No one will sign up to be part of a deal on Kiev-Washington arms co-production, given Russian precision strikes on Ukrainian military infrastructure amid its proxy war with NATO, former US State Department counterterrorism analyst Scott Bennett told Sputnik.
The US State Department recently announced a $2 billion package for Kiev aimed at creating the so-called Ukraine Defense Enterprise Program (UDEP) fund.
In particular, the fund could be used to “strategically weaken Russia by transitioning partners away from Russian systems and supporting [foreign military financing] loans to partners and allies,” an unnamed State Department official was cited by the Defense One news outlet as saying.
“Without any doubt, the US funding package for Ukraine – intended to be used to stimulate Europe’s arms industry, fund US-Ukraine arms co-production, and lure countries away from the Russian arms market – will fail in all of its objectives,” former US State Department counterterrorism analyst Scott Bennett said in an interview with Sputnik.
He explained that “the US-Ukrainian arms development scheme will ultimately fail because the entire nation of Ukraine is now devolving into a failed state.”
Another aspect pertains to the fact that Ukraine “has no personnel able to create weapons anymore, and no ability to establish such an enterprise on its soil, as Russia would immediately target and destroy any such facilities before they could produce or deploy any weapons to be used against Russian soldiers,” per Bennett.
“The Ukrainians know this, and therefore no one would ‘willingly’ sign up to be part of any facility in Ukraine that does such activities because it would just be a matter of time before the building disappeared in a mountain of rubble,” the ex-State Department analyst pointed out.
When asked what specific types of arms or ammunition the US could co-produce with Ukraine, Bennett said that “these type of guerilla terrorist weapons might include drones, sea, air, and land bombs.”
He didn’t rule out that investor nations involved in the UDEP project “would most likely be Britain, France, Germany, and the Baltic nations.”
Touching upon the issue of the weapons market, Bennett said the US “has been on a conveyor belt of producing weapons for the shallow purpose of enriching politicians and the military-industrial complex, and not for military efficiency purposes.” Per him, “This is a lethal flaw, and an impediment which the rest of the world sees and therefore consciously and unconsciously views US-NATO weapons on a lower level than the Russian weapons.”
Bennett referred to Russian weapons as something “designed to defeat the US-NATO Ukrainian military,” which he said is viewed as “the main destabilizer of the world.”
So, he went on to say, “It is logical to assume that Russian weapons will be valued and sought after as the natural antidote or best defense against future Western Empirical operations — which they openly boast is coming with fatalistic and narcissistic indifference.”
As such, the US-Ukrainian arms development scheme “will once again confirm to the American and European peoples — currently held hostage by their governments — that the real enemy of Western peoples are the tyrants in their own government who are using the war to bleed money from citizens and construct an endless excuse for absolute authoritarian political control using endless fear and ‘rumors of war’,” the ex-State Department analyst concluded.
Conflicts of interest within the medical community have reached record highs as concerns for patient safety and independent scrutiny of Big Pharma products are driven by newly released information showing serious conflicts of interest.
As the investigation into the origins and handling of the COVID-19 pandemic takes center stage through congressional hearings, shocking testimony is being revealed to the public. Shockingly, Dr. Lawrence Tabak, principal Deputy Director of the National Institutes of Health, has admitted under oath that NIH was funding gain of function research. In an even more shocking turn, newly released emails from Dr. David Morens, who worked as Senior Advisor to the Director at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases directly under Dr. Anthony Fauci, reveal shocking revelations that senior officials at NIH were purposely using private emails and having in person conversations to avoid FOIA requests. Amidst all of this, HHS has stripped all funding from Peter Daszak, and Eco Health Alliance.
Testimony from National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Senior Scientific Advisor David Morens — a longtime aide to former NIAID Director Anthony Fauci — only deepened congressional concerns about the possibility of concealed or destroyed emails concerning connections between the institute and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
A memo and over 150 emails released by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic Wednesday show that Morens spent considerable time and energy avoiding the Freedom of Information Act — a law that requires federal agency records to be provided to the public on request with limited exceptions.
Morens deleted sensitive emails, conducted official business on a private email account, and worked with an NIAID administrator in the Freedom of Information Office to strategically misspell keywords that the public might request to be searched, the committee alleges.
Morens sought to conceal emails in which he championed his close friend EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak, a scientist who subcontracted NIAID funding to the lab in Wuhan for experiments that made coronaviruses more deadly. Morens said that he and Daszak met twenty years ago and were part of the same close knit “fraternity” among emerging infectious diseases experts.
The subpoenaed emails make clear that Morens repeatedly advocated for EcoHealth and Daszak from within Fauci’s inner circle — serving as an intermediary between Daszak and Fauci — and often using his private Gmail account to shuttle messages.
One email released by the committee suggests that Fauci himself may have subverted public records requests through use of a personal email account, bypassing official channels.
“I can either send stuff to Tony on his private email or hand it to him at work or at his house,” Morens emailed on April 21, 2021. “He is too smart to let colleagues send him stuff that could cause trouble.”
Other emails show Morens and Daszak strategizing about how to convey information to Fauci without leaving a paper trail.
Morens confirmed Wednesday that he discussed grants from NIAID to the Wuhan Institute of Virology with Fauci.
“I certainly told him some things that he asked me to tell him about the situation with Peter [Daszak],” Morens said.
That statement contradicts a transcribed interview Morens gave the committee earlier this year in which he said he did not recall discussing EcoHealth or the Wuhan lab with Fauci.
“The evidence establishes that Dr. Morens likely provided false testimony to the Select Subcommittee,” the committee’s memo states.
The committee may recommend that the Department of Justice investigate Morens for making false statements, a crime in violation of Title 18 Section 1001.
The testimony follows revelations last week that Morens stated he would delete any “smoking guns” implicating a connection between Daszak’s organization and the COVID-19 pandemic.
Far from allaying concerns, Morens’ subpoenaed emails and testimony only raised more questions about the culture at the NIAID around transparency and public records requests. Indeed, the emails and testimony suggest NIAID may have systems in place to help employees evade FOIA requests.
NIAID did not reply to a request for comment.
In addition, Morens wrote an email about the possibility of a “kickback” for helping to restore EcoHealth’s NIAID funding. He wrote profane emails that referred to binge drinking and sex, and made a remark about former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Rochelle Walensky wearing a skirt, raising concerns about his lack of professionalism and attitudes toward women.
“It is very disturbing to witness this type of behavior from Dr. Fauci’s senior advisor, but the evidence is clear and overwhelming. Dr. Fauci’s NIAID was unfortunately less pristine than so many, including the media, would’ve had us all believe,” said Chair Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio.
In one of the emails obtained by the committee, Morens acknowledges that the reputation of EcoHealth and Daszak affect the reputations of Fauci and former National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins.
“From Tony’s numerous recent comments to me, and from what Francis has been vocal about over the past 5 days, they are trying to protect you, which also protects their own reputations,” Morens wrote in October 2021.
Morens’s attorneys turned over 30,000 emails to the committee responsive to a subpoena on April 30, just before Daszak testified to the committee on May 1. It remains to be seen whether more emails come to light following the new revelations that Fauci apparently used a private Gmail account and that Morens used a Proton Mail account in addition to his Gmail account.
Morens said that the emails about a “back channel,” a “kickback,” and “smoking guns” simply reflected “black humor.” Morens also expressed regret for how his emails had undermined trust in NIAID.
“I’ve already apologized for making snarky and profane comments but I made them thinking that they were made on my private Gmail in a manner that was just between a small group of friends,” Morens said. “It’s embarrassing to me. I shouldn’t have done it. But I accept that I did it. I don’t know what to say other than I’m sorry.”
However Morens gave unclear testimony in response to the question of whether he improperly used his personal email to conduct official business.
Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz., read out six separate emails in which Morens referred to avoiding FOIA. It took over three minutes to read every one.
“This Gmail communication thing was set up purely to deal with personal things that were not government business,” Morens said.
“How can you say that when in all of these emails you said you were intentionally avoiding FOIA? You said it in your own words, sir,” Lesko said.
Lesko countered that official emails had been forwarded to his private Gmail, that the emails on his Gmail had his official NIAID position in the email signature.
Morens blamed a technical issue.
“Sir, I’m sorry, but I just don’t believe you,” Lesko replied.
‘Do I get a kickback???’
When the novel coronavirus emerged from the same city in China with a high security lab specializing in coronaviruses, Daszak’s collaboration with the lab and with University of North Carolina gain-of-function coronavirologist Ralph Baric came under scrutiny — including from non-virologists like Wenstrup.
For his part, Morens helped Daszak with non-public information when concerns about the Wuhan lab prompted NIH to suspend EcoHealth’s grant. Morens forwarded Daszak an email marked “for official use only” in April 2020.
Morens appears to have helped Daszak navigate around NIH Deputy Director for Extramural Research Michael Lauer’s request for more information about the Wuhan lab in 2020 as a condition of the reinstatement of the grant, possibly hampering the U.S. government from accessing more information about the research underway there. Morens even personally edited EcoHealth’s response to Lauer, one email shows. That email too contradicts Morens’s transcribed interview earlier this year, perhaps exposing him to criminal penalties.
Daszak’s testimony earlier this month indicated that he never asked the Wuhan lab for genomic data beyond 2015 or so or for relevant lab notebooks — instead merely forwarding a request for information from NIH.
Morens also alerted Daszak to the forthcoming publication of documents released under FOIA in September 2021.
Morens invoked Fauci’s name in an email in which he appealed to an EcoHealth Alliance board member to continue to support the organization upon Daszak’s request.
After the grant was reinstated — despite Daszak’s failure to provide the data and information about the Wuhan lab that NIH requested — Morens sent an email referring to a “kickback.”
“Ahem…. Do I get a kickback??? Too much fooking money! DO you deserve it all? Let’s discuss….” he wrote.
“Of course there’s a kick-back,” Daszak replied.
Morens said the emails were in jest and denied receiving payment or any gifts from EcoHealth or Daszak.
Members of the committee of both parties expressed concerns that Morens used official resources and the imprimatur of the NIAID to improperly assist the embattled EcoHealth, and how that could impact NIAID.
“I just hope you’re going to be very careful as you are telling us what the facts are because I’m very disturbed about other people who may be thrown under the bus in some of the wiley statements you made on your personal statements,” said Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., an apparent reference to Fauci and Collins.
The Department of Health and Human Services has suspended federal funding both to EcoHealth and to Daszak personally pending an investigation into their handling of taxpayer funds. EcoHealth and Daszak could face debarment of any federal funds for several years.
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who recently co-launched a bipartisan investigation into biosafety issues at the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs, called upon the DOJ to investigate Morens Wednesday and alleged a criminal conspiracy to conceal records at NIAID.
The emails also indicate that Morens played a central role at NIAID in early debates about gain-of-function experiments — specifically, controversial experiments on highly pathogenic avian flu in 2011 — and that he privately criticized scientists in favor of stronger biosafety regulations at Rutgers University, Harvard University and Stanford University.
Symptoms of a dying empire are arrogance and a refusal to adapt to change. The M-1 Abrams tank is an outdated Cold War symbol of the power of the US Army. It was designed in the 1970s, costs far too much to upgrade and maintain, burns far too much fuel, lacks overhead protection from drones, and is far too heavy for most off-road operations and rural bridges. This was exposed during the war in Ukraine when M-1 tanks were easily destroyed on the battlefield. The Ukrainians were sent 31 70-ton M-1s and quickly asked to trade them for German Leopard tanks since the super heavy M-1s easily got stuck in mud, broke down often, and required daily refueling. After seven M-1s were destroyed during their first three months of sporadic combat, most were withdrawn from units.
“Ukraine pulls US-provided Abrams tanks from the front lines over Russian drone threats”; Tara Copp; AP News; April 25, 2024; https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-ru…
“M1 Abrams Ineffective By 2040 In Fight Against China: Army Study”; The Warzone; Joseph Trevithick; October 4, 2023; https://www.twz.com/m1-abrams-ineffec…
Some 126 of the Tory party’s 344 MPs have accepted funding from pro-Israel lobby groups, Declassified has found.
The revelation comes as Rishi Sunak calls a general election in which his unequivocal backing of Israel could cost the party votes.
The value of the donations or hospitality amounts to over £430,000, with the organisations paying for sitting Conservative MPs to visit Israel on 187 occasions.
Some of those trips also involved visits to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and a small number were co-sponsored by groups which do not form part of the Israel lobby.
The main funder is Conservative Friends of Israel, a parliamentary group which does not disclose its own sources of funding.
Other notable donors include the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Australia-Israel Cultural Exchange, and the European Leadership Network.
Thirteen Tory politicians have accepted over £50,000 in total to travel to Israel since 7 October, including for “solidarity” missions.
Friends of Israel
Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) is a pro-Israel lobby group set up in 1974 by Michael Fidler, a Tory politician described in one biography as having political views “reminiscent of the philosophy of Enoch Powell”.
The organisation has long standing links with the Israeli state, and is “beginning to resemble the Westminster outpost for Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud coalition”, according to veteran journalist Peter Oborne.
Around 80 percent of Tory MPs are members of CFI. Over the past decade, it has taken more MPs on overseas trips than any other political donor in Britain.
Publicly available data reviewed by Declassified shows that CFI has funded 118 sitting Tory MPs to travel to Israel on 160 occasions, providing over £330,000 towards the visits.
Those MPs include deputy prime minister Oliver Dowden, home secretary James Cleverly, and justice secretary Alex Chalk, prior to their appointment to the cabinet.
Some 22 of those CFI-led visits have been subsidised by the Israeli foreign ministry to the tune of over £8,000 in total.
The Israeli state has also independently funded trips for Nadhim Zahawi and Kwasi Kwarteng, two former UK chancellors, as well as John Whittingdale MP, then the shadow secretary of state for the environment.
Past CFI delegations have involved tours of factories run by Israel’s largest arms firm, Elbit Systems. When journalist David Cronin asked whether the lobby group was funded by Elbit Systems in 2011, a CFI spokesperson said: “I don’t have to give you those details”.
Solidarity missions
CFI’s lobbying activities have intensified since 7 October.
The group has led two “special solidarity” delegations to Israel amid the Gaza genocide, involving six MPs – Stephen Crabb, Theresa Villiers, Robert Jenrick, Michael Ellis, Nicola Richards, and Greg Smith.
In Israel, the MPs were hosted by president Isaac Herzog, whose statement in October 2023 – that the “entire nation” of Gaza was responsible for Hamas’ attack on Israel – was cited by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as plausible evidence of incitement to genocide.
CFI also funds parliamentary candidates to visit Israel even before they become elected.
Prior to the 2019 general election, CFI brought a delegation of prospective parliamentary candidates to Israel, seven of whom – Siobhan Baillie, Miriam Cates, Dehenna Davison, Peter Gibson, Tom Hunt, Robert Largan, and Matthew Vickers – are now MPs.
In February 2024, one month after Israel was put under investigation by the ICJ for genocide, CFI led another trip to Israel for four more prospective MPs, Alexander Clarkson, Katie Lam, Ben Obese-Jecty, and Bradley Thomas.
CFI’s lobbying efforts are not limited to funding trips to Israel.
The organisation also prepares briefing material for MPs, enjoying “superb access to Downing Street, Westminster, and Whitehall”, and hosts an annual banquet which functions as a public display of support for Israel.
Prime minister Rishi Sunak addressed their latest banquet in January, calling CFI “an integral part of our party”.
AIPAC
Other notable pro-Israel lobby organisations which have funded Tory MPs include the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Jewish National Fund (JNF), and the National Jewish Assembly (NJA).
The total value of their donations is over £42,000.
AIPAC is a pro-Israel organisation based in Washington, and one of the most powerful lobbying forces in US politics.
Michael Gove, who has led the charge to ban British public bodies from boycotting Israel, accepted £3,086 from AIPAC to attend and speak at its conference in Washington in 2017.
James Morris MP attended an AIPAC conference in 2011, funded by its sister organisation the American Israel Education Foundation, while Henry Smith MP was funded directly by AIPAC to attend its conference the next year.
Other funded attendees of AIPAC events include Jonathan Djanogly MP and former UK home secretary Priti Patel. Their travel was paid for by the Henry Jackson Society, a London-based think tank with opaque funders and close links to Israel.
The JNF is a quasi-governmental organisation which has supported illegal Israeli settlements in Palestine. It has been described by historian Ilan Pappé as a “colonialist agency of ethnic cleansing”.
Matthew Offord MP has accepted £2,799 from JNF UK to travel to Israel on two occasions.
The NJA, meanwhile, is chaired by Gary Mond, who was asked to step down from the Board of Deputies of British Jews after liking Islamophobic posts on Facebook. One of the NJA’s core objectives is “supporting Israel”.
Since 7 October, it has sent two “solidarity missions” to Israel, and contributed £27,801 to former UK home secretary Suella Braverman’s recent trip to Tel Aviv.
Following her trip, Braverman said that Israel’s killing of three British aid workers in Gaza should not be a reason for “Britain to soften its support for Israel”.
Braverman added that she was “certain that Israel is nowhere near breaking international law”, six weeks before the International Criminal Court announced arrest applications for prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and defence minister Yoav Gollant.
ELNET and AICE
Two of the other key organisations that fund Tory MPs’ trips to Israel include the European Leadership Network (ELNET) and the Australia-Israel Cultural Exchange (AICE).
ELNET was formed in 2007 to “counter the widespread criticism of Israel in Europe”.
The organisation’s British wing is directed by former Labour MP and Labour Friends of Israel chair, Joan Ryan, while much of its operations are run from its office in Tel Aviv, headed by Emmanuel Navon.
In February, Navon described Israel’s planned offensive into Rafah as “necessary” and suggested that EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell “need not worry about Gaza civilians”.
ELNET has funded six Tory MPs to visit Israel since 7 October, including Shaun Bailey, Lisa Cameron, Antony Higginbotham, Tom Hunt, Matthew Offord, and Andrew Percy.
The organisation also paid for former defence secretary Liam Fox to attend the US-Europe-Israel Strategic Dialogue in Washington in 2022.
The total cost of these delegations was £22,776.
AICE was established in 2003 by the then Israeli foreign minister, Netanyahu, and his Australian counterpart.
Four Tory MPs – John Howell, Jack Lopresti, Andrew Percy, and Will Quince – have accepted over £18,000 from AICE to travel to Israel on ten occasions.
Lopresti is also the only British politician to have also accepted a donation from Israel’s largest arms firm, Elbit Systems.
In addition to this, he helped to open Elbit’s “research, development and manufacturing hub” in Bristol alongside the Israeli ambassador to the UK, Tzipi Hotovely, in 2023.
More recently, Lopresti has been calling for politicians to distance themselves from campaign group Palestine Action.
Yet there has been little media attention on Lopresti’s association with Elbit Systems, Palestine Action’s main target, whose drone was used to kill three UK aid workers in April.
Other Tory MPs have accepted funding from European Friends of Israel and the Israel Allies Foundation.
Individual donors
The above data does not include donations from individuals linked to pro-Israel lobby organisations. Nor does it include donations to the Conservative Party itself from pro-Israel lobby organisations or individuals.
However, this area also deserves attention. In 2009, Peter Oborne reported in a Channel 4 Dispatches documentary that individuals linked to CFI had funded the Conservative Party to the tune of £10m.
A number of these individuals, such as Trevor Pears, Michael Lewis, David Meller, and Lord Kalms, have also donated to senior Tory figures.
That includes David Cameron, the unelected foreign secretary, who accepted £20,000 from Pears during his bid to become Tory party leader in 2005. Cameron also accepted hospitality from the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs three years later.
Grant Shapps, the current defence secretary, accepted £4,990 from Meller in July 2023, and an undisclosed amount from Lewis in 2005.
Other recipients of funding from Meller, Kalms, or Lewis include the former prime minister, Liz Truss, former shadow home secretary, David Davis, former defence secretary, Liam Fox, and Michael Gove.
The Israel lobby’s impact
The lobby is far from the only factor which conditions support for Israel in Britain.
The US government, which staunchly backs Israel, holds considerable sway over British foreign policy.
Some British politicians are committed Zionists, and would support Israel whether or not they received funding from the Israel lobby.
A small number of Tory MPs who have accepted Israel lobby funding, moreover, have gone on to oppose some of the Israeli government’s policies.
That includes former UK foreign secretary William Hague, who mildly criticised Israel’s attack on Lebanon in 2006 as “disproportionate”.
Some EU member states are considering imposing sanctions on Georgia, including the suspension of visa-free travel regime, over the foreign agents bill, the Financial Times reported on Wednesday, citing sources familiar with the situation.
On Saturday, Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili vetoed the controversial foreign agents bill that had been adopted by the country’s parliament last Tuesday. The parliament needs a simple majority to override the veto.
A number of EU countries, led by Estonia, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic and Sweden, aim to discuss restrictive measures towards Georgia at the EU Foreign Affairs meeting next week, the Financial Times reported.
The potential sanctions include suspending visa-free travel to the European Union by Georgians, freezing of EU funds for the country and some targeted sanctions, the newspaper cited the officials as saying.
If the foreign agents bill is enacted, Georgia’s EU accession progress will face a major setback, an EU official said.
The draft law “On the Transparency of Foreign Influence” was initially submitted to the Georgian parliament in February 2023 but was withdrawn the following month amid a wave of protests and pressure from Western countries. After revision, the term “foreign influence agent” was replaced with “organization promoting the interests of a foreign power,” while the rest of the content remained the same.
The latest iteration of the bill has sparked weeks of mass protests in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi amid concerns that it could block the South Caucasus nation’s path to EU membership. EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell criticized the bill in March, saying its adoption could have serious repercussions for EU-Georgian relations.
The West is acting as harshly and “crazily” as possible with regard to Georgia because it failed to destabilize the situation in the country earlier, as it did with Ukraine, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said.
The EU’s call on the Georgian authorities to ensure the right of citizens to protest can be interpreted as interference in internal affairs for the purpose of regime change, Maria Zakharova said. According to her, otherwise the EU’s call “can be interpreted as interference in the internal affairs of the state with the aim of regime change.
TBILISI – Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili said on Saturday that she vetoed the controversial foreign agents bill passed by the country’s parliament earlier in May.
On Tuesday, the Georgian parliament adopted a bill on foreign agents by a majority vote in the third and final reading at a plenary meeting. The bill, if adopted, would require organizations to register as “pursuing the interests of a foreign power” if they get over 20% of their funding from abroad.
“I have vetoed the ‘Russian’ law. This law … represents an obstacle on the European path. The veto is legally enforceable and will be passed to the parliament today. The law cannot be amended or improved in any way. This law must be repealed,” Zourabichvili said during a briefing.
The law, which prompted a major standoff between political factions, aims to promote “transparency and accountability of relevant organizations vis-à-vis Georgian society,” according to Tbilisi while protestors and some foreign politicians argue it is restrictive.
However, such regulations exist in many nations, including the US, Canada, Australia, and across the EU – which does not stop many Western politicians from criticizing the very same bill when it comes to Georgia.
I have mentioned previously that the introduction of all the latest and greatest western weapons in the inventory given to the Ukraine would have some very deleterious effects in the future. One was permitting possible future antagonists to observe and and take detailed notes on the tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) and experiment with prospective or actual countermeasures to neutralize or destroy these weapons systems and platforms. The other concerns would be allowing the first near-peer/peer martial contest to use this to shape and refine future strategic objectives. The Russians are certainly doing their homework and actively modifying and improving their means of waging war.
Performance is predictably abysmal for so many of these Western systems. The corporate/access media seems to finally be catching on that the weapons programs are not very effective.
The Biden administration has committed more than $50 billion in military aid to Ukraine since Russia invaded in February 2022, according to a Pentagon fact sheet. U.S. assistance has proven vital in helping Ukraine fend off Russia’s advances and mount counteroffensives, but some of the weapons have failed to have the desired impact as Russia’s military has adapted, according to media reports and experts.
If only the diversity enthusiasm incentivized opposing viewpoints and genuine intellectual differences.
Future historians will have a tremendous cottage industry trying to tease out how the world’s most expensive military paper tiger not only convinced the bill-payers to keep funding these disasters but the cognitive strategic deficit disorder that informed the entire fallacious enterprise managed to spend tens of trillions of dollars for a non-nuclear military apparatus that had a picture perfect track record of consistent failure since 1945.
Military and civilian authorities in Ukraine’s Kharkov Region paid millions of dollars to fake companies for the supply of non-existent building materials to construct defensive fortifications, the newspaper Ukrainska Pravda reported on Monday. With no fortifications built, Russian forces have advanced rapidly through the region.
Russia has seized dozens of towns and villages in the northern part of Kharkov Region after launching an offensive last Friday. According to the latest update from the Russian Defense Ministry, Russian troops had captured the village of Bugrovatka on Monday and are inflicting losses on Ukrainian manpower and hardware near Veseloye, Volchansk, and Liptsi, the latter of which is located just 20km from the outskirts of Kharkov city.
Writing in Ukrainska Pravda on Monday, Ukrainian anti-corruption activist Martina Boguslavets explained that Kharkov’s Department of Housing and Communal Services (ZhKG) and Regional Military Administration (OVA) had been given 7 billion hryvnias ($176.5 million to build fortifications to hold back this advance.
Much of this money was embezzled, Boguslavets claimed. For the supply of wood, the ZhKG and OVA signed contracts worth 270 million hryvnias ($6.8 million) with five companies that were set up immediately after the contracts were announced. No bidding process took place, and at least two of these companies were owned by the same person, Boguslavets wrote.
“Moreover, the owners of these firms do not resemble successful businessmen and businesswomen,” she wrote. “They have dozens of court cases, from whiskey theft to domestic violence against a husband and mother; some of them are deprived of parental rights and have had enforcement proceedings for bank loans.”
Boguslavets described these business owners as “avatars,” placed in charge of the companies either for a small fee or without their knowledge. One of the supposed CEOs, whose firm was paid 52 million hryvnias ($1.3 million) is an agricultural laborer, according to Boguslavets’ documents.
“The naked eye can see how a government official mercilessly registers new companies, using for this purpose people who, due to the circumstances, may not be aware of this,” she wrote. “And this someone continues to make money on blood.”
The lack of defensive fortifications allowed Russian forces to enter Kharkov Region almost unopposed, Denis Yaroslavsky, commander of a Ukrainian special reconnaissance unit, told the BBC on Monday. “There was no first line of defense. We saw it. The Russians just walked in. They just walked in, without any mined fields,” Yaroslavsky said.
“Either it was an act of negligence or corruption. It wasn’t a failure. It was a betrayal,” he added.
The story of the embezzled defense money is the latest in a long series of tales of corruption to emerge from Ukraine. Earlier this week, Poland canceled trade talks with Kiev after Ukrainian Agriculture Minister Nikolay Solsky was accused of illegally appropriating state land worth nearly $7.4 million. Several months earlier, Ukraine’s security service, the SBU, announced that it had uncovered a major embezzlement scheme in which Ukrainian officials and private contractors stole around $40 million earmarked for shell procurement.
World-famous cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough recently revealed startling figures about the immense earnings doctors received for pushing the COVID-19 injections.
On the Tommy T Podcast, Dr. McCullough claimed that a typical doctor could make an extra $250,000 if they injected a substantial portion of their patients.
More specifically, if a doctor injected 75% of his or her patients at $250 per newly-injected person, that would end up being around $250,000.
Dr. McCullough explained that a full-time primary care physician typically manages a patient panel ranging from about 1,000 to 2,000 people covered by Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield.
When you do the math, factoring in the $250 incentive, 1,000 newly vaccinated people times $250 = $250,000. Some doctors made less; some made more. But the point is that doctors were financially incentivized to inject as many patients as possible.
The question is, was Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield giving doctors jab incentives, or were they being paid to do so by the government?
Most Americans know that political corruption is destroying the United States, which devotes massive resources to expand and rule its empire. The US Constitution was written to keep some power in the hands of the states, who appointed their US Senators, but the 17th Amendment, promoted by American business titans and ratified in 1913, removed this control with direct Senate elections to allow the centralization of power in Washington DC. Repealing the 17th Amendment is a simple idea that would have an immediate impact on the nation as states regain control of the federal government. US Senators would suddenly focus funding on helping people in their state and have little interest in military interventions overseas.
Extraordinary events are taking place in the streets of Tbilisi. Normally, agitated crowds should be demanding increased transparency in public affairs and access to all the facts they need to efficaciously exercise their civic duties. In Georgia, they want the opposite. The agitated crowd’s vociferous demand is for the facts to be withheld from them.
They are vigorously opposed to Parliament’s intention to enact a legal mechanism that would provide for the registration of foreign agents operating within the country. The legislation now before the Georgian Parliament, which a comfortable majority of the deputies support, would make available to the demonstrators and to all citizens of Georgia information about foreign financing sources of the “non-governmental organisations” that proliferate in Georgia. In that small country targeted for regime change by the collective West there are currently about 20,000 “NGOs,” a remarkable statistic by any measure. The demonstrators however adamantly refuse to know and they oppose that their fellow citizens should be allowed to find out what entities from abroad supply money and logistical assistance to those “NGOs.” Consequently, what they are actually opposing is public disclosure of the agenda those organisations promote and serve.
In simple terms, the demonstrators are saying, “Do not turn on the lights. We prefer to wander in the darkness and as in the current geopolitical confrontation our country is being strong-armed to take a stance disadvantageous to it we prefer that the Georgian government and the public should also roam in complete darkness.”
Briefly, the law that the protesters are objecting to, and which is on the verge of being passed by the Georgian Parliament, provides that if more than twenty percent of operating funds originate from foreign sources, Georgian “NGOs” must publicly disclose such a fact and identify the sources of their funding. This law has been mendaciously misrepresented by Georgia’s NGO sector and the collective West media and political institutions as the “Russian law.” But it is, of course, nothing of the sort. It does exhibit some commonalities with legislation passed by the Russian Duma several years ago that requires foreign agents in Russia to be registered, but the Russian law itself is but a translated copy/paste version of the American Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) that the US Congress had passed in 1938. The enactment of FARA is explained by reference to perfectly reasonable national security and democratic transparency concerns:
“The Foreign Agents Registration Act provides the public with an opportunity to be informed of the identity of persons engaging in political activities on behalf of foreign governments, foreign political parties and other foreign principals, so that their activities can be evaluated in light of their associations.”
To say that from the standpoint of democratic practice the Georgian demonstrators’ demands are merely counter-intuitive would be putting it quite mildly. Being mostly young, with access to the internet and presumably computer-savvy, these opponents of the Georgian transparency law can easily research the facts. Invincible ignorance is therefore a plea that these alert young intellectuals are precluded from invoking.
The interesting question is what could possibly motivate a large crowd of mostly young Georgians to assemble day after day in the streets of their capital and to even try to storm their Parliament in a show of revulsion toward perfectly acceptable legislation which, moreover, happens to be invested with the imprimatur of the world’s leading democracy?
In light of what we have already witnessed of the successful application of cognitive reformatting techniques not merely in Ukraine but over the years in Georgia as well, and in Armenia more recently, the answer is readily suggested. In the Ukraine, after years of persistent and amply funded perception-altering indoctrination (to the tune of five billion dollars, according to Victoria Newland) the Maidan putsch of 2014 became possible. Even if they were not the majority, a politically significant portion of the Ukrainian public were persuaded to open the gates to their country’s adversaries. They were successfully zombified to choose fairy tale promises made by the West over the tangible benefits that would have accrued from the proposed alliance with Russia and associated countries. The tragic outcome of the wrong choice that a politically illiterate nation made then is today plain for all to see.
A symmetrical process has been taking place in Georgia. Since the partially successful “Rose revolution” of 2003, Western special services and their ancillary agencies have had twenty years to fine tune their color revolution scenario and adapt it to Georgia’s unique conditions. To that end, thousands of “NGOs” were set up, abundantly funded, and turned loose to reformat the thinking of the traditionalist Orthodox society in Georgia.
The creation of an insular core of programmed local activists to promote collective West’s agenda whilst deceitfully cultivating the illusion that the work being done was entirely by domestic forces not beholden to foreign sponsors is a fundamental part of the game. Transparency with regard to the logistics and command and control of local activists would demolish that illusion. The local public would grasp that it is being misled and manipulated, and by whom. That is impermissible. Hence the frantic effort and the mobilisation of all available local assets against the registration law, to impede the Georgian authorities from efficiently addressing this paramount national security issue. The monetary investment and decades-long cultivation of pliant cadres must not be allowed to go to naught.
An excellent theoretical explanation of the subversive technology on full display in the streets of Tbilisi is the concept of the “Lesser nation” developed by Academician Igor Shafarevich in his insightful essay “Russophobia.” The “Lesser nation” is an elitist subculture ensconced within its larger host. It is specifically programmed to be alienated from the larger nation that surrounds it and to continuously vex it from within. Just as importantly, in response to the remote control signals emitted by its animators, it is configured to be aggressive, loud, and obnoxious. The Lesser nation’s self-awareness is shaped to counter-pose it to the larger community in which it operates, whose interests, values, and traditions it dismisses with disdain. But at the same time, in sovereign fashion it claims the right to rearrange that community’s affairs, treating it as mere human fodder for the achievement of the Lesser nation’s ideological aspirations.
Shafarevich makes observations whose pertinence will readily be recognised by all who have studied the technology of “color revolutions” and creation of local battering rams that are meticulously prepared in advance to ensure their success.
He points out that local operatives are inculcated with the “belief that the people’s future, like a mechanism, can be freely designed and restructured; in this connection [they are imbued with] a contemptuous attitude toward the history of the ‘Greater People,’ up to and including the assertion that it has not existed at all; the demand that the basic forms of life be borrowed in the future from outside and that we [must] break with our own historical tradition [in this case it is the demonstrators’ demand that Georgia sacrifice transparency to chimerical EU membership, thus affirming its commitment to “European values”]; the division of the people into an ‘elite’ and an ‘inert mass,’ and the firm belief in the right to use the latter as material for historical creativity; and finally, outright revulsion toward representatives of the ‘Greater People’ and their psychological makeup” [P.17].
Shafarevich diagnoses this phenomenon as “hostile alienation from the spiritual foundations of the surrounding world” [P. 37].
With regard to the gullibility of the preponderantly youthful recruits, Shafarevich points out that “in the face of this refined technique of brainwashing that has been tested in practice and improved through long experience, confused young people find themselves absolutely defenceless. For, after all, no one who might be an authority for them will warn them that what they are dealing with is simply a new version of propaganda, albeit a very toxic one, that is based on an extremely fragile factual basis” [P. 28].
“Thus,” he concludes, “logic, facts and ideas alone are powerless in such a situation … ” [P. 25].
In other words, they will not be confused with facts.
Time will tell what measures the Georgian authorities will employ to ensure the integrity of their country. Scott Ritter harbours no doubts that Georgia is targeted for “regime change” but he believes also that the current Georgian government are well aware of the fate their Western “partners” have envisioned for them and will react accordingly. Let us hope that in Georgia on both the governmental and popular levels sound judgment shall prevail, as in neighbouring Armenia it evidently has not.
Soybeans generate approximately $80 million annually in mandatory producer assessments alone, funding a marketing apparatus that has transformed an industrial commodity into one of America’s most trusted “health foods.” The campaign succeeded. Soy milk lines supermarket shelves beside dairy. Soy protein fortifies everything from infant formula to energy bars. Vegetarians rely on tofu and tempeh as dietary staples. Doctors recommend soy to menopausal women. School lunch programs serve soy-based meat substitutes to children. An estimated 60 percent of processed foods contain soy derivatives. The premise underlying this proliferation—that Asians have thrived on soy for millennia and that modern science validates its health benefits—has been repeated so often it functions as established fact.
Kaayla T. Daniel’s The Whole Soy Story dismantles this premise through systematic examination of the scientific literature. The book documents that traditional Asian soy consumption averaged roughly one tablespoon daily, consumed as fermented condiments after processing methods that neutralized inherent toxins—a pattern bearing no resemblance to American consumption of industrially processed soy protein isolate, soy flour, and soy oil. Daniel catalogs the antinutrients that survive modern processing (protease inhibitors, phytates, lectins, saponins), the toxic compounds created by industrial methods (nitrosamines, lysinoalanine, hexane residues), and the heavy metals concentrated in soy products (manganese, aluminum, fluoride, cadmium). She traces the mechanisms by which soy isoflavones—plant estrogens present at pharmacologically significant levels—disrupt thyroid function, impair fertility, and interact with hormone-sensitive cancers. The evidence emerges from peer-reviewed journals, FDA documents, and industry sources themselves.
The stakes extend beyond individual dietary choices. Infants fed soy formula receive isoflavone doses equivalent to several birth control pills daily, with blood concentrations 13,000 to 22,000 times higher than their natural estrogen levels. Soy protein isolate—the ingredient in formula, protein bars, and thousands of products—has never received GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) status; its only pre-1960s use was as an industrial paper sealant. Two senior FDA scientists formally protested their own agency’s approval of soy health claims, citing evidence of thyroid damage and reproductive harm. The Honolulu Heart Program found that men consuming tofu twice weekly showed accelerated brain aging and increased dementia. These findings have not penetrated public awareness because the institutions responsible for consumer protection have been compromised by the industry they regulate. The Whole Soy Story presents the evidence that has been systematically excluded from mainstream health messaging, enabling readers to evaluate for themselves what the soy industry prefers they never learn. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Aletho News 