and other ICC officials in response.

In February 2021, the ICC’s pre-trial chamber ruled that the court did indeed have jurisdiction over the Palestinian territories, paving the way for Bensouda to open a formal investigation in March 2021. The landmark decision was hailed as a victory for accountability and justice by Palestinian officials and human rights groups. Bensouda’s term as chief prosecutor ended in June 2021, leaving her successor, Karim Khan, to take up the investigation and build on her work to hold those responsible for war crimes in Palestine accountable.

The investigation has now taken a dramatic turn under Bensouda’s successor, Karim Khan. Last week, Khan announced he was seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, alongside three Hamas leaders, over the country’s conduct in Gaza. The landmark case marks the first time the court has taken action against leaders of a country closely allied with the US and Europe.

Khan himself has not been spared from threats, warning recently that he would not hesitate to prosecute “attempts to impede, intimidate or improperly influence” ICC officials. While declining to comment on specific allegations, an ICC spokesperson confirmed that Khan’s office had been subjected to “several forms of threats and communications that could be viewed as attempts to unduly influence its activities”.

The revelations about Israel’s covert operation against Bensouda have been met with outrage from legal experts and former ICC officials. Efforts by the Mossad to threaten or pressure the prosecutor could amount to offences against the administration of justice under the Rome Statute, the treaty which established the court.

One individual briefed on Cohen’s activities accused him of using “despicable tactics” in a ultimately futile effort to intimidate Bensouda, likening his behaviour to “stalking”. Another source said: “The fact they chose the head of Mossad to be the prime minister’s unofficial messenger to [Bensouda] was to intimidate, by definition. It failed.”

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

The Drive for War

By Craig Murray | May 18, 2024

The collective shrug with which the Western media and political class noted the attempted assassination of Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico has been telling.

Can you imagine the outrage and emotion that would have been expressed by Western powers if not Fico but a pro-Ukraine, anti-Russian leader within the EU had been attacked? The new orders for weapons that would have been presented to the arms manufacturers, the troops that would have been deployed, the sabres that would have been rattled?

Instead we have the media telling us that Fico opposed sending arms to Ukraine and opposed threatening Russia. We are told he did not accept the mainstream narrative on Covid vaccinations. The media do not quite say he deserved to be shot, but they come very, very close.

Fellow EU leaders followed correct form in making statements of shock and disgust at the attack on Fico, but they were formal and perfunctory. The “not actually one of us” message was very clear.

There are now an ordered set of neoliberal beliefs to which anybody in a Western nation participating in public affairs must subscribe, or they are beyond the pale.

Not to subscribe to all of these beliefs makes you a “populist”, a “conspiracy theorist”, a “Putin puppet” or a “useful idiot”.

These are some of the “key beliefs”:

No. 1) Wealth is only created by a small number of ultra-wealthy capitalists on whom the employment of everybody else ultimately depends.
No. 2) The laws governing financial structures must therefore tend to concentrate wealth to these individuals, so that they may deploy it as they choose.
No. 3) State-created currency must only be concentrated in and distributed to private financial institutions.
No. 4) Public spending is always less efficient than private spending.
No. 5) Russia, China and Iran pose an existential threat to the West. That comprises both an economic threat and a physical, military threat.
No. 6) Colonialism was a boon to the world, bringing economic development, trade and education to people of inferior cultures.
No. 7) Islam is a threat to Western values and to world development.
No. 8) Israel is a necessary project for spreading Western values to the uncivilised Middle East.
No. 9) Security necessitates devoting very substantial resources to arms production and the waging of continual war.
No. 10) Nothing must threaten the military and arms industry interest. No battle against corruption or crime can override the need for the security military industrial complex to be completely unchallenged and internally supreme.

Dependent Orthodoxies

Within this architecture of belief, other orthodoxies hang dependent, such as the correct way to respond to a complex pandemic, or support for NATO and impunity for the security services. (Support for Israel is probably better portrayed as a dependent point, but with the subject of Gaza so prominent at the moment I have figuratively moved it into the main structure.)

