Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Alternative Media Giants Sue The Censorship Industrial Complex

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | May 29, 2024

In a new lawsuit, Webseed and Brighteon Media have accused multiple US government agencies and prominent tech companies of orchestrating a vast censorship operation aimed at suppressing dissenting viewpoints, particularly concerning COVID-19. The plaintiffs, Webseed and Brighteon Media, manage websites like NaturalNews.com and Brighteon.com, which have been at the center of controversy for their alternative health information and criticism of government policies.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.

The defendants include the Department of State, the Global Engagement Center (GEC), the Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and tech giants such as Meta Platforms (formerly Facebook), Google, and X. Additionally, organizations like NewsGuard Technologies, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), and the Global Disinformation Index (GDI) are implicated for their roles in creating and using tools to label and suppress what they consider misinformation.

Allegations of Censorship and Anti-Competitive Practices:

The lawsuit claims that these government entities and tech companies conspired to develop and promote censorship tools to suppress the speech of Webseed and Brighteon Media, among others. “The Government was the primary source of misinformation during the pandemic, and the Government censored dissidents and critics to hide that fact,” states Stanford University Professor J. Bhattacharya in support of the plaintiffs’ claims.

The plaintiffs argue that the government’s efforts were part of a broader strategy to silence voices that did not align with official narratives on COVID-19 and other issues. They assert that these actions were driven by an “anti-competitive animus” aimed at eliminating alternative viewpoints from the digital public square.

According to the complaint, the plaintiffs have suffered substantial economic harm, estimating losses between $25 million and $50 million due to reduced visibility and ad revenue from their platforms. They also claim significant reputational damage as a result of being labeled as purveyors of misinformation.

The complaint details how the GEC and other agencies allegedly funded and promoted tools developed by NewsGuard, ISD, and GDI to blacklist and demonetize websites like NaturalNews.com. These tools, which include blacklists and so-called “nutrition labels,” were then utilized by tech companies to censor content on their platforms. The plaintiffs argue that this collaboration between government agencies and private tech companies constitutes an unconstitutional suppression of free speech.

A Broader Pattern of Censorship:

The lawsuit references other high-profile cases, such as Missouri v. Biden, to illustrate a pattern of government overreach into the digital information space. It highlights how these efforts have extended beyond foreign disinformation to target domestic voices that challenge prevailing government narratives.

Webseed and Brighteon Media are seeking both monetary damages and injunctive relief to prevent further censorship. They contend that the government’s actions violate the First Amendment and call for an end to the use of these censorship tools.

As the case progresses, it promises to shine a light on the complex interplay between government agencies, tech companies, and the tools used to control the flow of information in the digital age. The outcome could have significant implications for the future of free speech and the regulation of online content.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Case of 14-Year-Old Vaccinated for COVID Against His Will Headed to North Carolina Supreme Court

By John-Michael Dumais | The Defender | May 28, 2024

The North Carolina Supreme Court on May 23 agreed to hear the case of a Guilford County teenager who was given a COVID-19 vaccine against his will and without parental consent in August 2021, according to Carolina Journal.

The court’s decision to take up the case comes after a North Carolina appeals court ruled against the teen and his mother in March, upholding a lower court’s dismissal of their lawsuit.

Tanner Smith, then 14 years old, was instructed to get tested for COVID-19 at a Guilford County Schools vaccination site in order to continue playing football.

Despite Smith’s objections and the lack of parental consent, clinic workers administered a dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, which at the time was available only under  emergency use authorization (EUA).

In its unanimous ruling against Smith and his mother, Emily Happel, the appeals court found that the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act shielded the defendants — Guilford County Board of Education and Old North State Medical Society — from liability in the lawsuit.

Commenting on the case, attorney Ray Flores, senior outside counsel for Children’s Health Defense, emphasized its significance for parental rights and the scope of the PREP Act’s liability shield.

“The North Carolina Supreme Court is the highest court so far to review parental rights vis-à-vis the PREP Act,” he told The Defender.

Flores argued that while the PREP Act is a “turbo-charged product liability immunity statute,” it should not shield “willful misconduct, fraud, breach of contract, undisclosed ingredients, false advertising — and certainly must not continue to abolish parental rights.”

Court recognized ‘egregious’ conduct but was ‘constrained’ by PREP Act

On August 19, 2021, Guilford County Schools sent a letter to Smith’s mother and stepfather about a “recent COVID-19 cluster” involving his football teammates. The letter recommended Smith report for a COVID-19 test to continue participating on the team.

The letter stated that testing would occur at Northwest Guilford High School on August 20, 2021, and that Old North State Medical Society would conduct the testing.

When Smith arrived at the testing site, workers gave him a form to fill out, which he believed to be related to the COVID-19 test.

Unbeknownst to Smith and his family, the site also operated as a COVID-19 vaccination clinic. Clinic workers attempted to contact Smith’s mother to obtain consent for administering the vaccine but were unsuccessful.

Despite the lack of parental consent and Tanner’s own objections, one of the clinic workers instructed another to “give it to him anyway,” and Tanner was injected with a dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.

In August 2022, Emily Happel and Tanner Smith sued the Guilford County Board of Education and Old North State Medical Society, alleging battery and violations of their constitutional rights.

The plaintiffs argued that administering the COVID-19 vaccine without consent violated Tanner’s bodily autonomy rights and Emily’s parental rights under the North Carolina Constitution.

However, in February 2023, a lower court dismissed the case, citing the immunity provided by the federal PREP Act. The defendants argued that the PREP Act shielded them from liability for claims related to the administration of covered countermeasures, such as the COVID-19 vaccine, during a declared public health emergency.

The North Carolina Court of Appeals’ March decision affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the lawsuit.

In its opinion, the court acknowledged the “egregious” nature of the conduct alleged in the case but found itself “constrained” by the broad immunity provided by the PREP Act.

The court held that both the Guilford County Board of Education and Old North State Medical Society were covered persons under the PREP Act and that the immunity applied to claims related to the administration of the COVID-19 vaccine.

The court noted that the PREP Act preempted state laws, including North Carolina’s statute requiring parental consent for EUA vaccines to minors.

‘We will win in the end’

Following the Court of Appeals decision, Emily Happel and Tanner Smith petitioned the North Carolina Supreme Court to hear their case.

The plaintiffs contended that the lower courts’ decisions have rendered North Carolina’s parental consent statute “totally useless” and “a law of aspiration, with no consequence for its blatant violation.”

David “Steven” Walker, attorney for the plaintiffs, wrote that the case:

“… involves legal principles of major significance to the jurisprudence of the State — the interplay between duty of the courts of North Carolina to remedy constitutional and other legal violations and a federal law that defendants purport forecloses that opportunity. …

“The trial court and the Court of Appeals interpreted the PREP Act so broadly as to shield nearly every act, no matter how egregious, from any legal consequence.”

On May 23, 2024, the North Carolina Supreme Court agreed to take up the case, focusing solely on the specific issue from Happel and Smith’s appeal concerning “Whether the trial court and the Court of Appeals erred when they determined that the PREP Act provided immunity to the defendants for constitutional violations and pre-empted all state law claims.”

The court’s decision to hear the case sets the stage for a potential landmark ruling on the scope of the PREP Act and its impact on state laws protecting parental rights.

Eight Republican members of the North Carolina House of Representatives filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs, urging the Supreme Court to hear the case.

The legislators, represented by attorney B. Tyler Brooks of the Thomas More Society, argued that they have a “special interest in protecting the fundamental rights of the parents they represent and for whom the General Assembly has recently enacted legislation on the very subject embraced by this appeal.”

The law in question, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-21.5(a1), specifically prohibits the conduct of the clinic workers in this case. It states:

“Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, a health care provider shall obtain written consent from a parent or legal guardian prior to administering any vaccine that has been granted emergency use authorization and is not yet fully approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration to an individual under 18 years of age.”

Flores said the legislators’ “expertly drafted” brief “dismantles the lower courts’ finding that PREP extinguishes applicable state law” and that its “mere filing … reaffirms my conviction that we will win in the end.”

Flores is no stranger to challenging the PREP Act’s liability shield. In May 2023, he sued the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) on behalf of George Watts, Jr., a 24-year-old who died from myocarditis complications after receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

Flores argued the DOD engaged in willful misconduct by continuing to distribute the EUA version of the vaccine after the FDA granted full approval to Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine.

EUA vaccines have a lower bar for safety and effectiveness. Watts delayed taking the vaccine until after FDA approval of Comirnaty, but the DOD did not make the approved vaccine available.

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

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | 2 Comments

The WHO pandemic treaty: dead but not buried

BY KEVIN BARDOSH | UNHERD | MAY 28, 2024

As the World Health Assembly began this week in Geneva, it was announced that member states had failed to reach agreement on a new, legally binding pandemic treaty.

Despite not reaching the deadline after more than two years of negotiations, the WHO Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, remained confident that the 194 member states would eventually reach an agreement, perhaps in six to 12 months. Health diplomats are also confident that amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) — a parallel set of global governance rules, including a new tiered system to declare a pandemic — will go ahead this week. We will have to wait and see.

Front and centre in the failure of the treaty this week were disputes between the Global North and South regarding pathogen sharing and access to the new tests, treatments and vaccines that would be developed by the pharmaceutical industry in the event of a new pandemic. This rekindled longstanding neocolonial sentiments, especially among African countries, concerned that access to pharmaceutical products would be dependent on fulfilling treaty obligations.

Recent analyses have also shown that, to meet basic targets of the treaty, developing countries would need to heavily invest in pandemic preparedness and response to the tune of some $31 billion per year. This level of financing would take away vital budgets from existing health systems and skew national priorities. Is this really in the best interest of developing countries?

Other criticisms of the treaty have come from US and UK conservatives. Senate Republicans recently called for the Biden administration to reject the treaty and shift focus to “comprehensive WHO reforms that address its persistent failures without expanding its authority”. With US elections set for November, negotiators in Geneva are well aware that Donald Trump may withdraw from the WHO if elected, as he did in 2020. In the UK, Nigel Farage also came out against the treaty, expressing concern about future WHO-supported lockdowns: “The WHO can be a force for good in the world, but only if it returns to its noble principles and core objectives.”

Yet the WHO has vehemently rejected any concerns about the treaty infringing on “national sovereignty”, previously calling them “fake news, lies, and conspiracy theories”. Mainstream news outlets — from the New York Times to Reuters — have reiterated these talking points. Recent articles in Health Policy Watch called for critics, or rather “spreaders of disinformation”, to be treated like an “organised crime” network. Any legitimate criticism is unwelcome.

Those in global health leadership want bolder steps to manage the “infodemic”. But advocates of the treaty have regularly engaged in misinformation themselves. Take, for example, a recent video from former UK prime minister Gordon Brown, now WHO Ambassador for Global Health Financing. In the video, Brown makes the bold claim that “the world needs agreement on the pandemic accord” since “no one is safe anywhere until everyone is safe everywhere”. The latter statement is a perfect illustration of the propaganda tools used by governments in the name of “health” during Covid: utopian, illogical, and Orwellian.

The negotiations and media framing of them, therefore, represent the cultural ethos of biosecurity, which prioritises “making the world safer” (security) over all other values and, given our collective experiences during Covid, basic principles of logic and Western democratic norms.

The WHO is also, this week, seeking an unprecedented increase of its budget by $7 billion over four years to respond to crises. Yet the organisation has failed to conduct a serious post-mortem of the failures of the Covid pandemic response. Instead, media outlets and health authorities complain about “mistrust” and “populism” without any mention of the harms of vaccine mandates and coercive and ineffective lockdowns, school closures, mask mandates, and other Covid measures. We must march forward into a global treaty, no questions asked.

Yet this problem is now systemic in global public health. Many preeminent Covid evaluation reports are deeply flawed. A recent paper called the UK Royal Society’s assessment, published last year, “irrelevant and weak from a methodological point of view but also dangerously misleading in terms of policymaking. This is how misinformation occurs.”

Many countries, the UK and US included, are still in the process of evaluating their Covid response. Others have none planned. It seems more than reasonable that the global public health community should first be obliged to take a serious, evidence-based look at just how wrong the experts got it from 2020-22. But to do that, we need the WHO to be less concerned about fighting “conspiracy theorists” and “far-Right nationalists” and more concerned about earning back the trust of the world’s public. It will be a long road ahead.

Kevin Bardosh is a research professor and Director of Research for Collateral Global, a UK-based charity dedicated to understanding the collateral impacts of Covid policies worldwide.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

America’s Ugly History with the International Criminal Court

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | May 30, 2024

On May 20, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court announced that he was seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant as well as for Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh, and Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri.

Officials in Washington lashed out against the court and began preparations to pressure the ICC to back off on pursuing the arrests. Netanyahu and Gallant, the United States insisted, should be left alone or left to Israel’s courts.

The Hamas officials should be held accountable, according to the State Department, but not by the ICC. “The Israeli government should hold them accountable on the battlefield. And if not a battlefield, then a court of law,” State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said. “We absolutely believe that Hamas should be held accountable. That could either be through the prosecution of the war effort by Israel. It could be by being killed. It could be by being brought to justice in an Israeli court.”

Congress is looking to take the lead in punishing the ICC. House Speaker Mike Johnson said, “Congress is reviewing all options, including sanctions, to punish the ICC and ensure its leadership faces consequences if they proceed.”

During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary of State Antony Blinken was asked if the White House would cooperate on legislation that “includes the question of the ICC sticking its nose in the business of countries that have an independent, legitimate, democratic judicial system.” Blinken responded that he is “committed to doing that.” He added, “We want to work with you on a bipartisan basis to find an appropriate response” and that “there’s no question we have to look at the appropriate steps to take to deal with, again, what is a profoundly wrong-headed decision.”

Blinken also told the Senate Appropriations subcommittee he would “welcome” working on “bipartisan” sanctions against the ICC. However, the White House may be considering other steps to deal with the ICC that do not include sanctions.

On May 28, White House spokesperson John Kirby said that sanctions were “not the right answer” to deal with the ICC arrest warrants. It is not that the White House would not punish the ICC, but that “Sanctions on the ICC are not an effective or appropriate tool to address U.S. concerns,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, adding that the White House “will work with Congress on other options to address the ICC overreach.”

Still, the White House remains firmly committed to thwarting the ICC deliberation into issuing an arrest warrant for Netanyahu. “Let me be clear,” Biden said, “We reject the ICC’s application for arrest warrants against Israeli leaders.”

Washington has centered its argument on the grounds that a democratic nation’s legal system should be given priority to act first. Marjorie Cohn, emerita professor of law at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and dean of the People’s Academy of International Law, told me that “the ICC operates under the principle of ‘complementarity.’ That means the Court will assume jurisdiction over a case only if the home country of the accused is unable or unwilling to hold him legally accountable.”

The White House also argued that Israel is not a member of the ICC, so the court lacks jurisdiction over Tel Aviv. Additionally, the Biden administration said that because the United States is not a member, it should not have to support or follow the court.

But, the U.S. fully supported the recent ICC arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over actions taken in Ukraine. Russia and Ukraine are also not members of the ICC.

Biden endorsed the arrest warrant for Putin. “Well, I think it’s justified,” he said. “But the question is—[the ICC is] not recognized internationally by us either. But I think it makes a very strong point.” Blinken urged all member nations of the ICC to comply with Putin’s arrest warrant. Asked if European allies should “turn over” Putin, Blinken answered, “I think anyone who’s a party to the court and has obligations should fulfill their obligations.”

A reporter asked if the administration’s policy for Israel would impact the Defence Department’s work “with the ICC to provide evidence about Ukraine.” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin answered, “Regarding the question of whether or not we’ll continue to provide support to the ICC with respect to crimes that are committed in Ukraine, yes, we continue that work.”

The separate standard for friends and enemies has consequences beyond the ICC. It nourishes the perception of the global majority and the newly emerging multipolar world that the U.S. has abandoned the universal application of international law for the self-serving application of the rules-based order. In doing so, it further damages the United States’ standing in the world and its pursuit of hegemony.

The ICC had jurisdiction to issue an arrest warrant for Putin because Ukraine accepted ad hoc jurisdiction of the court in 2014, meaning that crimes against humanity or genocide, but not crimes of aggression, committed on Ukrainian territory can be tried by the ICC.

But Palestine is an observer state in the UN General Assembly and also granted the ICC jurisdiction over its territory, including Gaza. On February 5, 2021, the ICC ruled that it does have jurisdiction over Palestine. What’s more, unlike Ukraine, Palestine is a signatory to the ICC’s Rome Statute.

The United States does not recognize the ICC. In 1998, 160 countries attended a conference to formulate the Rome Statute. Many of those countries advocated for universal jurisdiction that would give the new court jurisdiction over crimes committed anywhere in the world. The U.S. blocked that universal jurisdiction and insisted that the ICC have jurisdiction only over crimes committed in countries that voluntarily signed the Rome Statute. This was a loophole the U.S. planted for future exploitation.

In 2000, President Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute but did not send it to the Senate to be ratified. Two years later, President George W. Bush withdrew the signature. That ensured that the ICC could not prosecute Americans for war crimes.

That has always been an important concern for the United States. Current and former officials told The New York Times in 2023 that “American military leaders oppose helping the court investigate Russians because they fear setting a precedent that might help pave the way for it to prosecute Americans.” Following the decision to seek an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, Mike Johnson said, “If the ICC is allowed to threaten Israeli leaders, ours could be next.”

To ensure that never happens, in 2002, the Bush administration enacted the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act, or the “Hague Invasion Act,” as it came to be known. The act authorizes the U.S. to use “all means necessary… to bring about the release of covered U.S. persons and covered allied persons held captive by, on behalf, or at the request of the Court.”

To be doubly sure, the Act banned “the provision of U.S. military assistance… to the government of a country that is a party to the court.” That prohibition was extended in 2004 by the Nethercutt Amendment to include several other types of economic assistance. NATO countries and major non-NATO allies were exempt. For all other countries—unless the president deemed it important to the national security of the United States– there was only one route to exemption. That was by entering a Rome Statute Article 98 agreement with the United States, ensuring that they agree not to surrender Americans to the ICC, “preventing the International Criminal Court from proceeding against United States personnel present in such country.”

WikiLeaks revealed hundreds of cables that show how the U.S. used the threat of sanctions to force countries into Article 98 agreements. A confidential December 2002 U.S. cable from Honduras states, “The U.S. will help those countries that sign Article 98 agreements and cut aid to those that do not.”

The United States sought agreements from 77 countries who joined the ICC “to make extraditions of Americans to the Hague impossible.” They exerted significant pressure. Romania’s foreign minister said he “can’t remember anything they put so much weight or interest into.”

The European Union told member states that entering into an Article 98 agreement with the U.S. “would be inconsistent” with their ICC obligations. Human Rights Watch said the American goal was “to exempt U.S. military and civilian personnel from the jurisdiction of the ICC” and that signing the “impunity agreements… would breach their legal obligations under the Rome Statute.” In the end, at least one hundred countries signed Article 98 agreements with the United States.

The long list of sanctioned countries eventually boomeranged against the United States, leading countries to look to Russia and China for help and impeding the U.S. wars on terror and drugs. They were gradually dropped.

In 2020, when the ICC tried to investigate the American use of torture against terrorism detainees, the U.S. imposed sanctions on court officials. The Biden administration revoked the sanctions order in 2021. When the ICC resumed its investigation into Afghanistan, it decided to focus on the Taliban and the Islamic State in Khorasan Province and allow alleged U.S crimes to “take a back seat.”

Whatever the U.S. intent is—whether it is to protect its friend or itself—the hypocritically selective application of its policy undermines the universality of international law. It also reinforces the perception of the global majority and the newly emerging multipolar world that the U.S. is no longer a sponsor of international law but of a rules-based order that is invoked when it suits them or their friends and is not invoked when it doesn’t.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

What Has Israel Done for Americans in the Past Week?

They’ve taken our money & weapons and made us complicit as war criminals

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • MAY 30, 2024

The Jewish Virtual Library asserts that “The US-Israel relationship is based on the twin pillars of shared values and shared interests. Given this commonality of interests and beliefs, it should not be surprising that support for Israel is one of the most pronounced and consistent foreign policy values of the American people.” That is, of course, the big lie among the many that constitute the tie that binds the two countries together. The back-up lies, regularly spouted in Congress, are that Israel is a democracy and an ally. It is, of course neither, as it is a Jews-only apartheid regime that has no fixed borders and no reciprocal security arrangements with the US. Israel and its promoters never tell the truth, particularly when they are conning the United States government into providing more money and more weapons, as has been occurring both openly and secretly over the past eight months during the horrific ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.

So how does it happen, particularly as Israel is manifestly evil in terms of its treatment of the Palestinians as well reckless in its aggression directed against neighbors like Lebanon and Syria? That it is not also bombing Egypt and Jordan is largely attributable to the billions of dollars in aid that the US gives to those countries conditional on their maintaining a wobbly modus vivendi with the aggressive and nuclear armed Zionists.

Given the wonderful comfort zone that Israel has established largely due to US protection in international bodies like the United Nations and the UN Security Council as well as vis-à-vis the several international courts and humanitarian aid agencies, Israel has been regularly attacking and otherwise killing its neighbors without ever being held accountable for anything. It is a pattern that is particularly visible now as the slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza approaches the 50,000 mark, consisting mostly of women and children. The recent outrageous assault on the Tal al Sultan neighborhood refugee camp near Rafah, which killed at least 45 and included graphic photography of a burning child’s body without a head as well as other still flaming and smoking corpses, was directed against homeless Gazans living in tents who had previously been driven from their destroyed homes in the northern part of the country. And to the eternal shame of Biden and company, the slaughter used US-made and supplied weapons.

Add to the carnage the famine that is now threatening to kill tens of thousands more Palestinians due to the Israeli government and its extremist settlers blocking the entry of food supplies and the scale of Israel’s chosen genocidal actions can be appreciated. Netanyahu’s claim that the army only used small munitions in Rafah and was targeting two Hamas officials hiding among the civilians was as usual a lie and the camp otherwise had no significance as a military target. Israel has followed up on the attack with another bombing run on nearby al-Mawasi the following night which killed more than twenty and the Jewish state’s tanks are now penetrating deep into the city no doubt preceding an infantry assault that could kill tens of thousands more. They have also cut off access to the entry point from Egypt to the south of Rafah. One senior Israeli government official is now predicting that the war will continue until the end of the year, another seven months, success apparently being measured by arriving at a point when Hamas and all other hostile Palestinians will be either killed or deported.

Following the Rafah slaughter, there no doubt occurred the mandatory phone call exchange between a sneering Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the grinning mental giant President Joe Biden, no doubt including Bibi’s expressing thanks for the American weaponry reportedly used in the killing. It’s really great when you don’t even have to pay for the weapons used to murder someone. To show his appreciation of the Israeli gratitude Biden no doubt muttered a phrase engraved on his prefrontal lobes, i.e. “Israel has a right to defend itself!” The transnational interaction presumably also produced the typical flatulence that emerges from the White House propaganda machine. Biden, in a bid to make it look like he was actually pressuring Israel to reduce civilian casualties, had previously warned that a full-scale invasion of Rafah would be hard to support and would be considered a “red line” issue, but it was a political stunt that he never intended to carry out apart from one delayed arrival of a shipment of the super heavy 2000 pound bombs. Many Americans, indeed a majority, are rightly deeply upset about the support of the US military and government for Israel’s latest war and an addled Biden is now counting votes while pretending to have humanitarian concerns.

Even so, the White House did not go so far as to blame the Israelis for their overreach. At a press conference, Biden’s National Security communications officer John Kirby, who reportedly was an Admiral once upon a time, possibly on the Good Ship Lollypop, articulated how “You’ve all seen the images, they’re heartbreaking, they’re horrific. There should be no innocent life lost here as a result of this conflict. Israel, of course, has a right to go after Hamas… As a result of this strike on Sunday, I have no policy changes to speak to. It just happened. The Israelis are going to investigate it. We’re going to be taking great interest in what they find in that investigation.” Sure you are John, and it will be a great and thorough investigation by Israel just like it was in the cases of the dead Americans on board the USS Liberty, peace activist Rachel Corrie, journalist Shireen Abu Akleh and, most recently, the 80 year old American citizen Omar Abdalmajeed As’ad who was beaten to death by elements in Israel’s “most moral army in the world” after being detained for the crime of having been walking in his West Bank village.

Why are Joe and company such dedicated dissimulators of the truth when it comes to Israel and all its malignant works? It is because of an entity known euphemistically as the Israel Lobby but which I much prefer to describe more accurately as the Jewish Money In Politics Entity (AIPAC, ADL and others) supported by the Scofield Bible Zio-Christian Crowd headed by clowns like House Speaker Mike Johnson. I know it’s a mouthful but that is what it is. Israel does not obtain US uncritical and overwhelming support because its behavior deserves it or because it serves American interests but rather because of all that money judiciously applied to corrupt the government at all levels and to buy and control the message of the media and entertainment industries. Professor John Mearsheimer, co-author of 2007’s The Israel Lobby, has long claimed that “Israel’s backers will go to silence anyone who challenges their narrative.” But according to Mearsheimer, something changed because of October 7th: “The big difference is that the lobby’s activities are completely out in the open today. I think few people knew much about the lobby back then. And very few people knew much about the lobby’s influence on American foreign policy, especially as it applies to the Middle East. And I think that we helped to expose that and now more people understand what’s going on. The lobby is now forced to operate much more out in the open.”

Pari passu, all that corruption judiciously applied is serving to strip Americans of their fundamental rights, particularly freedom of speech, as it will soon be illegal to criticize either Jews or Israel. And don’t expect any relief coming from the national election in November if there is a GOP victory in the form of Donald Trump and possibly Nikki Haley or some creature like that as a Ziocon replacement part. Trump sold out on every conceivable issue for Israel back in 2016-20 and would do it again. The Republicans have been striving to become the new party of “Israel First” as they want to steal away all that cash and media support from the Democrats. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has been calling for nuking Gaza while Nikki has been in Israel signing bombs to be dropped on the Pals with a purple marker: “Finish Them! America [Loves] Israel.” Her urging of a foreign military funded and armed by the US government to kill refugees living in tents after the destruction of their homes might be considered the cruelest way to endorse mass murder, but hey, Israel always comes first in the thinking of most Congressmen and those who are unfortunately sitting in the White House.

There is also legislation in the pipeline being pushed by the Republicans opposing any attempts by the White House to try to condition behavior by suspending weapons shipments to good friend and ally Israel, not that Biden would really go that route. The Congress has also been putting intense pressure on universities to clamp down on Pro-Palestinian groups on campus by claiming they are antisemites while not doing the same vis-a-vis the sometimes violent supporters of Israel, and the universities are obliging, canceling the graduation of protesters or even expelling them. Donald Trump has recently told a largely Jewish audience that he will deport any anti-Israel protesters if he becomes president, an interesting proposal as most of those demonstrating are native born American citizens and many of them are Jewish. He has also called on Israel to “finish” what it is doing to the Palestinians, clearly meaning that they should be exterminated or forced to emigrate, and has also told Jewish donors that today’s atmosphere in the US is very much like “before the holocaust.” No longer the loudmouth who called for an end to foolish wars, Trump has now in addition said that if he had been president when the Russian intervention into Ukraine had taken place, he would have bombed them. Likewise for China if it were to attack Taiwan. Either move would almost certainly start World War 3 even though neither Ukraine nor Taiwan is a vital security interest of the US but Trump is too stupid to know that. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is, for his part, urging that the US release for deployment in Ukraine advanced missile systems that would be able to strike deep into Russia. As dumb ideas go that it about as dumb as it gets, as the Russians have already indicated that they would respond with everything they have, meaning US military targets worldwide would be considered fair game for retaliation possibly using nuclear weapons.

We have truly been entering into something that might be entitled the Psycho Zone if it were to be made into a movie. War is being treated by the sociopaths in Washington, Israel and parts of Europe as though it were something to be casually entered into in one’s spare time. There is even talk in both the US and UK as well as in some other European capitals about initiating active conscription at a close to war level so we freedom lovers can sock it to those Russkies and Chinks good and proper. And as for the Palestinian trash, the Biden pontoon bridge that cost $320 million appears to be broken but it can still be used to carry out Netanyahu’s plan to push a bunch of screaming Ay-rabs into the Mediterranean Sea to get rid of them for once and for all. Hopefully they can’t swim and the Chosen ones will again be able to take possession of what was given to them by Yahweh. Or something like that.

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 30, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | 2 Comments

The Israeli regime is in legal trouble, but what does this actually mean?

By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | May 30, 2024

Within the space of one week, the Israeli regime was hit with two major legal blows, first from the International Criminal Court (ICC) and then from the International Court of Justice (ICJ). While these measures may not actually translate to any tangible changes on the ground for now, the chronic effects may prove irreversible.

Prior to the launch of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood by the armed wing of Hamas, the al-Qassam Brigades, the political predicament of the Palestinian cause was that it remained on life support. Although the majority of United Nations member states would annually vote on the so-called Two-State solution model on bringing about a resolution to the conflict, there were no real efforts to translate this unanimous consensus into a reality on the ground.

It was interpreted throughout most of the world, including in the United States and the Zionist entity, that the Palestinian question was effectively stuck and was not even worthy of attention. Therefore, the US government pursued normalization deals with the Arab regimes and believed that Israeli efforts to Judaize the holy sites in occupied al-Quds and the Naqab, as well as to annex areas in the West Bank, were not going to impede their mission to reach a prized Saudi-Israeli deal.

Meanwhile, the situation on the ground for Palestinians grew even more dire. While in the past there were certain political limits as to how far internationally renowned Human Rights groups could go in their criticisms of Israeli policy and practices against the Palestinians, this somewhat eased as there was not even talk of any developments in favor of Palestinians politically. Therefore, we saw the likes of Human Rights Watch (HRW), Amnesty International, and the top Israeli human rights group, B’Tselem, release reports justifying why they identified “Israel” as an apartheid regime.

It is telling that these human rights reports, which in the cases of HRW and Amnesty were voluminous and provided copious sources, were able to essentially affirm what Palestinian human rights groups had been saying for decades. What was most significant about these reports, however, is that they did not stop at condemning Israeli conduct in the West Bank, Gaza, and the eastern part of al-Quds, but chose to shine a light on the entirety of occupied Palestine.

Despite the condemnations by Israeli leaders, who predictably labeled the reports “antisemitic”, it became clear that these were not deemed as consequential to the point of triggering any form of change in policy. Yet, this is where it all started to go terribly wrong for the Zionist entity.

In this post-October 7 setting, we are now living in a world where the Palestinian cause is not only internationally relevant, it is the most popular issue of its time. The entire world is fixated on the Palestinian struggle and the ongoing atrocities in Gaza, and millions of people are consistently taking any action they can to support the Palestinian cause for national liberation. This is all happening without there even being a unified Palestinian leadership.

It is in this context that the International Court of Justice (ICJ), ruled in favor of South Africa’s submission accusing the Israelis of violating the Genocide Convention. The ICJ voted unanimously to impose provisional measures on the Zionist regime to prevent genocide in Gaza. This may not have actually stopped the war in Gaza, but the effects of the Israeli regime being plausibly accused of committing genocide in the top legal authority on earth will remain now forever.

The reason why the accusation of genocide against the self-proclaimed “Jewish State” is so damning, is because the entire Israeli invention narrative surrounds the idea that the reason why they have a right to exist as a state is because they were themselves subjected to a genocide. So, if “Israel” is seen to be a regime that conducts genocide, it cannot on the other hand use the excuse they need to exist because of genocide.

On Friday, the ICJ accepted the South African submission requesting further provisional measures be adopted by the court, asserting that “Israel must immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah Governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” What it also did was specifically deem it necessary to “reaffirm” that the Israelis must abide by the initial provisional measures ordered by the court. If the Zionist entity directly chooses to violate the ICJ’s orders, which are considered binding by the United Nations, it could trigger further action against it and work against its favor in the ongoing genocide case.

In addition to this, the decision by the International Criminal Court (ICC)’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, to finally request arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Defence Minister Yoav Gallant now also piles on even more pressure.

The way this now looks for the Zionist entity is as follows; they are a genocidal, apartheid regime that is committing crimes against humanity and are run by wanted war criminals. This is the case, as more and more nations around the world continue to recognize Palestine as a state and cut ties with the Israeli regime.

It is also apparent that this genocidal apartheid regime, run by war criminals, cannot possibly conclude any kind of deal to resolve the situation by allowing a so-called “Two-State solution”. There are no major political parties that could plausibly come to power after Netanyahu’s coalition that would accept the idea of creating a Palestinian State, nor is there any effort going on to create a viable roadmap to a peaceful solution.

For any objective observer the reality today couldn’t be any more obvious: “Israel” is an entity that is based upon total Jewish supremacy and will not allow a reality in which Palestinians can have human rights. If the Palestinian people are roughly equal to the size of the Jewish Israeli population in the entirety of historic Palestine, or what the Zionists would call “Greater Israel”, then the only way to maintain the Zionist regime in which only Jews are granted the right to self-determination, is either in maintaining an indefinite system of apartheid or choosing to conduct a mass campaign of ethnic cleansing or genocide.

It is inevitable that when people are subjected to apartheid rule, they will revolt and resist. Both the Israeli regime and its Western backers wanted this to be a status quo, to maintain apartheid and periodically allow the Zionists to mass murder the Palestinians in order to “put them in their place.” Until October 7, the US-Israeli agenda was succeeding, although the Resistance in Gaza would go to war with the Zionists every few years, these armed flare-ups never inflicted a big enough wound on the Israelis to change the equation. This is why the Zionist entity would refer to its wars with Gaza as “mowing the lawn”, they believed it to be necessary and sadistically saw it as a calculated approach.

When the Palestinian Resistance finally broke down the gates of their concentration camp on October 7, all previous understandings were torn to shreds. The Zionist army, its intelligence agencies and weapons technology were dismantled and disgraced. Operation Al-Aqsa Flood shook them to their core, as neither the Israelis nor their American allies ever believed that such a defeat could be inflicted upon them. It is at this moment that they both decided that genocide would be the new goal and that apartheid could not work within the Gaza Strip. This is why the Zionists have no idea what to do in the besieged coastal territory, they evidently believed that after eight months they would have at least weakened the resistance in Gaza, but they even failed to do this and their deliberate annihilation of civilians and their homes has not led to victory.

Politically the Zionist entity is trapped, it understands there are limits imposed on what is possible for them to do in the Gaza Strip, such as the mass ethnic cleansing of the population into the Egyptian Sinai, so they are without a clue as to how they must proceed.

While the Zionist regime’s leadership tries to buy time and look for a way to achieve a victory, in order to at least save their political careers, they set the stage for future Israeli internal strife. All as the Lebanese Resistance lay waste to their military sites and settlements in the North, displacing over a hundred thousand settlers and debunking the idea that the Israeli military has the capacity to take on Hezbollah. The Israeli economy is being devastated, the Yemeni blockade in the Red Sea is incredibly effective and even the Iraqi Resistance are able to lob missiles and drones towards them at will, with no real response. On the battlefield in the Gaza Strip, their ill-trained occupation soldiers fight without discipline, returning to their families in body bags and with life-changing injuries, losing motivation by the day, due to fighting an endless battle with no goals.

The Zionist entity is now in real legal trouble, faces a legitimacy crisis, and only promises one thing to both the world and its own settler population, a future of war and battle for ethnic supremacy. Most of the world’s population is looking on in utter horror at what they see occurring in Gaza, they are sick to their stomachs at what the Western regimes are backing and seek an immediate end to this disgusting racist regime’s never-ending civilian massacre.

Although the ICJ and ICC decisions may seem meaningless in the short term, as did the flood of human rights groups labeling the Zionist Entity an apartheid regime, these are nails that will in due time be nailed into the Israeli coffin. The Israelis have sealed their fate, their apartheid regime is coming to an end, whether this is to occur quickly through a war of liberation or through a longer drawn out process.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | 2 Comments

Why Israeli Military-Industrial Complex’s Dizzying Gaza War Profits Won’t Last

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 30.05.2024

Israel’s defense sector has been making money hand over fist supplying weapons to the military for the war in Gaza, with profits going into the double digits, and order backlogs soaring to more than $50 billion. International affairs and security analysts told Sputnik what will stop Israel from sustaining this bonanza over the long run.

Israeli defense giants have been fruitful in multiplying their profits on the eve of the eight-month anniversary of the war in Gaza, with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Elbit Systems enjoying record bumps in stock prices and profits, nearly $15 billion in combined revenues in 2023, and an order backlog worth a whopping $52.4 billion.

The companies – which manufacture everything from drones and armored vehicles to the offensive and defensive missiles the IDF has used against Gaza fighters, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Yemen’s Houthi militia, expect the good times to continue to roll through 2024, with Elbit reporting Q1 profits of $1.55 billion in an earnings call this week – surpassing in quarterly terms the $6 billion the company raked in last year.

Israel is among the top ten weapons exporters in the world, accounting for nearly 2.5 percent of the global arms market between 2019 and 2023. Top clients include the United States, Britain, continental Europe, Azerbaijan, India and Vietnam, with sophisticated Israeli drones and missiles constituting among the top most sought after export articles.

Tel Aviv scaled back exports abroad from the fourth quarter of 2023 onward as the defense sector reoriented toward domestic needs – buoyed by US military assistance – which enables the Israeli government to spend part of its multibillion dollar American aid packages on weapons made in Israel, and supports joint air and missile defense research (preferences Washington doesn’t extend to any other major ally).

The Gaza campaign is a mixed blessing for Israel’s arms industry, observers have told Sputnik, pointing out that while Israeli defense giants may benefit over the short term from the present spike in orders, Tel Aviv’s diplomatic reputation coming out of the crisis may not be what it was when it entered it.

“I don’t think it’s been the most illustrious military weapons show,” veteran international and military affairs observer and former US Army Lieutenant Colonel Earl Rasmussen told Sputnik, when asked whether Israel’s defense industry has benefited or been damaged by the IDF’s Gaza operations.

“I would think some of their demand may diminish,” Rasmussen said, pointing out that besides the reputation of Israeli weapons, there is the country’s international political reputation to account for.

“In the political sense, Israel has isolated themselves due to what’s going on in Gaza. And also you see that what should have been a very quick entrance in and exit out has now dragged on for seven months, and I don’t know if there’s any end in sight until they level the entire Gaza Strip,” the veteran soldier said.

“Ukraine may still engage with them for military sales…but I would not be surprised if a lot of other foreign militaries and countries interested [in some of Israel’s] really good technology may be more hesitant and may look at other opportunities or competing technology,” given what can only be described as the “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” taking place in Gaza, Rasmussen said.

Veteran Italian former diplomat and prime ministerial foreign policy advisor Dr. Marco Carnelos concurs with this assessment, telling Sputnik that while militarily, the Gaza campaign may have brought Israel’s military establishment some benefits, politically it has been suicidal.

“Politically speaking I do not see any way in which Israel has been benefiting from waging the war in Gaza. Its top leaders received arrest warrants from the International Criminal Court and a judgement for genocide is pending against Israel at the International Court of Justice,” Carnelos said.

“Militarily speaking [Israel’s] armed forces gained further knowledge and expertise in carrying out urban warfare in Gaza in the [past] seven months, maybe testing new techniques and weapons. It is the same for its foes – who after widespread destruction are still capable of engaging Israeli forces,” the observer said. “The real question remains: was it worth this political debacle to get better military experience? I strongly doubt it. Israel’s deterrent power is probably over and the political and strategic consequences could be huge,” Carnelos added.

Israel’s deterrent capabilities and reputation in the eyes of the world have taken a beating over the course of the Gaza crisis, with Hamas proving able to hold its own through seven plus months of intense Israeli bombardment and ground operations across the bombed out ruins of the 365 square kilometer strip of land, the IDF and its US and European allies proving unable to stop Yemen’s Houthi militia from essentially shutting down the Red Sea to Israeli-linked shipping, and Israel and Hezbollah engaging in months of deadly skirmishes along the Lebanese border.

But perhaps nowhere were the limits of Israeli (and by extension NATO) power demonstrated more thoroughly than during Iran’s April 14 drone and missile barrage targeting Israel. The Islamic Republic managed to land multiple projectiles at the Negev Desert air base the IDF used to strike Iran’s Embassy compound in Damascus on April 1, as well as an intelligence collection facility in northern Israel, despite advance warning and Israeli defenses being shored up by military assets belonging to the US, the UK and Jordan. For the first time since the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel’s adversaries were able to demonstrate that the Jewish state – while a regional military powerhouse, is certainly not invincible.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Terror in Syria: a US distraction from Gaza

The Resistance Axis has effectively thwarted US distraction tactics in Syria meant to support Israeli interests as the war on Gaza rages on

By Khalil Nasrallah | The Cradle | May 30, 2024

Western-backed terrorist strongholds in Syria have not remained untouched by the Israeli military assault on Gaza. With the broad activation of the Axis of Resistance in support of Gaza, particularly in Lebanon, it didn’t take too long before Washington began to mobilize its extremist foot soldiers in Syria’s north.

Soon after the 7 October Al-Aqsa Flood Palestinian resistance operation – and even before the war’s trajectory became clear and Hezbollah’s intentions were understood – terrorists in Syria began to escalate their operations. Terror attacks were recorded in northern Latakia and the western Aleppo region, where Hezbollah, Iranian advisors, and the Syrian army are concentrated, as well as along the demarcation line between areas controlled by the state and those controlled by the militants.

This escalation was almost certainly not a coincidence, given the history of similar mobilizations triggered during crucial political and military events in Syria. It is well established that Washington supports terrorist armed groups in northwest Syria to keep the Syrian army and its allies in a state of attrition, serving US and Israeli interests – most notably in the eastern part of the country where the US maintains an illegal military presence.

Moreover, there are clear indications that the uptick in terrorist attacks after 7 October was linked to the war on Gaza. This strategy seems designed to distract resistance forces, particularly Hezbollah, and sends a message that escalation by resistance factions would activate other fronts to alleviate pressure on Tel Aviv.

Idlib, the main northern sanctuary for the terror militias, presents a complex front, not only militarily but also due to its political entanglements and involvement in various regional dynamics. The conditions for launching a major operation there were unfavorable before 7 October and remain unfavorable in the ongoing war.

US support for subversive activities in Syria before 7 October

Before the Hamas-led resistance operation, US efforts were focused on supporting subversive activities in Syria, explicitly backing Al-Qaeda offshoot Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) led by Abu Mohammad al-Julani.

With British intelligence assistance, Washington sought to strengthen ties with Julani following a series of operations by the Syrian government and its allies in 2020. These military offensives culminated in the recapture of the Aleppo–Damascus M5 motorway and significant territory south of Idlib.

The hostilities concluded with the 5 March ceasefire agreement between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan during the latter’s visit to Moscow, marking a new phase in the regional conflict.

On several occasions, the US attempted to rekindle hostilities to influence Turkish–Syrian negotiations, which were sponsored by Moscow and Tehran, aiming to restore relations and reduce tensions between Ankara and Damascus.

However, these talks faced several obstacles, including Erdogan’s domestic political considerations and the challenges posed by US policies regarding the Syrian crisis.

Between 2020 and 2023, the Syrian army and its allies imposed military conditions that restricted the militants’ capabilities, preventing them from launching large-scale operations. Reports indicate that during this period, the militants focused on enhancing their drone warfare capabilities, allegedly with support from French, British, and US intelligence.

These drones were used in several attacks, most notably the 5 October 2023 assault on a graduation ceremony at a military academy in Homs, central Syria, which resulted in over 150 military personnel and civilian casualties.

Post-7 October: Shifting focus and new frontline dynamics

The impact of the terrorist attack in Homs quickly faded as the world turned its attention two days later to the Qassam Brigades storming military sites and settlements around the Gaza Strip, capturing dozens of soldiers and settlers, prompting Israel to declare a state of war. As regional powers shifted their focus to the Gaza Strip, the situation in Idlib subsequently took a different turn.

In late December, terrorists launched a large-scale attack in the western Aleppo area, reaching the 76th Regiment near Urm al-Kubra. Hezbollah and the Syrian army managed to repel the assault, inflicting heavy casualties on the terrorists, many of whom were Uyghurs from China’s Xinjiang region.

Following, several other attacks tried to exploit the broader regional conflict, particularly the tensions in southern Lebanon. These attacks were influenced by external forces and extended beyond Julani’s leadership.

The attacks continued sporadically until the beginning of February, when the Syrian army, supported by Russian forces, introduced FPV (first-person view) suicide drones into the battle. These drones, which had demonstrated high effectiveness in Ukraine, significantly hindered the terrorists’ movements along the front lines to logistical points behind them.

The ability to curb the front lines suggested that disruptive tactics Washington might employ at any stage, especially in Idlib, could be neutralized. This came after the US had agreed to a truce in eastern Syria, accepted the status quo, and made concessions to prevent its bases from being targeted. These developments indicated the Resistance Axis’ capability to manage and prepare for new challenges, maintaining regional stability despite external pressures.

The steadfastness of resistance forces in Syria

Several indicators show that despite US attempts to create distraction fronts for resistance factions, Hezbollah remains steadfast in its fight against terrorism in Syria.

Hezbollah, along with other resistance forces such as Iraqi factions and Iranian advisors, has maintained a presence that supports the ongoing confrontation. Ultimately, the Syrian army and its allies have been successful in countering US distraction tactics through significant terrorist organizations, especially in Idlib.

This success offers several insights for the future. The Resistance Axis forces had anticipated such tactics and responded effectively, adapting to the circumstances of each stage. The American–Israeli reliance on terrorism to alter realities on support fronts has proven to be an unrealistic and losing strategy.

The outcomes of the current conflict may create political conditions favorable for a wide-scale military operation in Idlib in the future. Additionally, resistance forces are not isolated in their efforts to counter terrorist fronts, with Russian involvement playing a significant role that cannot be overlooked.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , | 1 Comment

For a Fistful of Shekels: Israeli Defense Contractors’ Profits Boom as Economy Takes a Beating

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 30.05.2024

With the world watching in horror as the raging Palestinian-Israeli conflict approaches its eight month anniversary, arms makers continue to quietly make a tidy profit from the war. Israel’s domestic defense sector is no exception.

US business media has warned of the “haunting parallels” between Israel’s ballooning military expenditures amid the Gaza War and the country’s 1970s ‘lost decade’ of surging inflation, out of control budget deficits, stagnant growth and faltering investor confidence.

Israel’s Central Bank expects the war in Gaza to cost a whopping 250 billion shekels ($67.4 billion US) through 2025, as defense spending as a share of GDP jumps from 5.3% to 9%. That’s amid increasingly dour circumstances in the civilian economy, with Q4 of 2023 seeing Israel’s GDP drop by over 20%, while consumption dropped 27% and investment by 70%.

Most worrying of all for Tel Aviv is the potential loss of investment flows – particularly in the tech sector. “We can’t even begin to measure how many people have decided not to invest in Israel in the short term, let alone on a permanent basis,” Shoresh Institute economist Dan Ben-David told Bloomberg in a report published Thursday.

But as the civilian economy suffers, Israel’s arms makers have no complaints, boasting record profits, buoyed by Washington’s nod to an unprecedented $17 billion in new military aid (more than five times the $3 billion+ Tel Aviv has been getting from the US annually since the early 1980s). A portion of the funds can be spent on Israeli-made weapons – a privilege not granted to other US allies, with roughly half a billion dollars also typically slated for Israeli-US joint research in missile defense.

Israel’s top three defense giants – Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Elbit Systems have enjoyed surging stock prices and orders growing at a pace beyond their ability to keep up.

  • IAI reported a 7% growth in sales to $5.3 billion in 2023, a 49% jump in net profit, with production ranging from drones, missiles, bombs, radars and electronic warfare articles to space-based defenses. Its order backlog has soared to $18 billion.
  • Rafael – makers of Tamir missiles for the Iron Dome and an array of other air defense and anti-tank missiles and drones, saw a record 21% increase in sales and a whopping 85% increase in order volume, with net profits hitting $158 million – a 17% jump from 2022, and the backlog of orders reaching over $14 billion.
  • Elbit, makers of much of the “guts” of Israeli weapons, plus drones, communications equipment, small arms, cluster munitions and armored vehicles, saw profits jump 8% in 2023, with revenues reaching nearly $6 billion, and Q1 2024 results this week showing $1.6 billion in revenues, and a $20.4 billion order backlog.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

The US is the World Leader with No Pier

gaza pier

By Bill Buppert | The Libertarian Institute | May 30, 2024

Yet another existential chaos avalanche in American foreign policy.

The pier took two months and $350m to build, lasted 12 days, and delivered less than 60 trucks’ worth of food (most of which was stolen after it reached Gaza) before it broke and had to be towed away for repairs. Think through the process: ships provide a mass delivery mechanism for cargo and the draft of a ship prevents it from getting close to shore hence the need for pier structures for off-loading and the US spends a third of of billion dollars for a temporary structure to facilitate the off-loading. Weather conditions and sea states are not a mystery and for those keen enough to observe, the facilitators of this disaster had access to all the historical data to know what to do and whether to proceed ahead with the project.

And, remember, this is the same US foreign policy that provides military aid, even now, that necessitated the need for the temporary pier in the first place.

This debacle is a demonstration project of the American experience in the Middle East.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Science and Pseudo-Science | | 1 Comment

France plans to send military instructors to Ukraine – Reuters

RT | May 30, 2024

France could announce that it will send military instructors to the country during a visit to Paris by Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, despite widespread concerns from some allies and criticism from Russia, Reuters has reported, citing diplomatic sources.

Zelensky, whose presidency expired on May 20, visited Paris for talks with French President Emmanuel Macron two weeks ago, and will return next week to attend a ceremony marking 80 years since D-Day, the start of a large-scale operation by the Allies against Nazi Germany during World War Two.

The unnamed diplomats told Reuters that Paris hoped to forge and lead a coalition of countries that would offer training assistance to Kiev. France reportedly would initially send a limited number of personnel to assess the modalities of a mission before dispatching several hundred trainers.

Training would focus on demining, equipment and warplane maintenance, to be provided by the West. Paris would also finance, arm, and train a Ukrainian motorized brigade, Reuters added.

“The arrangements are very advanced, and we could expect something next week,” the agency cited one of its sources.

Ukraine’s top general Aleksandr Syrsky said earlier this week that he had signed papers allowing French personnel to visit training centers in Ukraine “soon,” to familiarize themselves with infrastructure and staff.

Over the past few months President Macron has repeatedly insisted he would not rule out the possibility of NATO member states sending troops to Ukraine. According to the French leader, his policy of “strategic ambiguity” is intended to keep Moscow guessing about the US-led bloc’s intentions and the lengths it is willing to go to in support of Kiev.

Some of France’s NATO partners fear that the bloc’s boots on the ground in Ukraine could make a direct conflict with Russia more likely. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has said that Berlin will not do anything that places it in direct conflict with Russia. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has also spoken out against German instructors training Ukrainian soldiers in the country.

The US remains publicly opposed to sending instructors to Ukraine while Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has described statements about sending troops to Ukraine as “crazy”.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Western military instructors “have long been present” in Ukraine. Acting as mercenaries, they service high-precision weapons sent by NATO countries and are suffering losses, Putin stated.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said earlier this month that the French leadership’s “belligerent rhetoric” and provocative statements around Ukraine are escalating the conflict.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | 1 Comment

Top Hungarian Diplomat Criticizes NATO Plans to Let Ukraine Strike Inside Russia

Sputnik – 30.05.2024

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto decried NATO plans to let Ukraine use Western-supplied weapons to hit targets in Russia as “insane,” warning that Russia’s response would be multifold.

“I think it is an insane idea because, as we have seen before, Russia will respond. There is no lack of munitions or equipment in Russia. Its response will be multifold,” Szijjarto told Hungarian reporters in Brussels.

The Hungarian minister called for an end to “this madness” before it spiraled out of control.

Szijjarto also criticized a proposal made by NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg that NATO take over the coordination of military aid to Ukraine, giving the alliance a more active role in the conflict. Szijjarto argued that NATO was wiping out its own red lines.

Earlier in the week, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg confirmed he was in favor of lifting restrictions on the use of Western weapons on “legitimate targets” on Russian territory.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries