Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

MPs smear Gaza protestors, while others invent scare stories

By Yvonne Ridley | MEMO | March 1, 2024

Are the massive pro-Palestine marches in Britain being deliberately targeted and smeared as part of a concerted Zionist effort to use the law to stop people from joining the ranks of the growing anti-war movement? That would certainly explain the furore over MPs’ safety which came to a head last week when Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons and a member of the Labour Friends of Israel lobby group, cited threats to politicians in his disastrous handling of a debate on calls for a ceasefire in Gaza.

I pose the question after some extraordinary events have been picked up and anchored in a media campaign which has collectively shown nothing but hostility towards Palestinians in favour of the Zionist Israeli state as the genocidal onslaught in Gaza continues. Throw in some decidedly Islamophobic comments by prominent Conservative MPs, and there is a really toxic atmosphere brewing in advance of this year’s General Election, with Muslims — “Islamists” — cast as the bad guys.

Today, my suspicions were fuelled by none other than British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak who resorted to shameless smears and scare tactics as he warned police chiefs of a “growing consensus that mob rule is replacing democratic rule”. Calling for more robust police action, Sunak used inflammatory language to insist that politicians need to be protected from intimidatory protests outside their homes.

However, the Home Office has nevertheless announced a £31 million package aimed at protecting MPs. It is said to be in response to the impact of the ongoing “Israel-Hamas conflict”.

Meanwhile, in Scotland police were called to investigate bizarre claims that the Glasgow constituency office of Labour Members of the Scottish Parliament was “stormed” by 30 pro-Palestine protesters, with MSP Paul Sweeney criticising officers for taking 27 minutes to respond even though the office staff were left “distressed”.

Police Scotland insist that the storming of the politicians’ shared office never happened as described, and rejected the claims made by Sweeney. According to him, campaigners forced their way into the office that he shares with party leader Anas Sarwar, and fellow MSPs Pam Duncan-Glancy and Pauline McNeil.

“It may well be that this entire furore over alleged threats by protestors is confected,” said Mick Napier, a co-founder of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign, whose members took part in the protest. Certainly, the example of Sweeney caught flagrantly inventing threats to the staff suggests that this might be the case. Sweeney supports a party leader who endorses Israel withholding water, food and fuel from the entire population of Gaza — not only cruel, but also collective punishment, a war crime — while he complains that people opposing such barbarism raise their voices.

“Although in this case voices weren’t even raised,” explained Napier. “There seems to be something new in the shamelessness with which our politicians lie to the public. Could it be because the mainstream media have given up any pretence of investigating such fabrications?”

Despite repeated attempts to contact Sarwar, McNeil, Duncan-Clancy and Sweeney, none were prepared to offer a comment to me about the incident.

European political analyst Kevin Ovenden wrote about the incident on 22 February: “Two elected politicians have been exposed today for simply lying that they faced violent intimidation when they merely had to deal with democratic lobbying and political pressure. One is the Labour Member of the Scottish Parliament Paul Sweeney. Police in Glasgow refuted his highly charged claim that anti-war protesters stormed his office and intimidated his staff. They did no such thing, as the police concluded, having been present throughout for an orderly protest, without even any civil disobedience, by a small group of middle-aged or older women and men.

“That has not stopped the Speaker of the House of Commons, Lindsay Hoyle (for years a nodding-donkey Labour MP) today smearing the entire anti-war movement as in some way incubating terrorism as justification for his anti-democratic manoeuvres on behalf of [Labour Party leader] Keir Starmer.”

Ovenden blames craven support for Israel by the two main establishment parties, Conservative and Labour, for “not only leading to authoritarianism against public protest and free speech. It is now even crushing the limited democratic avenues available through parliament.”

The streets of London have witnessed some of the largest, peaceful, pro-Palestine demonstrations in the capital’s history, but that did not stop Sunak from calling an urgent meeting in Downing Street for police chiefs on Thursday. He urged them to use all of their existing powers to crack down on the alleged intimidation, disruption and subversion.

“We simply cannot allow this pattern of increasingly violent and intimidatory behaviour which is, as far as anyone can see, intended to shout down free debate and stop elected representatives doing their job,” insisted the prime minister.

Without a hint of irony, the man who has so far given his unconditional support to Israel, currently under investigation for genocide by the International Court of Justice, added: “That is simply undemocratic… I am going to do whatever it requires to protect our democracy, and our values, which we all hold dear.”

Del Babu, a former chief superintendent in London’s Metropolitan Police, said language like “mob rule” was not “helpful”. He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that appealing to people to demonstrate less could have “unintended consequences” and potentially lead to more people protesting.

“We will continue to march until there is an immediate ceasefire,” said Shamiul Joarder of Friends of Al-Aqsa. The organisation is part of a coalition of groups organising the marches which have brought world attention to London’s streets.

Members from all six groups, along with Labour MP and former shadow chancellor John McDonnell, and the campaign group Liberty, held a press conference earlier this week in parliament criticising unhelpful language used by politicians. They claim that anti-Muslim “hysteria” and pressure from the government had provoked the Metropolitan Police into heavy-handed and “discriminatory” policing of “peaceful mass protests”.

Home Secretary James Cleverly, meanwhile, told the BBC: “I genuinely don’t know what these regular protests are seeking to achieve. They have made their position clear, we recognise that there are many people in the UK that hold that position.”

Hours later, 104 starving Palestinians in Gaza were massacred — witnesses say that Israeli troops opened fire on them — as they gathered around an aid convoy distributing food. If Cleverly doesn’t understand the point of the street demonstrations then he has the emotional intelligence of a brick and a surname which doesn’t quite match his IQ.

Calls for a ceasefire will continue until Israel’s genocide of the people of occupied Palestine is stopped in its murderous tracks. Which bit of “Stop Killing Civilians” do our politicians not understand?

March 1, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Ex-UK Army Chief Nick Carter, Once In Charge of “Misinformation” Surveillance Army Unit, Joins Tony Blair Institute

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 28, 2024

A new noteworthy instance of what can be described as the UK-style revolving door policy, where those working for the government and private entities switch employers in both directions, has happened in that country.

A former chief of the British Army, under whose watch the 77th Brigade was spying on citizens during the pandemic, has now joined Tony Blair’s organization.

General Nick Carter is therefore a new recruit at the Institute for Global Change (globalist not in name only, either) – which the former British prime minister set up to supposedly create “open, inclusive and prosperous countries for all.”

Carter previously “distinguished” himself at the peak of the pandemic for allowing a unit under his command to hunt down “bad” speech on the internet – that of citizens skeptical of Covid measures and related contentious issues, whatever was treated as “Covid misinformation.”

Carter’s fellow new recruit at the Institute is former Government Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance. Another new hire is Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin. They will act as members of a team of “expert strategic counselors” in what critics might call Blair’s elitist globalist group – his own version of WEF, even.

Before becoming Blair’s private adviser, Carter, a decorated officer, served as the principal military advisor to the prime minister (reports don’t say which ones), as head of the Armed Forces, and finally the chief of the Defense Staff for the United Kingdom.

Back in the spring of 2020, reports cited Carter, then at the helm of the Defense Staff, saying that the 77th Brigade was “countering coronavirus misinformation online.”

Not a traditional deployment of a country’s military potential, even if it is one set up to carry out physiological warfare, like 77th Brigade had been.

And it didn’t make things better that the target of this warfare was free speech on the UK’s citizens – on Twitter, Facebook and the like.

No less than 2,000 military personnel were involved in this, with a dubious to say the least goal of what looks like a straight-forward attempt to sway opinion among the population.

This was at the time phrased as delivering “means of shaping behavior through the use of dynamic narratives.”

Related: 

Tony Blair Institute Calls For a Digital ID For All British Citizens, Calls It The “Great Enabler”

UK government monitored tweets from high profile journalists and politicians that criticized Covid policy

February 29, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

EU-Created Fund Interfering in Georgia’s Elections – Parliament Speaker

Sputnik – 28.02.2024

TBILISI – The EU-established European Endowment for Democracy (EED) fund is interfering in the parliamentary elections to come in Georgia by financing various political parties, Georgian parliamentary speaker Shalva Papuashvili said on Wednesday.

“EED does not disclose its own expenses in Georgia. Apparently, the fund directly finances political parties and interferes in the elections. Holding the elections properly is part of the nine points [needed to be taken by Georgia for EU integration] and we cannot deal with this alone. The European Union, its representative office, the European Commission must intervene, because this foundation is an institution created by the EU,” Papuashvili told reporters.

If not stopped, foreign funding will harm the elections, which are scheduled to take place in the country, on October 26, and hinder the choice of the Georgian people, the parliamentary speaker added.

“We are seeing that a significant part of the opposition is being financed directly from abroad and, given the fact that the current year is an election year, this is equivalent to foreign interference in the elections in Georgia. Foreign interference is one of the threats expected in these elections … For the elections to be transparent, it is necessary to prohibit and stop direct or indirect funding of parties in Georgia through European channels,” Papuashvili said.

Established in 2023 by the European Union, EED officially aims to promote democracy in the European Neighborhood, the Western Balkans, and Turkiye.

February 29, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

How to Stop the WHO – #SolutionsWatch

Corbett | February 27, 2024

We all know the problem by now: the World Health Organization is trying to override your health freedoms and abrogate your bodily autonomy in the name of their scamdemic agenda. But what is the solution? Join James for this in-depth exploration of the ideas, organizations and actions that are already in motion to derail the WHO tyranny and regain our medical sovereignty.

WATCH ON: ARCHIVE / BITCHUTE / ODYSEE / ROKFIN / RUMBLE   /SUBSTACK or DOWNLOAD THE MP4

SHOW NOTES:

Episode 417 – The Global Pandemic Treaty: What You Need to Know

Episode 442 – The Global Pandemic Treaty Is A Threat To Us All

Episode 445 – James Corbett Testifies at the National Citizens Inquiry

Canadian petitions to parliament

UK petition

US petition

The Global WHO Uprising Has Begun! on CHD TV

Amending The International Health Regulations (2005) – Health.Govt.NZ

Netherlands Letter To Parliament

South Africa Bill To Withdraw From WHO

Press conference on the growing concerns over the WHO ‘pandemic treaty’

Presentation to Irish parliament

UK Reject and Exit the WHO!

Good News: The UK’s membership of the WHO seems to be unlawful and legal action is pending

DoorToFreedom.org

jamesroguski.substack.com

screwthewho.com

exitthewho.org

Nullification – #SolutionsWatch

Maharrey on The Corbett Report

Michael Maharrey on “Shot Callers” discussing nullifying the WHO agreements

This week, please PAY FORWARD your gratitude for this work by sending info on the WHO takeover to someone in your life and by supporting the group or the individual that put that info together.

February 29, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism, Video | | Leave a comment

Canada’s Liberal Government Advances “Online Harms” Censorship Bill

Trudeau wants new laws to censor online speech

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | February 27, 2024

Canada’s Justice Minister Arif Virani has advanced a highly controversial bill, named Bill C-63, proposing comprehensive new legislation aimed at addressing online “hate” speech.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

The bill covers seven types of harmful material, from content sexually exploiting or re-victimizing children and survivors, to content promoting violence and extremism.

But it also outlaws online “hatred,” so-called “hate speech,” and forms of deepfakes.

In an attempt to decrease the prevalence of harmful content, this legislation puts the onus on online platforms to be accountable and transparent about how they handle such content.

Platforms like social media and live-streaming services are included under the legislation’s “online services” umbrella.

The bill would also create a new “standalone hate crime offense that would apply to every offence in the Criminal Code and in any other Act of Parliament, allowing penalties up to life imprisonment to denounce and deter this hateful conduct as a crime in itself,” – the briefing explained.

The proposed law would also raise the maximum punishments for the four hate offenses from five years to life imprisonment for advocating genocide and from two years to five years for the others when persecuted by way of indictment.

The Liberal government states that the bill’s proposed regulations centre on the platforms most frequented by Canadians. However, the specifics will depend on whether these platforms meet the eventual user thresholds. Over time, the government may hold other platforms accountable, if these platforms end up posing “a significant risk of harm.”

Additionally, Bill C-63 proposes establishing a censorship organization, which will oversee digital “safety” issues. This organization is anticipated to include a five-member digital safety commission, an independent digital safety ombudsman, and a digital safety office. These will assist in addressing Canadians’ grievances about platforms’ content moderation decisions.

In a recent critique of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s approach to regulating online speech, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre didn’t mince words. He accused Trudeau of labeling any speech he personally dislikes as “hate speech.” This accusation comes amidst discussions surrounding Canada’s proposed online harms bill, a legislation echoing similar efforts in other western democracies aimed at curbing hate speech, terrorist incitements, and violent content online.

Poilievre’s comments reflect a growing concern about the potential for such laws to be misused for broader censorship. This concern is not unfounded, given precedents in other countries where similar laws have veered into the realm of suppressing free speech. The Conservative leader’s stance suggests a keen awareness of these risks.

The term “woke authoritarian agenda” was used by Poilievre to describe the draft of the online harms bill, which he and his party are committed to opposing. He draws attention to the Trudeau administration’s handling of the 2022 “Freedom Convoy,” a protest against COVID-19 restrictions. Poilievre points out the government’s extreme measures, including freezing citizens’ bank accounts, as indicative of a mindset that easily conflates criticism with hate speech.

Highlighting the Trudeau government’s actions during the pandemic, Poilievre remarked, “Justin Trudeau said anyone who criticized him during the pandemic was engaging in hate speech.” This statement underscores a fear that the government might use the proposed legislation to silence dissent in various scenarios.

February 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Tucker Carlson makes shocking revelation about Moscow trip

RT | February 27, 2024

Tucker Carlson said on Tuesday that US spies had monitored him while he was in Russia earlier this month, and leaked to a ‘friendly’ outlet that he had met with Edward Snowden. This is despite the American journalist’s claim that he had tried to keep his meeting with the NSA whistleblower a secret.

Carlson went to Russia to interview President Vladimir Putin. During his eight days in Moscow, he also met with Snowden – and US spies found out about it, he told podcaser Lex Fridman in the course of a three-hour conversation.

“I was being intensely surveilled by the US government,” Carlson told Fridman, noting that US spies had thwarted his plans to interview Putin in 2021 and that he received confirmation that he was being intensely monitored ahead of his Moscow trip. “Then, I’m over there, and of course I want to see Snowden, whom I admire.”

Snowden allegedly accepted Carlson’s invitation to have dinner at the Four Seasons Hotel, but declined the interview as well as a photo request, saying that it would be better to tell no one.

“I didn’t tell anybody,” Carlson told Fridman, however the meeting was leaked. “Semafor runs this piece – reporting information they got from the US intel agencies, leaking against me, using my money, in my name, in a supposedly free country – they run this piece saying I met with Snowden, like it was a crime or something.”

“If you have a media establishment that acts as employees of the national security state, you don’t have a free country. And that’s where we are,” Carlson added.

Carlson revealed that he did not fear getting arrested in Russia at any point, but was warned by his lawyers that the US might arrest him depending on the content of the Putin interview.

“I felt not one twinge of concern for the 8 days that I was there,” he told Fridman about being in Moscow.

Before he left for Russia, his team of attorneys counseled him to “not do this… A lot will depend on the questions you ask of Putin. If you’re seen as too nice to him you could be arrested when you come back,” Carlson quoted the lead lawyer as saying, to which he said he replied, “You’re describing a fascist country, OK?”

In 2013, Snowden revealed that the NSA was systematically engaged in mass illegal spying on American citizens. Fearing for his safety, he fled to Hong Kong with the intent to reach Ecuador, which did not have an extradition treaty with the US, but was stopped during a layover in Moscow after Washington canceled his passport. Russia ended up granting him asylum and reportedly, eventual citizenship.

One of the founders of Semafor, the outlet to which Carlson claims US spies leaked his dinner with Snowden, is Ben Smith, a former editor-in-chief of the now defunct BuzzFeed newsroom. In 2017, Smith notoriously published the ‘Steele Dossier,’ a sham document leaked by US spies to discredit incoming President Donald Trump.

February 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

FRENCH BILL SEEKS TO CRIMINALIZE MEDICAL “MISINFORMATION”

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | February 22, 2024

Press and medical journalists appear to be the target of a new bill proposed in France that may seek to criminalize criticism of therapeutic and prophylactic remedies that have been deemed safe by the medical community.

February 26, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , , | Leave a comment

UK Government Minister Shuns Concerns About “Anti-Disinformation Unit”

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 25, 2024

Critics of the contentious, and some would say at times unlawful, work of UK’s Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU) are expectedly unimpressed by it getting a “rebrand” – that is, a new name.

It remains to be seen if the National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT – née CDU), will continue with activities of the kind that highly likely got the image of the CDU so tarnished that it needed a “rebrand.”

But government officials continue at the same time to deny there was any wrongdoing on the part of CDU to begin with – or that there will be any done by NSOIT.

The controversy over CDU goes back to the “heyday” of the pandemic and censorship of Covid-related content. The accusation – that continues to be rejected by the government – is that individuals, including senior figures from across the UK’s political spectrum, were targeted.

And, their online activity was first surveilled by CDU, which would then flag some posts for removal merely for criticizing the government, rather than “spreading disinformation.”

But, responding to questions about all this in the British Parliament’s House of Lords earlier in the week, an official from the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology – NSOIT’s parent agency, said there was no merit to such claims, or fears, going forward.

“I can confirm not only that it is not the role of NSOIT or the CDU to go after any individuals, regardless of their political belief, but that it never has been,” junior minister Jonathan Berry told the lords, adding that the unit supposedly only looks for “threats from foreign states” – while the form of domestic political persecution it was accused of is something that is “categorically false.”

However, Liberal Democrat Paul Strasburger continues to press the matter, specifically seeking answers as to how NSOIT will be controlled in the future, particularly given what he says was CDU’s “worrying overreach.”

And – why the government “refuses to allow the Intelligence and Security Committee” to do that oversight.

Berry’s response essentially amounted to revealing that NSOIT will – oversee itself.

“As part of the civil service, NSOIT would have robust internal measures to verify and check its own work, and indeed it reports regularly across government and to ministers,” the junior minister is quoted as stating.

Other than that, Berry could offer “reassurances” to the House of Lords regarding the unit’s role, and he at the same time would not speak about either how NSOIT is staffed, nor how many people it employs, referring to it as “a national security institution.”

February 25, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

At Long Last? UK Media Blasts West’s Support to Euromaidan Coup & Ukraine Conflict

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 25.02.2024

Ten years after the Euromaidan coup in Ukraine, a mainstream UK media outlet published an op-ed questioning why the West supported violent mobs against elected president Viktor Yanukovich, stressing that the roots of today’s Ukraine conflict lie in the February 2014 regime change operation.

A leading British newspaper columnist has blamed the Western-sponsored 2014 coup in Kiev for the current military disaster in Ukraine.

The Mail on Sunday, an established British daily publication with the third biggest readership in the UK, published an op-ed by veteran columnist Peter Hitchens.

He raised uncomfortable questions about the ongoing Ukraine conflict and the chain of events in the February 2014 coup in Ukraine.

“What is Britain’s interest in this conflict? Why do so many in politics and the media cheer for carnage that has devastated Ukraine, the country they claim to love and admire?” asked Hitchens. “What has Ukraine gained from it? What can Ukraine and its people possibly gain from it?”

Hitchens also asked why the West supported undemocratic violence and the overthrow of legitimately elected President Viktor Yanukovich.

Laying out the events November 2013 – February 2014, Hitchens stressed that before Euromaidan Ukraine was “a crude but functioning democracy” which faced both east and west politically. He noted that Yanukovich won the 2010 election fair and square, beating his nearest rival Yulia Timoshenko, and that in February 2014 Yanukovich was “the lawful head of state, with two years to run.”

He added that what was painted as a peaceful protest at the start was soon hijacked by a violent mob.

“There is much that is murky about these bitter days, including the mysterious shootings of members of the crowd,” Hitchens said of the sniper shooting spree in February 2014.

The journalist quoted the leaked — and never denied — phone call between Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and then-EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton. The two discussed “stronger and stronger understanding” that “behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovich, but it was somebody from the new coalition.”

Hitchens pointed out that following the bloodshed, Yanukovich signed an agreement with three senior Euromaidan leaders on February 21, 2014 in the presence of three EU ministers.

“Yanukovych offered a rewrite of the constitution to suit the opposition; a new government; early presidential elections (no later than December 2014); and an impartial probe into the violence (which there has never been). All sides renounced the use of force,” the journalist underlined.

But by the evening of the same day the deal was torn apart by the Kiev mob – “an unelected body with no constitutional or democratic authority” which “certainly did not represent the eastern part of the country,” Hitchens wrote.

The Maidan leaders made no effort to defend the duly-elected president against the violent crowd. In fact, the Ukrainian parliament or Verkhovna Rada moved to remove him in violation of the nation’s constitution, the British journalist noted.

In the aftermath of those events Yanukovich fled Kiev, but did not resign or leave the country, stressed Hitchens, quoting highly-respected Ukrainian historian Serhy Plokhy. That “shows beyond doubt that the elected President was still in office and in Ukraine when parliament voted to remove him.”

But what struck Hitchens the most was the reaction of the West to the obviously illegitimate coup d’etat.

“Western nations, including Britain, should have condemned this action. They are normally vigilant defenders of law and democracy all over the world, are they not? But in this case, they condoned the coup,” the journalist wrote, quoting then-foreign secretary William Hague, who he accused of lying when he told the House of Commons on March 4, 2014 that Yanukovich was removed “by the very large majorities [in the Verkhovna Rada] required under the constitution.” In reality, the vote was unlawful, since Ukrainian MPs lacked the votes needed to do so under the constitution, explained Hitchens.

Lord Hague’s assertion that “it is wrong to question the legitimacy of the new authorities” in fact “seriously misled Parliament,” stressed the journalist.

The events of February 2014 irrevocably divided Ukraine and caused “a filthy little war in the east of the country in which (among other tragedies and horrors) many civilians died at the hands of the Ukrainian army,” Hitchens continued, adding that the current conflict is only the “second stage” of the Ukraine war which started 10 years ago.

While falling short of accusing US and EU of playing a direct role in fomenting the 2014 coup d’etat in Kiev, Hitchens still stressed that “the West blatantly betrayed its own principles to condone and forgive the nasty event.” According to the journalist, those who supported the putsch are also responsible for the ongoing havoc.

“Think of that as you listen to all those loud, safe voices demanding that we keep on fuelling this war, in which Ukrainians die daily for democratic principles we do not, in fact, support,” he concluded.

In an interview with US journalist Tucker Carlson earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin openly attacked the West’s readiness to embrace the illegitimate regime change.

Putin pointed out that the coup was completely “unnecessary” given that Yanukovich met all the demands of Euromaidan leaders on February 21. Furthermore, EU representatives were there and backed the deal between the then-Ukrainian president and opposition leaders. The West had a chance of helping Ukraine stay within the legal framework of democratic processes, and yet US and EU leaders squandered it at the time,” he told Carlson.

Putin made it clear that the Euromaidan events led to the bloodshed in eastern Ukraine that did not accept Yanukovich’s overthrow. After exhausting all avenues for ending the internal west-east Ukrainian conflict through the 2014 and 2015 Minsk agreements, Russia launched its special military operation in 2022 to end the Kiev regime’s years-long war against Russian-speakers in Donbass, according to the Russian president.

Hitchen’s piece for the Mail on Sunday indicates that some understanding of Euromaidan and its disastrous consequences has started to manifest itself in the West.

February 25, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

The EU Is Hotel California

An Unelected Body Of Ruling Class Elites, Indistinguishable From Feudal Leaders Of Europe’s Bloodstained Past

By Manorborn | The Truth Barrier | February 20, 2024

Two weeks ago, leaks emerged in The Financial Times revealing how the EU is setting out to destroy Hungary economically for its refusal to fund the war against Russia.

The irony is stunning. Viktor Orban, the president of Hungary, who was once arrested in his youth for protesting the brutality of the USSR toward his little nation, is now objecting to the EU’s strongarmed sabotage of the sovereignty of member states like his and by the EU’s unjustified, unreasonable treatment of the Russian Federation as an enemy instead of a beneficial economic partner.

Orban was forced to back down a few days later. But by backing down, he weakened Hungary vis a vis Ursula van der Leyen and her minions. Orban should have presented the EU’s unacceptable, coercive plan of economic warfare against the Hungarian people and their livelihoods before the UN.

Hungary has many allies around the world – it’s time to go to them for support now that he’s discovered what Greece discovered a decade or so ago – that the EU is Hotel California.

It was that “lovely face” of Western Europe that drew the love starved Easterners once free from the Soviets. Nimium non crede lepidi faciei. (Trust not too much to an enchanting face).  – Virgil

Before the inception of the EU, Europe was a region of free, sovereign, more or less democratic nation-states with bright economic futures. After federalization under the EU and concurrent with the neocon capture of the US government, EU member states absent Germany, France, Italy and the Twisted Sisters of Benelux gradually found themselves inured in a 21st Century version of the Warsaw Pact with a grim future of belt tightening, war and downward mobility.

Now we are witnessing just how individual European nations are no longer free in all instances to make decisions that best serve their distinctive populations. Instead they’re tightly bound to EU governance – a commissariat administered by an unelected body of ruling class elites who’re indistinguishable in character and ambitions from the feudal leaders of Europe’s bloodstained past.

But whereas the Warsaw Pact was formed to protect the interests of the USSR, the EU exists to serve the interests of the US hegemon and the competing globalist vision of the WEF who groom and vet future EU leaders.

Fortunately, Orban, along with Fico in Slovakia, Vučić in Serbia and Matteo Salvini in Italy is one of the few European leaders who is not afraid to call out the authoritarian nature and mounting abuses of the EU. Surely he’s noted the EU’s subservience to US plans for escalating wars to target Iran and eventually directly target Russia for its refusal to lie down and allow the West to select its leaders and open up its resources to the kind of pillaging by the West that transpired under Boris Yeltsin.

Orban knows that what the EU is doing to Russia, it could and would do to Hungary. EU membership will not shield it. Western NGOs have been working round the clock to create regime change in Slovakia, Serbia and Hungary. In 2020 the EU ruled that national laws like the law in Hungary requiring NGOs to register as foreign agents are unlawful. That can only signify one thing: Room keys will always be held by the front desk at Hotel California.

February 24, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Biden Admin Wants To Spend Around $1 Million on University “Disinformation” Monitoring Program

Despite legal scrutiny, the Biden administration continues its interest in speech monitoring.

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 23, 2024

The White House’s latest initiative to carry out its brand of combating misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation (which is now referred to by the handy “MDM” initial) continues to co-opt the education sector.

The Department of Justice agency the National Institute for Justice (NIJ) is behind the funding effort that is said to be designed to study and research “effective technologies and tools for identification, moderation, and/or removal of extremist content.”

A grant worth $1 million will be spent to come up with a dashboard featuring an MDM tracker, which is supposed to surveil the internet for both speech, and narratives, and do so in real time. The project’s official name is, “Networks and Pathways of Violent Extremism: Effectiveness of Mis/Disinformation Campaigns.”

And reports say that the targeted speech coincides with “contentious political events.” Critics say that the taxpayer dollars here are in reality going towards suppression of conservative and religious groups, rather than as declared, violent extremists.

The recipient of the grant is South Carolina-based Clemson University. Researchers there are expected to come up with computer models that will keep an eye on accounts singled out as MDM peddlers and identify people associated with allegedly spreading MDM.

Eventually, the effort should produce the real-time tracking dashboard.

Regular citizens may not benefit from this project – considering the “fluid” nature of the very definitions of misinformation and its companions (some reports mention the initial, and subsequent treatment of the Covid origin and Hunter Biden laptop stories as examples of this.)

But the grant does specify who will benefit: law enforcement and policymakers.

This is by no means the only initiative of the kind coming from the Biden administration – since the current US president came to power, $39 million went to “MDM research” from the National Science Foundation (NSF) alone, also in some cases involving prominent educational institutions, such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

And while Clemson researchers are reassuring that their efforts are not politically or ideologically biased, the Internet Accountability Project and the Foundation for Freedom Online are voicing their fears that the end result will be yet another tool facilitating censorship, specifically by suppressing conservative voices.

February 23, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

German Vice Chancellor accuses journalist of doing Moscow’s bidding after probing question

RT | February 22, 2024

German Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck, who is also the country’s minister for economic affairs and climate action, accused “Russian journalists” of “discrediting liberal democracy” after a German reporter asked him about allegations that he had turned to unusual methods of dealing with dissent among his subordinates.

The Green politician was presenting a Federal Economy Report at a press conference on Wednesday when journalist Florian Warweg questioned him about allegations that he used Germany’s domestic security service – the BfV – to run checks on ministerial officials whose opinions were “far from the political course” of the government.

The reporter was referring to a case dating back to August 2022, when two high-ranking officials within the Economy Ministry were suspected of spying for Russia over internal documents that showed “understanding for the Russian point of view” and used arguments that “did not fit the official line of the federal government.”

According to the Die Zeit report, background checks on the two suspects revealed an “emotional closeness to Russia” but no solid evidence of espionage activity. The investigation itself was reportedly prompted by Habeck’s “confidants,” who allegedly alerted the domestic security agency.

“Was it an isolated case or do you still resort to the [services] of the [BfV] when encountering inconvenient opinions among your civil servants?” Warweg asked. Instead of answering the question, Habeck immediately struck back by questioning the reporter’s credentials. “Are you from Russia Today?” the minister asked, referring to RT.

When told that Warweg was working for the German political blog NachDenkSeiten, Habeck still maintained that the journalist’s question was “full of false allegations” the minister “rejects.” He then went on to say that “security checks” for employees working in sensitive areas were a new “normal standard” amid the current circumstances.

The journalist had worked as an editor for RT’s German-language branch, RT DE, but quit in mid-2022 and has been working at NachDenkSeiten since June of that year.

The NachDenkSeiten blog was co-founded and run by Albrecht Mueller, a former Social Democrat MP and aide to two German chancellors. The media outlet positions itself as a “critical website,” although some German media increasingly have sought to portray it as a “pro-Russian” news outlet that had supposedly fallen under Moscow’s influence.

When further pressed by Warweg about the internal climate in his ministry, which allegedly leaves little room for dissenting opinions, particularly if they are seen as favorable to Russia, Habeck alleged that Moscow was attempting to assault democracy in Germany.

“It is difficult to bear, just a few days after Navalny was murdered, that Russia’s reporters here… discredit Germany’s liberal democracy in such a way,” he said, referring to the death of Russian opposition figure Alexey Navalny in a Russian prison.

The cause of the 47-year-old’s death remains unclear, but the incident has sparked an uproar in the West and was immediately blamed on Moscow. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov earlier said it was “completely unacceptable” for Western politicians to make “outrageous statements” regarding Navalny’s death while the investigation into the case is still ongoing.

February 22, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | | Leave a comment