Any deviation on any point of belief is a challenge to the entire system, and thus must be eradicated. You will note there is no room whatsoever, within this architecture of thought, for values like freedom of speech or freedom of assembly. They simply do not fit. Nor is it possible within this architecture to incorporate actual democracy, which would give people a choice of what to believe.

If you accept this architecture of thought, then you must argue that the genocide in Gaza is a good thing, and it threatens the entire structure if you state that it is not a good thing. That is why we have witnessed the spectacle of politicians defying and then repressing their own people, willing to place all of their political capital at the service of genocidal Zionism.

Words struggle to convey the horrors we have all seen from Gaza, and in no way does it lessen the terrible suffering nor the extent of the crime to observe that it has caused a major rift in the neoliberal belief system which cannot be hidden from the people.

Gaza has ramifications leading to questioning throughout the system. Why is Tik Tok being banned, to stop people getting information on Gaza? Why is it a problem that the platform is owned by China?

What has China done that makes it an enemy? China has no military designs on the West. Of recent purchases most of us have made of physical goods, a high proportion have come from China. Why is an important trade partner an “enemy”?

Why is Russia our enemy? The notion that the Russian army is going to land on the Wash is utterly implausible. The Russian state, over centuries and wildly differing regimes, has never had the slightest desire to invade the British Isles. In the U.K., under various governments, for almost three centuries charlatans have been claiming a threat of Russian invasion to justify higher defence expenditure.

Why the need to have “enemies” at all?

Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010. His coverage is entirely dependent on reader support.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

Putin warns West about consequences of attacking Russia

RT | May 28, 2024

The West needs to understand that long-range strikes on Russian territory with their weapons would represent an escalation with “serious consequences,” Russian President Vladimir Putin has said.

Speaking to reporters at the end of his two-day visit to Uzbekistan, Putin addressed the recent Ukrainian demands for NATO to permit the use of their weapons in attacks on Russia and the comments by the US-led bloc’s head, Jens Stoltenberg, appearing to endorse this.

“To be honest, I don’t know what the NATO secretary-general is saying,” Putin told reporters, adding that Stoltenberg “did not suffer from any dementia” when he worked constructively with Russia as the prime minister of Norway (2005-2013).

“This constant escalation can lead to serious consequences. If these serious consequences occur in Europe, how will the US behave, bearing in mind our parity in the field of strategic weapons? Hard to say. Do they want global conflict?”

Putin explained that long-range precision strikes require space reconnaissance assets – which Ukraine does not have, but the US does – and that their targeting is already done by “highly qualified specialists” from the West, without Ukrainian participation.

“So, these representatives of NATO countries, especially in Europe, especially in small countries, must be aware of what they are playing with,” the Russian president said, noting that a lot of these countries have “a small territory and a very dense population.”

Putin reminded reporters that their colleagues in the West never reported on the Ukrainian attacks on Belgorod and other Russian regions along the border, only about the Russian advance on Kharkov.

“What caused this? They did, with their own hands. Well, then, they will reap what they have sown. The same thing can happen if long-range precision weapons are used,” the Russian president added.

Asked if Russia was refusing to negotiate with Ukraine, Putin told reporters that such claims by the West were baffling.

“We don’t refuse!” he said. “I’ve said it a thousand times, it’s like they don’t have ears!”

The Ukrainian side initialed an agreement with Russia in March 2022, then publicly reneged and refused to negotiate any further, Putin explained. He described Kiev’s current “peace conference” effort in Switzerland as an attempt to get some kind of international buy-in for their entirely unrealistic “peace platform,” which isn’t working out.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine’s Use of Chemical Weapons Became Systematic With US’ Silent Consent – Russian MoD

Sputnik – 28.05.2024

The use of poisonous substances and chemical riot control agents by Ukrainian forces has become systematic with the tacit approval of Washington, Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, the head of the Russian Armed Forces’ radiation, chemical and biological defense troops, said on Tuesday.

“With Washington’s tacit approval, the use of poisonous substances and chemical riot control agents by Ukrainian militants during their special operations has become systematic,” Kirillov said at a briefing.

“Numerous cases of the Ukrainian side using the irritant substance chloropicrin, often mixed with chloroacetophenone, have been recorded in the Donetsk region, in the settlements of Bogdanovka, Gorlovka, Kremenovka, and Artyomovsk (Bakhmut),” he added.

Kirillov emphasized that while chloroacetophenone is classified as a chemical riot control agent, chloropicrin is listed in Schedule 3 of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Kirillov recalled that Ukrainian neo-Nazis first used the dangerous substance chloropicrin against Euromaidan opponents during the siege of the Trade Union House in Odessa on May 2, 2014.

“There are grounds to believe that the action carried out in Odessa was premeditated, meticulously planned to exploit the effects of the toxic substances used, aimed at inflicting maximum casualties,” Kirillov added.

He noted that Russian law enforcement agencies conducted an investigation that identified the perpetrators of the terrorist act.

According to Kirillov, the use of this toxic substance was indicated by the militants’ possession of pre-prepared filtering gas masks, the appearance of characteristic yellow-green smokefire broke out at the Trade Union House , and attempts to mask the use of toxic chemicals with the aftermath of the fire.

Recently, Kiev used gas grenades containing the irritant substance CS against Russian servicemen.

“The Russian side has recorded and confirmed cases of the Ukrainian Armed Forces using munitions not only loaded with chloropicrin but also with other chemical irritants. Gas grenades of American production containing the substance CS were employed against Russian servicemen in the Krasny Liman and Boguslav regions,” Kirillov said.

“Hand grenades with chemical irritants, labeled Teren-6, were dropped from Ukrainian UAVs onto positions of Russian troops, and a stash containing these munitions was discovered in the territory of Donetsk. According to testimony from Ukrainian prisoners of war, assault groups of the Ukrainian Armed Forces are equipped with such grenades,” the official added.

CS is an irritant chemical. It is a white, solid, slightly volatile crystalline substance with a pepper-like odor. It is sparingly soluble in water, moderately soluble in alcohol, and freely soluble in acetone and chloroform. Under combat conditions, it is dispersed as an aerosol. CS at low concentrations is irritating to the eyes and upper respiratory tract, while at high concentrations it causes burns to exposed skin areas and in some cases paralysis of the respiratory and circulatory systems leading to death.

The Ukrainian armed forces also used the chemical agent BZ against Russian servicemen.

“Ukrainian armed formations also use other listed chemicals. We refer to cases of use of the combat chemical agent BZ against Russian servicemen in August 2022 and silyl acid in February 2023,” he said at the briefing.”

Kirillov noted that Ukrainian Armed Forces also use other other listed chemicals.

“We are referring to instances of using the combat chemical agent BZ against Russian servicemen in August 2022 and silyl acid in February 2023,” he explained.

“The statements from Ukrainian military representatives about their possession of phosphorus organic compounds, including analogs of the combat chemical agent Tabun (GA), raise particular concern,” Kirillov added.

He added that Ukraine is requesting antidotes and gas masks in excessive quantities, indicating plans for the use of toxic substances.

“The requests from Ukraine for the supply of antidotes, gas masks, and other personal protective equipment in volumes that are clearly excessive testify to plans for large-scale use of toxic substances,” Kirillov said.

In addition, Ukrainian nationalists continue in their attempts to destroy chemically hazardous facilities in the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.

“The attempts by Ukrainian nationalists to destroy chemically hazardous facilities in the territories of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics persist, thereby creating a threat of chemical contamination to the civilian population of the regions,” Kirillov said.

He recalled that industrial facilities such as Zarya in the city of Rubezhnoye, Azot in Severodonetsk, and the Koksokhim plant in Avdeyevka have repeatedly been subjected to massive rocket attacks.

US Continue to Develop New Chemical Weapons

The Pentagon continues to develop new and upgrade existing non-lethal chemical munitions and other chemical weapons delivery systems.

“According to available information, the Pentagon continues to develop new and upgrade existing non-lethal chemical munitions and other chemical weapons delivery systems, such as 120mm mortar rounds, 155mm artillery shells, and 120mm tank rounds,” Kirillov said at the briefing.

“No less than $10 million is allocated annually for their procurement for use in combat zones,” he added.

OPCW turns a blind eye to the fact that the US is still storing highly toxic reactive masses in chemical weapons destruction facilities. “I would like to draw your attention once again to the fact that according to the deadlines set by the OPCW, the United States should have completed the destruction of its declared chemical weapons stockpiles by 2007. However, despite the economic potential, they did not achieve this until 2023, twice postponing the deadline, citing financial, organizational, and technical difficulties. The United States still retains highly toxic reactive masses at chemical weapons destruction facilities. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons does not seem to notice this fact,” he said.

The US has also developed a legal framework that regulates a wide range of scenarios for the use of chemical agents by the US armed forces, Kirillov added.

“Washington has not only not renounced the use of chemical agents, but has also enshrined the possibility of their use at the legislative level. Thus, the United States has adopted a combined arms manual on the use of non-lethal weapons,” Kirillov told reporters, adding that it defines the procedure for the use of non-lethal chemical weapons by military units during special, humanitarian, anti-terrorist and peacekeeping operations.

If previously the US talked about using such weapons only in response to the enemy chemical aggression, an important aspect of the new rules is the ability to use toxic chemicals unilaterally,” the official said.

“Thus, the United States has created a legal framework that regulates a wide range of scenarios for the use of chemical weapons by the armed forces,” Kirillov said.

The United States allocates at least $10 million annually to purchase non-lethal chemical munitions for use in combat areas, the official said, adding that the Pentagon continues to develop new and modernize existing non-lethal chemical munitions.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Remembering Those Who Died for Our Government

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | May 28, 2024

Each Memorial Day, countless Americans recite the standard mantra that has been inculcated within their minds from the first grade of the public (i.e., government) schools to which their parents were forced to send them: American soldiers who died in America’s wars died to protect our freedoms and defend our country.

Each Memorial Day, it is worth reminding ourselves that such is simply not the case. American soldiers who died in those wars died for our government, not to protect our freedoms or our country.

And, yes, our government and our country are two separate and distinct entities, a phenomenon reflected by the Bill of Rights, which expressly protects our country from our government.

Afghanistan. The Taliban government never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so. The reason that the U.S. government went to war against Afghanistan was that the Taliban regime refused to comply with President Bush’s unconditional extradition demand, which the Taliban regime had the right to do given that there was no extradition treaty between the United States and Afghanistan. Thus, U.S. soldiers who died in Afghanistan died for our government, not to protect our freedoms or our country.

Iraq. Iraq never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so. Thus, U.S. soldiers died for our government, not to protect our freedoms or our country.

Vietnam. North Vietnam and the Vietcong never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so. U.S. soldiers died for our government, not to protect our freedoms or our country.

Korea. North Korea never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so. U.S. soldiers died for our government, not to protect our freedoms or our country.

World War II. While Japan did attack the United States, it was not with the intent of invading and conquering the United States. Japan’s aim was simply to knock out the U.S. Pacific Fleet to secure oil from the Dutch East Indies. The attack was a response to President Roosevelt’s oil embargo, whose aim was to provoke Japan into attacking the United States, as a “back door” to getting the U.S. embroiled in the European War against Germany, which the vast majority of Americans opposed. While a German victory over the United States in Europe combined with a Japanese victory in the Pacific might well have threatened people’s freedom here at home, it is worth reminding ourselves that American soldiers died as a result of FDR’s success in securing U.S. intervention into the war.

World War I. Germany never attacked or invaded the United States and had no interest in a war against the United States. President Wilson intervened in the European conflict with two war aims: make this the war to end all wars and to make the world safe for democracy. Thus, U.S. soldiers died for our government, not to protect our freedoms or our country.

Spanish-American War. The Spanish Empire never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so. Thus, U.S. soldiers died for their government, not to protect our freedoms or our country.

It’s also worth reminding ourselves that the government for which U.S. soldiers have died conscripted many of them to fight in the war in which they died. When a government has to force people to fight its wars, that’s a pretty good sign that soldiers have actually died for nothing.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism | , | 1 Comment

Arrest these insane NATO warmongers!

By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 28, 2024

Incredibly, the world is being pushed to the abyss of nuclear war by nonentity Western numbskulls who are not even elected.

Jens Stoltenberg, the civilian head of the NATO military bloc, is the latest blockhead to advocate for the United States to permit the targeting of Russia with long-range weapons.

The Norwegian figurehead, we are led to believe, made the conceptual breakthrough (how much was he paid and by whom or what was the blackmail used?) by telling the Economist magazine that the Ukrainian regime should henceforth be officially allowed to use NATO missiles to hit Russia.

However, with the logical skills of a hacked-up chopping block, Stoltenberg claimed that such a move would not lead to an escalation in war between Russia and NATO because the weapons were not being fired from NATO countries.

So Stoltenberg thinks it’s somehow feasible to turn Ukraine into a silo for launching ballistic missiles at Moscow and yet for Russia not to perceive NATO nations as a legitimate target?

As if to further reassure, he added: “We don’t have any intention to send NATO ground troops into Ukraine because our purpose… has been two-fold, to support Ukraine as we do, but also to ensure that we don’t escalate this into a full-scale conflict.”

The barefaced cheek of Stoltenberg and other Western figures is that, in their arrogant mindsets, what’s going on is not escalation because they say it is not escalation. It’s like hitting someone with a punch in the face and then having the brass neck to tell the person you didn’t hit them because you said so.

The former Norwegian prime minister, who is soon to leave his NATO job to take up a plum post as a central banker, is the latest Western voice to up the ante in the U.S.-led proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken – a wannabe rock guitarist who hasn’t a clue what he is singing about – has also joined the list of gung-ho politicians urging for Ukraine to be given a license to strike Russian territory with long-range NATO-supplied weapons.

Britain’s Foreign Minister Lord David Cameron, the Eton-educated dimwit, has decided that Ukraine has “every right” to use British-supplied Storm Shadow cruise missiles to hit targets inside pre-war Russian borders.

Other political figures de facto egging on nuclear war are U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a religious fanatic who believes God is an anticommunist, as well as Victoria Nuland, the former American diplomat who midwifed the 2014 coup in Kiev that ushered in the current NeoNazi regime.

All of them are urging the Biden administration to abandon official restrictions on the Ukrainian proxy regime using Western missiles to hit Russia.

Ukraine’s puppet president Vladimir Zelensky, who cancelled elections but continues to hold office, has remonstrated with his Western handlers to be given a free hand to strike deep into Russia.

The distinction of “official permission” is a cynical sleight of hand. The Ukrainian side with NATO logistics and weapons has already been targeting inside Russia.

Oil infrastructure and military bases inside Russia’s pre-war borders have been frequently hit with missiles and drones. It is inconceivable that such targeting could be achieved without NATO’s involvement, including boots-on-the-ground advisors.

Nevertheless, the rhetorical difference is significant. For the Biden administration to officially give the green light for such attacks would mark a grave and explicit escalation – and one that Russia could not afford to ignore.

Russia has already warned that NATO weapons hitting its territory would result in retaliation beyond Ukraine. That could mean a Russian air strike on NATO members.

This week Moscow began exercises for deploying tactical nuclear weapons. Russia’s publicly avowed nuclear doctrine defines the permissibility of using such weapons with the criterion of the Russian nation facing a strategic threat, even if that threat is posed by enemies using conventional arms.

The West and its Ukrainian proxy are pushing at that catastrophic threshold. In the past week, one of Russia’s early warning ballistic radar systems in southwest Krasnodar region was reportedly hit by a drone attack. One purpose of the raid was to disable Russia’s ability to intercept the long-range ATACMS conventional warheads that the U.S. is ready to supply Ukraine. Another much more sinister interpretation is the West is probing the capability of Russia’s nuclear defenses.

When this proxy war erupted more than two years ago with Russia’s intervention in Ukraine after eight years of relentless NATO arming and provocation of the NeoNazi regime, there were anxious elite discussions among NATO members about whether to send “lethal weapons” and not just helmets, night-vision goggles, and radios.

Two years on, the NATO deliberation has shifted beyond sending tanks, F-16s fighter jets, and cruise missiles, and is now taking an official position endorsing the deep-striking of Russia with ballistic warheads.

Incredibly, the people continually pushing the envelope are a minuscule minority in Western societies who are not even elected – Stoltenberg, Blinken, Cameron, Nuland, among others. These ventriloquist dolls are doing the bidding of the masters of war, the military-industrial complex, and the banking elite.

The elite warmongers argue that Ukraine has its hands tied behind its back because it can’t bombard Russia at will. In reality, the country with its hands tied is Russia. It has to listen to the likes of Stoltenberg and his ilk advocating for strikes on Russia from NATO’s firing positions in Ukraine – and yet Russia is somehow supposedly not permitted to retaliate against NATO.

Surely, a fatal red line is imminent. Insanity rules among the Western elites as the world is pushed towards the abyss.

The world’s majority needs to issue arrest warrants for these privileged criminals… before it’s too late.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

The US Is Playing A Dangerous Game Of Nuclear Chicken With Russia

BY ANDREW KORYBKO | MAY 26, 2024

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski revealed in his latest interview with The Guardian that “The Americans have told the Russians that if you explode a nuke, even if it doesn’t kill anybody, we will hit all your targets [positions] in Ukraine with conventional weapons, we’ll destroy all of them. I think that’s a credible threat.” If true, and there’s no reason to suspect that he simply made that up, then this amounts to the US playing a dangerous game of nuclear chicken with Russia.

As was explained in this analysis here about why Russia is presently undertaking tactical nuclear weapons exercises, it hopes to deter NATO from a conventional military intervention in Ukraine, barring which it wants to signal that it could resort to these arms if those forces cross the Dnieper. From Russia’s perspective, the reportedly 100,000-strong force that NATO is preparing to invade Ukraine if its “red lines” are crossed could pose a threat to its territorial integrity if they attack its newly unified regions.

So long as they stay on the western side of the Dnieper, then there’d be no reason for Russia to countenance using tactical nuclear weapons, but they could realistically be employed in the event that they cross the river and credibly appear to be approaching that country’s new borders. In that scenario, Russia would have reason to drop them on the invading forces as a last resort out of self-defense to preemptively neutralize this threat in accordance with its nuclear doctrine.

Having brought the reader up to speed about the context within which Sikorski shared the US’ planned response to Russia potentially exploding nukes in Ukraine, it should now be easier to understand why this amounts to a dangerous game of nuclear chicken. Essentially, the US wants Russia to stand down from its signaled intent of possibly using tactical nuclear weapons if NATO’s reportedly 100,000-strong invasion force crosses the Dnieper, which could occur if Russia achieves a military breakthrough.

If this sequence of events unfolds – the front lines collapse, NATO conventionally intervenes in Ukraine, its reportedly 100,000-strong invasion force crosses the Dnieper, Russia drops tactical nukes on them, and then the US hits all of its forces in the newly unified regions – then World War III would break out. There’s no way that Russia would sit back and let the US directly attack any target within its borders since it’ll either respond in a tit-for-tat fashion or jump to the chase by launching a nuclear first strike.

The only way to avoid this worst-case scenario is for NATO to eschew its invasion plans under any circumstances, including a potential Russian military breakthrough. If they still go through with them, however, then they should keep their forces on the western side of the Dnieper and ideally rely on a neutral mediator like India to convey to Russia that they don’t intend to cross even if they approach it. Anything less is a dangerous game of nuclear chicken that could literally provoke the apocalypse.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment