Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Imran Khan jailed for 14 years

RT | January 17, 2025

Former Pakistani prime minister Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi have been convicted in a £190 million ($232 million) land corruption case involving the Al-Qadir Trust, local media reported on Friday.

According to ARY News and Dawn, an anti-corruption court in the northern city of Rawalpindi sentenced Khan to 14 years in prison and Bibi to seven years, with the verdict being announced at Adiala Jail.

Khan and Bibi have also been fined $3,600 and $1,800, respectively, with the failure to comply carrying an additional imprisonment term.

The Al-Qadir Trust case centers on allegations that Khan and Bibi were involved in a quid pro quo scheme that saw the politician and his wife receive land worth millions of dollars from a property mogul during the establishment of an eponymous university in exchange for legal protection.

The former Pakistani prime minister has denied the charges, calling them “politically motivated.” Before the verdict, Khan said the case lacked evidence and would embarrass the authorities. “My sentencing is being sought in a case where neither have I derived a single penny of personal gain, nor has the government suffered a single penny of financial loss,” he said.

Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party condemned the ruling, calling it a “black verdict,” while sharing a video purportedly showing protests against the decision outside the National Assembly.

A cricketer-turned-politician, Khan served as prime minister from 2018 to 2022, when he was ousted from office in a no-confidence vote, with the opposition accusing him of mismanaging the economy and foreign policy. Khan, however, claims that he was overthrown as a result of a US conspiracy.

He has been embroiled in numerous legal battles, with looming charges of corruption. In 2023, he was found guilty of illegally buying and selling state gifts he had received during his premiership, although the sentence was suspended. One year later, he was also sentenced to ten years for leaking state secrets, a charge he has denied. His earlier arrests and sentences sparked nationwide protests, some of which turned violent.

January 17, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

The man who deserves but probably will not be allowed to lead Romania

By Stephen Karganovic | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 17, 2025

Calin Georgescu rightfully has a huge grievance against what passes for “Western democracy.” He is the clear first-round winner in the Presidential elections held in Romania late last year. Yet his projected even more resounding victory in the second round, scheduled for early December 2024, was scrapped (as the BBC indelicately put it) following a Romanian Supreme Court ruling that the electoral process was marred by alleged hybrid warfare interference conducted by Russia on Georgescu’s behalf.

How do you “scrap” elections in a vibrant democracy such as Romania, which also happens to be a member in good standing of NATO and the European Union, which are bastions of liberal freedoms and the rule of law? Well, you do it by making up a bogus dossier on the political candidate that you dislike and by ordering the local judiciary to act on it as if it were genuine evidence. The dossier purporting to document the alleged interference was so patently phony that at its first sitting to consider the matter the Romanian Supreme Court dismissed it out of hand. This show of integrity did not sit well at all with the paladins of the rules-based order. So they ordered the judges to reassemble forthwith in their chambers and to get it right this time. On 6 December the distinguished Romanian jurists did just that and obediently reversed their ruling issued just four days previously.

Citing Article 146 (f) of the Romanian Constitution concerning the legality and correctness of the presidential elections, the Court ordered that the “entire electoral process will be integrally redone.” So the result of the first round was duly “scrapped” and along with it the second round as well. The second round, which was in progress as the judges hurriedly improvised their new ruling, was stopped in its tracks. As even the Atlantic Council, no friend of elections which go the wrong way, was compelled to admit “the rollout of the decision was somewhat fumbled, as it became public while polling stations were already open for the [Romanian] diaspora in the second-round presidential election, and by the time the process was stopped, around 53,000 citizens abroad had already voted.” Scrapped just in time, because the Romanian diaspora was known to be a hotbed of Georgescu supporters.

The Presidential election was set by the judges for an unspecified date in the future. Some rumours suggest that it might be in May of this year, or whenever it is that the stage can be prepared to ensure the right outcome. In the meantime, Klaus Iohannis, who should have relinquished his post in December to his successor, is now as legally “expired” as his Ukrainian colleague Zelensky. But that does not seem to bother any of the vociferous champions of the democratic process. Iohannis after all is their man.

The Romanian public, however, do not seem to take kindly to electoral interference by the compliant judges and their string-pullers, who are widely suspected of being located abroad but not in Russia. Thousands have been marching in the streets of Bucharest and other major cities to oppose the cancellation of the elections. How much good it will do them in a country that has embraced the principles of Western democracy remains to be seen.

The protagonist of this political earthquake who was not permitted to democratically establish his credentials as the new President of Romania, Calin Georgescu, ever since his first-round triumph has been subjected to the full measure of calumny that is reserved for those whom the globalist system perceives as a non-team-player and a threat. The hope was evidently that he would be successfully discredited and simply fade away, allowing the charade of “democratic elections” with a prearranged outcome to be repeated whenever it is judged safe to do so.

Expectedly, the Georgescu affair with its scandalous implications has been largely ignored by the collective West media, except for a few derogatory observations here and there at the banned candidate’s expense. The Georgescu story might have died a quiet death but for the professionalism of American podcaster Shawn Ryan, who decided to perform a public service by travelling to Romania to find out first-hand what the electoral commotion was all about.

The result was a remarkable interview with the man who by all reasonable estimates should be sitting today in the Presidential office in Bucharest. It is worth viewing carefully and in its entirety for the insights it affords into the sombre times in which we happen to live.

Georgescu strenuously denies that he is “pro-Russian” and says that he has no personal acquaintance with Russian officials except for watching them on television. In any court of law or public opinion that declaration should suffice because the burden of proof is on his accusers and they have failed to meet it. But the accusation brings up a much deeper and more significant issue: even if he were, why should it be a problem? Most of the other candidates, including the election runner-up, advocated policies explicitly aligned with non-Romanian interests and entities, such as NATO and the EU. Why is it objectionable for another presidential candidate in a supposedly sovereign and democratic country to propose to the electorate a different policy for their consideration and approval?

And here comes the crux of the matter. Asked by Shawn Ryan whether he is pro-Russian, Georgescu let the cat out of the bag by responding that no, he is pro-Romanian, and that the policies he contemplates are shaped to best serve the needs and interests of the Romanian people. In the current political atmosphere there is hardly a more disqualifying admission than that. The few European leaders, such as Orban and Fico, who had made it through the cracks in the globalist system to ultimately disclose that their primary commitment is to their respective countries’ interests are shunned and reviled for their subversive patriotism. One was the target of an assassination attempt, the other is the target of a colour revolution as this is being written. The rise of another leader who espouses a similar philosophy would be intolerably disruptive to the globalist agenda. That is why Georgescu had to be thwarted by any means, fair or foul.

Georgescu clearly is a simple man, plain spoken and without guile, not practiced in the use of mendacious phrases which characterise the discourse of trained political mannequins, the chosen puppets of the power elites who are allowed inhabit the public universe of Western political systems. Asked by Shawn Ryan how he views Romania’s membership in NATO, he gave an answer that was somewhat awkward but still made fundamental sense. When Romania joined NATO, he said, it was understood to be a defensive alliance, but since then its mission was changed to include offensive operations in which Romania has no national interest. Romania, he implied, is no longer part of the same outfit that it had originally joined. It is a fair answer, not just from the standpoint of Romania but also of quite a few other countries that by hook and by crook were rushed into joining NATO for the geopolitical benefits their geographical location offered to the alliance and its belligerent agendas.

Hence, according to Georgescu, Romania (and by implication other countries which were similarly enticed into joining) is now fully entitled to reconsider its choice and pursue a policy that takes into account the alliance’s changed nature and Romania’s current interests.

As for the collective West’s favourite quagmire, Project Ukraine, speaking for his country and the Romanian nation, Georgescu was unforgivably frank. “That is not our war,” he said.

These are only some salient snippets of this highly illuminating interview which lays bare the corruption of the political system we have been told represents the pinnacle of liberal democracy. One wishes that Georgescu’s English were more fluent, but still it sufficed to convey the important points that he makes and it fully answered the question, if there was anyone who was still in doubt, why they are prepared to resort to the basest trickery to make sure this man of integrity does not become President of Romania. And to ensure by example that no like-minded patriot in any other country that they control will ever think of emulating Calin Georgescu.

January 17, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Russian oil product exports shoot up – Bloomberg

RT | January 17, 2025

Russia’s refined fuel exports have surged to their highest level in nearly a year, even as the US imposed new sanctions on the country’s energy sector last week, Bloomberg reported on Thursday.

Seaborne shipments of Russian petroleum products hit an 11-month high, averaging 2.5 million barrels per day (bpd) in the first ten days of January, the outlet said, citing data from analytics firm Vortexa. The surge marks a 12% increase compared to December’s daily average and represents the highest level since February 2024, according to the report.

The US slapped a new round of sanctions on Russia last week in coordination with the UK. The measures targeted major Russian oil companies such as Gazprom Neft and Surgutneftegas, as well as dozens of vessels allegedly used to transport Russian oil in defiance of Western restrictions, which the US has described as a ‘shadow fleet’.

Moscow has condemned the sanctions, calling them “illegal,” with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warning that they could destabilize global energy markets.

The latest round of sanctions targets more than 180 tankers allegedly involved in Russian trade, primarily focusing on crude oil shipments. However, only about 4% of petroleum products exported between January 1 and 10 were transported on sanctioned tankers, data from Vortexa, showed. Additionally, there has been no deviation observed in the voyages of these vessels.

The recent surge in Russia’s petroleum products exports is primarily driven by surging shipments of diesel and fuel oil, the outlet said. Revenue gains from fuel exports in December exceeded the decline in crude oil earnings, supported by soaring gasoil flows and higher prices, Bloomberg said citing the International Energy Agency (IEA).

Diesel and gasoil exports, which make up about 40% of Russia’s refined-fuel shipments, jumped 17% from December levels to 1.08 million bpd, the highest since last February. Shipments from Baltic ports rose by over 50%, contributing to the growth, data showed.

Fuel oil flows also increased, reaching 792,000 bpd which represented a 19% increase and the highest level since July 2023. Volumes to Africa saw the most significant rise.

January 17, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

Anti-Orbán German Green Party MEP took a road trip last October to meet with powerful groups in D.C.

By Liz Heflin | Remix News | January 17, 2025

German Green MEP Daniel Freund, an obsessive critic of Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán, recently held talks in Washington, D.C., according to Magyar Nemzet

Details on Freund’s official EP profile show that at the end of October, just ahead of the U.S. presidential election, he met with several entities in D.C., including the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), The German Marshall Fund, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Transparency International U.S., and the U.S. State Department.

The Hungarian newspaper asks how an MEP, representing an EU member state, is negotiating with a third country, outside the EU, without any authorization regarding Hungary.

Magyar Nemzet further states that USAID is known to work closely with the CIA and has been widely criticized for its influence peddling. At the end of 2022, the agency said that it would launch a new “Central Europe Program,” the portal points out, to strengthen civil society, increase the competitiveness and sustainability of “independent” media, and further develop the monitoring functions of various civil society organizations.

“Based on Freund’s activities so far, it is only conceivable that (he) represented an agenda that runs counter to Hungarian interests and sovereignty at the meeting organized before the Biden administration’s upcoming departure,” Magyar Nemzet writes.

Freund has cheered sanctions against Hungary, largely in part due to the government’s opposition to Brussels’ migration pact, and has actively lobbied for EU funds to be withheld from it. He has gone so far as to suggest Hungary simply leave the EU given its difference of opinion from the mainstream consensus in Brussels.

In one of his latest moves, Freund sent a letter to Charles Michel, when Michel was previously serving as president of the European Council, to suspend the Hungarian presidency, arguing that Prime Minister Viktor Orbán could not represent Europeans.

And in October, just a couple weeks before his trip to D.C., Freund called for Viktor Orbán to be arrested for corruption. “Who has ever stolen so much from European sources?” asked Freund.

January 17, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Leave a comment

Kremlin reacts to UK plans for military build-up in Ukraine

RT | January 17, 2025

The possible appearance of NATO-linked military infrastructure in Ukraine is a concern for Russia, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday, commenting on a new security deal between London and Kiev.

The 100-year bilateral agreement, signed by Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Thursday, states that the two nations will “explore options for deploying and maintaining defense infrastructure in Ukraine, including military bases, logistics depots, reserve military equipment storage facilities and war reserve stockpiles.”

While the establishment of such facilities would in itself not amount to Ukraine joining NATO, a scenario that Moscow strongly opposes, the British plans are “certainly worrisome”, Peskov told a media briefing.

He also relayed the Russian government’s negative attitude toward British statements that its defense cooperation with Ukraine would include enhanced “collaboration on maritime security” near Russian borders, including in the Azov Sea. Peskov emphasized that the Azov Sea is a Russian inner body of water, so that “interactions between Ukraine and Britain can hardly happen there.”

Moscow views NATO as a hostile entity and has accused its members of waging a proxy war against Russia, using Ukrainian soldiers as ‘cannon fodder’.

The UK has been one of the most vocal supporters of Kiev’s war effort. In the 100-year agreement, it has committed to no less than £3 billion ($3.66 billion) in annual military assistance to Ukraine until financial year 2030/31.

NATO’s eastward expansion since the 1990s – conducted in violation of assurances given to Moscow to secure its acceptance of Germany’s reunification – is one of the primary causes of the current hostilities, according to Russian officials.

January 17, 2025 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

UK promises to ‘explore options’ for military bases in Ukraine

RT | January 17, 2025

London has revealed details of a long-term partnership agreement with Kiev, which includes broad plans for military infrastructure development and defense cooperation over the next century. The document suggests the potential establishment of military bases in Ukraine, with an emphasis on aligning these initiatives with NATO standards for maximum effectiveness.

The 15-page declaration, signed on January 16, 2025, lays out a framework for cooperation between the United Kingdom and Ukraine across various sectors, with a primary focus on military collaboration. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky formalized the deal during a ceremony in Kiev on Thursday.

“The Participants will explore options for deploying and maintaining defence infrastructure in Ukraine, including military bases, logistics depots, reserve military equipment storage facilities and war reserve stockpiles,” the document states.

The agreement also emphasizes maritime cooperation, particularly in the Black Sea region. The UK has pledged to enhance Ukraine’s interoperability with NATO in the maritime sphere through joint naval operations, port visits, and the development of Ukrainian naval bases.

“We will work together to ensure NATO learns the lessons from Ukraine’s experience in the Black Sea to inform its development of future maritime capabilities. We will promote the development of naval bases on the territory of Ukraine,” the document reads.

Another section highlights plans to “deepen cooperation on long-range strike capabilities,” integrated air and missile defense, and the stockpiling of complex weapons to bolster “deterrence.”

Additionally, London has committed to providing Ukraine with annual military assistance of no less than £3 billion until at least 2031, and “for as long as needed to support Ukraine.”

While the agreement lacks detailed, binding commitments beyond promises to expand, intensify, and facilitate collaboration across multiple sectors, Zelensky hinted at potential “secret” components within the pact.

The UK has been one of Ukraine’s prime backers since the escalation of conflict between Moscow and Kiev in February 2022. It has committed 12.8 billion pounds ($16 billion) in military and civilian aid to Ukraine and reportedly trained 50,000 Ukrainian troops on British soil.

Russia has sharply criticized London’s continued support of Kiev as a sign that the UK government “clearly does not seek to resolve the conflict.” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova previously said “they are doing everything possible to make it drag on, thus prolonging the suffering of the Ukrainian people.”

Meanwhile, reports suggest that US President-elect Donald Trump, set to take office next Monday, may propose deploying Western troops as peacekeepers along a demilitarized zone between Russia and Ukraine. The rumored plan reportedly excludes US forces, relying instead on “European” soldiers acting outside NATO’s command structure.

London remains cautious about the idea of sending British troops to Ukraine as part of any peacekeeping force, even though Starmer is said to have discussed the matter with French President Emmanuel Macron, according to The Telegraph.

January 17, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Oakland is CLOSING fire stations to save money…

Metal Leo | January 16, 2025

Three fire stations in the Oakland Hills have closed to help address $129 million budget deficit, and four more are slated to close next month for a total of seven fire stations closed in the city of Oakland, leaving this city in high risk

January 16, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Video | | Leave a comment

Dr. Drew Pinsky Criticizes YouTube for Video Removals and Mandatory Reeducation Training Over Vaccine Discussions

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | January 15, 2025

Dr. Drew Pinsky, widely known as Dr. Drew, has publicly criticized YouTube for removing two of his videos over alleged violations of the platform’s medical “misinformation” policy. On January 14, 2025, Pinsky took to X to challenge YouTube’s decision, highlighting concerns about free speech and the suppression of open dialogue on health-related topics.

In order to get the flags removed from his video, YouTube told Dr. Drew that he would have to attend a form of reeducation training and have no violations for 90 days, or else it would delete his entire channel and all of his videos. Pinsky has over 1,000 videos on the platform.

In one of his posts, Pinsky expressed frustration over the platform’s actions: “This weekend, @YouTubeCreators accused me of spreading ‘medical misinformation’ & took down 2 videos with an MD & a lawyer. I’ve been a board-certified physician for over 40 years – 2x @YouTube’s existence.”

The flagged videos featured discussions with Dr. Kelly Victory, a board-certified physician, and attorney Warner Mendenhall. Pinsky elaborated that these conversations centered around the side effects of mRNA vaccinations, a topic he argues warrants open discourse rather than censorship. In his discussion with Dr. Victory, she stated that the “vast majority of the people who have been injured are young, healthy people who were under the age of 50 who had fundamentally zero risk from COVID itself. They all got COVID. These are people who would have been fine if they were just left alone.”

Pinsky defended the content, asserting that sharing professional perspectives and personal beliefs in a public forum should not be equated with spreading misinformation. He emphasized that their dialogue was an exchange of viewpoints rather than a promotion of falsehoods.

In a separate video with Warner Mendenhall, the attorney discussed legal cases involving individuals who suffered severe reactions following vaccination. Pinsky highlighted that Mendenhall shared client experiences and expressed personal beliefs—not medical advice. Pinsky wrote, “It is not medical misinformation for someone to state their belief that a large number of people were harmed by a medical product or study.”

This isn’t the first time YouTube has targeted Dr. Drew’s content. He noted that previous strikes were resolved after discussions between his production team and YouTube officials. Despite the latest removals, Pinsky confirmed that the videos remain accessible on X, suggesting that alternative platforms may offer more space for unrestricted conversations.

A prominent internist and addiction medicine specialist, Dr. Drew Pinsky has been a notable media figure for decades. His career includes hosting television shows like Dr. Drew On Call on HLN and Lifechangers on The CW.

January 16, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Biden warns of tech oligarchs’ power in farewell speech, ignoring his own role in expanding censorship

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | January 16, 2025

Outgoing President Joe Biden concluded his presidency with a farewell address on Wednesday night, sharply criticizing what he termed the “tech-industrial complex” while urging tighter accountability for social media platforms. Ironically, Biden’s remarks highlighted the decline of free press and the dangers of “misinformation,” even as his administration has often been linked to censorship efforts and suppression of dissenting viewpoints.

During his speech, Biden drew parallels to President Dwight Eisenhower’s famous warning about the “military-industrial complex.” He stated, “Six decades later, I’m equally concerned about the potential rise of a tech-industrial complex that could pose real dangers for our country as well.” His comments painted a picture of concentrated power in the hands of tech oligarchs, whom he accused of enabling an “avalanche of misinformation and disinformation” to flourish unchecked.

The president, leaving office with historically low approval ratings, accused social media platforms of abandoning fact-checking efforts and contributing to the erosion of public trust. “The free press is crumbling. Editors are disappearing. Social media is giving up on fact-checking,” Biden said.

Biden’s condemnation of social media fact-checking policies appeared aimed directly at Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, whose platform recently transitioned away from third-party fact-checking to a “community notes” model reminiscent of the system employed by Elon Musk’s X.

Throughout his presidency, Biden frequently championed tighter controls on digital platforms under the guise of protecting democracy and public health. However, critics argue his administration’s push for censorship often targeted dissenting views and stifled legitimate debate.

Biden also lamented the decline of legacy media, suggesting that unchecked misinformation on digital platforms undermines democracy. “We must hold the social platforms accountable to protect our children, our families, and our very democracy from the abuse of power,” he declared.

The president’s rhetoric on misinformation is not without controversy. He has faced repeated accusations of spreading false or unverifiable claims himself, such as recent remarks regarding Los Angeles utilities during wildfire discussions that local officials disputed.

Regarding Covid vaccines, Biden also famously said: “You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations,” and added, “If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in the IC unit, and you’re not going to die.” Those who challenged this idea found themselves banned on several social media platforms.

Meta’s recently abandoned fact-checking model, which involved junior writers downgrading posts based on often-disputed analyses, has faced criticism for censoring accurate information that reflected poorly on Biden. The new community-based approach on X and Meta allows users to collaboratively evaluate content, signaling a move away from centralized content moderation.

January 16, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite | , | Leave a comment

What legitimacy is the PA talking about?

By Ramona Wadi | MEMO | January 16, 2025

“While we are waiting for the ceasefire, it is important to stress that it won’t be acceptable for any other entity to govern the Gaza Strip but the legitimate Palestinian leadership and the government of the state of Palestine,” the Palestinian Authority’s Prime Minister, Mohammad Mustafa, stated during a meeting of the Global Alliance for the Implementation of the Two-State Solution.

The PA is not a legitimate leadership. In 2006, Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections, disturbing the Western world’s preferred outcome. Democracy, according to the West, can only conform with Western expectations; therefore Palestinians got a taste of what the US does when democracy crashes imperialist expectations. Instead of respecting the electoral result, the US and Fatah embarked upon a series of destabilisation and coercion tactics, aimed at marginalising Hamas further and ultimately destroying the legitimate representation of Palestinians according to the 2006 electoral result.

While Hamas was shunned and its diplomatic efforts rebuffed, even though it combined resistance and political pragmatism, the PA intensified its efforts at forcing Hamas to relinquish power, enforcing sanctions on an enclave repeatedly bombarded by Israel. When Palestinians in the Occupied West Bank protested against such authoritarianism and cruelty, the PA unleashed its security services on civilians, and continues to do so. As the US and the EU continued funnelling funds to enhance the PA’s brutality under the guise of state-building, the PA continued harming Palestinians in the name of security, to the point of detaining, torturing and, at times, killing their critics.

All this was orchestrated because the international community sided with an illegitimate political representation under the auspices of democracy. Are we to assume that legitimacy and democracy change meaning according to colonial and imperialist interests? What of the importance of language, which is of equal importance in the anti-colonial struggle against Israel and the PA?

Back to the present. Since Israel started its genocide in Gaza, the PA has consistently sought to navigate the corridors of power by presenting itself as an alternative to Hamas. Yet, in doing so, it completely neglected the fact that its silence on the genocide is tantamount to tacit support. The PA merely reiterated the importance of the two-state paradigm as it has for decades, with no acknowledgement of the fact that not even the hypothesis can sustain itself, let alone implementation. Meanwhile, to garner favour with Israel and the international community, and possibly prove how relevant it is to post-genocide Gaza governance, the PA started its own attack against the Palestinian Resistance.

The question is, since legitimacy does not hold the same meaning for the PA and its accomplices, what does legitimacy mean in the context of its Prime Minister citing legitimacy as the reason why the PA should return to Gaza? There is no other acceptable entity, according to the PA – based on what parameters? Just as genocide became synonymous with human rights in the Israeli and international narrative, is the PA’s illegitimate rule becoming synonymous with democracy? Why hasn’t the PA suggested elections and why has the international community not voiced any concern over Ramallah wanting to extend its power to Gaza?

The PA’s attempts to prove itself purportedly worthy of governing Gaza are precisely the reason why it should not. The PA’s only foundations are foreign funding and Israeli colonialism. Having sold itself to the two highest bidders (not forgetting the tangible illegitimacy since 2006), what Palestinian leadership and legitimacy is the PA really talking about?

January 16, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Biden’s ’empty threats’ let Israel get away with horrors in Gaza: Prominent US journalist

Press TV – January 16, 2025

An investigative American journalist says the Biden administration repeatedly undermined international institutions and damaged US credibility in a desperate attempt to shield Israel during the regime’s aggression against the people of the besieged Gaza Strip.

Brett Murphy, a Pulitzer Prize finalist in 2018 for his investigative reporting series, said in a recent article published on ProPublica that Biden’s record of repeated empty threats had given the Israelis a sense of impunity.

The reputed journalist spoke with scores of current and former officials throughout the year and read through government memos, cables and emails, many of which have not been reported previously.

The records and interviews shed light on why Biden and his top advisers refused to adjust his policy even as new evidence of Israeli abuses emerged.

The author maintains that almost none of the US’s demands that Israel improve conditions in the besieged Palestinian territory had been met.

Biden’s failure to follow through led to impunity for widespread human rights abuses, including blocking aid deliveries, even after explicit US warnings, he wrote.

In October, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the administration delivered their most explicit ultimatum yet to Israel, demanding the army allow hundreds more truckloads of food and medicine into Gaza every day.

The October red line was the last one Biden laid down, but it wasn’t the first. His administration issued multiple threats, warnings and admonishments to Israel.

Soon after, when the 30-day deadline was up, Blinken made it official and said that Israelis had begun implementing most of the steps he had laid out in his letter. The top US diplomat’s position was immediately called into question.

In the month that followed, the Israeli military was accused of roundly defying the US, its most important ally.

The Israeli military tightened its grip, continued to restrict desperately needed aid trucks and displaced 100,000 Palestinians from North Gaza, humanitarian groups found, exacerbating what was already a dire crisis “to its worst point since the war began.”

On Nov. 14, a UN committee said that Israel’s methods in Gaza, including its use of starvation as a weapon, were “consistent with genocide.”

The international rights groups went further and concluded a genocide was underway.

The International Criminal Court also issued arrest warrants for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former war minister Yoav Gallant for the war crime of deliberately starving civilians, among other allegations.

Time and again, Israel crossed the Biden administration’s red lines without changing course in a meaningful way, according to interviews with government officials and outside experts.

Last spring, the president vowed to stop supplying offensive bombs to Israel if it launched a major invasion into the southern city of Rafah.

The Biden administration told Netanyahu the US was going to rethink support for the war unless he took new steps to protect civilians and aid workers after the Israeli military blew up a World Central Kitchen caravan.

And Blinken signaled that he would blacklist a notorious Israeli unit for the death of a Palestinian-American in the West Bank if the soldiers involved were not brought to justice.

The southern city of Rafah was supposed to be a haven for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who the Israeli military had forced from their homes in the north at the start of the war.

“It is a red line,” Biden had said, marking the first high-profile warning from the US.

Netanyahu invaded in May anyway. Israeli tanks rolled into the city and the Israeli soldiers dropped bombs on residential areas, including a refugee camp, killing dozens of civilians.

Biden responded by pausing a shipment of 2,000-pound bombs but otherwise resumed military support.

In late May, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to stop its assault on the city, citing the Geneva Conventions.

Behind the scenes, State Department lawyers scrambled to come up with a legal basis on which Israel could continue smaller attacks in Rafah.

Several experts told the author that international law has been effectively discretionary for some states or entities.

Each time, the US yielded and continued to send Israel’s military deadly weapons of war, approving more than $17.9 billion in military assistance since late 2023, by some estimates. The State Department recently told Congress about another $8 billion proposed deal to sell Israel munitions and artillery shells.

“It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the red lines have all just been a smokescreen,” said Stephen Walt, a professor of international affairs at Harvard Kennedy School and a preeminent authority on US policy in the region. “The Biden administration decided to be all in and merely pretended that it was trying to do something about it.”

Throughout the contentious year inside the State Department, senior leaders repeatedly disregarded their own experts.

They cracked down on leaks by threatening criminal investigations and classifying material that was critical of Israel.

Some of the US top Middle East diplomats complained in private that they were sidelined by Biden’s National Security Council.

The council also distributed a list of banned phrases, including any version of “State of Palestine” that didn’t have the word “future” first.

Two human rights officials said they were prevented from pursuing evidence of abuses in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

During a series of internal State Department meetings, top regional diplomats voiced their frustrations about messaging and appearances. Hady Amr, one of the government’s highest-ranking authorities on Palestinian affairs, said he was reluctant to address large groups about the administration’s Israel policy.

US Ambassador to Israel Jack Lew told the Times of Israel he worried that a generation of young Americans would harbor anti-Israel sentiments into the future.

The repercussions for the United States and the region will play out for years.

Protests have erupted outside the American embassies in Muslim-majority countries like Indonesia, the world’s third-largest democracy, while polls show Arab Americans grew increasingly hostile to their government stateside.

By the summer, State Department analysts in the Middle East sent cables to Washington expressing concerns that the Israeli military’s conduct would only inflame tensions in the West Bank and galvanize young Palestinians to take up arms against Israel.

On Wednesday, after months of negotiations, Israel and Hamas reached a ceasefire deal.

Early reports suggest if the Biden administration had followed through on its tough words, a deal could have been reached earlier, saving lives.

“Netanyahu’s conclusion was that Biden doesn’t have enough oomph to make him pay a price, so he was willing to ignore him,” said Ghaith al-Omari, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute.

“Part of it is that Netanyahu learned there is no cost to saying ‘no’ to the current president,” Omari said.

Over the past 15 months, Israeli soldiers have videotaped themselves burning food supplies and ransacking homes. One Israeli military group reportedly said, “Our job is to flatten Gaza.”

Israel’s defenders within the US administration acknowledge the devastating human toll but contend that American arms have helped Israel advance Western interests in the region and protect itself from other enemies.

January 16, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Houthi: Israel ‘failed miserably’ in onslaught on Gaza Strip

Press TV – January 16, 2025

The leader of Yemen’s Ansarullah resistance movement says Israel “failed miserably” in the Gaza Strip, and that the US and the Tel Aviv regime were forced to accept the ceasefire agreement with Hamas after committing horrific crimes for months.

“The announcement of a ceasefire agreement in Gaza is an important development. The Israeli enemy and the US were forced to agree to the deal after months of horrendous atrocities,” Abdul-Malik al-Houthi said in a televised speech on Thursday evening.

“The Israeli enemy, with full American complicity, continued its efforts to exterminate the Palestinians in Gaza, committing more than 4,050 massacres,” the Ansarullah chief said.

Houthi said the Israeli military indiscriminately targeted all Palestinians in Gaza, attacking all sections of the society in a barbaric manner.

“The Israeli enemy subjected prisoners and captives to the most heinous forms of torture, violating human dignity. The plight of Gaza marks a gross injustice that can neither be denied nor ignored.

“The steadfastness of resistance fighters in Gaza, under the most challenging circumstances and with the most basic means, is truly praiseworthy,” Houthi stated.

The Ansarullah leader emphasized that the Israeli army failed in Gaza despite possessing sophisticated weapons and extensive intelligence operations aimed at ending the resistance front and eliminating all its fighters.

“The Israeli enemy failed in Gaza even though it employed all tactics to decisively win the battle, with full US support. The Palestinians in Gaza stood firm despite being subjected to daily extermination and all forms of terror that many other nations cannot endure.”

The Ansarullah leader said the Americans had no option but to accept an agreement after a major failure.

Many Israeli leaders, media figures, and research centers were in a state of despair and frustration as well, he said.

“The Israeli enemy failed to achieve any of its declared objectives, and dismally could not release its captives without a prisoner exchange deal. It also failed to displace Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.

“What the Israeli enemy achieved in Gaza is an enormous record of unprecedented crimes within a limited expanse of land,” Houthi pointed out.

He also noted that the Palestinian nation was not protected by international organizations, which represent themselves as so-called advocates of justice and human rights.

“The United Nations was mocked and ridiculed by Israelis, with criminal [Benjamin] Netanyahu at its very platform. The world body, however, took no concrete action against the Israeli enemy.

“At the very least, the UN should have rinsed out the deep shame of recognizing Israel and granting it membership. The international community did not intervene to impose a no-fly zone over occupied Palestinian terrorists and establish safe zones, as is the case with other regions,” he said.

Houthi criticized Arab governments for their inaction, as well as their abject failure to politically and economically boycott the Zionist regime and support the Palestinian nation.

Elsewhere in his speech, Houthi stated that Yemeni forces have conducted operations to support Gaza under very difficult conditions, emphasizing that such strikes have significantly affected Israel.

“We carried out 1,255 operations involving ballistic, cruise and hypersonic missiles, drones as well as unmanned underwater vehicles. We worked diligently to do everything possible in support of Gaza, continuously developing our capabilities and escalating our operations,” he said.

Houthi stressed that the US, from the onset of the Gaza genocidal war, sought to provide full protection to Israel, threatening regional countries against taking any action in support of Palestinians.

“The US deployed its naval fleets and provided military and technological protection, intercepting any attacks targeting the Israeli-occupied lands. Certain regimes even collaborated with the US in intercepting missiles and drones launched towards the occupied lands.

“American aircraft carriers and warships initially intercepted some missiles; but now they can barely shoot them down and often resort to retreat,” the Ansarullah leader said.

Houti emphasized that Yemen will continue its pro-Palestinian military operations in case the Israeli enemy insists on its genocidal campaign and reneges on implementing the ceasefire agreement.

He said a total of 106 Yemenis have been killed and another 328 wounded in the course of aggression carried out by the US, Britain and Israel against Yemen.

The Ansarullah leader finally called upon all Yemeni people to participate in mass pro-Palestinian rallies across the country on Friday, reaffirming their unflinching support for Palestinians to the entire world.

January 16, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment