The Cold War Racket Is Back
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | March 7, 2023
Chinese leader Xi Jinping has issued a direct critique against the U.S. government’s policy of containment when it comes to China. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, the critique is unusual in that it comes directly from China’s leader rather than indirectly through governmental spokespersons.
The Journal article quotes Shirley Martey Hargis, fellow at the Washington think tank Atlantic Council, who suggests that Xi might just be shifting the blame for economic problems in China. “It’s either take the blame or shift it,” she said.
Notwithstanding China’s economic problems, however, the fact is that Xi is right. There is no denying that U.S. national-security establishment, led by the Pentagon and the CIA, have been pursuing a Cold War policy of containment against China, with the aim of renewing its old Cold War racket.
Of course, as the Russians will attest, the Pentagon and the CIA have been doing the same with them — doing everything they can to gin up their old Cold War racket against Russia, just as they are doing against China.
Take a look at this map. You might be shocked, or maybe not. It displays the number of U.S. military bases near China. Tom Orsag, a freelance leftist journalist, points out that “China is effectively encircled by US bases all across the Pacific.” Orsag adds, “The U.S. is the biggest bully in the Pacific, with rings of military bases blocking and threatening China.”
Now, take a look at this map. It depicts the number of Chinese military bases near the United States. Number? Zero! In fact, according to an article at Eurasia Times entitled “Over 750 Military Bases Across 80 Countries: How US Military Overshadows China In Projecting Power Overseas,” China has the grand total of one foreign military base — in Djibouti, which is more than 7,000 miles away from the United States.
Take a look at this map. It shows the number of U.S. military bases near both Russia and China.
Now, take a look at this map again. It shows the number of Russian military bases near the United States. Number? Zero!
Let’s just imagine that the situation was reversed. Let’s assume that the United States had no military bases overseas whatsoever and had a non-empire, non-interventionist foreign policy. And let’s imagine that the United States was encircled by the same number of Russian and Chinese military bases that the Pentagon and the CIA have encircling Russia and China.
What do you think would be the reaction of U.S. officials? My hunch is that they would be going ballistic and directly objecting to China’s and Russia’s policy of encircling and containing the United States, just as Russia and China are currently objecting to U.S. encirclement and containment of their countries.
Are China and Russia justified in their concern over the Pentagon’s encirclement of their nations? Martin Luther King, whose birthday U.S. officials honor each year with a federal holiday, pointed out that the United States was the greatest purveyor of violence in the world. And that was before the U.S. invasions and wars of aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq! Given such, why wouldn’t China and Russia be concerned about being encircled and contained by the Pentagon and the CIA?
The Wall Street Journal article cited above quotes Jessica Chen Weiss, a Cornell University professor and former State Department advisor, saying in response to the escalating tensions between China and the U.S., “The current tit-for-tat spiral serves no one.”
Is Weiss really that innocent and naive? Serves no one? Are you kidding me? It serves the entire U.S. national-security establishment, including its army of “defense” contractors who eat out our substance by feeding voraciously at the public trough. The current tit-for-tat gives the U.S. national-security establishment its old — and extremely lucrative — Cold War racket back.
China warns of ‘critical juncture’ in Ukraine conflict
RT | March 7, 2023
The conflict in Ukraine will spin of control if a peace process does not start soon, Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang has said.
The fighting between Russia and Ukraine has reached a “critical juncture,” Qin stated during his annual press conference in Beijing on Tuesday.
“There will either be cessation of hostilities, restoration of peace and a move towards political settlement, or fuel will be added to the fire, the crisis will expand, and the situation will get out of control,” he warned.
The diplomat pointed out that now is the time for “calmness, sanity and dialogue,” insisting that talks “should start as soon as possible.”
“The legitimate security concerns of all parties should be respected” during the negotiations, as this is the only way to achieve long-term peace and stability in Europe, he said.
Qin also expressed regret that previous attempts to launch a peace process to end the conflict had been “repeatedly undermined.”
“There is an ‘invisible hand’ pushing the conflict towards escalation and trying to use the Ukrainian crisis to serve a certain geopolitical agenda,” he said.
Moscow has repeatedly said the conflict in Ukraine is a “proxy war” waged against Russia by the US and its NATO allies, which provide Kiev with weapons, funds and intelligence.
Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated that Moscow was ready to consider peace proposals “that are made out of sincere desire to find a political solution” to the crisis. However, Lavrov pointed out that there haven’t been any such serious peace offers coming from either Kiev or its Western backers since last March. On the contrary, “Ukraine is being persuaded to continue the fighting,” he said.
During his press conference, Qin also spoke about the significance of relations between Russia and China. Over the past year, Beijing resisted Western pressure to condemn and sanction Moscow, while consistently calling for a peaceful resolution of the crisis.
“The more turbulent the world is, the more steadily the Chinese-Russian relations should move forward,” the Chinese FM said.
Cooperation between Beijing and Moscow will “provide impetus for multipolarization of the world and democracy in international relations; global strategic balance and stability will be assured through it,” he stated.
What they are talking about on the Russian talk shows today: full war mobilization!
By Gilbert Doctorow | March 7, 2023
A month ago I was asked by a retired U.S. lieutenant colonel in a private email correspondence whether Vladimir Putin would be announcing general mobilization in his State of the Union address on 21 February. I answered with full confidence that this was unfounded speculation, that the Russian war effort was going well in the estimation of the Kremlin, that they expect the imminent capture of Artyomovsk (Bakhmut), opening the way for Russia to assume full possession of the Donbas.
Indeed, the fighting in and around Artyomovsk today continues to favor the Russians, notwithstanding the latest dispatch of 10,000 or more Ukrainian army forces to keep open supply lines to their comrades in the nearly surrounded city, who number perhaps 20,000.
Meanwhile, the United States and its NATO allies have come to agreement on what further heavy equipment they can ship to Ukraine in support of Kiev’s planned counteroffensive later this spring. Several Leopard tanks have already been delivered by Poland; more are on their way from other countries. And, as Russian television has been showing for the past 24 hours, there is an enormous stock of American armored personnel carriers, self-propelled artillery, HIMARS launchers and other equipment now stored on the quays of the Polish port of Gdansk awaiting delivery to Ukraine.
In this context, the discussion in Washington and European capitals over how far they can go without crossing Russia’s red lines and triggering a hot war between Russia and NATO is being bypassed by events. As the latest editions of prime news and discussion programs Sixty Minutes and Evening with Vladimir Solovyov indicate, Russia’s political elites consider that these lines have been crossed, with or without delivery of the F-16 fighter jets requested by Zelensky; with or without the latest version of the Leopards or the Abrams tanks promised by the USA. The Russians also speak openly on television about the Polish, French and Italian ‘mercenaries’ whom their troops in Donbas are overhearing daily on the front lines, and there is no question but that these are in effect NATO officers, not volunteers from the street.
The ‘fog of war’ distortions and blatant propaganda over the status of the Ukraine war that we see daily in mainstream electronic and print media in the West are being cleared away by very realistic assessments of the intentions and capabilities of the sides that I now see on the aforementioned talk shows. The information being broadcast is coming from war correspondents in the field, from front line commanders themselves and from expert analysts-Duma members of various parties, as well as from among academics and think tank directors.
The Financial Times may be just a sounding board for the Zelensky regime. Sixty Minutes and the Solovyov show are far more nuanced, self-critical and helpful for the broad Russian public to understand the challenge their country is facing as it goes up against the entire U.S.-led West in economic and military warfare.
These programs are unquestionably preparing the Russian public for mobilization of the economy to a full war footing and for further call-ups of reservists and recruits to join the fight. At the same time, I see demands that the government adopt a much more repressive policy at home to purge the country of fence-sitters, implementing a policy well-known to Americans from the time of President George W. Bush: ‘you are either with us or you are against us.’
The recent cases of sabotage and attempted political assassinations within Russia perpetrated by treasonous Russian nationals or by teams of Ukrainians who passed through the porous border have given rise to demands to ‘get tough’ and follow the practices put in place by Stalin, namely summary execution of saboteurs and ‘enemies of the people.’
It must be stressed that until now the Russian government has been lenient towards its domestic critics and enemies. Western talk of an ‘authoritarian’ or ‘autocratic’ Kremlin has just been libelous propaganda. However, by encouraging the Kiev regime to deploy every kind of despicable attack on Russia up to and including use of chemical and biological weapons on the field of battle, as the Russians now report is the case, Washington is making a mockery of international law and inviting Russia to wage all-out war.
In this regard, I point to the remarks of Belarus president Alexander Lukashenko before and during his visit to Beijing a week ago: he remarked that the present moment should not be lost, that all sides should be pressuring the warring parties to declare a cease-fire and enter into peace negotiations. Lukashenko argued that Russia had not yet unleashed its military potential, had not yet mobilized its economy and its society for total war, but that was sure to come if the conflict is allowed to proceed and thus to escalate further.
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2023
How Could Western Intelligence Have Got It Wrong, Again? They Didn’t. They Had Other Purposes
By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 6, 2023
Larry Johnson, an ex-CIA analyst, writes “I no longer hold clearances and have not had access to the classified intelligence assessments. However, I have heard that the finished intelligence being supplied to U.S. policymakers continues to declare that Russia is on the ropes – and their economy is crumbling. Also, analysts insist that the Ukrainians are beating the Russians”.
Johnson responds that – lacking valid human sources – “western agencies are almost wholly dependent today on ‘liaison reporting’” (i.e., from ‘friendly’ foreign intelligence services), without doing ‘due diligence’ by cross-checking discrepancies with other reporting.
In practice, this largely means western reporting simply replicates Kiev’s PR line. But there does occur a huge problem when marrying Kiev’s output (as Johnson says) to UK reports – for ‘corroboration’.
The reality is UK reporting itself is also based on what Ukraine is saying. This is known as false collateral – i.e., when that which is used for corroboration and validation actually derives from the same single source. It becomes – deliberately – a propaganda multiplier.
In plain words however, all these points are ‘red herrings’. Bluntly, so-called western ‘Intelligence’ is no longer the sincere attempt to understand a complex reality, but rather, it has become the tool to falsify a nuanced reality in order to attempt to manipulate the Russian psyche towards a collective defeatism (in respect not just to the Ukraine, but to the idea that Russia should remain as a sovereign whole).
And – to the extent that ‘lies’ are fabricated to accustom the Russian public to inevitable defeat – the obverse edge clearly is intended to train the western public towards the ‘groupthink’ that victory is inevitable. And that Russia is an ‘unreformed evil Empire’ which threatens all Europe.
This is no accident. It is highly purposeful. It is behavioural psychology at work. The ‘head-spinning’ disorientation created throughout the Covid pandemic; the constant rain of ‘data-driven’ model analysis, the labelling of anything critical of the ‘uniform messaging’ as anti-social disinformation – enabled western governments to persuade their citizens that ‘lockdown’ was the only rational answer to the virus. It was not true (as we now know), but the ‘pilot’ behavioural nudge-psychology trial worked better – better even than its own architects had imagined.
Professor of Clinical Psychology, Mattias Desmet, has explained that mass disorientation does not form in a vacuum. It arises, throughout history, from a collective psychosis that has followed a predictable script:
Just as with lockdown, governments have used behavioural psychology to instil fear and isolation to mass large groups of people into herds, where toxic sneering at any contrariness cold-shoulders all critical thinking or analysis. It is more comfortable being inside the herd, than out.
The dominant characteristic here is remaining loyal to the group – even when the policy is working badly and its consequences disturb the conscience of members. Loyalty to the group becomes the highest form of morality. That loyalty requires each member to avoid raising controversial issues, questioning weak arguments, or calling a halt to wishful thinking.
The ‘Groupthink’ allows some self-imagined reality to detach; to drift further and further from any connection to reality, and then to transit into delusion – always drawing on like-minded peer cheerleaders for its validation and extended radicalisation.
So, it’s ‘goodbye’ to traditional Intelligence! And ‘welcome’ to western Intelligence 101: Geo-Politics no longer revolves around a grasp on Reality. It is about the installation of ideological pseudo-realism – which is the universal installation of a singular groupthink, such that everyone lives passively by it, until it is far too late to change course.
Superficially, this may seem clever new psyops – even ‘cool’. It is not. It is dangerous. By deliberately working on deeply ingrained fears and trauma (i.e. the Great Patriotic War for Russians (WW2)), it awakens a type of multi-generational existential plight within the collective unconscious – that of total annihilation – which is a danger that America has never faced, and towards which there is zero American empathetic understanding.
Perhaps, by resurrecting long, collective memories of plague in European countries (such as Italy) western governments have found that they were able to mobilise their citizens around a policy of coercion, that otherwise ran wholly against their own interests. But nations have their own distinct myths and civilisational mores.
If that were the purpose (to acclimatise Russians to defeat and ultimate Balkanisation), Western propaganda has not only failed, but it has achieved the converse. Russians have coalesced closely together against an existential western threat – and are prepared to ‘go to the wall’, if necessary, in defeating it. (Let those implications sink in.)
On the other hand, falsely promoting a picture of inevitable success for the West inevitably has raised expectations of a political outcome that is not only not feasible, but which recedes further into the far horizon, as these fantastical claims of Russian setbacks persuade European leaders that Russia can accept an outcome in line with their constructed false reality.
Another ‘own goal’: The West now faces the task of de-fusing the landmine of their own electorate’s conviction of a Ukraine ‘win’, and of Russian humiliation and decomposition. There will be anger and further distrust for the Élites in the West to follow. Existential risk ensues when people believe nothing the élites say.
Plainly put, this resort to clever ‘nudge theories’ has succeeded only in toxifying the prospect for political discourse. Neither the U.S. nor Russia can now move directly to pure political discourse :
Firstly, the parties inevitably must come to some tacit psychological assimilation of two quite dis-connected realities, now hyped into palpable, vital beings through these psychological ‘Intelligence’ techniques. There will be no acceptance by either side of the validity or moral rightness of the Other Reality’s, yet its emotive contents must be acknowledged psychically – together with the traumas underlying them – if politics is to be unlocked.
In short, this western exaggerated psyops perversely is likely to lengthen the war until facts-on-the ground finally grind the contrasting expectations closer to what may be the ‘new possible’. Ultimately, when perceived realities cannot be ‘matched’ and nuanced, war rubs one or the other into more emollient form.
The degeneracy in western intelligence did not start with the recent collective ‘excitement’ at the possibilities of ‘nudge-psychology’. The first steps in this direction began with a shift in ethos reaching back to the Clinton/Thatcher era in which the intelligence services were ‘neo-liberalised’.
No longer was the role of ‘devil’s advocate’ – of bringing ‘bad news’ (i.e. hard-edged Realism) to the relevant political leadership valued; instead what was inserted was a radical shift towards ‘Business School’ practice of services being tasked with ‘adding value’ to existing government policies, and (even) of creating ‘a market’ system in Intelligence!
The politician-managers demanded ‘good news’. And to make ‘it stick’, funding was tied to the ‘value added’ – with administrators skilled at managing bureaucracy moved into leadership jobs. It marked the end to classical Intelligence – which always was an art, rather than science.
In short, it was the outset to fixing the intelligence around policies (to add value), rather than the traditional function of shaping policies to sound analysis.
In the U.S., the politicisation of intelligence reached its apex with Dick Cheney’s initiation of a Team ‘B’ intelligence unit reporting personally to him. It was intended to furnish the anti-intelligence to combat the intelligence service output. Of course, the Team ‘B’ initiative shook confidence amongst the analysts, and by-passed the work of the traditional cadre – just as Cheney had intended. (He had a war (the Iraq war) to justify).
But there were separately other structural shifts. Firstly, by 2000, woke narcissism had begun to eclipse strategic thought –creating its own novel groupthink. The West just could not shake off the sense of itself at the centre of the Universe (albeit no longer in a racial sense, but via its awakening to ‘victim politics’ – requiring endless redress and reparations – and such woke values serendipitously seemed to anoint the West with a renewed global ‘moral primacy’).
In a parallel shift, U.S. neo-cons piggy-backed on this new woke universalism to cement the meme of ‘Empire matters primordially’. The unspoken corollary to this, of course, is that original values of the American Republic or of Europe, cannot be re-conceived and brought forward into the present, as long as ‘liberal’ Empire groupthink configures them as a threat to western security. This conundrum and struggle lies at the heart of U.S. politics today.
Yet the question remains just how can the intelligence being supplied to U.S. policymakers insist that Russia is imploding economically, and that Ukraine is winning – against what can be easily observed facts on the ground?
Well, no problem; Washington think-tanks have big, big finance from the Military Industrial World, with the preponderance of these funds going to the neo-cons – and their insistence that Russia is a small ‘gas-station’ posing as a state, and not a power to be taken seriously.
Neo-con claws tear at anyone gain-saying their ‘line’ – and think-tanks employ an army of ‘analysts’ to turn out ‘academic’ reports suggesting that Russia’s industry – to the extent it exists at all – is imploding. Since last March, western military and economic experts have been regularly-as-clockwork, predicting that Russia has run out of missiles, drones, tanks and artillery shells – and is expending its manpower throwing human-waves of untrained troops upon the Ukrainian siege lines.
The logic is plain, but again flawed. If a combined NATO struggles to supply artillery shells, Russia with the economy the size of a small EU state (logically) must be worse off. And if only we (the U.S.) threaten China hard enough against supplying Russia, then the latter will ultimately run out of munitions – and NATO supported Ukraine ‘will win’.
The logic then is that a war prolonged (until the money runs out) must deliver a Russia bereft of munitions, and NATO-supplied Ukraine ‘wins’.
This framing is entirely wrong because of conceptual differences: Russian history is one of Total War that is fought in a long, ‘all-out’, uncompromising engagement against an overwhelming peer force. But inherent to this idea, is its all-important grounding in the conviction that such wars are fought over the course of years, with their outcomes conditioned by the capacity to surge military production.
Conceptually, the U.S. shifted in the 1980s away from its post-war military-industrial paradigm, to off-shore manufacturing to Asia and to ‘just-in-time’ supply lines. Effectively, the U.S. (and the West) shifted in the opposite direction to ‘surge capacity’, whereas Russia did not: It kept alive the notion of sustainment which had contributed to saving Russia during the Great Patriotic War.
So, western intelligence services again got it wrong; they misread the reality? No, they didn’t get it ‘wrong’. Their purpose was different.
The few who got it right were mercilessly caricatured as stooges to make them seem absurd. And Intelligence 101 was re-conceived as the purposeful denialism of all off-Team thinking, whilst the majority of western citizens would live passively in the embrace the groupthink – until too late for them to awaken, and to change the dangerous course on which their societies were embarked.
Unverified Ukrainian reports (liaison reporting) served up to western leaders therefore is not a ‘glitch’ – it is a ‘feature’ of the new Intelligence 101 paradigm intended to confuse and dull its electorate.
US Foreign Policy Goes “Woke”?
Regime change in store for cultural conservatives?

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • MARCH 7, 2023
It is generally observed that imperial powers like the United States frequently interfere in foreign governments in support of economic or hard political reasons. To be sure, Washington has refined the process so it can plausibly deny that it is interfering at all, that the change is spontaneous and comes from the people and institutions in the country that is being targeted for change. One recalls how handing out cookies in Maidan Square in Kiev served as an incentive wrapped around a publicity stunt to bring about regime change in Ukraine in 2014 when Senator John McCain and the State Department’s Victoria Nuland were featured performers in a $5 billion investment by the US government to topple the friendly-to-Russia regime of President Viktor Yanukovych. Of course, change for the sake of a short-term objective might not always be the best way to go and one might suggest that the success in bringing in a new government acceptable to Nuland has not really turned out that well for Ukraine and the Ukrainian people, nor for those Americans who understand that the Biden Administration’s pledge to arm Ukraine and stay in the fight against Russia “as long as it takes” just might not be very good for the United States either.
And the United States continues to be at it, meddling in what was once regarded as something like a war crime, though it now prefers to conceal what it is up to by preaching “democracy” and wrapping the message in “woke-ish progressivism” at every opportunity. An interesting recent trip by a senior government official that was not reported in the mainstream media suggests that the game is still afoot in Eastern Europe. The early February visitor was Samantha Power, currently head of USAID, and a familiar figure from the Barack Obama Administration, where she served as Ambassador to the United Nations and was a dedicated liberal interventionist involved in the Libya debacle as well as various other wars started by that estimable Nobel Peace Prize recipient after he had received his award. The Obama attack on Syria has been sustained until this day, with several American military bases continuing to function on Syrian territory, stealing the country’s oil and agricultural produce.
USAID was founded in 1961 and it was intended to serve as a vehicle for nurturing democratic government and associated civic institutions among nations that had little or no experience in popular government. That role has become less relevant as nation states have evolved and the organization itself has responded by becoming more assertive in its role, pushing policies that have coincided with US foreign policy objectives. This has led some host nations to close down USAID offices. Within the US government itself, participants in foreign policy formulation often observe that USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) now are largely in the business of doing what the CIA used to do, i.e. interfering in local politics by supporting opposition parties and other dissident or even terrorist groups. Both organizations were very active in Ukraine in 2014 and served as conduits for money transfers to the opposition parties and those who were hostile to Russia’s influence for “democracy building.”
Samantha Power, who is married to another Democratic Party affiliated power broker, lawyer Cass Sunstein, traveled to Hungary on her diplomatic passport but took pains to cover her travel as a routine bureaucratic visit to an overseas post. Hungary is undeniably a democracy, is a member of the European Union, and also of NATO, but Power reportedly did not clear the travel with the Hungarian government and apparently did not meet with any government officials, even as a courtesy. She tweeted that her visit was to reestablish USAID in the Hungarian capital, “Great to be here in Budapest with @USAmbHungary where @USAID just relaunched new, locally-driven initiatives to help independent media thrive and reach new audiences, take on corruption and increase civic engagement.”
By “independent media” Power clearly meant that the US will be directly supporting opposition press that is anti-government and which embraces the globalist-progressive view currently favored by the White House. A US Embassy press release on the visit revealed that Power was in town as part of a project to relaunch seven USAID programs throughout Eastern Europe. It did not elaborate on the “corruption” that Power intended to address, which, of course, would have been a direct insult to the local governments wherever she intended to visit, nor did the document reveal that many of the groups that will be supported are likely to be affiliated with “globalist” George Soros.
In Budapest, Samantha Power did indeed meet with opposition political figures and civil organizations and groups, with particular emphasis on the homosexual community including “Joined @divaDgiV, @andraslederer, and @viki radvanyi for lunch in Budapest where we spoke about their work to advocate for LGBTQI+ rights and dignity in Hungary and around the world @budapestpride” as described in one of her tweeted messages after arrival. Power was also accompanied throughout by the highly controversial US Ambassador David Pressman, who is openly homosexual, of course, married to a man, and who has been highly critical of the conservative Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government, which was reelected in 2022 by a landslide margin in a vote that was considered free and fair. Orban is disliked by Joe Biden’s Washington because he is conservative and a nationalist, not because he is incompetent or dishonest while Pressman was and is a perfect example of the Biden State Department sending a terrible fit as ambassador to an extremely conservative country just to make points with the gay community in the US. Pressman has persisted in telling Hungarians how to behave not only on foreign policy but also on sexual diversity and cultural issues and, for his efforts, was finally told to “shut up” by Hungary’s Foreign Minister.
To be sure, Hungary’s undeniably democratic government, which is politically and economically tied to Washington, does not support the United States-led strategy to prolong and even escalate the Russia-Ukraine war and will not contribute to arming Ukraine. It does not accept “globalist” open immigration that seeks to challenge the established national culture, and also opposes same-sex marriage on religious grounds. It does not allow LGBTQ material to be presented to minors in state schools, which it considers to be morally correct anti-pedophilia legislation. For that reason, the time was clearly right, in the “woke” view of the Biden Administration, for Samantha Power to show up with a little dose of regime change in her portfolio. Hungarian officials had already expressed their concern over what they consider extreme pressure coming from the United States, largely because Hungary is a conservative country that values its culture and political independence. The visit by Power sent a signal to the Hungarian government and people that the pressure will likely increase and that Washington will not hesitate to use its embassies and overseas military bases to actively support groups that promote views that are not generally embraced by the local populations.
The Samantha Power story is of interest, to be sure, because it demonstrates that since the United States is the self-appointed enforcer of the “rules based international order” nothing in the world is off limits. Far too many US politicians and media pundits think that other states are not really sovereign and have to submit to US dictates in everything, and if they dare to step out of line they can be punished. If a conservative Christian country or leader – by which one might include Hungary, Russia or Brazil – believes that homosexuality or even abortion on demand are morally objectionable the US now believes that it has a mandate to use federal government resources to change that perception including by actively engaging with a foreign nation and its government on its own soil. To put it bluntly, the United States must certainly be considered the world leader in compelling all nations to conform to the political and moral values that it insists be adhered to.
So if one wants to learn why US Foreign Policy is so inept in terms of actually serving the interests of the American people, look no farther than was has happened and continues to roil in Ukraine as well as the implications of the Samantha Power visit to Hungary. For Foreign Service Posts, providing support for the agendas of the collection of freak shows that make up the Democratic Party has become manifestly as or even more important than promoting genuine national interests overseas or assisting American businesses and travelers.
What is perhaps most interesting is the way the “woke” foreign policy is being largely concealed from the American public and is being run as some kind of stealth operation. One initiative run by USAID in Macedonia in 2016 under President Obama included a $300,000 grant for “suitable” Macedonian applicants to “fund” a program entitled “LGBTI Inclusion” to counter how “Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons continue to suffer discrimination and homophobic media content, both online and offline… Considerable efforts are still needed to raise awareness of and respect for diversity within society and to counter intolerance.” How many American taxpayers would be happy to learn that their hard-earned money has been going to support programs run in nonconsenting foreign democracies to make them more “woke?” Of course, no one in the Biden Administration is telling the public about it, nor is the story likely to appear in the mainstream media, so presumably no one will know!
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.
The Future Food False Flag
Corbett • 03/06/2023
Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
The food supply is under attack. But by whom? And for what purpose? Find out the dirty truth about the global food crisis and how the powers-that-shouldn’t-be are trying to use this crisis as an opportunity to usher in the Great Food Reset on today’s fast-paced edition of The Corbett Report podcast.
Watch on Archive / BitChute / Odysee / Rokfin / Rumble / Substack / Download the mp4
For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.
For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).
DOCUMENTATION
| The Attack on Food Symposium + Solutions to Fight Back | |
| Time Reference: | 01:07 |
| At least two people injured in explosion at Hermiston food plant | |
| Time Reference: | 02:52 |
| Massive Fire Engulfs Salinas Food Processing Plant; Neighborhoods Evacuated | |
| Time Reference: | 03:06 |
| Fire at Maricopa Food Pantry destroys 40,000 pounds of food | |
| Time Reference: | 03:18 |
| Dade City poultry farm fire likely killed 250,000 chickens | |
| Time Reference: | 03:30 |
| West Side food processing plant left with smoke damage after fire, SAFD says | |
| Time Reference: | 03:39 |
| Crews battle large commercial fire at nut processing plant in Sutter County | |
| Time Reference: | 03:48 |
| Potato-Processing Plant Fire In Belfast, Maine Leads To Shelter-In-Place Order | |
| Time Reference: | 03:59 |
| Fire kills tens of thousands of chickens at Wright County farm | |
| Time Reference: | 04:13 |
| Meat Processing Facility Catches Fire | |
| Time Reference: | 04:22 |
| Zeemap of food processing incidents 2021-2022 | |
| Time Reference: | 05:37 |
| FBI warns of cyberattacks on US food plants after a dozen hit by mysterious fires | |
| Time Reference: | 07:30 |
| Cyberattack on Dole | |
| Time Reference: | 09:39 |
| Up Next: The Collapse of the Food Supply Chain | |
| Time Reference: | 10:46 |
| Rahm Emanuel on the Opportunities of Crisis | |
| Time Reference: | 14:15 |
| Ian Bremmer – Beyond 2023: A Global Outlook | |
| Time Reference: | 14:25 |
| Henry Kissinger (HQ) Obama and The New World Order 1/5/09 | |
| Time Reference: | 14:35 |
| How a misunderstanding about Chinese characters has led many astray | |
| Time Reference: | 15:11 |
| Eating Bioengineered Spores | |
| Time Reference: | 17:32 |
| Israeli Company’s Pioneering ‘Sweet Proteins’ | |
| Time Reference: | 19:28 |
| Nicole Kidman Eats Bugs | Secret Talent Theatre | Vanity Fair | |
| Time Reference: | 21:08 |
| Eating bugs to save the planet | |
| Time Reference: | 21:13 |
| Why you will be eating bugs very soon | James Rolin | TEDxBozeman | |
| Time Reference: | 21:36 |
| This London insect farm is changing the way we eat | Pioneers for Our Planet | |
| Time Reference: | 22:36 |
| EATING JAMES FRANCO: Bite Lab Wants to Experiment with Celebrity Tissue to Make Edible Meats | |
| Time Reference: | 23:46 |
| Insects on the menu as EU approves two for human consumption | |
| Time Reference: | 25:44 |
| What is the Future of Food? | |
| Time Reference: | 26:31 |
| Who is Behind the Great Food Reset? | |
| Time Reference: | 27:37 |
| The Gates/Rockefeller “Green Revolution” Scam Exposed | |
| Time Reference: | 27:57 |
| Glyphosate Now the Most-Used Agricultural Chemical Ever | |
| Time Reference: | 30:04 |
| Bill Gates-Backed Vegan Burgers Hit Mainstream With Safeway Deal | |
| Time Reference: | 30:58 |
| America’s Biggest Owner Of Farmland Is Now Bill Gates | |
| Time Reference: | 31:20 |
| “insects” search on World Economic Forum website | |
| Time Reference: | 32:08 |
| EAT – who we are | |
| Time Reference: | 32:22 |
| USAID: Systemic Solutions for Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in Agriculture, Nutrition, And Food Systems | |
| Time Reference: | 32:55 |
| Another Globalist “Simulation” Comes True (Food Chain Reaction exercise) | |
| Time Reference: | 33:45 |
| Biodigital Convergence: Bombshell Document Reveals the True Agenda | |
| Time Reference: | 39:59 |
| The Future of Food (Is Ours to Decide) | |
| Time Reference: | 41:57 |
Florida GOP Declares War On The First Amendment to ‘Combat Anti-Semitism’
By Chris Menahan | Information Liberation | March 5, 2023
“The Free State of Florida” is set to have the most oppressive hate crime laws in America in order to “combat anti-Semitism.”
“There is no First Amendment right to conduct,” Jewish Florida State Rep. Randy Fine told the media earlier this week. “If you graffiti a building, it is a crime now, but if your motivation is hate, it will be a third-degree felony and you will spend five years in prison. If you want to litter, it’s a crime right now, but if you litter and your motivation is a hate crime, it will be a third-degree felony and you will spend 5 years in jail.”
The bill was put forward by the GOP to silence the “Goyim Defense League” who’ve been sharing anti-Semitic flyers in Florida neighborhoods and holding up anti-Semitic banners over bridges which are critical of Jews.
Florida Rep. Mike Caruso told reporter Chris Nelson on Friday that the bill “makes anti-Semitism a hate crime.”
“If we do nothing we are going to have 1933’s Nazi Germany all over again,” Caruso said.
The Florida GOP is expected to pass their new hate crime bill this legislative session.
If Governor Ron DeSantis signs the bill into law, Florida will have worse hate crime laws than California, New York, Connecticut and every other state in the Union.
Silence is not an option, and sending weapons to Ukraine perpetuates the war
By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | March 6, 2023
As is usually the case in long wars, the warring parties and their affiliated media in the Russia-Ukraine conflict have painted each other using uncompromising language, making it nearly impossible to offer an unbiased view of the ongoing tragedy that has killed, wounded and displaced millions of people.
While it is understandable that wars of such horror and near complete disregard for the most basic human rights often heighten our sense of what we consider to be moral and just, parties involved and invested in such conflicts often manipulate morality for political and geopolitical reasons. This logic is underway in Ukraine. Both sides are adamant that nothing less than a comprehensive victory is acceptable. The Ukrainian view is fully supported by western countries in word and deed, sending billions of dollars’ worth of modern weapons that have done little except make an already bloody conflict worse. They perpetuate the war, not end it.
The Russians hardly see their war in Ukraine as a war against Ukraine itself. In his speech on the first anniversary of the war, Russian President Vladimir Putin presented the war as an act of self-defence. “They are the ones who started this war, and we are using our forces to put a stop to it,” said Putin in a joint session of the Russian Parliament and Kremlin officials.
NATO members have also characterised the war using similar language. “We are fighting Russia,” said Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock. Although her statement was withdrawn later on, Baerbock was actually being honest: NATO and Russia are, indeed, at war.
The narratives of both sides, however, are both complex and polarised. To even attempt to offer a third view on the war, or to even approach the subject in a purely analytical manner, immediately qualifies one to be accused of being “biased” one way or the other. Each side believes that its version of the truth is moral, historically defensible and consistent with international law. As a result, many reasonable people find themselves retreating in silence.
Silence is an immoral position, especially during times of war and human suffering. Anyone who thinks otherwise should think again. In Islamic theology, it is accepted that, “Anyone who refrains himself from speaking the truth is a mute devil.” This maxim is shared by most modern philosophies and political ideologies. Among many such statements addressing the matter, one of the most powerful assertions by Dr Martin Luther King Jr. was, “The day we see truth and cease to speak is the day we begin to die.”
Yet, there is no single truth on the Ukraine war that can remain fully truthful after being placed within a larger context. The war on Ukraine is indeed illegal; but the preceding civil war in Donbas and the violated Minsk agreements at the behest of Western powers — as admitted by former German Chancellor Angela Merkel — were also immoral and illegal. In fact, none of these acts can be analysed accurately or understood fairly, without considering the others.
A year after the war started, more fuel has been added to the fire, as if the main goal behind the war is prolonging it. Concurrently, very few proposals for peace talks have been advanced or considered. Even a proposal made by former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, hardly a peacenik, was dismissed almost immediately by the pro-Ukraine camp. When someone like Kissinger is accused of being a compromiser, we can be certain that the political discourse on the war has reached a degree of extremism unprecedented in decades.
Aside from the morality of speaking out against the continued war, and the immorality of silence, there is another matter deserving of our attention. It is not simply a dispute between Russia and its allies on one hand, and Ukraine and NATO on the other. It is affecting all of us.
A comprehensive study conducted by researchers from the Universities of Birmingham, Groningen and Maryland examined the possible effect of the war on household incomes in 116 different countries. The study created a model for the future, based on what millions of people around the world, especially in the Global South, are already experiencing. It looks bleak. Just the fact that energy prices could force an individual household to spend anywhere between 2.7 to 4.8 per cent more is enough to push 78 to 114 million people into extreme poverty. Since hundreds of millions already live in extreme poverty, a massive section of the human race will no longer be able to afford proper food, drinkable water, education, healthcare or shelter.
Hence, our silence on the inhumanity and futility of the war in Ukraine is not only immoral, but also constitutes a betrayal of the fate of hundreds of millions of people around the world. This is why the war in Ukraine must end, even if one party is not fully and comprehensively defeated; even if NATO’s geopolitical interests are not served; and even if not all of Russia’s goals, whatever they are, are achieved.
The war should end because, regardless of the outcome, long-term instability in that region will not cease completely any time soon; and because millions of innocent people are suffering and will continue to suffer, in Ukraine and around the world as a direct result of the conflict. And because only political compromises through peace negotiations can put an end to this horror.
Washington gives secret bailout to companies accused of war crimes in West Asia
The Cradle | March 6, 2023
US lawmakers last year secretly authorized a bailout for weapons makers for unproven inflation burden as part of the record-breaking 2023 annual defense budget, which allotted over $800 billion for defense spending.
The bailout provision, crafted behind closed doors and quietly added to the approved budget, allows for “extraordinary relief” via unchecked price hikes to Pentagon contracts in response to any alleged losses weapons makers experience “due solely to economic inflation.”
However, there are no requirements for defense contractors to prove their costs increased due to inflation alone. Earlier versions of the defense budget did not include this provision, and it was reportedly added by a handful of congressional negotiators without broader congressional input.
“The new law places no restrictions on when contractors may ask for increases in contract prices; the only requirement is that costs exceed the original agreed upon price,” Responsible Statecraft reports.
The bailout was approved despite the senate striking down a similar provision and defense contractors failing to demonstrate to the Pentagon that inflation was threatening their bottom line, as they have managed to report record profits despite the economic effects of the pandemic or the war in Ukraine.
As a result of this, US taxpayer money is now being earmarked to provide “profit insurance” to giant corporations like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing.
Their profits are also bolstered by US officials covertly deploying troops and waging secret wars over the past two decades in dozens of countries across the globe.
US defense contractors have repeatedly been accused of having responsibility for countless war crimes committed in West Asia and other regions of the world.
Last week, a group of Yemeni nationals filed a lawsuit against several US weapons makers for their role in the bombing of a wedding and a funeral in Yemen.
“Year after year, the bombs fell – on wedding tents, funeral halls, fishing boats, and a school bus – killing thousands of civilians and helping turn Yemen into the world’s worst humanitarian crisis,” reads the lawsuit.


