Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Two Senior South Korean Military Officials Indicted Over Martial Law — Reports

Sputnik – 31.12.2024

SEOUL – Two high-ranking South Korean military officials have been indicted over their role in the president’s failed attempt to impose martial law, the Yonhap news agency reported on Tuesday.

Capital Defense Commander Lee Jin-woo is suspected of sending troops to the National Assembly on December 3 and ordering the arrest of 14 people, including opposition party leaders, while Defense Counterintelligence Commander Yeo In-hyung is accused of ordering troops to the parliament and telling the police commissioner to dispatch officers to detain lawmakers.

The officers face accusations of inciting insurrection to overturn constitutional order, the prosecutors reportedly said.

The parliament voted 191-71 on Tuesday to launch a special committee investigation into President Yoon Suk Yeol’s martial law declaration to assess the legality of a cabinet meeting that was held shortly before the martial law was imposed, as well as the role of the military and police. The probe is expected to end by February 13, 2025.

On December 3, President Yoon declared martial law, claiming that the opposition was sympathizing with North Korea and plotting a “rebellion.” The parliament defied the presidential declaration and voted to lift martial law hours later. Yoon obeyed and apologized to the nation. On December 14, the South Korean parliament voted to impeach Yoon over his controversial declaration of martial law.

The Constitutional Court will make a final decision on the matter by June 11, 2025. Yoon will be suspended from office pending the ruling and will not be able to leave the country, while an interim president will be in charge until the final verdict is passed.

December 31, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Leave a comment

Israel and the United States: Who Rules the Roost?

By Dr. M. Reza Behnam | Palestine Chronicle | December 8, 2024 

We had several other people in the country (USA), even among the Jews,the Zionists particularly, who were against anything that has to be done if they couldn’t have the whole of Palestine and everything handed to them on a silver plate so they wouldn’t have to do anything. It couldn’t be done. We had to take it in small doses. You can’t move 5 or 6 million people out of a country and fill it up with 5 or 6 million more and expect both sets of them to be pleased….don’t think that the decision to recognize Israel was an easy one. I had to make a compromise with the Arabs and divide Palestine.”

President Harry S. Truman, 1945-1953

The Palestinian catastrophe in the United States began with the 33rd president and has continued with the 47th.

And then there was one, or two—one country, two systems. The political, economic, military and intelligence “interests” of the United States and Israel have become intertwined and often indistinguishable since President Truman decided to officially recognize Israel in 1948.

President Joe Biden has repeatedly stated, “I am a Zionist.” With that avowal, he placed the government and the American people firmly in the Israeli camp, linking the United States to apartheid, genocide and crimes against humanity.

Fifty-seven years ago, the United States chose to inextricably link its interests with an apartheid entity. And since then, for Biden and many in Washington, Israel has become a religion. Very few American politicians, especially since the 1990s, have had the mettle to challenge Israel’s dominance over US policy in the Middle East.

Israel’s leaders are well-practiced in manipulation. They have a long history of insolence toward their number one patron. Americans and US policy in the Middle East have been seen as naive and easily exploited, said Uri Dromi, who served as spokesman for the regimes of Yitzhak Rabin (1974-77; 1992-95) and Shimon Peres (1984-86).

American presidents engage in public rebukes and short-term responses to Israel’s brutal actions, but rarely, if ever are there consequences. The following encounters are just a limited edition of instances when US politicians have buckled under Israeli pressure.

The interactions, for example, between President Ronald Reagan (1981-89) and Prime Minister Menachem Begin (former Irgun terrorist) were fraught. On June 7, 1981, Israel used US warplanes to destroy Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor without informing President Reagan.

Instead Begin called Jerry Falwell, founder of the Moral Majority, to inform him of the impending attack. Begin and his Likud Party had been cultivating ties to evangelical leaders like Falwell to build the alliance between US evangelical Christians and Israel. Today there are more than 30 million Christian Zionists in the United States.

As a US “ally,” Reagan expected Israel to consult when planning measures that would impact US strategic interests in the region. The administration temporarily suspended the delivery of additional F-16 jets and supported a UN Security Council resolution denouncing the attack on an International Atomic Energy Agency-approved nuclear reactor. Despite Begin’s rejection of US proposals and refusal to apologize, the White House lifted the suspension of the F-16s deliveries in August 1981.

Reagan faced another affront a few months later in December 1981, when again, without informing the president, Begin illegally annexed the captured Syrian Golan Heights. The slight came shortly after the two countries had signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on strategic cooperation, written specifically so that Israel would no longer surprise the United States.

In response to the annexation, the United States suspended the MoU and imposed limited economic sanctions on Israel. Begin then accused the United States of anti-Semitism and “pointed out” that the United States had a strong Jewish community and millions of Christians supportive of Israel. The underlying message of electoral consequences was not lost on Reagan. Like measures taken after the Osirak attack, the penalties imposed on Israel were merely temporary window dressings.

George H.W. Bush, who succeeded Reagan in 1989, experienced his measure of clashes with then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir (former Zionist leader of the right-wing Stern Gang) and Benjamin Netanyahu, who was deputy foreign minister at the time.

The Bush administration was the last to “seriously” negotiate peace. Pro-Israel lobbies, both Jewish and Christian, in the United States did their best to sabotage the 1991 comprehensive peace conference in Madrid.

Bush’s secretary of state, James A. Baker, came under fire for negotiating directly and officially with Palestinians. He was also criticized for leveraging US aid to stop Israel’s expanding colonization of the occupied West Bank and for calling on Israel to lay aside its expansionist policies and unrealistic vision of a Greater Israel.

Frustrated by Israeli intransigence, Baker reportedly referred to Tel Aviv’s stalwart supporters in the US Congress as “the little Knesset.”

The Madrid Conference failed to produce results. Although Palestinians were essentially asked to negotiate with their Israeli occupiers, little was asked of Israel. To get Shamir to attend, the United States accepted Israel’s conditions that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) be excluded, that the Palestinian delegation be subject to Israeli approval, and that Palestinian independence and statehood not be addressed.

The famous confrontation in 1991 over US loan guarantees to Israel was yet another example of its insouciance about bypassing the executive to achieve its aims.

Shortly after America’s war against Iraq in 1991, Israel sought an additional $10 billion in loan guarantees from Washington to help populate Palestinian land with Jewish emigres from the former Soviet Union. The White House wanted assurances that the money would not go toward the building of additional “settlements,” and threatened to withhold funds until it received guarantees.

Recalling the event years later, Baker explained that the clash between the two governments resulted because Prime Minister Shamir had threatened that if the administration did not provide the funds, he would bypass the executive and take his case directly to Congress. Baker said he responded, “you’re damn well not going to do that. You can’t go around the President of the United States.”

The Jewish right to this day views Baker as toxic. The Jewish Press, a religiously conservative pro-Israel newspaper, described him as one of the most “reviled” public figures in Israel and among American Jews.

Although the administration eventually yielded on the loan issue, President Bush remained convinced he lost re-election in 1992 because of the pro-Israel lobby campaign against him.

The willingness to enter into political struggles with Israel’s leaders and their Washington supporters and to seriously ask something of Israel essentially came to an end with the election of President Bill Clinton (1993-2001).

The Madrid Conference paved the way for the Oslo Accords (1993 and 1995) negotiated during the Clinton presidency. For the Palestinians, it was a sham. For Israel, it consolidated domination over Palestinians and their land.

Israel can be more thoroughly understood by observing the conduct of incumbent prime minister and international fugitive, Benjamin Netanyahu. It has been his mission since the early 1990s to expand illegal colonies in occupied Palestine, prevent the creation of a Palestinian state and crush Palestinian resistance.

Netanyahu thinks of the United States as gullible. A former Israeli minister who worked with him remarked that in cabinet discussions whenever someone raises the question of how America would act, Netanyahu says “Leave the Americans to me.”

To show America who’s the boss, Netanyahu has embarrassed presidents Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden.

One of Netanyahu’s first acts as prime minister in 1996 was to sabotage the Oslo Accords, antagonizing President Clinton who had helped negotiate the agreement. After his first meeting with Netanyahu, Clinton let loose, saying “Who the f**k does he think he is? Who’s the f***ing superpower here?”

By the time Netanyahu’s first term ended in 1999, the Oslo agreements had collapsed and Zionist colonies were firmly entrenched.

Netanyahu’s contemptuous approach toward the United States was in full view in a secretly recorded video of a conversation he had with colonists in their house in the occupied West Bank in 2001. In it, he bragged that he had deceived Clinton into believing that he was implementing the agreement, that he knew how to manipulate Americans, and that he had essentially put an end to the Oslo Accords.

The video was taped during the second intifada (Palestinian uprising) when the Israeli military was crushing the resistance. Netanyahu talked about hitting Palestinians “hard” many times so that “the price will be unbearable.”

A skeptical colonist asked him if he worried about what the United States and the world would think and say of Israel “hitting Palestinians hard.” Netanyahu responded:

“The world will say nothing… that we are defending ourselves…  I know what America is. America is a thing that can be easily moved… moved in the right direction. The Americans will not bother us. Let’s suppose that they will say something… So they say it. Eighty percent of Americans support us. It’s absurd. We have such support there!”

Netanyahu’s belligerence intensified during the presidency of Barack Obama. His flippancy toward Obama was unabashed during a tense public meeting in the Oval Office in May 2011.

The meeting took place a day after Obama had attempted to revive the stalled peace process, where he stated that the borders between Israel and Palestine should be based on 1967 lines, with some adjustments for existing Zionist colonies.

Netanyahu bluntly responded, “It’s not going to happen,” Israel would never return to 1967 borders, warning Obama not to chase “illusions” of peace. He then brazenly lectured the president on the history of the region. After the meeting, Obama’s national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, said: “I have never seen a foreign leader speak to the president like that, and certainly not in public… ”

Netanyahu used the Oval Office exchange during his 2019 campaign by releasing a campaign video in which he boasted of how he stood up to Obama and stared him down.

An additional insult came on 3 March 2015. On that date, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of the US Congress (for the third time), excoriating the Obama administration’s signature foreign policy initiative—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) or Iran nuclear deal. He had come to Washington at the invitation of then-Republican House Speaker John Boehner. The White House was not informed of the arrangements.

Although the relationship between the two leaders was fraught, Obama was one of the most pro-Israel presidents, giving it more money and arms than any of his predecessors. Before leaving office, Obama approved one of the largest military aid packages yet: $38 billion for the next ten years.

Netanyahu repaid President Obama’s favors with a number of slights. During his campaign for re-election in 2012, for example, he endorsed the president’s opponent, Republican Mitt Romney. In addition, Netanyahu also embarked on a very public and intense campaign to sabotage the Iran nuclear agreement. That was finally accomplished in May 2018, when President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the JCPOA.

With the election of Biden in 2021, the pro-Zionist/pro-Israel sentiment of the US regime has become more pronounced.

In service to Israel, the Biden administration has spent more than $22 billion on military aid and made more than 100 military aid transfers and weapons sales to Israel from October 7, 2023, to September 30, 2024. Another $680 million arms sales deal was recently approved. And for the fourth time (November 20, 2024), the administration vetoed UN Security Council resolutions calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.

Our history reveals that some American politicians in the past exhibited the ethical and moral courage necessary to speak and write on the pitfalls of following Israel uncritically. There have not been many. Among the few, Arkansas Senator J. William Fulbright stands out. In his 1989 book, The Price of Empire, he wrote:

“The (Israel) lobby can just about tell the president what to do when it comes to Israel. Its influence in Congress is pervasive and, I think, profoundly harmful to us and ultimately to Israel itself… So completely have many of our principal officeholders fallen under Israeli influence that they not only deny today the legitimacy of Palestinian national aspirations, but debate who more passionately opposes a Palestinian state…,” adding,

“AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and its allied organizations have effective working control of the electoral process. They can elect or defeat nearly any congressman or senator that they wish, with their money and coordinated organizations. They are the really important power to negotiate within the Middle East if you want an agreement.”

Senator Fulbright served for 30 years, 15 of those as Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

Another critic of Israeli arrogance was Admiral Thomas Moorer. He was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1970 to 1974. Republican Congressman Paul Findley of Illinois recalled Moorer’s comments on page 161 in his book, They Dare to Speak Out:

“I’ve never seen a president… stand up to them (the Israelis)… They always get what they want. The Israelis know what’s going on all the time… If the American people understood what grip those people have on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens don’t have any idea what goes on.”

The political climate in Washington has gone from bad to worse since Findley served in Congress from 1961 to 1983. His recollections on page 84 of his book are noteworthy:

“Today, on Middle East issues at least, independence and courage are almost unknown… Since the establishment of modern Israel in 1948, only a handful of senators have said or done anything in opposition to the policies of the government of Israel. Those who break ranks find themselves in difficulty.”

George Ball, US Under Secretary of State (1961-1966), also spoke frankly when he discussed Israel and its relationship with US politics and American politicians. In a 1988 CBS “60 Minutes” report on AIPAC influence on US politics, he remarked: “Practically every congressman and senator says his prayers to the AIPAC lobby.”

Amnesty International, in December 2024, released its well-documented 293-page report, “You Feel like You Are Subhuman: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza.” In a warning to all, it stated: “Our damning findings must serve as a wake-up call to the international community: “This is genocide. It must stop now.”

The State Department’s response to the report: “What I can say as a spokesperson for the US government and as a spokesperson of this administration is that the findings of the accusations of genocide, we continue to believe those to be unfounded.” The non-response bears witness to America’s complicity in genocide and the continuous catastrophe for Palestinians.

Caveat lector: As long as Israel and its lobbies have ownership over America’s Middle East policy, Palestinians will experience more of the same indifference and injustice, the region will be thrown into more chaos, the American public will continue to be red-pilled and international law will become worthless.

Dr. M. Reza Behnam is a political scientist specializing in the history, politics and governments of the Middle East.

December 31, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israel’s collateral killing of civilians is finally in the spotlight

The New York Times’ recent “bombshell” presents facts that have been known for a long time – and does its best to sanitize them

By Robert Inlakesh | RT | December 30, 2024

The New York Times recently published a piece admitting that an unprecedented amount of “collateral damage” was permitted by the Israeli military. However, it omits key statistics that were previously revealed in order to sanitize the revelations it claims to be uncovering.

Presented as a bombshell piece, the December 26 article reveals that Israel had sent through an order that permitted killing up to 20 civilians for each low-level Hamas target. “The order, which has not previously been reported, had no precedent in Israeli military history,” the article reads.

However, in early April of 2024, an Israeli media outlet called +972 Magazine had not only published this fact, citing sources within Israel’s military, but uncovered much more damning figures detailing what was to be considered “acceptable” collateral damage.

The +972 article revealed that the Israeli airstrike that killed Hamas’ Shujaiya Battalion Commander, Wisam Farhat, was authorized to kill 100 civilians. Even more shocking was the infamous case of Ayman Nofal, the commander of Hamas’ Central Gaza Brigade, where, according to the sources, “the army authorized the killing of approximately 300 civilians.”

The +972 report was mentioned in passing by The New York Times, with the caveat that Israel’s military had denied it. However, +972 Mag’s investigative work on this topic did not begin in April. In fact, a piece published in November of 2023 cited a source who claimed the following:

“The numbers increased from dozens of civilian deaths [permitted] as collateral damage as part of an attack on a senior official in previous operations, to hundreds of civilian deaths as collateral damage.”

So, while a big deal is made of the fact that such high numbers of collateral damage have “no precedent in Israeli military history,” the IDF has been knowingly writing off civilians as collateral damage for years. One need only look at literally any UN report on Israel’s past military conduct to see it.

It isn’t only in Gaza that such horrendous “collateral damage” has been normalized, it has also been the case in Lebanon. When Israel carried out the assassination of Hezbollah’s Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, it openly announced that it estimated the total death toll to be around 300, as a result of leveling a number of civilian buildings in southern Beirut.

There is literally nothing in the article published by The New York Times that is new; all it does is affirm what has already been reported, yet it is done in a way that works to water the killings down by omitting key facts and repeating old tropes.

For example, it repeats as proven fact the widespread allegation that Hamas purposely embeds itself amongst civilians to use them as human shields, a point that has been found at least questionable before.

What is undeniable however, is that Israel uses Palestinians as human shields, as has been copiously documented throughout the war and used to be an accepted part of Israel’s military doctrine.

“From November 2023 onward, amid a global outcry, Israel began to conserve ammunition and tighten some of its rules of engagement, including by halving the number of civilians who could be endangered when striking low-ranked militants who posed no imminent threat” states the NYT. The question here is, where did this information come from? According to the article itself, the sources are all Israeli soldiers and officials.

The only evidence presented is the words of the Israelis. Was there any analysis done or examples cited to prove that the IDF would only kill ten civilians on average for every low-ranking Hamas fighter? Absolutely not, because not even Israel can present this information to the public, nor the names of the thousands of supposed “Hamas fighters” it has targeted.

If we go by Israel’s official figures for the number of alleged Hamas militants killed, they rise at such a rate that it doesn’t match the death toll figures accepted by the United Nations. While the official death toll in Gaza is nearly 46,000, with 10,000 missing and presumed dead, the only way Israeli “Hamas fighter” figures make sense is if the toll is much higher. However, accepting a higher death toll in order to give Israel’s claims about Hamas fighters more legitimacy would mean that The New York Times would face another issue: they would then have to wrestle with the fact that the killing only escalated in November of 2023.

In addition to this all, the +972 article from April 3 provides a much more in-depth insight into the artificial intelligence systems used by the Israeli army and points out that the targets it generated were highly inaccurate. The investigation discovered that when the Lavender system chose junior Hamas targets, the Israeli army would actually use its more lethal unguided munitions, because “you don’t want to waste expensive bombs on unimportant people.”

Furthermore, +972 noted that while a human has to verify targets chosen by the AI before a strike is ordered, eventually this boiled down to simply making sure the target is male – spending about 20 seconds on average before pulling the trigger.

Nowhere in the New York Times article is there any mention of the slaughter of civilians where no military target is located, there is no mention of the mass torture, sexual abuse, or demolition of homes for the pure vanity of soldiers. Everything is framed as a military that went a little overboard after the Hamas-led October 7 attack.

Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the Palestinian territories and currently works with Quds News. Director of ‘Steal of the Century: Trump’s Palestine-Israel Catastrophe’.

December 30, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

More than Dozen Martyred in Israeli Strike on Syria’s Adra

Al-Manar | December 30, 2024

At least ten people were martyred on Sunday in an Israeli strike on Syria’s Adra Industrial City in rural Damascus, Syrian and Arab media reported.

Reports said there was an explosion in the city of Adra, on the eastern outskirts of the capital.

An Israeli drone had reportedly fired two missiles at a building in the vicinity Adra industrial zone.

Arab media outlets reported that 11 people were killed, while other reports put the death toll at 17, with a number of others being injured.

A video shared on social media showed the aftermath of the attack. The video showed a building reduced to rubble with several bodies scattered among the debris.

The Zionist entity has been taking advantage of the former Syrian regime’s fall earlier this month, with the occupation military launching hundreds of strikes in the last weeks on several areas across the Arab country, and seizing positions including the summit of a mountain with an uninterrupted sightline to the capital Damascus.

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

Syria’s new leadership receives Ukrainian FM in Damascus

The Cradle | December 30, 2024

Syria’s de facto ruler Ahmad al-Sharaa, better known as former Al-Qaeda chief Abu Mohammad al-Julani, and the country’s new Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaybani hosted Ukraine’s top diplomat in the capital, Damascus, on 30 December.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha arrived in the capital at the head of a high-level delegation, which included President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s special envoy.

“We seek to cooperate with the new Syrian administration in several areas. We share with Syria the suffering from unjust regimes,” Sybiha was quoted as saying. “We are ready to help Syria in collecting evidence and investigating the crimes of the former regime and Russia.”

“Russia and Assad regime are partners in committing atrocities in Syria. We believe that relations between our two countries will witness great development,” he added.

The foreign minister went on to say, “If you can expel the Russians from your lands, you will ensure your security and the security of neighboring countries.”

Shaybani said during the meeting that his country is “turning the page” on the era of the former government of Bashar al-Assad, stressing that there will be a “strategic partnership” between Damascus and Kiev.

Sharaa’s organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), formerly known as the Nusra Front (Al-Qaeda’s offshoot in Syria), appointed a transitional authority following the collapse of the Syrian army and the fall of Damascus on 8 December after an 11-day shock offensive that took the region by surprise.

Over the past few years, Ukraine has provided crucial support to HTS and other extremist factions under its command – who were based in Syria’s northern Idlib governorate before the assault that ended the Assad government.

HTS militants and fighters from ISIS and other extremist groups have also been deployed in Ukraine to fight Russian forces.

Before the launch of the offensive on 27 November, Ukrainian drone experts had been training and equipping extremist militants in Idlib.

The Russian military intervened in Syria in 2015 in support of Assad’s government, helping the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) turn the tide against several groups who had taken over large swathes of the country – including the Nusra Front, which became HTS.

Moscow and the former Al-Qaeda branch have established a line of contact since Assad’s government fell in early December.

“Russia is an important country and is considered the second most powerful country in the world. There are deep strategic interests between Russia and Syria. All Syrian weapons are Russian, and many power stations are run by Russian expertise,” Sharaa said on 29 December. “We do not want Russia to leave Syria in the way some people would like.”

Russia has said that the future of its presence in Syria will depend on the outcome of talks with the country’s new authorities following the transitional period.

December 30, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Collapsing Empire: RIP ‘Overt Operations’

By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | December 30, 2024

In recent months, a remarkable development in the Empire’s decline has gone almost entirely unnoticed. The National Endowment for Democracy’s grant database has been removed from the web. Until recently, a searchable interface allowed visitors to view detailed records of Washington-funded NGOs, civil society, and media projects in particular countries – covering most of the world – the sums involved, and entities responsible for delivering them. This resource has now inexplicably vanished, and with it, enormous amounts of incontrovertible, self-incriminating evidence of destructive US skullduggery abroad.

Take for example NED grant records for Georgia, the site of recent repeated color revolution efforts, at the forefront of which were Endowment-bankrolled organizations. While still accessible via internet archives, they were deleted during the summer. Today, visitors to associated URLs are redirected to a brief entry simply titled “Eurasia”. The accompanying text describes in very broad terms the Endowment’s aims regionally and the total being spent, but the crucial questions of where and on what aren’t clarified. In a comic hypocrisy too, the blurb boldly states:

“The heart of NED’s work in the region is the need to maintain access to objective information for local populations. Across the region, government actors are attempting to limit the space for citizens to distribute information and communicate freely online.”

Resultantly, independent academics, activists, researchers, and journalists have been deprived of an invaluable resource for tracking and exposing the Empire’s machinations. Yet, the Endowment incinerating its public paper trail can only be considered a significant victory for these same actors. NED’s explicit and avowed raison d’être was to do publicly what US intelligence did – and in many cases still does – covertly. Now, after 40 years of wreaking havoc worldwide in service of the Empire, the CIA front has been forced underground, defeating its entire purpose.

‘Spyless Coups’

NED was founded in November 1983, after the CIA became embroiled in a series of embarrassing public scandals. Then-Agency director William Casey was central to its construction. His objective was to create a public mechanism to conduct traditional CIA meddling overseas, except out in the open. Ever since, the Endowment has financed countless opposition groups, activist movements, media outlets, and trade unions to the tune of millions to engage in propaganda and political activism, to disrupt, destabilize, and displace ‘enemy’ regimes the world over.

The NED’s true nature was openly acknowledged by the mainstream media for many years. In June 1986, Endowment’s president Carl Gershman told the New York Times, “It would be terrible for democratic groups around the world” to be subsidized by the CIA. The exposure of such connivances meant they had been “discontinued”, and farmed out to NED. Several high-ranking interviewees strenuously denied there was any connection between NED and the Agency, although the outlet acknowledged many Endowment programs seemed “superficially similar” to past CIA operations.

At this time, NED was hard at work killing off Communism in the Soviet Union, Warsaw Pact, and Yugoslavia. This included for instance enormous investment in Poland’s famous Solidarity trade union, which became a global emblem of anti-Communist resistance. In September 1991, the Washington Post published a highly laudatory appraisal of these efforts, stating the “political miracles” the Endowment achieved in the former Soviet sphere had ushered in a “new world of spyless coups” and “innocence abroad”:

“The old era of covert action is dead. The world doesn’t run in secret anymore. We are now living in the age of Overt Action… When such activities are done overtly, the flap potential is close to zero. Openness is its own protection. Covert funding for these groups would have been the kiss of death, if discovered. Overt funding, it would seem, has been a kiss of life.”

NED proceeded to take down a number of governments throughout the 1990s and 2000s, very overtly. In many cases, mainstream outlets published highly revealing accounts detailing precisely how. In Ukraine in November 2004, Endowment-trained and bankrolled activists forced a rerun of that year’s presidential election. As The Guardian jubilantly reported, the entire effort was “an American creation” and “sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in Western branding and mass marketing,” which had been repeatedly deployed in the new millennium to “topple unsavoury regimes”:

“Funded and organised by the US government, deploying US consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties and US non-government organisations…the operation – engineering democracy through the ballot box and civil disobedience – is now so slick that the methods have matured into a template for winning other people’s elections.”

‘Kiss of Death’

The next year, USAID published a slick magazine, Democracy Rising, bragging extensively about how it and NED were fundamental to a wave of revolutions in Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Yugoslavia, and elsewhere during the first years of the 21st century. Fast forward to February 2014, and Ukraine’s government once again fell victim to an Endowment-orchestrated coup, in the form of the Maidan ‘revolution’. Yet, the media either ignored the irrefutable US role in fomenting the upheaval or dismissed the proposition as “Russian disinformation” or conspiracy theory.

This is despite contemporary polls never showing majority Ukrainian support for the Maidan protests; ousted President Viktor Yanukovych remaining the most popular politician in the country until his last day in office; every actor at Maidan’s forefront, including the individuals who started the demonstrations, receiving NED or USAID funding; leaders of US-financed organizations in the country openly advertising their desire to overthrow Yanukovych in the years prior; and the Endowment pumping around $20 million into the country in 2013 alone.

This mass omertà, which has intensified since, may be attributable to ever-rising hostility towards NED by foreign governments and populations, and associated efforts to restrict or outright proscribe the organization. The reality of the Endowment’s raison d’être and modus operandi has thus not only become unsayable but must be vehemently denied by Western journalists. Representatively, a July 2015 Guardian report on Russia banning NED quite unbelievably relied on a brief quote from the organization’s own website to describe its operations.

While the mainstream media may have remained silent on the NED’s mephitic influence overseas over the past decade, the same is not true of independent academics, activists, researchers, and journalists. The Endowment grant database served as an invaluable tool for keeping a close eye on Washington’s international intrigues and mapping the personal and organizational connections of agents and entities of influence. Meanwhile, NED’s status as a CIA front could be simply proven, via multiple public admissions of its own leaders.

Whenever protests erupted somewhere in the world and received widespread Western news coverage, concerned citizens could consult the NED grant database and find in the overwhelming majority of cases, most if not all individuals and groups quoted in media reports were in receipt of Endowment funding. While impossible to quantify, it would be unsurprising if dissident voices calling attention to this fact have averted color revolution efforts, disrupted external meddling campaigns, protected popular governments and political figures, and more.

Of course, despite NED brazenly purging evidence of its vast operations from the web, that conniving continues apace regardless, covertly. One might even argue the Endowment’s chicanery is all the more dangerous now, given individuals and organizations can conceal their funding sources. But the move amply shows NED today cannot withstand the slightest public scrutiny, which its very existence was intended to exemplify. It demonstrates that “overt operations” with open US funding are now the “kiss of death” the Endowment was meant to replace.

December 30, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Kiev announces US gift of $15bn from seized Russian funds

RT | December 30, 2024

The US will provide Kiev with $15 billion, leveraging future revenues from frozen Russian central bank assets, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denis Shmigal announced on Monday. The Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has previously said about Washington’s purported illegal transfer of Russian funds to Kiev that Moscow may challenge it in court.

The American funding is part of a broader $20 billion contribution under the G7’s $50 billion loan framework to Ukraine. The agreement was signed by Ukraine’s Ministry of Finance and the World Bank under the PEACE in Ukraine initiative, Shmigal claimed, in a post on his Telegram channel.

The G7, comprising the US, Canada, Japan, the UK, France, Germany, and Italy, initially pledged the $50 billion loan in June 2022, using profits from frozen Russian assets as collateral. Of the estimated $300 billion immobilized, $213 billion is held in the Brussels-based clearinghouse Euroclear.

Euroclear froze the assets of the Russian central bank in late February 2022, shortly after the EU imposed sanctions on Russia in response to the conflict escalation in Ukraine. The frozen funds have already generated billions in interest, with the clearinghouse transferring €1.55 billion ($1.63 billion) to Ukraine in July.

Moscow has vehemently criticized the asset seizures. Last Wednesday Dmitry Peskov condemned the measures as theft and warned of legal retaliation. He was reacting to Shmigal’s announcement that the US had already transferred to Ukraine the first installment of the $1 billion from the frozen Moscow central bank funds.

Last month, Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said there are plans to mirror the West’s actions, using income from frozen Western assets in Russia.

“We have also frozen the resources of Western investors, Western financial market participants and companies. The income from these assets will also be used,” the official said.

The decision to use frozen Russian assets has previously stirred debate among G7 nations. European members of the club such as Germany, France and Italy have raised concerns over financial market stability and about the legal implications of such actions. The IMF has warned that seizing these assets without robust legal frameworks could erode global trust in the Western financial system.

December 30, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Ukraine’s ‘Second Front’ in Africa: Zelensky ‘Will Bite Dust’ There

By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 30.12.2024

The Kiev regime, unable to defeat Russia on the battlefield, has opened a “second front” in Africa by aligning with terrorist groups in Mali and Niger, both of which have already severed diplomatic ties with Ukraine, said the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Ukraine’s opening of a “second front” on the African continent is “a desperate move aimed at media sensation, with no clear vision and strategy,” Professor Alexis Habiyaremye, Research Chair in Industrial Development at the University of Johannesburg, told Sputnik.

Context for Ukraine in Africa

It is unclear what Ukraine’s strategy in Africa is “beyond participation in destabilization” of the continent, he said, mentioning the Confederation of Sahel States, which are “led by a vision of sovereignty that is stronger than Ukrainian hatred and racism.”

“African countries are motivated by the determination to wrest their full independence from the neocolonial Western powers, while Ukraine is acting erratically based on anger and frustration. [Volodymyr] Zelensky and his agents will certainly bite the dust in Africa,” Habiyaremye stressed.

Ukrainian intelligence services “have unashamedly claimed to collaborate” with terrorist groups in Africa, “hoping to destabilize Russian security partners, and by doing so, to discredit Russia,” the analyst added, pointing to “the blanket impunity granted to Ukraine by its Western backers.”

Why is the Effort Fruitless?

The professor singled out the Sahel region, where he said the Kiev regime relied on “French logistics and American satellite technology” to help “terrorists ambush troops of Malian Armed Forces.”

“By allying itself with terrorists to attack African countries, Ukraine has squandered any possible goodwill it could hope to get from Africa and the rest of the Global South. It is therefore unlikely to achieve anything of significance as it tied its lot with that of the terrorists,” Habiyaremye concluded.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova earlier stated that Mali’s and Niger’s decision to sever diplomatic relations with Ukraine indicates the African countries’ growing understanding of the terrorist nature of the Kiev regime.

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

Slovak PM slams ‘irrational’ EU

RT | December 30, 2024

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has sent an open letter to European Council President Antonio Costa and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, urging immediate action to address Ukraine’s imminent halt of natural gas transit through its territory to the EU.

A transit agreement between Russia and Ukraine is set to expire on December 31. Kiev has refused to extend it, citing the conflict with Moscow.

In a letter posted on Facebook on Sunday, Fico accused Kiev of failing to consider the potential impact its decision will have on the EU economy. Brussels’ acceptance of the situation is “absolutely irrational and wrong,” he stressed.

Gas transit through Ukraine accounts for only 3.5% of EU consumption, the letter states, citing an analysis carried out by Slovakia’s main gas supplier and trader, SPP. Despite the modest share, any halt would disrupt the market, raising gas prices by roughly 30%, the document claims. Such a price spike would translate to an additional annual cost of € 40-50 billion for European households and infrastructure, Fico argued.

“It is in the interest of all EU citizens that European efforts to support Ukraine should be carried out rationally, and not in the form of self-destructive and extremely damaging gestures,” the Slovak prime minister noted. Kiev’s decision will lead to “reciprocal measures,” he warned.

Fico also said Russia “will easily place such a small volume of gas in other markets,” thus mitigating its losses.

The situation requires urgent attention from EU institutions and member states to mitigate risks of supply shortages, he added.

Landlocked Slovakia’s position within Europe’s energy network makes it highly susceptible to disruptions in natural gas supply. The country is reliant on Russia for around 85% of its gas demand, primarily through pipelines transiting Ukraine.

Fico has repeatedly voiced concerns regarding EU energy policy. He has consistently advocated for pragmatic approaches to energy security, often clashing with Brussels on its approach to the Ukraine conflict, namely the issue of military support to Kiev and the issue of economic sanctions against Russia.

European Union leaders have repeatedly expressed confidence in the bloc’s ability to manage without Russian gas, accusing Moscow of using energy as a geopolitical weapon.

The European Commission and Council have yet to issue formal responses to the Slovak leader’s letter.

December 30, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Germany whining it’s defenseless against ‘Oreshnik’ after initially mocking it

By Drago Bosnic | December 30, 2024

After the Russian military’s Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN) used the latest “Oreshnik” missile in Dnepropetrovsk on November 21, the world was left shocked, with news ranging from “end of the world” scaremongering to ridicule. Some major German media outlets resorted to the latter, with Julian Roepcke (better known as Jihadi Julian), one of the more prominent “military experts” at the Bild, a German tabloid, saying that the missile “likely carried no explosive charge and did not cause any significant damage”. Roepcke’s report, published on November 23, says that the launch was “a propaganda and political action rather than a military one”, as there was “neither a nuclear charge nor explosives inside”. The German author insists “that’s the reason the damage was so insignificant”. As many analysts have already suggested (myself included, both last year and in April), Roepcke also believes that the missile is most likely based on the RS-26 “Rubezh” (although this is yet to be confirmed). However, he erroneously thought that “the ‘Oreshnik’ didn’t contain explosives or a warhead and would have been equipped with a substitute of the same size and weight to simulate the appearance of a nuclear warhead”. While this is true for regular missile tests, the launch of the “Oreshnik” was anything but. Namely, the RVSN used 36 advanced kinetic penetrators to strike heavily fortified targets, including those deep underground. Thus, it’s quite clear that Roepcke’s virtually immediate disregard of the “Oreshnik’s” capabilities was a careless miscalculation, to say the least.

President Vladimir Putin himself stated that the missile is effectively unstoppable, but this too was met with disregard and even ridicule. For some inexplicable reason, neither the mainstream propaganda machine nor its bosses in the political West’s leadership seem to be able to learn from their mistakes. Namely, when President Putin says something, it should be taken very seriously. For instance, back in 2004, just two years after the United States announced its unilateral withdrawal from the ABM (anti-ballistic missile) Treaty, he publicly promised that Russia would resume the development of hypersonic weapons started during the (First) Cold War. However, nobody listened, as NATO was convinced that the Eurasian giant was “finished” (nothing could be further from true).

Just two years after that speech, Moscow inducted the “Iskander-M” missile system, along with its 9M723 hypersonic missile. Since then, the Russian military acquired at least a dozen types of such weapons, resulting in an advantage measured in decades. Back in 2019, I argued that the Kremlin was at least 20 years ahead of its NATO adversaries, including the US. This turned out to be not only true, but it can even be argued that the “Oreshnik” ensured this advantage grows further. Now, much unlike Roepcke, it seems that the German military understands just how outclassed it is, especially by such weapons. Namely, Roepcke’s own newspaper, the Bild, disagrees with his previously mentioned report about the “Oreshnik”. First, the outlet lamented that Russia deployed the missile in Belarus.

According to the report, a recently leaked internal document showed that the Federal Foreign Office (AA) warned that “Germany is not adequately protected against this deadly danger”. Interestingly, the document also posits that “the current protection provided by ‘Patriot’ systems is not sufficient” and that “the federal government now wants to close the gap”. The report also points out that interception rates are atrocious and that the extremely overhyped US-made ABM/SAM (surface-to-air missile) system would “base their performance on sheer luck” when it comes to intercepting Russian missiles (particularly something like the “Oreshnik”). The Bild also added that Berlin would purchase the Israeli “Arrow” ABM system to “help strengthen Germany’s defense against new types of missiles”.

It’s quite interesting that the Germans openly said that the “Patriot” cannot effectively intercept hypersonic weapons. Namely, for nearly three years, the Neo-Nazi junta has been saying its forces regularly “shoot down” Russian hypersonic missiles. I’ve argued numerous times that such claims are virtually guaranteed to be nothing more than war propaganda. Simply put, the numbers behind all this just don’t add up. This fact is supported by other globally renowned experts, including senior military officers. Namely, retired Group Captain Uttam Kumar Devnath from the Indian Air Force recently stated that “Russia’s ‘Oreshnik’ missile system is beyond the interception capabilities of Western defense systems like the ‘Patriot’ and THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense)”.

“The ‘Oreshnik’, described as a hypersonic, intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM), is claimed to travel at speeds that exceed Mach 10, making it, according to Devnath, ‘too fast for radar targeting’. This speed, coupled with its maneuverability, purportedly renders it impervious to interception by current Western missile defense technologies,” the Indian Defence Research Wing reported, quoting Group Captain Devnath and adding: “The ‘Oreshnik’s’ velocity and ability to alter its trajectory are cited as key reasons why systems like the ‘Patriot’, designed to counter ballistic threats, would fail to engage it effectively. Devnath highlighted the missile’s design, suggesting it leverages stealth technologies and hypersonic flight principles to evade detection and interception.”

President Putin has already publicly called on NATO to pick any target, deploy its much-touted SAM/ABM systems to defend it and promised that the Russian military would neutralize it either way. Such confidence serves as a testament to Moscow’s unrivaled hypersonic capabilities. Obviously, the political West would never accept such a proposal, which speaks volumes about the veracity of the claims that NATO-sourced missile defenses are supposedly “shooting down” Russian hypersonic weapons left and right. It should also be noted that the usually quoted speed of Mach 10 for the “Oreshnik” is quite misleading, as the missile it was based on, namely the RS-26 “Rubezh”, can actually fly at speeds of anywhere between Mach 20 and Mach 25 (7-8,5 km/s or 25,000-30,000 km/h).

The “Oreshnik” is not only a major asset for Russia, but also for the whole multipolar world, as it offers a massive advantage in non-nuclear strategic deterrence. Although surely nuclear-capable, the “Oreshnik” is armed with a conventional MIRV/MaRV/HGV payload composed of 36 advanced kinetic penetrators (six in each of the six warheads). Coupled with its speed and maneuverability, this makes it the most powerful conventional weapon ever devised. This combination is what makes hypersonic weapons effectively impossible to track and intercept. Namely, unlike traditional ballistic missiles which fly at a predictable path, hypersonic weapons maneuver, making the interception based on the calculations of ballistic computers completely useless and void.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

December 30, 2024 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

11 Reasons why the “EV Transition” will NEVER happen

MGUY Australia | December 25, 2024

Mark P Mills gave an extended talk on EV mandates in November, at Hillsdale College, Michigan, and in this video I’ve extracted 11 key points that explain why the much vaunted “EV transition” will never happen.

Go and watch the full video here:    • EV Mandates vs. Freedom | Mark P. Mills  

Ten Reasons why you should NEVER buy an EV:    • TEN reasons why you should NEVER buy …   #electricvehicle #electriccar #evfire #ev

☕️ Want to support this channel? Buy me a coffee! ➜ https://m-g.uy/donate

December 29, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Video | Leave a comment

Deborah Birx’s Bird Flu Fearmongering Campaign

By Daniel McAdams | Peace and Prosperity Blog | December 29, 2024

In June, I wrote about Deborah Birx, one of the key “public health” officials from the orchestration of the American coronavirus scare, being back in action stirring up fear of another disease. This time Birx’s fearmongering was about bird flu. And she was advocating for government to follow a similar disastrous course to supposedly counter this disease as had been pursued in regard to coronavirus in the crackdown begun years back.

Here is an update.

Birx is continuing on her quest to stir up a new bird flu scare in America, and to build public support for a government response harmful to health and liberty. A recent stop on Birx’s bird flu fearmongering campaign was a Friday interview at CNN in which she warned that, like coronavirus early on, bird flu is not being addressed sufficiently by the United States government. Now, she said, routine weekly testing of people who may have been exposed to bird flu needs to be undertaken.

This testing which Birx suggested mirrors testing that was pursued to build up fear of coronavirus through jacking up the number of coronavirus cases via testing that shot out many false positive results. Indeed, Birx stated in the interview that with bird flu much increased testing is needed because “we know from covid most of the spread was asymptomatic.” Got that? The testing is purposed to identify people as sick despite the fact that they are not sick.

Birx has her pandemic propaganda process down pat.

In her CNN interview pitch, Birx tried to butter up her potential victims, declaring “I find the American public to be incredibly smart.” Hopefully, most Americans will prove too smart to fall for Birx’s new fearmongering campaign and the attacks on health and liberty it supports.

December 29, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment