Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Berlin confirms sanctions against Russian news crew

RT | November 28, 2024

A news crew working for Russia’s public broadcaster Channel 1 has been expelled from Germany due to sanctions arising from the Ukraine conflict, local authorities in Berlin confirmed on Wednesday evening.

Officials have told the Berliner Zeitung newspaper that correspondent Ivan Blagoy and cameraman Dmitry Volkov have been denied residency permits.

According to the immigration office for the state of Berlin, the decision to punish the news crew was taken because Channel 1’s co-owner, National Media Group, has been blacklisted under the EU’s ninth sanctions package.

The permits were, therefore, denied under a law applying to foreigners who “impair or endanger the interests” of Germany, Berliner Zeitung said. Overall, five people were targeted under anti-Russia sanctions in Berlin “in recent months,” according to the newspaper.

Channel 1 reported on Wednesday morning that the German authorities had ordered the closure of its bureau in the EU country’s capital. The German Foreign Ministry quickly rejected these claims as “false,” insisting that “Russian journalists can, as before, broadcast freely and unhindered in Germany.”

The broadcaster said the journalists were, in fact, singled out because of their employer. “Yes, our press credentials have not been revoked. However, we were barred from being physically present in the country, which means we were effectively barred from working in accordance with our credentials,” Blagoy said in his news report.

According to the journalist, he received a notice from the Berlin authorities claiming that Channel 1 is spreading “propaganda and disinformation” about the conflict in Ukraine and poses “a significant and direct threat to public order and security of Germany and the European Union.”

Blagoy has denied the allegations, saying his reporting has been truthful. The broadcaster similarly described the expulsion of its staff as “punishment for truth and professionalism.”

Russia has responded in kind, expelling correspondent for Germany’s state broadcaster ARD, Frank Aischmann, and technical employee Sven Feller. ARD Foreign Coordinator Joerg Schoenenborn condemned the decision, accusing Moscow of “intimidation and restrictions” on the channel’s reporting.

The EU has banned multiple Russian news organizations since 2022, citing “disinformation.” Russia has responded by blacklisting dozens Western media outlets.

November 28, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

UK, US intended to move Palestinians out of Palestine through UNRWA, British documents reveal

By Amer Sultan | MEMO | November 27, 2024

The UK and the US intended to resettle Palestinians in the neighbouring countries, after they were forced to flee their homes in Palestine in 1947 and 1948 due to the terrorist actions of Zionist forces, British documents reveal.

The documents, unearthed by MEMO in the British National Archives, also show that the British government viewed the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) as a tool to achieve this goal.

UNRWA was established by a UN General Assembly resolution on 8 December 1949, and officially began operations on 1 May 1950, with its headquarters in Beirut, Lebanon. Since its inception, the agency’s main mission was to transfer Palestinian refugees from direct relief to work programmes while awaiting a political solution to their plight. By mid-June 1950, the UN reiterated that the agency “has no mandate to deal with political settlement of the problem of the Palestinian refugees”.

In December 1949, the UN adopted Resolution 194, which recognised the Palestinian refugees’ right to return to their homes in Palestine. The resolution called for refugees who wished to return and live peacefully with their neighbours to “be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date.” It was adopted with 35 votes in favour, including from the United Kingdom and the United States, 15 votes against and 8 abstentions.

The resolution also stipulated that compensation should be provided to those “choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

However, in August 1949, 13 months after the announcement establishing Israel, the British government decided that the “final solution” of the problem lies in “resettlement not in relief”.

Prime Minister Clement Attlee, in a memo on the “Palestinian Arab refugees” problem, instructed his foreign, treasury and economic ministers to “discuss what further provision should be made” for addressing the problem. “The emphasis should lie heavily on resettlement,” he wrote.

When UNRWA’s operations began in 1950, the agency was assisting around 750,000 Palestinian refugees residing in 58 recognised refugee camps across Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Attlee’s memo further instructed that no financial support should be given to the governments of countries hosting the refugees unless they contributed to the resettlement effort. “Any further specific contributions from British funds should be conditional on the recognition by the local government concerned, to a greater extent than hitherto, of responsibilities in the matter,” the memo added.

This followed deliberations among various British governmental departments to establish an official British stance on the refugee problem. The ministers recommended that the governments of the neighbouring countries should “make a substantial contribution to the relief and resettlement” of the Palestinian refugees. They stressed that the British government should prioritise resettlement over relief efforts, and that “the major emphasis should be on the framing of the scheme for resettlement in preference to relief.”

At the time it was estimated that the combined costs of relief and resettlement efforts from both Western and non-Western governments amounted to around $24 million. The ministers recommended waiting to see what contributions other governments would make before committing further British funds. “We should also expect them to contribute a larger proportion to any future fund than their share,” they wrote.

In a letter to the prime minister, Lord Jay, the British economic minister, expressed his belief that “the only radical solution of the relief problem is by way of resettlement and not relief.”

“The prime responsibility for these Arab (Palestinian) refugees rests with the local governments concerned,” he wrote. While acknowledging that Britain had a “special position in the Middle East,” Lord Jay suggested that Britain had a “substantial interest” in the refugee question. However, he also argued that the British contribution to the relief fund was already “more than our appropriate share.”

Lord Jay’s letter was sent to the prime minister after a request from Ernest Bevin, the then foreign minister, who proposed that “further funds should be provided for relief and/or resettlement” of the Palestinian Arab refugees. In his response, Lord Jay again emphasised that the main focus “should be on resettlement”.

The British government viewed the refugee issue as “a direct responsibility” shared not only by Israel but also by the neighbouring Arab states and the international community.

In his letter, Lord Jay reminded his colleagues that the Arab states “inhabit an area so important from the political and strategic aspect” and noted that the Arabs “tend to consider that British policy over the last thirty years has been responsible for the setting up of a Jewish state and, in some degree, for the displacement of these Arab refugees.”

The documents also reveal that the UK and the US were in frequent contact to discuss how best to resettle the Palestinian refugees in host countries through ongoing relief activities.

The British “have been considering both in London and with the Americas how best to stimulate the local governments to continue the work of relief and turn it into resettlement,”Lord Joy’s letter explained. The British and the Americans believed that the resettlement “would provide the only long-term solution of the problem.”

The documents reveal that less than a year later, a number of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon appealed to Britain and human rights defenders for the right to return to Palestine, their homeland. In a letter to the British prime minister, sent through the British consul in Beirut, they wrote in Arabic: “We truly believe that you could send us back to our homes by using your powers if you wished.”

The letter was written by Ali Ahmed El-Abed, who had been forced to leave his village, Shafa Amr, in northern Palestine. He had to live as a refugee in the Wavel Camp, located in Baalbek, east of Beirut.

The letter placed the responsibility for the Palestinian refugees’ plight squarely on the UK. It reminded the British government that Palestinians had been under British protection for 30 years and noted: “As a result, we are scattered away far from our homes, our country, and our people.” The situation of the refugees was deteriorating, the letter explained, stating that “the situation goes from bad to worse,” and warning that “death is nearer to us than life.”

The letter, dated 21 June 1950, reminded the British government that the refugees still considered themselves “under British protection, and carry passports bearing the British crown.”

On 18 July, the British government rejected the petition. In its response, the government expressed “sympathy” for the refugees, but clarified that “it is not possible for His Majesty’s government to take any action in this matter except through the medium of the United Nations.” The response, sent to El-Abed, affirmed the British government’s “full and unqualified support” for the UN in addressing the issue.

A few weeks later, the former Soviet Union’s ambassador received a similar letter, signed by 10,000 refugees, requesting support for the Palestinians’ return to their homes. This letter rejected UNRWA as a project that “aimed to prevent the implementation of the decisions of the United Nations.” The signatories viewed this project as a “pursuit of an imperialist policy.”

The letter, written in Arabic with an English translation, was sent to the British government and insisted on the implementation of UN Resolution 194, which affirmed the Palestinians’ right to return to their homes in Palestine.

November 28, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Can Europe Return to Reason & Reverse Its Decline?

Jeffrey Sachs, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen
Glenn Diesen | Nov 27, 2024

I had a conversation with Jeffrey Sachs and Alexander Mercouris about the political changes in Europe. The optimism of the European project as a region of peace and prosperity is long gone. The objective had been to resolve conflicts on the continent peacefully and use collective bargaining power to establish greater economic and political independence. Instead, the continent is experiencing war, de-industrialisation, socio-economic and political instability, excessive dependence on the US, and growing irrelevance in the wider world. What went wrong and can the decline be reversed?

The rest of the world adjusts to the emerging multipolarity with a multivector foreign policy by diversifying economic connectivity to improve economic competitiveness and enhance political autonomy. In contrast, the Europeans have subordinated themselves completely to the US and thus suffer from economic decline and political subordination. Declining rationality is also a clear problem as the Europeans pursued policies towards Russia that they knew would put them on a collision course with Russia. Instead of pursuing course correction, the proxy war with Russia increased the security dependence on the US, which enabled Washington to impose bloc discipline. The recovery of Europe requires reversing the militarisation of dividing lines in Europe, and diversifying economic ties to avoid excessive dependence on any one state or region.

November 28, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

Corporate Media Meltdown Over Trump’s CDC Director Pick Dr. Dave Weldon

A look a the possible changes ahead for the CDC under his leadership

By Jefferey Jaxen | November 25, 2024

Former seven-term congressman Dr. David Weldon was chosen by President-elect Donald Trump going into this past weekend to serve as director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Amidst the flurry of possible appointments grabbing headlines, Dr. Weldon has the opportunity to change the way America has handled public health for decades.

The Washington Post described Dr. Weldon in the second sentence of its breaking news article as “… a strong critic of the CDC, especially its vaccine program.” The reporting meant the sentence to be a negative, ironically, it’s probably now a breath of fresh air for most Americans post-COVID.

“… increasingly we talk only to a certain elite. More and more, we talk to ourselves” wrote Jeff Bezos, owner of the Washington Post, less than a month ago when admitting most people don’t believe corporate/legacy media anymore. It’s like WAPO’s recent reporting on Weldon already forgot this warning.

The New York Times claimed that Dr. Weldon was “skeptical of vaccine safety,” a designation that would have worked to neutralize his voice in years past when the outlet still garnered attention and respect.

STAT News wrote, “The former Florida congressman sponsored legislation that would have carved out the CDC’s vaccine safety research…”

The Vaccine Safety Bill to ‘carve out research’ Dr. Weldon introduced in 2007 wanted to establish an independent agency within the Department of Health and Human Services to handle the nation’s vaccine safety. His reasoning at the time was that the CDC had an inherent conflict of interest being responsible for both vaccine safety and promotion—an issue unchanged to this day.

In Weldon, the public also finds a rare leader who has been willing to ask politically forbidden questions about links between vaccines and autism along with the greater questions about health outcomes of children receiving HHS’s childhood vaccine schedule compared with children who had not been vaccinated. In addition to why there’s been limited investigation to determine what children may be as risk of being harmed by vaccines.

“The thing I continue to find extremely disturbing is the fact that the CDC still does not allow researchers access to the vaccine safety data… The best way to get answers on the vaccine safety data is to open it up and let objective scientists come in and look at it.” – Rep. Dave Weldon at the Vaccines & Autism House Government Reform Committee 2002

One of the key data tranches Weldon is referring is vaccine safety datalink or VSD. A monitoring system using electronic health record data from health sites around the country to assess vaccine safety and detect adverse events in near-real time. Also a system that the public and independent researchers are blocked from accessing.

Besides the possibility of allowing the sunlight of independent researchers to comb through once-hidden vaccine data while dedicating resources to health-affirming tools outside of one-size-fits-all shots, Dr. Weldon will have veto power over the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).

ACIP makes recommendations about which vaccines are added to the U.S. schedule, among other decisions. The committee needs final approval from the director of the CDC to implement their calls. Dr. Weldon would hold a power position over a committee who unanimously rubber-stamped every COVID vaccine and booster from infants to the elderly, among other questionable call throughout the years leading to reduced public trust.

Another approach long-called for, and even once implemented by the CDC, would be to automate their Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to instantly detect and report potential safety issues with the shots they promote.

In 2006 this was attempted through a $1M HHS grant to create a spontaneous reporting system to VAERS at Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. The researchers found that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported” yet predictably, the CDC never followed up.

As many new to this conversation are rushing the gates to further their careers or gain influence and power on the back of the rapid political change we find ourselves at the beginning of, there have been those holding a strong space with little fanfare. Dr. Dave Weldon is one such individual.

His decades-long hopes to reform the CDC and, more importantly, protect American children and families from unrestrained harms brought upon so many by liability-free injectable pharmaceutical products which have enjoyed a privileged position away from full public and scientific scrutiny may soon see the light of day.

To the readers, is the CDC even salvageable at this point?

What other major areas of reform could help rapidly transform public consciousness around health and healing?

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Sputnik Investigates: Why Doesn’t the US Ban Water Fluoridation?

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 27.11.2024

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has been nominated by President-elect Donald Trump as health and human services secretary, has vowed to remove fluoride from public water systems in the US if his appointment is approved by the Senate.

“Fluoride is an industrial waste associated with arthritis, bone fractures, bone cancer, IQ loss, neurodevelopmental disorders, and thyroid disease,” tweeted RFK Jr.

What is Water Fluoridation and Who is Peddling the Practice?

Community water fluoridation was introduced in the US in 1945 and envisages adjusting the amount of fluoride in drinking water to a current recommended level of 0.7 milligrams per liter of water, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

  • CDC is part of the US Department of Health and the major agency that has led water fluoridation since 1975. Its declared goal is to increase the proportion of US people using fluoridated water.
  • CDC claims that water fluoridation prevents cavities and saves $6.5 billion in dental treatment costs for the nation annually.
  • Over 209 million Americans have access to fluoridated drinking water, as per CDC.
  • It’s up to state and local governments to decide whether to fluoridate their community water. According to some estimates, US communities spend over $300 million annually on water fluoridation.
  • For its part, CDC: actively propagates water fluoridation across the US; supports infrastructure in states to promote water fluoridation; monitors coverage and quality of fluoridation; provides technical assistance to state fluoridation programs
  • CDC’s FY2025 budget, requested by President Joe Biden, amounted to $19.7 billion, whereas CDC’s department overseeing water fluoridation (Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion) was assigned $1.5 billion, a 9% increase compared to FY2024.

Despite the CDC propagating community water fluoridation, the measure is surrounded in controversies with critics referring to numerous alleged health risks.

  • While the CDC claims community fluoridation led to a 25% reduction in cavities in children, international oral health data shows almost the same level of reduction in cavities in the countries which have not fluoridated their water over the past decades.
  • According to the WHO, prolonged exposure to high concentrations of fluoride (over 1.5 mg/L) could cause tooth enamel and skeletal fluorosis.
  • 2024 studies indicated that high exposure to fluoride for pregnant women could be associated with lower IQ in children as well as neurobehavioral problems.
  • Scientists warn that it is impossible to control the dose of fluoride each individual receives when consuming fluoridated water: first, water consumption varies; second, an average person also receives fluoride from sources other than the water supply.

Moreover, to fluoridate its water systems, the US uses technically-grade chemicals:

fluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6; also referred to as hydro fluorosilicate, FSA, or HFS), a by-product of the manufacture of phosphate fertilizers, which is used by most US water systems; sodium fluorosilicate (Na2SiF6); and sodium fluoride (NaF)

A 2014 study showed that HFS contains arsenic (As) – that could be responsible for lung and bladder cancer cases – whereas both HFS and NaSF have been shown to leach lead (Pb).
On November 22, Florida surgeon general, Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo, issued guidance calling to stop adding fluoride to the water supply

On September 24, a federal district court in California ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate fluoridation of drinking water to eliminate the “unreasonable risk” to health.

Axios noted that even if RFK Jr assumes the position of health and human services secretary, he wouldn’t be able to prohibit fluoridation. However, if the EPA recognizes it as a toxic substance, it could stop the practice.

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Trump Picks Russia Hawk as Envoy to Ukraine Conflict

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | November 27, 2024

On Wednesday, President-elect Donald Trump tapped retired General Keith Kellogg as his envoy to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Kellogg advocated for the Joe Biden administration strategy in Ukraine and even called for implementing a no-fly zone over the war-torn country.

“I am very pleased to nominate General Keith Kellogg to serve as Assistant to the President and Special Envoy for Ukraine and Russia. Keith has led a distinguished Military and Business career, including serving in highly sensitive National Security roles in my first Administration,” Trump posted on TruthSocial, adding, “Together, we will secure PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH, and Make America, and the World, SAFE AGAIN!”

While Kellogg served in the first Trump administration, his views on Ukraine are starkly different from what Trump said on the campaign trail. As a candidate, Trump promised, on day one, to end the Ukraine war. Though, he never explained how he would accomplish that ambitious goal.

In March of 2022, in an interview on Fox News, Kellogg suggested that Biden and NATO leadership were wrong to dismiss the idea of a no-fly zone over Ukraine. If implemented, that policy would have required the US to shoot down Russian planes over Ukraine, a major escalation that would have meant direct war with Russia.

A year later, in March of 2023, Kellogg endorsed Biden’s Ukraine policy to Congress. “I believe that if you can defeat a strategic adversary without using any US troops, you are at the acme of professionalism.” He continued, “Because letting Ukraine defeat [Russia] it takes a strategic adversary off the table. And we can focus where we should be focusing against, our primary adversary, which is China.”

In a paper published by the America First Policy Institute in April, Kellogg and coauthor Fred Flietz argue that Putin invaded Ukraine because Biden was not aggressive enough in his approach towards Moscow. Kellogg highlighted Trump’s willingness to kill Russian mercenary troops in Syria in 2018, that he “revitalized the NATO alliance,” and sanctioned the Nord Stream 2 Pipelines as examples of his aggressive policies.

“Trump also had a Russia policy that demonstrated American strength. For example, in 2018, after the Russian mercenary Wagner Group advanced on U.S. bases in Syria, they were met with immediate and decisive action when President Trump authorized punitive airstrikes against them,” they wrote. “Russia never retaliated against the United States over that attack—which reportedly killed hundreds of Russian mercenaries—likely because Putin did not know how Trump would respond.”

Kellogg and Fleitz go on to explain that Biden’s crucial failure in the war was not giving enough support to Kiev at the start of the conflict. “Nevertheless, Ukraine’s counteroffensive against Russia ran out of steam by the fall of 2022 because the United States and its allies failed to provide the country with the weapons it needed to continue the fight to reclaim its territory.” They add, “Biden failed to recognize until it was too late, however, that it was in America’s interests and the interests of global security for the United States to do everything possible short of direct US military involvement to help Ukraine.”

The authors propose no workable plan to end the war as they are only willing to offer the Kremlin a postponement regarding Kiev’s prospective NATO membership. Putin was opposed to Washington’s plans seeking Ukraine’s NATO membership when they were announced in 2008, and it is unlikely that taking the issue off the table for a few decades will appease the Kremlin.

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Provoking Nuclear War Over Something Americans Do Not See as a Major Threat

By Adam Dick | Peace and Prosperity Blog | November 27, 2024

New polling conducted this month by the Pew Research Center indicates that only 30 percent of Americans believe that the invasion of Ukraine by Russia is a “major threat to U.S. interests.” That perception was at its highest of 50 percent of Americans shortly after the invasion. It has in successive polling consistently come in much lower, until reaching this new low.

Nevertheless, the United States government over the past nearly three years has kept ramping up its support for Ukraine’s ongoing war with Russia — including via money, intelligence, and weapons. So involved in the war has the US become that it is seems a stretch to claim that the US is not at war directly with Russia. Thus we reach the point where nuclear war between the US and Russia has become a possible outgrowth of the ongoing conflict.

When Russian troops entered Ukraine on February 24, 2022, US President Joe Biden rushed to present a speech to stir up public support for the US government helping Ukraine and punishing Russia. He presented the US as acting to advance democracy in these endeavors. However, even at the height of stirred up war fever, an American majority did not see Russia’s action as a major threat to US interests. Now, that view is held by less than a third of Americans. Yet, the US government remains relentless in its war effort. In reality, it is all about power to the politicians, not power to the people.

Biden’s appeal to democracy was intended to stir up an overwhelming support among Americans for the US going all in on aiding Ukraine and harming Russia. He largely failed in the effort. Democracy in America has said “no” to war. Nonetheless, Biden, along with many other politicians, have continued pursuing war anyway. And now it seems they may keep doing so to the point of nuclear annihilation.

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Canada helps Israel in broadening its definition of ‘anti-Semitism’

By Ramona Wadi | MEMO | November 26, 2024

Once again, anti-Semitism was the catchphrase for political rhetoric denouncing the protest in Montreal against NATO’s complicity with Israel’s genocide. NATO delegates met in Canada for the 70th annual session of its Parliamentary Assembly, and protesters called for Canada’s withdrawal from the organisation, even as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that the country is on track to increase its military spending, which NATO has established as two per cent of the country’s GDP.

“We need to commit ourselves every day to NATO and the principles that keep us safe in this uncertain world,” said Trudeau, acting as if former colonial powers were not responsible for “this uncertain world” and, along with Israel, the genocide in Gaza.

Activists at the protest thought otherwise, of course. As the gathering outside the meeting turned violent, Israeli and mainstream media were swift to label the protest as “anti-Semitic”, as did Trudeau. Montreal’s police, however, said that they did not receive reports of anti-Semitic violence or hate crimes. Mayor of Montreal Valerie Plante condemned the violence, but said that she did not believe that the protest was anti-Semitic.

The protest was organised by Divest for Palestine and the Convergence of Anti-Capitalist Struggles, with the purpose of exposing NATO’s complicity with Israel’s genocide.

However, as Israel increasingly targets any criticism of its actions as “anti-Semitism”, Trudeau followed suit.

“As a democracy, as a country that will always defend freedom of speech, it’s important for people to be able to go out and protest and express their anger, their disagreements in free and comfortable ways,” he declared. “But there is never any room for anti-Semitism, for hatred, discrimination, for violence.”

Canada’s Defence Minister Bill Blair took a similar position. “Those behaviours are unacceptable and we can condemn them, and in particular the hatred and anti-Semitism that was on display, in the strongest possible terms.”

According to reports in Israeli media, a protestor referenced the “Final Solution” which was a Nazi euphemism for the Holocaust.

What stands out is the discrepancy in responses to two different scenarios – Israel’s internationally-approved genocide and a protest against NATO – which showed clearly that the latter’s manifestation of violent action, directed against a transatlantic military alliance, was deemed to be more disturbing than Israel’s systematic destruction of Gaza and the Palestinian people.

Besides this discrepancy, Israel is also extending the “anti-Semitic” label to include any form of protest directed even at organisations that are not Jewish, but prioritise allegiances to Zionism and Zionist colonial violence. The target audience of the protest in Montreal was clearly the NATO delegates.

NATO members have supported Israel’s genocide through purchasing the occupation state’s military technology (“as field-tested against Palestinian civilians”) and also by selling weapons to Israel. Since 2017, Israel has also benefited from its permanent official mission established in NATO headquarters in Brussels. In January 2023, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg met with Israeli President Isaac Herzog at NATO headquarters, noting that,

“NATO and Israel have worked together for almost 30 years.”

Calling out NATO’s complicity in genocide is not anti-Semitic by any stretch of the imagination. Trudeau has confirmed recently that Canada will abide by the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. What message is Trudeau sending to the Canadian public about his government picking and choosing what part of colonial violence it deems worthy of support, while vilifying protestors for drawing attention to government-level hypocrisy?

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Genocide’ vs ‘Bigger Genocide’ in Gaza: Time to decolonise our minds

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | November 27, 2024

“Imperialism leaves behind germs of rot which we must clinically detect and remove from our land but from our minds as well,” wrote Frantz Fanon in The Wretched of the Earth (1961). What the iconic anti-colonial philosopher and psychiatrist was essentially arguing is that the mind must be decolonised first, in order for the undoing of colonialism to succeed in all aspects of our liberation.

Many in the Global South, but especially intellectuals and analysts concerned with Middle East affairs, are still struggling with their relationship with the United States. Although all signs indicate a rapid decline of America’s global status, many among our intelligentsia, possibly unwittingly, still believe that Washington holds all the cards, and that whoever controls the White House must naturally also rule the world.

Of course, US domestic and foreign policies are relevant to global affairs, as financial decisions by the US Federal Reserve, for example, will affect US-global trade volumes, and will have an impact on the interest or disinterest in purchasing US treasury bonds. Some countries that are keen on standing at an equal distance between the US and China often jockey to refine their positions and to protect themselves in case of seismic political changes in the US.

The vibe radiating from many in the Middle East is that the doomsday scenario is real, and that the big war is upon us.

However, they ignore the fact that for many nations around the world, from Gaza to Lebanon to Ukraine to Sudan and elsewhere, wars have already arrived, many of which are bankrolled by western funds and political blank cheques. To warn of war while tens of millions are already suffering the outcomes of western-funded wars reflects the degree of desensitisation and opportunism of the followers of western order.

Some of those crying over the supposedly imminent doom had initially presented the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, Kamala Harris, as the best worst-case option for Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims. Although they may have acknowledged the genocide in Gaza, and even criticised the Joe Biden administration for enabling it, they recoiled at the mere suggestion that the Democrats must be punished for their many sins in the Middle East and beyond.

Another crowd presented Donald Trump as the saviour, the strong man who, with a stroke of a pen, will end all wars, the one in Gaza included. They cited the man’s repeated claim that, “I’m not going to start a war, I’m going to stop the wars.” They even went on to argue that Trump, who would be serving a second and final term in office, is now immune to political manipulation from the pro-Israel lobby and all other pressures.

Trump won, of course.

His crushing defeat of the Democrats on all fronts, including in the popular vote, indicates that he would have won regardless of those who considered ending the war in Gaza to be a top political priority. However, the early announcements that Trump’s administration come January will be a who’s who of the pro-Israel Republican circle has reignited the debate about the “bigger genocide” awaiting Palestinians and other scare-mongering tactics.

Both sides of this inconsequential debate conveniently ignore obvious facts: that America’s ruling elites are rooted in pro-Israel political allegiances; that although there might be a difference in style, US foreign policy under Democratic Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Trump’s future hire, Marco Rubio, is likely to be identical; and that the Biden-Harris administration gave Israel all the help it needed to sustain its wars in the Middle East over the course of 13 months and counting.

This stifling debate, however, misses some of the most critical points that should be discussed, and urgently so. For example, the Middle East region is not a single political monolith. It has its own political calculations, conflicts, alliances and options that include other political heavyweights, such as China and Russia, among others.

Moreover, several Middle Eastern countries are joining the increasingly influential BRICS alliance. The latter is not just a trade club, but also a powerful economic alliance with a strong political discourse to match.

Thus, the future and survival of the Middle East does not hinge on US economic policies.

Finally, the war in Gaza is a war that also involves the Palestinians, the Lebanese and their Arab and international allies. The people of occupied Palestine and Lebanon have agency, choices and strategies that are not wholly dependent on the ideological identity or political inclinations of a lone American ensconced in the White House.

If the political views of the US president were indeed the most decisive aspect in the fate and future of the Palestinian people, Palestinian aspirations would have been suppressed decades ago due to America’s inherent pro-Israel bias. They weren’t, not because of any compassion on the part of US administrations, but due to the sumud, resilience, of the Palestinian people.

It is time that we abandon the archaic thinking regarding our collective colonial past, or present, that views western leaders as our masters, and our people as mere subjects, struggling to survive, imploring, though never obtaining, prudent western foreign policies.

The world is changing, vastly, and it is time for us to change as well. Fanon gave us the cure decades ago: We must clinically detect and remove the rot, not only from our land but from our minds as well.

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

Biden administration advancing $680m arms sale to Israel, source says

MEMO | November 27, 2024

The Biden administration is pushing ahead with a $680 million arms sales package to Israel, a US official familiar with the plan said on Wednesday, even as a US-brokered ceasefire in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah has come into effect, Reuters reports.

The package, which was first reported by the Financial Times, includes thousands of joint direct attack munition kits (JDAM) and hundreds of small-diameter bombs, according to the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The news comes less than a day after the ceasefire agreement ended the deadliest confrontation in years between Israel and the Hezbollah group, but Israel is still fighting its other arch foe, the Palestinian group, Hamas, in the Gaza Strip.

However, the package has been in the works for several months. It was first previewed to the congressional committees in September then submitted for review in October, the official said.

The package follows a $20 billion sale in August of fighter jets and other military equipment to Israel.

Reuters reported in June that Washington, Israel’s biggest ally and weapons supplier, has sent Israel more than 10,000 highly destructive 2,000-pound bombs and thousands of Hellfire missiles since the start of the Gaza war in October 2023.

The conversations about the latest arms package had been going on even as a group of progressive US senators, including Bernie Sanders introduced resolutions to block the sale of some US weapons to Israel over concerns about the human rights catastrophe faced by Palestinians in Gaza.

The legislation was shot down in the Senate.

Biden, whose term ends in January, has strongly backed Israel since Hamas-led gunmen attacked in October 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.

However, since then, it has been revealed by Haaretz that helicopters and tanks of the Israeli army had, in fact, killed many of the 1,139 soldiers and civilians claimed by Israel to have been killed by the Palestinian Resistance.

Most of Gaza’s population of 2.3 million people has been displaced and the enclave is at risk of famine, more than a year into Israel’s war against Hamas in the Palestinian enclave. Gaza health officials say more than 43,922 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s offensive.

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Ceasefire with Hezbollah ends Israel’s illusion of reshaping West Asia by force: Hamas

Press TV – November 27, 2024

The Palestinian resistance movement Hamas says the ceasefire Israel eventually clinched with Hezbollah has shattered Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “illusion” of reshaping West Asia by force.

On Tuesday, Netanyahu finally accepted the deal, which is expected to end the regime’s months-long deadly escalation against Lebanon.

It came after a meeting of his “security cabinet” to discuss a proposal put forward by the United States and France.

“The enemy’s acceptance of the agreement with Lebanon without fulfilling the conditions it set is an important milestone in shattering Netanyahu’s illusions of changing the map of the Middle East by force,” Hamas said in a statement published on its Telegram channel on Wednesday.

It said Netanyahu’s “illusions of defeating the Resistance forces or disarming them” were also sent to the oblivion.

The Israeli regime has killed more than 3,700 people in Lebanon, including 42 who perished across the country on Tuesday, besides wounding nearly 15,700 others.

“We commend the pivotal role played by the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon, in support of the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian resistance, and the great sacrifices made by Hezbollah and its leadership, led by the late Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.”

“We appreciate the steadfastness of the brotherly Lebanese people and their constant solidarity with the Palestinian people in confronting the Zionist occupation and its brutal aggression, asking God Almighty to protect Lebanon and its people from all harm and evil,” Hamas said.

Israeli military commanders had pledged to eradicate Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. However, they were ultimately compelled to accept the ceasefire agreement without achieving any of those goals.

“We affirm that this agreement would not have been achieved without the steadfastness of the Resistance and the popular support around it. We are confident that the Resistance Axis will continue to support our people and back their battle with all possible means,” Hamas said in its statement.

Hezbollah has been responding to the Israeli aggression with hundreds of successful retaliatory strikes against various sensitive and strategic military targets across the occupied territories.

The Lebanese resistance movement recently announced killing more than 100 Israeli troops and injuring upwards of a thousand others during the strikes.

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ceasefire Deal: Netanyahu’s ‘Focus on Iran’ Could Mean ‘Serious Regional War’ if Backed by US

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 27.11.2024

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday there are three reasons why Israel concluded a ceasefire deal with Lebanese Shiite movement Hezbollah: to focus on Iran; to replenish weaponry stocks; and to isolate Hamas.

“It is not clear how Israel would focus more on Iran,” Dr Marco Carnelos, a former Italian diplomat and Middle East adviser of Prime Ministers Prodi and Berlusconi, tells Sputnik. “Probably the Israeli prime minister hopes that with the incoming Trump administration a direct military pressure on Iran might be increased together with the US.”

Dr. Tamer Qarmout, associate professor at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, dubs Netanyahu’s focus on Iran as “cheap talk.”

“How would the Israelis engage with Iran if they were not able to eliminate Hezbollah,” Qarmout asks while talking to Sputnik. “We’ll have to see the new [Trump] administration’s take on Iran. But if this happens for whatever reason, this means a serious regional or even could be a global war.”

The experts allege Netanyahu has been cornered by the military leadership over heavy losses sustained by the Israeli Defense Forces in southern Lebanon, and snubbed his hawkish cabinet members to implement the deal.

“My feeling is that the Israeli military echelon cornered Netanyahu on this point because on the battleground in Southern Lebanon the Israeli Army was able to advance only a few km and incurred in severe losses. Israel erased Hezbollah’s leadership but it did not defeat the movement on the ground… And because Hezbollah has not lost the battle, by default it will be perceived as the winner,” Carnelos says.

It is clear that Netanyahu will use the “breather” to double down on attacking Hamas in the Gaza Strip, according to Qarmout: “Israel would be able to shift its military power on to sources to continue its genocidal war on Gaza,” he says.

Still, the future of the ceasefire deal is hanging in the balance, according to the pundits.

“The devil is still in the details. We still have 60 days to see if this agreement will hold,” Qarmout concludes.

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »