Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Why is the top US spy alliance afraid of Trump?

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 01.02.2025

America’s Five Eyes partners – Canada, Britain, Australia, and New Zealand – fear that US President Donald Trump’s deep state crackdown and spy apparatus overhaul could destabilize their intelligence network, reports The Wall Street Journal.

What’s driving their concerns?

Free Riders

  • Trump may see Five Eyes as a bloated racket exploiting US resources, per the WSJ. The US spends nearly $100 billion on intelligence – 10 times more than the other four combined.

Russia Collusion Hoax

  • Five Eyes were entangled in the Trump-Russia collusion narrative, largely pushed by US intelligence.
  • The FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane probe, later debunked, was triggered by an Australian tip in 2016.
  • Britain’s GCHQ may have wiretapped Trump during his 2016 campaign, as the White House suggested in 2017.
  • Trump hasn’t directly targeted Five Eyes lately, but their unease suggests they have plenty to hide.

What Triggered the Panic?

  • The “world’s most powerful spy alliance” sounded the alarm as Trump’s intelligence picks, Kash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard, near confirmation in Congress.
  • Gabbard, nominated for director of National Intelligence, vowed to fight weaponized intelligence, citing Iraq War lies and the Russia collusion hoax.
  • Patel, set to lead the FBI, pledged to curb overseas operations and increase transparency.

February 1, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception | , , , , | Leave a comment

The 99th Congress That Called Vaccines “Unavoidably Unsafe”

By Ginger Taylor | Brownstone Institute | January 28, 2025

Meet the original “Conspiracy Theorists,” Ronald Reagan and the members of the 99th Congress, who, in 1986, passed into law the “medical misinformation” that vaccines were “unavoidably unsafe” and potentially caused autism.

Last week Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) sent Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., President Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services, a scathing letter accusing him of, among other things, “dangerous views on vaccine safety” and “false hysteria that vaccines cause autism.” The letter included 175 questions that she said he should be prepared to answer at his Senate confirmation hearings. But in her letter, she exposes her own ignorance of federal vaccine policy and the laws passed by her own legislative branch.

In 1986 the House of Representatives passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to 300aa-34) by a voice vote. Senator Warren should know that her current Senate Minority Leader Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) was, at the time, a member of the House and should presumably know that the bill that was passed to give vaccine makers liability protection from civil claims when a child was killed or seriously injured by a vaccine, and placed all vaccines administered to children in the legal category of “unavoidably unsafe” medical products, which means a product that cannot be made safe for its intended use.

In 2018, Mary Holland, JD, then the Director of the Graduate Legal studies program at New York University School of Law, and now Chief Executive Officer of Children’s Health Defense, a non-profit organization founded by Kennedy, remarked on the legal standing of the safety of vaccines:

The key language about “unavoidable” side effects comes from the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, 42 USC 300aa-22, re manufacturer responsibility (see bold text below).

That language was based on language from the Second Restatement of Torts (a legal treatise by tort scholars), adopted by most state courts in the mid-1960’s, that considered all vaccines as “unavoidably unsafe” products. The Restatement opined that such products, “properly prepared, and accompanied by proper directions and warnings, is not defective, nor is it unreasonably dangerous.”

Further the 2011 SCOTUS ruling in the Bruesewitz v. Wyeth case interpreted the highlighted text below from the National Vaccine Injury Act to find that it did not permit design defect litigation – that issue had been unclear since 1986, and different state high courts and federal circuits had decided the issue differently. So, [it] is correct that the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) never decided that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” directly, but it acknowledged that Congress considers them to be so.

Sec. 300aa-22. Standards of responsibility

(a) General rule

Except as provided in subsections (b), (c), and (e) of this section State law shall apply to a civil action brought for damages for a vaccine-related injury or death.

(b) Unavoidable adverse side effects; warnings

(1) No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings.

(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), a vaccine shall be presumed to be accompanied by proper directions and warnings if the vaccine manufacturer shows that it complied in all material respects with all requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. See https://www.ageofautism.com/2018/11/the-supreme-court-did-not-deem-vaccines-unavoidably-unsafe-congress-did.html

What few know, even among their own memberships and supporters, is that the following medical authorities consider vaccines unsafe:

The American Academy of Pediatrics (“AAP”)

The American Medical Association (“AMA”)

The American Academy of Family Physicians (“AAFP”)

The American College of Osteopathic Pediatricians (“ACOP”)

The American College of Preventive Medicine (“ACPM”)

The American Public Health Association (“APHA”)

The Association of State and Territorial Healthcare Officials (“ASTHO“)

The Center for Vaccine Awareness and Research at Texas Children’s Hospital in Houston

Every Child By Two, Carter/Bumpers Champions for Immunization (“ECBT”)

Immunization Action Coalition (“IAC”)

Infectious Diseases Society of America (“IDSA”)

The March of Dimes Foundation

Meningitis Angels

The National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners (“NAPNAP”)

The National Foundation for Infectious Diseases

The National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies Coalition

The National Meningitis Association, Inc. (“NMA”)

Parents of Kids with Infectious Diseases (“PKIDs”)

The Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (“PIDS”)

The Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine (“SAHM”)

The Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (“CHOP”)

When the family of Hannah Bruesewitz, a child injured by Wyeth’s Tri-Immunol DTP vaccine, challenged the 1986 Act in the Supreme Court for the right to sue Wyeth for Hannah’s severely disabling vaccine-adverse event, these organizations filed an amicus brief in support of Wyeth, asking the court to uphold the law that protects vaccine makers from liability for injury or death arising from any vaccine licensed by the FDA and recommended for children by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (“ACIP”). They even went as far as to argue against the idea that each vaccine should be individually evaluated for the “unavoidably unsafe” status, stating in their brief

Case-by-case consideration of whether vaccines are unavoidably unsafe, on the other hand, would “undoubtedly increase the costs and risks associated with litigation and would undermine a manufacturer’s efforts to estimate and control costs.”(citing Bruesewitz v. Wyeth Inc., 561 F.3d 233, 249 (3d Cir. 2009).

Brief Amici Curiae Of The American Academy Of Pediatrics and 21 Other Physicians and Public Health Organizations In Support Of Respondent [Wyeth LLC], at 25.

The organizations’ position that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe taken before the legislative and judicial branches of the federal government has caused consternation in parents and vaccine safety and choice advocates for decades, because many of these same organizations argue the exact opposite – that vaccines are safe – when they appear before state legislatures in support of school vaccine mandates and in opposition to vaccine exemptions.

A lobbyist for the pharmaceutical industry may argue over breakfast in Washington, DC that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” and then drive to Annapolis at lunchtime and testify that Maryland should remove religious exemptions to vaccines required for school entry because “vaccines are safe.”

Attempts to have these organizations explain their conflicting positions met with stonewalling.

In 2015, the Maine Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics argued for the removal of and/or restrictions to the religious and conscientious objections to mandated childhood vaccines. The Executive Director of the Maine AAP, Dee Kerry deHaas, testified in writing that this should be done because “vaccines are safe,” but when testifying in person, said that vaccines are “mostly safe.” In my response to her, as the then Director of the Maine Coalition for Vaccine Choice, I asked several questions arising from her testimony, including the following questions:

How can the AAP argue that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” in the Supreme Court in order to convince the federal government to grant you liability protection from vaccine injury, and then argue that, “vaccines are safe,” and “vaccines are mostly safe,” before this committee in order to convince the State of Maine to mandate that families receive counseling/buy vaccines from you?

Are vaccines, “safe,” “mostly safe,” or “unavoidably unsafe?”

How do such widely contradictory statements engender trust in vaccines and in pediatricians?

Her response to my questions:

Ms. Taylor,

On behalf of the Maine AAP, I acknowledge receipt of your email and list of questions. I understand that our organizations have different perspectives in the vaccine debate. Each perspective has been aired in the legislative hearings and sessions with regard to these vaccine bills in the First Regular Session of the 127th Maine Legislature.

I respectfully decline to respond to your list of proposed questions or to continue the debate with you through electronic correspondence or social media.

Dee deHaas
Executive Director
American Academy of Pediatrics, Maine Chapter

Those advocating under this nonsensical construct quip that vaccines are unsafe, but only in DC.

Parent of a vaccine-injured son, Kim Spencer of The Thinking Moms’ Revolution, noted of the vaccine industry, “their claim that vaccines are ‘unavoidably unsafe’ won them liability protection, their claim that ‘vaccines are safe’ won them school and work mandates, but their claim that both are true has won them the distrust and contempt of parents.”

Senator Warren also accuses Mr. Kennedy of having, “spread false hysteria that vaccines cause autism.” But Kennedy has only done what Warren’s Congressional colleagues did 20 years before he began in vaccine safety advocacy; promote research into the vaccine-autism link and any link between vaccines and other childhood disorders.

Congress, while giving liability protection to vaccine makers with the 1986 Act, also ordered HHS to study links between the pertussis vaccine and more than a dozen conditions, including autism:

SEC. 312. RELATED STUDIES.

(a) REVIEW OF PERTUSSIS VACCINES AND RELATED ILLNESSES AND CONDITIONS.—Not later than 3 years after the effective date of this title, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall complete a review of all relevant medical and scientific information (including information obtained from the studies required under subsection (e)) on the nature, circumstances, and extent of the relationship, if any, between vaccines containing pertussis (including whole cell, extracts, and specific antigens) and the following illnesses and conditions:

(1) Hemolytic anemia.

(2) Hypsarrhythmia.

(3) Infantile spasms.

(4) Reye’s syndrome.

(5) Peripheral mononeuropathy.

(6) Deaths classified as sudden infant death syndrome.

(7) Aseptic meningitis.

(8) Juvenile diabetes.

(9) Autism.

(10) Learning disabilities.

(11) Hyperactivity.

(12) Such other illnesses and conditions as the Secretary may choose to review or as the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines established under section 2119 of the Public Health Service Act recommends for inclusion in such review. (Ante, p. 3771).

PUBLIC LAW 99–2660—NOV. 14, 1986 100 STAT. 3755

The pertussis vaccine injury inquiry ordered by law in 1986 was undertaken by the National Institutes of Health, carried out by the Institute of Medicine, published by the National Academy of Sciences in 1991, and edited by, among others, none other than Harvard’s Harvey Fineberg, who chaired the Committee to review the Adverse Consequences of Pertussis and Rubella Vaccines. PubMed (a database maintained by the United States National Library of Medicine at the National Institutes of Health) gave the following summary of the final report, titled Adverse Effects of Pertussis and Rubella

Vaccines: A Report of the Committee to Review the Adverse Consequences of Pertussis and Rubella Vaccines:

Parents have come to depend on vaccines to protect their children from a variety of diseases. Some evidence suggests, however, that vaccination against pertussis (whooping cough) and rubella (German measles) is, in a small number of cases, associated with increased risk of serious illness. This book examines the controversy over the evidence and offers a comprehensively documented assessment of the risk of illness following immunization with vaccines against pertussis and rubella. Based on extensive review of the evidence from epidemiologic studies, case histories, studies in animals, and other sources of information, the book examines: The relation of pertussis vaccines to a number of serious adverse events, including encephalopathy and other central nervous system disorders, sudden infant death syndrome, autism, Guillain-Barre syndrome, learning disabilities, and Reye syndrome. The relation of rubella vaccines to arthritis, various neuropathies, and thrombocytopenic purpura. The volume, which includes a description of the committee’s methods for evaluating evidence and directions for future research, will be important reading for public health officials, pediatricians, researchers, and concerned parents. See https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25121241/ (emphasis added).

The report’s cursory summary on autism was this: The report’s cursory summary on autism was this:

No data were identified that address the question of a relation between vaccination with DPT or its pertussis component and autism. There are no experimental data bearing on a possible biologic mechanism. (p. 152.)

In other words, we don’t know; no one has ever looked.

But since there was no data to prove a link, because there was no data, they decided to reject the hypothesis and conclude:

There is no evidence to indicate a causal relation between DPT vaccine or the pertussis component of DPT vaccine and autism. (Id.)

Today there is a great deal more data than there was in 1991. This report was published before the dramatic rise in autism rates in the 1990s following the rapid expansion of the number of vaccines given to children once the industry had liability protection from vaccine-induced injuries.

Now, more than 200 papers showing multiple vaccine-autism links exist. You can review those papers at https://howdovaccinescauseautism.org/.

Senator Warren and all those skeptical of Mr. Kennedy’s vaccine critique must understand that he is more informed on vaccine law than the legislators questioning him. The political talking point that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is a “conspiracy theorist” if perpetuated, must now extend to the entire Legislative branch of the US Government starting with Democrats like former Congressman Henry Waxman, who wrote and introduced the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

Senator Warren might also consult with other current members of the US Congress who held seats when the 1986 Act was passed, such as Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Hal Rogers (R-KY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Chris Smith (R-NJ, who also sponsored the Combating Autism Act of 2006), and most notably, her own fellow Democratic Senator from Massachusetts, Ed Markey. Warren, like most politicians and doctors, does not understand that the presumption at the foundation of American vaccine policy, and the landmark law that has underpinned that policy for 39 years, is that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. does.

Ginger Taylor is an author, speaker, writer and activist. She writes on the politics of health, vaccination, informed consent and both corporate and government corruption from a biblical perspective.

February 1, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

WhatsApp accuses Israeli spyware firm of targeting journalists, civil society members

RT | January 31, 2025

Meta’s popular messaging platform WhatsApp has alerted nearly 100 journalists and civil society members to potential device breaches involving spyware from Israeli firm Paragon Solutions, a company official told Reuters on Friday.

These individuals have likely been compromised through a zero-click attack, possibly initiated via a malicious PDF sent in group chats, according to WhatsApp.

The identity of the attackers remains unknown, though Paragon’s software is typically used by government clients. After detecting and disrupting the hacking effort, WhatsApp issued a cease-and-desist letter to Paragon. The incident has been reported to law enforcement and Citizen Lab, a Canadian internet watchdog.

Paragon declined to comment on the accusations, according to Reuters.

Citizen Lab researcher John Scott-Railton told the outlet that the incident “is a reminder that mercenary spyware continues to proliferate and as it does, so we continue to see familiar patterns of problematic use.”

Paragon’s website advertises “ethically based tools, teams, and insights to disrupt intractable threats,” and claims to only sell to governments in stable democratic countries. The company’s products include Graphite, spyware that allows total phone access.

Despite Paragon’s claims of ethical practices, WhatsApp’s findings suggest otherwise, Natalia Krapiva, senior tech-legal counsel at Access Now, told Reuters. She emphasized that such abuses are not isolated incidents, saying, “This is not just a question of some bad apples – these types of abuses (are) a feature of the commercial spyware industry.”

This incident follows a series of legal challenges against Israeli spyware firms. In December 2024, a US judge ruled that NSO Group, the maker of Pegasus spyware, was liable for hacking the phones of 1,400 individuals through WhatsApp in May 2019, violating US state and federal hacking laws, and WhatsApp’s terms of service. A separate trial in March will determine what damages NSO Group owes WhatsApp.

Legal documents from ongoing US litigation between NSO Group and WhatsApp have revealed that it is the Israeli cyberweapons maker NSO Group, not its government clients, that installs and extracts information using its spyware. This disclosure contradicts NSO’s prior claim that only clients operate the system without NSO’s direct involvement.

January 31, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

A Republic of Spies

By Andrew P. Napolitano | Ron Paul Institute | January 30, 2025

In 2021, to his credit, President Joe Biden warned the American public against the dangers of zero-click spyware manufactured by an Israeli corporation. Zero-click is unwanted software that can expose the entire contents of one’s mobile or desktop device to prying eyes without tricking one into clicking on to a link. Biden banned its importation and use in the United States.

Last week, as an inducement to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to accept the Israel/Hamas ceasefire agreement, President Donald Trump secretly agreed to lift the embargo on zero-click.

Here is the backstory.

Though America has employed spies since the Revolutionary War, until the modern era, spying was largely limited to wartime. That changed when America became a surveillance state in 1947 with the public establishment of the Central Intelligence Agency and the secret creation of its counterparts.

The CIA’s stated public task at its inception was to spy on the Soviet Union and its satellite countries so that American officials could prepare for any adverse actions by them. This was the time of the Red Scare, in which both Republicans and Democrats fostered the Orwellian belief that America needed a foreign adversary.

We had just helped the Russians defeat Germany in World War II, and our Russian ally — which was bankrupt and had just lost 27 million troops and civilians — suddenly became so strong it needed to be kept in check. The opening salvo in this absurd argument was fired by President Harry Truman in August 1945 when he used nuclear bombs intentionally to target civilians of an already defeated Japan. One of his targets was a Roman Catholic cathedral.

But his real target — so to speak — was his new friend, Joe Stalin.

When Truman signed the National Security Act into law in 1947, he also had Stalin in mind. That statute, which established the CIA, expressly stated that it shall have no internal intelligence or law enforcement functions and all its collections of intelligence shall come from sources outside the United States.

These limiting clauses were vital to passage of the statute, as members of Congress who crafted it feared the U.S. was creating the type of internal surveillance monster that we had just confronted in Germany.

Of course, no senior official in presidential administrations from Truman to Trump has taken these limitations seriously. As recently as the Obama administration, the CIA boasted that it had the capability of receiving data from all computer chips in the homes of Americans — such as in your microwave or dishwasher.

As well as its presence in your kitchen, the CIA is physically present in all 50 state houses in America. What is it doing there?

The feds admit to funding and empowering 18 domestic intelligence agencies — spies next door. The most notorious of these is the National Security Agency, which, when it last reported, employs 60,000+ persons, mostly civilians, with military leadership.

What do they do? They spy on Americans. We know this thanks to the personal courage of Edward Snowden and others who chose to honor their oaths to uphold the Constitution. NSA spying has produced so much data that the NSA built the second-largest building in the U.S. — after the Pentagon — for use as a storage facility of the data it has collected, and it is running out of room.

What has it collected? Quite simply, everything it can get its hands on. These domestic spies have access to every keystroke and all data on every digital device everywhere in the United States, without a warrant. This is computer hacking, a federal crime; but the feds don’t prosecute the spies they have hired to spy on us.

It also represents an egregious violation of the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees the right to privacy of all persons. The operative language is “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.”

The law defines all searches and seizures conducted without a warrant as unreasonable and thus violative of not only this amendment but also the uniquely American value it was enacted to protect — the right to be left alone. Surely the computer chip in every desktop, mobile device, dishwasher and microwave is an “effect” protected by the Constitution.

The spies and, sadly, the presidents for whom they have worked don’t see it that way. They have claimed in federal courts and elsewhere that the Fourth Amendment does not pertain to them because they are not law enforcement and because they work directly for the president, who, when he is operating as the commander in chief, is free to employ government assets as he wishes, without constitutional constraints.

This argument has been used to justify the CIA’s violent killings of Americans and others in foreign lands using drones and its agents dressed as military. It has justified the brutal torture of foreign nationals, even those whom the CIA deemed were being truthful during their interrogations. And, of course, it has justified ignoring the Constitution and the rights it protects and the values that underlie it.

This argument was also used to justify foreign and federal spying on Trump. Now he wants to make it easier for America’s spies to spy on the rest of us.

Spying belies the very purpose of the Constitution — to keep the government off the people’s backs. Of course, when the late Justice William O. Douglas coined that phrase, there were no computer chips, the CIA was thought to be law-abiding and the NSA didn’t exist.

So, we can see how desirous of secrecy the Trump administration was last week when it agreed to lift the zero-click embargo.

We can try to avoid commercial spyware, but how can we avoid a totalitarian government that spies on everyone?

According to the Declaration of Independence, we can do so by altering or abolishing it.

To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, visit https://JudgeNap.com.
COPYRIGHT 2025 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

January 31, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Conspiracy Theory’ Now Fact: Greater Israel Has Arrived

By Kit Klarenberg | Mint Press News | January 28, 2025

Ever since Tel Aviv’s 1948 creation, much has been said and written about ‘Greater Israel’ – the notion Zionism’s ultimate end goal is the forcible annexation and ethnic cleansing of vast swaths of Arab and Muslim lands for Jewish settlement, based on Biblical claims this territory was promised to Jews by God. The mainstream media typically dismisses this concept as antisemitic conspiracy theory, or at most the fringe fantasy of a minuscule handful of extremist Israelis.

In reality, as The Guardian admitted in 2009, the idea of a Greater Israel has long-appealed to “religious and secular right-wing nationalists” alike at a state and public level in Tel Aviv. They have the shared objective of “[seeking] to fulfill divine commandments about the ‘beginning of redemption’, as well as create ‘facts on the ground’ to enhance Israel’s security.” The outlet acknowledged this motivation was a key contemporary driving force in mainstream Zionist entity politics, which “effectively turned the Palestinians into aliens on their own soil.”

The Nation has described the push to establish Greater Israel as “the central ideological goal” of Benjamin Netyahu’s Likud Party, which has dominated Israeli politics in recent decades. In July 2018 too, the Zionist entity passed the “Nation State of the Jewish People” law. It enshrines “the development of Jewish settlement as a national value.” Meanwhile, the state is legally obligated “to encourage and promote” the “establishment and consolidation” of settlements, in illegally occupied territory.

A proposed map of ‘Greater Israel’

This is based on the Jewish people’s “exclusive and inalienable right” to territory as far away from present Israel as Saudi Arabia. Old Testament terms such as “Judea and Samaria” are also employed. Markedly, this text is absent from the legislation’s official English translation. Zionist entity chiefs may not have wanted to make their irredentist, settler colonial ambitions quite so obvious at the time. Fast forward to today though, and Zionists at every level are wholly unabashed about their grand expansionist plans in West Asia.

The Syrian government’s fall has raised all manner of questions, concerns, and uncertainties locally and internationally. Can the country survive in its present form? Will Western-backed ‘former’ ultra-extremists be able to run a government? May the Iran-led Axis of Resistance, which inflicted such harm to the Zionist entity and its Western puppet masters throughout 2023/4, be under threat? The list goes on. But one thing is certain – Israel is seeking to profit handsomely from the chaos. If successful, the results will be revolutionary.

‘Defensive Position’

On December 8th, a triumphant, smart-casual-bedecked Benjamin Netanyahu made a public address from an Israeli Occupation Force observation point, in the illegally-occupied Golan Heights. Taking personal credit for Bashar Assad’s ouster, he hailed “a historic day” for the region, which offered “great opportunity.” The Israeli leader bragged that the Zionist entity’s “forceful action against Hezbollah and Iran” had “set off a chain reaction” of upheaval, showing no sign of abating. Nonetheless, he warned of “significant dangers”.

One of those hazards, Netanyahu declared, was “the collapse of the Separation of Forces Agreement from 1974.” This largely forgotten accord was signed by Damascus and Tel Aviv following the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Both sides agreed not to mount hostile military operations of any kind against one another from their shared Golan Heights border. Perhaps surprisingly, it was scrupulously adhered to for 50 years. Now, though, Assad’s fall has sparked a Syrian military withdrawal from the area, and, in turn, the IDF is moving in.

Netanyahu announced orders had been given to the IOF to push deep into the demilitarized zone created by the Agreement, which is legally and historically Syrian territory. He claimed this was merely a “temporary defensive position until a suitable arrangement is found.” Yet, ever since, it has become increasingly unambiguous that for the Zionist entity, Assad’s departure not only greenlights the tearing up of longstanding diplomatic agreements, but the entire map of West Asia as we know it.

For the time being, the IOF has captured strategically invaluable Mount Hermon, Syria’s tallest mountain, from which Damascus can be seen just 40 miles away. Concurrently, hundreds of Zionist entity airstrikes have obliterated what remained of Syria’s military infrastructure, leaving the country completely defenseless from any and all incursions by air, land, and sea. The stage is plainly set for a major escalation and attempt by Israel to absorb further territory, at its behest. Who or what could stop them?

IOF militants unfurl an entity flag on Mount Hermon

On December 10th 2024, while testifying at his long-running trial for industrial scale corruption in office, Netanyahu used the occasion to hint strongly at Assad’s defeat heralding a major reshaping of the region afoot. “Something tectonic has happened here, an earthquake that hasn’t happened in the 100 years since the Sykes-Picot Agreement,” the Israeli leader said, referencing the 1916 treaty under which Britain and France carved up the Ottoman Empire.

In an ironic twist, destruction of the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided West Asia into artificial boundaries under Western colonial rule, was a regular feature of ISIS propaganda. The group cited the pact as a symbol of Western oppression against Islam, presenting its demise as a religious duty. With figures associated with ISIS now taking charge in Damascus, that vision could now be achieved, a prospect both serving Israel’s long-term goals, and aligning with Netanyahu’s long-standing ambitions.

‘Living Room’

In recent weeks, Israeli media has undergone a significant tonal shift. Historically, even critical Israeli news outlets and journalists have been careful to frame the Zionist entity’s most egregious actions – ranging from military operations against neighboring countries to settlement expansion and land confiscation – in terms of “security” and “defense”. However, in the days leading up to Tel Aviv’s invasion of Lebanon on October 1st 2024, The Jerusalem Post published a strikingly candid explainer guide for its readers, enquiring, “Is Lebanon part of Israel’s promised territory?”

The outlet leaned on a Brooklyn-based Rabbi to “graciously” explain in detail how, based on multiple passages in Jewish scripture, “Lebanon is within the borders of Israel,” and Jews are therefore “obligated and commanded to conquer it.” The article was subsequently deleted after mass backlash and condemnation. But lessons from the debacle evidently weren’t learned in some quarters.

On December 4th – four days before the Syrian government’s fall – The Times of Israel published an op-ed on how “Israel’s exploding population” urgently required “Lebensraum”, a notorious German concept meaning “living room”, typically associated with the Nazis. The piece noted the Zionist entity’s population was projected to grow to 15.2 million by 2048, meaning Tel Aviv’s territory rapidly needed to be greatly expanded – perhaps not to the size of Russia, but certainly considerably.

This extremist rant was likewise purged from the web, due to widespread public outcry and mockery. Yet, since Assad’s fall, the term “Greater Israel” abounds readily in Zionist media, and seizure of territory from Tel Aviv’s neighbors is openly and eagerly discussed on primetime entity TV. Geopolitical analyst and founder of The Cradle Sharmine Narwani tells MintPress News that in a sense, the blatant nature of these discussions is a welcome development, as it lays bare Tel Aviv’s most extreme ambitions. However, she warns, attempts to expand the entity’s borders could backfire in catastrophic ways:

“The good news is, Israel has completely dropped all its masks. The bad news is it will go for land grabs everywhere. But this will be done opportunistically, and without much forethought or strategic planning. In the end, which country besides the US will be able to support Israel publicly? Tel Aviv will corner itself because the dominant Western discourse and EU law are still premised on human rights and ‘rules’. Allowing Israel these land grabs will also sink the Western-led global order.”

‘Primary Target’

Academic David Miller concurs the Zionist mask is off once and for all. Gravely, he tells MintPress News, “the fact that the CIA backed regime in Damascus is openly saying it is no threat to Israel is another indication regime change in Syria is a planned attempt to destroy the Axis of Resistance, and finally genocide all Palestinians.” Furthermore, he believes the writings of Zionism’s founder Theodore Herzl make clear seizing Lebanese and Syrian territory was Israel’s plan all along.

This malign objective, Miller adds, was echoed in many statements of countless prominent Zionists over decades, and “even codified and published as the Yinon Plan.” Little-known today, this extraordinary document was published in February 1982 in Hebrew journal Kivunim, under the title “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s”. Its title is derived from author Oded Yinon, a shadowy former Israeli Foreign Ministry official and advisor to Zionisty entity leader Ariel Sharon.

Some sources claim the Yinon Plan provided a precise blueprint for major future events in West Asia, such as the illegal 2003 Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, Syrian dirty war, and rise of ISIS. It may be an exaggeration to suggest the Plan precisely portended all these developments, but nonetheless, much of the document’s contents are eerily prescient. Moreover, while many of its proposals failed to subsequently materialise, we are left to ponder whether they may now do so in future.

For example, the Plan noted there was significant potential for “domestic trouble” to erupt in Syria between “the Sunni majority and the Shiite Alawi ruling minority” – the latter constituting a “mere 12% of the population” – to the extent of “civil war”. While Damascus’ “strong military regime” was considered formidable, Yinon declared “the dissolution of Syria into ethnically or religiously unique areas” and destruction of its military power should be “Israel’s primary target” on its Eastern front, “in the long run”.

The Plan envisaged similar outcomes for other countries in Israel’s immediate vicinity. Lebanon was to be broken up into “five provinces” along religious and ethnic lines, partition “[serving] as a precedent for the entire Arab world.” Yinon wrote, “this state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run,and that aim is already within our reach today.” Four months later, the Zionist entity invaded Beirut, carrying out ethnic cleansing, massacres, and land theft along the way.

Israel’s June 1982 invasion of Lebanon

Once the Zionist entity’s immediate neighbors were neutralized, Iraq was to be crosshaired “later on”. Baghdad, “rich in oil” while “internally torn” between its Sunni and Shiite population, was “guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets.” Its destruction was “even more important for us than that of Syria,” due to its “power” and strength relative to other regional adversaries. Yinon hoped the then-ongoing Iran-Iraq war would “tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall”, preventing Baghdad from ‘[organizing] a struggle on a wide front against us”:

“Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon… It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization.”

‘Permissive Approach’

Yinon also considered it a “political priority” to regain control of the Sinai peninsula, over which the Zionist entity had fought its Arab neighbors since inception, before relinquishing all claims to the region to Egypt under the March 1979 Camp David accords. He slammed these peace agreements, and looked forward to Cairo “[providing] Israel with the excuse [emphasis added] to take the Sinai back into our hands,” due to its vast “strategic, economic and energy” value:

“The economic situation in Egypt, the nature of the regime and its pan-Arab policy, will bring about a situation after April 1982 in which Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai… for the long run. Egypt does not constitute a military strategic problem due to its internal conflicts and it could be driven back to the post 1967 war situation in no more than one day.”

We are now well-past April 1982. In the intervening time, successive Israeli governments have demanded Egypt allow the IOF to relocate Gaza’s population to the Sinai. Netanyahu is particularly taken with the prospect. In the immediate wake of October 7th 2023, official Israeli government and Zionist think tank policy papers openly advocated driving Palestinians into the neighbouring desert. It has been reported entity officials begged the US to pressure Cairo into allowing this mass displacement.

For the Zionist entity, this strategy’s appeal is self-evident. On top of emptying Gaza for settlement, forcing Palestinians into Sinai would inevitably create mass chaos and tensions there, which could in Yinon’s phrase provide “the excuse” for Tel Aviv to militarily occupy the region, in the manner of the West Bank. Just as a “temporary defensive position until a suitable arrangement is found” of course, as Netanyahu said of the IOF’s brazen creation of a prospective beachhead on Mount Hermon.

In December 2024, Haaretz observed Netanyahu was “angling for a legacy as the leader who expanded Israel’s borders”, and “wants to be remembered as the one who created Greater Israel.” Simultaneously, neoconservative Brookings Institute vice president Suzanne Maloney wrote for Empire house journal Foreign Affairs that the incoming Trump administration “will surely take a permissive approach to Israeli territorial ambitions.” After all, recent developments showed “a maximalist military approach yields spectacular strategic dividends along with domestic political benefits” for the Zionist entity.

We must hope, as Sharmine Narwani prophesied, Netanyahu’s megalomaniacal reveries of Greater Israel are just that, and come to nothing. Despite understandable mass anti-imperialist mourning over the Assad government’s demise, Tel Aviv faces a panoply of intractable internal problems. Contrary to claims of Tel Aviv’s population “exploding”, tens of thousands of dual-citizenship residents are routinely fleeing due to Resistance attacks, while its economy has perhaps permanently been relegated to the doldrums, the entity entirely dependent on US financial largesse to endure.

January 30, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine wants EU to replace lost US aid

RT | January 30, 2025

Ukrainian lawmakers have appealed to non-US donors to fund local media outlets and NGOs following the suspension of Washington’s foreign assistance programs that has reportedly drastically impacted the sector.

Last week, President Donald Trump halted cash flows from the US and ordered a 90-day review of aid schemes. Many affected programs were run by USAID, Washington’s soft power agency that distributes billions of dollars each year for projects that promote US interests around the world, under the premise of humanitarian development. It spent over $60 billion in 2023 alone.

Ukrainian recipients of American grants were hit “worse than it may seem,” a statement by the parliamentary committee on humanitarian affairs said on Wednesday. Lawmakers anticipate that it will take up to six months for US funding to fully resume, and have urged EU donors to step in.

“Given the constraints on public funding, grants remain virtually the only way for cultural and media projects to function,” the statement said.

Oksana Romanyuk, executive director of a Kiev-based media research non-profit, warned that 90% of news outlets in Ukraine rely heavily on foreign grants. With USAID operations frozen, many of them are now soliciting emergency donations.

The Ukrainian MPs described foreign assistance as “an important part of our path to democratic development and sustainability”. They empathized that USAID was funding projects for children, with thousands of minors attending schools that depend on American taxpayer dollars.

According to media reports, senior officials in the Department of State have lobbied Secretary Marco Rubio to make exemptions for their preferred aid programs, arguing that they are essential for US interests. Meanwhile, at least 60 senior USAID officials reportedly have been placed on paid administrative leave.

January 30, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | 1 Comment

Elizabeth Warren’s False Accusation Against RFK Jr. at Senate Hearing Sparks Controversy

By Maryanne Demasi, PhD | January 29, 2025

Today, the Senate confirmation hearing for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. swiftly devolved into a political battleground, with partisan tensions overshadowing any serious examination of Kennedy’s qualifications.

Intended to assess his suitability, the hearing became a spectacle of accusation and counter-accusation, leaving little room for meaningful dialogue.

Kennedy, who has long advocated for drug safety and transparency in medical practices, has faced harsh criticism for his outspoken views on vaccines.

Lawmakers seized on his stance, accusing him of hiding his anti-vaccine beliefs and embracing conspiracy theories to dissuade the public from using life-saving vaccines.

Tensions escalated when Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren clashed with Kennedy in a heated exchange. She demanded that he promise not to financially benefit from any lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies if confirmed.

“I’m asking you right now that you will not take a financial stake in every one of the lawsuits [against pharmaceutical companies] so that what you do as secretary will also benefit you financially down the line,” Warren demanded.

Kennedy, visibly frustrated, responded, “Senator, you’re asking me not to sue pharmaceutical companies.” Warren retorted sharply, “No, I am not!”

Amid this verbal sparring, Warren also made a false accusation, claiming that Kennedy had pocketed $2.5 million from law firm Wisner Baum for recruiting plaintiffs in vaccine-related lawsuits.

Wisner Baum wasted no time in issuing a statement to categorically refute the baseless claim. The firm made it clear that Kennedy had never received any compensation in connection with vaccine litigation.

R. Brent Wisner, managing partner at the firm, quickly set the record straight: “The suggestion that Wisner Baum has paid Mr. Kennedy millions from vaccine cases is false and misleading,” he asserted.

Wisner explained that Kennedy’s earnings had been derived exclusively from lawsuits related to Monsanto’s Roundup and wildfire-related litigation.

“We have compensated Mr. Kennedy solely for his involvement in cases concerning Monsanto Roundup-induced non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, the Woolsey Fire, and the Paradise/Camp Fire cases,” Wisner clarified.

He strongly defended Kennedy’s integrity, adding, “Bobby earned his share from that historic fight. Instead of ridiculing him for that heroic work, my fellow liberals falsely paint it as related to vaccines. It’s simply not true. He has made no money from a single vaccine case.”

Senator Warren’s attack on Kennedy was seen as hypocritical. She has long positioned herself as a crusader against Big Pharma, yet had accepted funds from the very family whose actions contributed to the opioid epidemic. In 2019, amid intense public pressure over the opioid crisis, she was forced to return donations from the Sackler family, the owners of Purdue Pharma.

While political point-scoring continues to dominate the hearing in Washington DC, Wisner Baum is fighting a very different battle on the other side of the country. In a Los Angeles court, the safety of Gardasil is under intense scrutiny.

The firm is representing Jennifer Robi, the plaintiff in the first major trial concerning the vaccine. Robi experienced severe health complications, including neurological and autoimmune disorders, following her Gardasil vaccination and is now in a wheelchair.

“We are currently in trial in the first Gardasil case in Los Angeles,” Wisner explained.

“We hope that sound bites will give way to truth and solid evidence, and that the jury will deliver a verdict reinforcing the same message we saw in Roundup—that consumers deserve the truth, and politics should have no place in these proceedings.”

January 29, 2025 Posted by | Deception | | 4 Comments

UNRWA Shutdown Risks Killing Gaza Ceasefire: Official

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute |  January 28, 2025

The head of the UN’s Palestinian Aid Agency (UNRWA) said Tel Aviv’s decision to halt his agency’s assistance programs in Israel jeopardizes the Gaza truce and hostage deal.

On Tuesday, Israel’s Ambassador to the UN said UNRWA would have to cease its operations in Israel when Tel Aviv’s law banning the organization goes into effect on Thursday. “UNRWA must cease its operations and evacuate all premises it operates in Jerusalem,” Ambassador Danny Danon told the Security Council. “Israel will terminate all collaboration, communication and contact with UNRWA or anyone acting on its behalf.”

UNRWA Chief Philippe Lazzarini responded by saying the shuttering of UNRWA in Israel risked causing the Gaza ceasefire and hostage deal to end.

“In two days, our operations in the occupied Palestinian territory will be crippled, as legislation passed by the Israeli Knesset takes effect,” he told the UNSC. “At stake is the fate of millions of Palestinians, the ceasefire, and the prospects for a political solution that brings lasting peace and security.”

UNRWA serves as the most crucial aid agency for Palestinians who live as refugees or as second-class citizens in Israeli-occupied territory. Since the start of the Israeli onslaught in Gaza, UNRWA has provided a crucial lifeline to people living in deplorable conditions caused by the Israeli siege of the Strip.

Following the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, then-Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant declared a complete siege, including food, water, and medicine, of Gaza. UNRWA has been the key facilitator of bringing aid through the Israeli checkpoints to the people of Gaza.

Tel Aviv has attempted to portray UNRWA as another wing of Hamas, claiming its members helped to conduct the October 7 attack. However, an independent inquiry found that Israel could not provide evidence to back up that claim.

Lazzarini told the Security Council that Israel recently ramped up its global propaganda campaign against the agency. “The Government of Israel is investing significant resources to portray the Agency as a terrorist organization, and our staff as terrorists or terrorist sympathizers,” he explained. “Billboards and ads accusing UNRWA of terrorism recently appeared in major cities around the world. They were paid for by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.”

The UNRWA chief went on to say that Tel Aviv is weaponizing Google ads as a part of its narrative warfare. “Google ad campaigns re-direct those seeking information about the Agency to websites replete with disinformation,” he added.

Lazzarini argued that the anti-UNRWA propaganda has had deadly effects, as 273 of his organization’s staff have been killed during the Israeli destruction of Gaza.

January 29, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Compatible Left Joins Imperialism in Celebrating Defeat of Syria

By Stansfield Smith | Covert Action Magazine | January 8, 2025

It may be no surprise that the “mainstream” corporate news media have turned into advertising agencies for U.S. government policy. But it still surprises that what the CIA called a compatible left—those on the left it deemed compatible with maintaining imperialist rule—celebrates another successful U.S. “regime change,” this time, in Syria.

Portside, which assembles daily news articles that it advertises as “being of interest to people on the left,” ran an article, “Liberation in Syria Is a Victory Worth Embracing” by Layla Maghribi, which criticized “some self-styled Western ‘anti-imperialists’” for their lack of enthusiasm for the “victory.” While it does note that Israel bombed Syria 220 times up to mid-November this past year, one finds no mention of the long U.S. blockade imposed on Syrians.

CounterPunch has been a compatible left website outspoken in its hostility toward those exposing U.S. coup operations in Syria.

On December 10, CounterPunch published “Understanding the Rebellion in Syria” an interview with Swiss-Syrian socialist Joseph Daher. The introduction made the outlandish assertion that “some on the Left have claimed without foundation that their rebellion was orchestrated by the U.S. and Israel.” Daher himself in turn said that “the U.S. nor Israel had a hand in these events. In fact, the opposite is the case.”

Daher goes on to write off as “campists” and “tankies” those of us who recognize the obvious, “that this military offensive is led by ‘Al-Qaeda and other terrorists’ and that it is a Western-imperialist plot against the Syrian regime intended to weaken the so-called ‘Axis of Resistance’ led by Iran and Hezbollah… [T]he campists claim that the fall of Assad weakens it and therefore undermines the struggle for the liberation of Palestine.”

On December 11, CounterPunch turned to academic Stephen Zunes for an “exclusive interview,” presenting him as a “foreign policy expert” for the left.

Zunes, however, is on the advisory board of International Center for Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC); a group whose founder and primary funder was Peter Ackerman, a member of the Executive Committee of the Atlantic Council and chair of Freedom House. Also, back in 2011, Zunes praised the U.S.-NATO destruction of Qaddafi’s Libya in Truthout.

In the interview, Zunes impugned Assad for his “savage repression” and “endemic corruption” and blamed him for Syria’s growing poverty without mentioning the draconian U.S. sanctions policy or ravaging effects of a war that had been triggered by outsiders.

Zunes went on to characterize the anti-Assad rebels as a “popular resistance movement,” obscuring its domination by jihadist elements, and said that the rebellion “would have happened regardless of U.S. policy,” which obscures the crucial nature of U.S. support.

Zunes showed his true colors subsequently when he defended President Barack Obama, who inaugurated the largest covert operations in Syria since the 1980s Afghan mujahadin and illegally bombed Syria based on fraudulent pretexts, a phony charge of chemical weapons attacks.[1]

According to Zunes, “Many of these Western ‘anti-imperialists’ are themselves stuck in an imperialist mindset which denies agency to people of color in the Global South (or Slavs in Eastern Europe) who are struggling for their freedom against tyranny.”

However, the struggle against tyranny in this case was financed heavily by outside powers, including the U.S., and was led not by “freedom fighters” but jihadist terrorists who came from 84 different countries.

CounterPunch has long supported the fake “Syrian revolution.” They refuse to publish anti-imperialist writers such as Ben Norton, who reported, “a bombshell declassified 2012 memo from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) reveals that, from the start, ‘The Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria.’ AQI is a reference to Al-Qaeda in Iraq, which later evolved into ISIS.”

Even the New York Times disclosed—seven years ago—that the CIA had already spent more than $1 billion to overthrow Assad, “one of the costliest covert action programs in the history of the C.I.A.”

Why do these “left” websites like CounterPunch cover up major CIA regime-change operations?

Truthout on December 11 ran its own pro-U.S. regime-change article, “As Assad Regime Falls, Syrians Celebrate — and Brace for an Uncertain Future” by Shireen Akram-Boshar, a socialist writer and Middle East/North Africa solidarity activist. The article repeats the same apologetics for U.S. imperial rule: “Contrary to common misconceptions, the U.S. and Israel did not aspire to remove Assad after 2013.”

Similarly, Democracy Now ignored the U.S. involvement in the operations against Assad and triumph of al-Qaeda and interviewed an AP reporter, Sarah El Deeb, who pointed to cheering crowds and expressed enthusiasm about the new Syria with Assad’s removal from power.

El Deeb further echoed the mainstream media in pointing out human rights abuses allegedly committed by Assad, while ignoring the record of ethnic cleansing, suicide bombings and massacres carried out by the rebel forces backed by the U.S. which have now succeeded in deposing Assad.

John Feffer of the Institute for Policy Studies published a more sensible article, but one that still covered up the U.S. economic blockade’s destruction of Syria as well as its long regime-change operation. Feffer also repeats the U.S. line that the Syrian government used chemical weapons attacks, even though Seymour Hersh, MIT scientist Theodore Postol and The Grayzone showed that the U.S. concocted this story.

None of the compatible left websites mentioned the words of Biden and Netanyahu, who with legitimate reason took credit for the fall of Assad.

Netanyahu recognized the Assad government as “a central link in Iran’s axis of evil.” The Axis of Resistance to the Israeli-U.S. anti-Palestinian genocidal bloc includes Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah, Assad’s Syria, and Yemen. The Israeli butcher proudly acknowledged the overthrow “is a direct result of the blows we have inflicted on Iran and Hezbollah, the main supporters of the Assad regime.”

Biden spoke likewise: “Neither Russia nor Iran nor Hezbollah could defend this abhorrent regime in Syria. This is a direct result of the blows that Ukraine and Israel have delivered upon their own self-defense with unflagging support of the United States.” Indeed, Israel inflicted heavy damage on Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Russia remains tied up combating the U.S.-instigated war in Ukraine.

Some of the compatible left—LA Progressive and Common Dreams, both orbiting the Democratic Party—ran honest articles on the U.S. role.

On December 11-12, Common Dreams posted “The West Celebrates Assad’s Fall, But What Comes Next May Be Even Worse,” and Jeffrey Sachs’ excellent “How the US and Israel Destroyed Syria and Called it Peace.”

The former noted the so-called “liberation” was “cheered by U.S. President Joe Biden and other major Western leaders, like French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.” It asked the obvious question: “[W]hy is the West cheering for al Qaeda and its allies?” Indeed, and why are these compatible lefties following suit?

It continues: “Since the fall of Assad, Israel has already carried out hundreds of airstrikes across Syria, targeting airports, naval bases, and military infrastructure. And the U.S. Central Command announced that it has struck more than 75 targets, including ISIS leaders, operatives, and camps…

The Obama administration provided support to the anti-Assad forces, primarily to the Free Syrian Army forces and its affiliates, but the CIA began to support other groups as early as 2013 even though they had jihadi orientations. CIA’s covert operation against the Syrian regime, known as Timber Sycamore, was a joint effort with Saudi Arabia that had long ties with radical Islamist groups…

Syria was under imperialist attack for the past 13 years. The U.S. (along with Turkey) backed and funded mercenaries and terrorist forces against Assad’s regime, imposed economic isolation of the country through sanctions, and denied plans that would have contributed to reconstruction even though aid was desperately needed for civilians.”

Jeffrey Sachs (also here and here) pointed out that U.S. destruction of Syria was planned since 1996. General Wesley Clark revealed in an interview clip, probably seen by leftists of all stripes, that, back in 2001, after Afghanistan, the U.S. intended to wage war and overthrow seven more states in the Middle East: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. The only one not yet destroyed is Iran.

The Long U.S. War Against Syria

Relying on deadly sanctions, an invisible form of carpet bombing, the U.S. starved the Syrian people and hollowed out the Syrian economy until it collapsed.

Before 2011, Syria, just like Qaddafi’s Libya, was a thriving nation, self-sufficient in energy and food, with free health care, free education and no national debt. Then the U.S. and its NATO and Gulf allies orchestrated a dirty war, funding and arming sectarian terrorists to fragment Syria. These groups were deceitfully presented by many on the compatible left as part of a liberation movement.

Even David Sorenson, a professor at the U.S. Air War College recognized, “By 2015, aid to anti-Assad forces became the most expensive U.S. covert action program in history, topping 1 billion USD.” Since 2014, U.S. and Turkish military and proxy forces have occupied about one-third of Syrian territory and appropriated all its oil, gas, and wheat harvests.

Alena Douhan, UN Special Rapporteur on the effect of the U.S. economic blockade against Syria, reported, “The imposed sanctions have shattered the State’s capability to respond to the needs of the population, particularly the most vulnerable, and 90% of the people now live below the poverty line.” They have “limited access to food, water, electricity, shelter, cooking and heating fuel, transportation and healthcare.” The World Food Programme states that almost 13 million Syrians, half the population, lack sufficient food.

How many died from these measures we do not know, but the similar draconian U.S. blockade on Venezuela killed 40,000 in a year and a half.

Douhan continues, “With more than half of the vital infrastructure either completely destroyed or severely damaged, the imposition of unilateral sanctions on key economic sectors, including oil, gas, electricity, trade, construction and engineering have quashed national income, and undermine efforts towards economic recovery and reconstruction.”

We should wonder who CounterPunch is serving when it publishes the claim that “Neither the U.S. nor Israel had a hand in these events.”

The “campists” or “tankies” CounterPunch refers to run the gamut—from Scott Ritter, Ron Paul, Vijay Prashad, Ben Norton, Glenn Greenwald, Colonel Douglas MacGregor, Aaron Maté and JD Vance to Sara Flounders.

They share opposition to the endless neo-con wars advocated by Obama, Hillary, Biden and Cheney.

We find, once again, sectors of the compatible left functioning as a conveyor belt for U.S. regime-change propaganda broadcast into the progressive and anti-war movements, telling us to celebrate another successful U.S. imperial operation.

Meanwhile, the struggle of the Middle East to free itself from U.S.-Israeli domination has suffered a major defeat, on top of that inflicted on Hezbollah and Gaza. The Palestinians’ situation has worsened, Iran is next on the U.S. hit list, and Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua are not far behind. Our active solidarity is needed now more than ever.

  1. Zunes said that “President Obama had been subjected to unfair criticism both for providing some support for the resistance as well as for not doing enough.”

January 29, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CIA, Israel and conspiracy theories: What to expect from the JFK files

RT | January 28, 2025

US President Donald Trump has ordered the declassification of all remaining withheld records pertaining to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Almost 5,000 documents are still veiled in secrecy.

Kennedy was killed in November 1963, while visiting Dallas, Texas. A congressional commission chaired by Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren concluded in 1964 that “lone gunman” Lee Harvey Oswald was to blame. The CIA coined the pejorative term “conspiracy theory” to describe alternate scenarios regarding JFK’s death, which has not stopped many Americans from doubting the Warren Commission’s conclusions.

Trump’s order also applies to the remaining classified records about the 1968 assassinations of Senator Robert F. Kennedy and civil rights campaigner Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.

How many documents are there?

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) says it has declassified 99% of some 320,000 documents related to the JFK assassination, as required by a law passed by Congress in 1992. The final deadline for declassification was October 2017, but the US intelligence community claimed it needed more time to review and redact the records.

According to multiple estimates, 2,140 documents remain fully or partially redacted, while another 2,500 records have been kept secret for other reasons, such as court orders or donor restrictions.

What is in the secret files?

One item of particular interest is a June 1961 memorandum written by White House adviser Arthur Schlesinger, outlining how JFK could accomplish his goal of “splintering the Agency [CIA] into a thousand pieces and scattering it to the winds.” One page is redacted in full, while two more have partial redactions. Kennedy was frustrated with the CIA after the botched invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs in April that year.

Another partially redacted record is the transcript of the testimony that CIA Counterintelligence Chief James Jesus Angleton gave to the Church Committee in January 1976. Some scholars believe Angleton, who ran the CIA’s Israel desk for years and was a friend of Soviet spy Kim Philby, had lied to Congress about Israel obtaining nuclear weapons in the 1960s – something the Jewish State has neither confirmed nor denied.

Other potentially revealing records relate to CIA surveillance activities in Mexico in the early 1960s, when Oswald visited the country, and the work of a CIA officer with Cuban exiles in Miami that intersected with Oswald.

What can be expected of the revelations?

Historians and researchers that have spoken to major US outlets seem to agree that there will be no “smoking gun” in the remaining documents.

“There will be some puzzle pieces that will be put back in that will tell a more robust and rich story,” Tom Samoluk, a board member of the JFK Library Foundation, has told CNN.

Journalist Gerald Posner has warned that “anybody waiting for a smoking gun that’s going to turn this case upside down will be sorely disappointed.”

Kennedy’s nephew Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has lauded the declassification as a step against the “60-year strategy of lies and secrecy, disinformation, censorship, and defamation” used by the intelligence agencies to suppress “troubling facts” about the JFK assassination. He claimed that this “provided the playbook for a series of subsequent crises – the MLK and RFK assassinations, Vietnam, 9/11, the Iraq war and COVID – that have each accelerated the subversion of our exemplary democracy by the Military/Medical Industrial Complex.”

RFK Jr. has said that he believes there is “overwhelming evidence” tying the CIA to the assassination of both his uncle and his father.

When can we expect the release?

Trump’s executive order gave the US Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General 45 days to review the records and “present a plan” for their full and complete release. Both offices are currently held by acting officials, as the Senate still needs to confirm Pam Bondi as the attorney general and Tulsi Gabbard as the DNI.

“We’re hoping this is going to be a mechanical plan,” Larry Schnapf, a New York-based attorney who has sued the government to compel the release of JFK files, told ABC News. If the government opts for a “substantive” review, going document-by-document, “it’s going to be a while,” he added.

January 29, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , , , | 2 Comments

John Helmer and spitting out the red, white, and blue Skripal pills

Gorilla Radio with Chris Cook and John Helmer January 15, 2025 

In today’s podcast from Canada, Chris Cook and I discuss the reasons for the failure of Novichok to kill anyone, and its success at brainwashing everyone, or almost everyone.

The contrast with other media campaigns of resistance to western information warfare is a glaring one. For example, the campaign to defend Julian Assange and free him from a British prison and trial in the US has turned out to have been a popular success. However, Assange himself, his Wikileaks platform, and his London advocates have done nothing to expose the Novichok deception operation. They are good men who have done nothing — their media success has failed to deter or stop the Anglo-American march to war in the Ukraine; Assange’s lawyers are supporters of the war against Russia. Assange’s alt-media reporters have pretended they are the only truth-tellers in the present discontents; their war is against their media competitors.

For their names; for the truth of the Novichok story; and for the after-life of the Novichok poison in the coming war against Russia, click to listen.

John Helmer and spitting out the red, white, and blue Skripal pills in the second half. Begin at Minute 31:00. Source: https://gradio.substack.com/

January 27, 2025 Posted by | Audio program, Deception, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

The CIA Report: Why a Low Confidence Finding is the Height of Hypocrisy

By Jonathan Turley | January 27, 2025

Every modern president seems to promise transparency during their campaigns, but few ever seem to get around to it. Once in power, the value of being opaque becomes evident. We will have to wait to see if President Donald Trump will fulfill his pledges, but so far this is proving the cellophane administration. Putting aside his constant press gaggles and conferences, the Administration has ordered wholesale disclosures of long-withheld files from everything from the JFK investigation to, most recently, the CIA COVID origins report. That report is particularly stinging for both the Biden Administration and its media allies.

Newly-confirmed CIA Director John Ratcliffe released the report, which details how it views the lab theory as the most likely explanation for the virus. Expressing “low confidence,” the agency still favored that theory over the natural origins theory, which was treated as sacrosanct by the media and favored by figures like Anthony Fauci. (Other recent reports have contradicted the equally orthodox view on the closing of schools, showing no material benefit in terms of slowing the transmission of COVID).

Even a low-confidence finding shows the height of hypocrisy in Washington where politicians and pundits savaged any scientist who even suggested the possibility that the virus was man-made and likely originated in the Wuhan lab near the site of the outbreak.

This follows a recent disclosure in the Wall Street Journal of a report on how the Biden administration may have suppressed dissenting views supporting the lab theory on the origin of the COVID-19 virus. Not only were the FBI and its top experts excluded from a critical briefing of President Biden, but government scientists were reportedly warned that they were “off the reservation” in supporting the lab theory.

As previously discussed, many journalists used the rejection of the lab theory to paint Trump as a bigot. By the time Biden became president, not only were certain government officials heavily invested in the zoonotic or natural origin theory, but so were many in the media.

Reporters used opposition to the lab theory as another opportunity to pound their chests and signal their virtue.

MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace mocked Trump and others for spreading one of his favorite “conspiracy theories.” MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt insisted that “we know it’s been debunked that this virus was manmade or modified,”

MSNBC’s Joy Reid also called the lab leak theory “debunked bunkum,” while CNN reporter Drew Griffin criticized spreading the “widely debunked” theory. CNN host Fareed Zakaria told viewers that “the far right has now found its own virus conspiracy theory” in the lab leak.

NBC News’s Janis Mackey Frayer described it as the “heart of conspiracy theories.”

The Washington Post was particularly dogmatic. When Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark) raised the theory, he was chastised for “repeat[ing] a fringe theory suggesting that the ongoing spread of a coronavirus is connected to research in the disease-ravaged epicenter of Wuhan, China.”

Likewise, after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) mentioned the lab theory, Post Fact Checker Glenn Kessler mocked him: “I fear @tedcruz missed the scientific animation in the video that shows how it is virtually impossible for this virus jump from the lab. Or the many interviews with actual scientists. We deal in facts, and viewers can judge for themselves.”

As these efforts failed and more information emerged supporting the lab theory, many media figures just looked at their shoes and shrugged. Others became more ardent. In 2021, New York Times science and health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli was still calling on reporters not to mention the “racist” lab theory.

In Kessler’s case, he wrote that the lab theory was “suddenly credible” as if it had sprung from the head of Zeus rather than having been supported for years by scientists, many of whom had been canceled and banned.

As these figures were attacking reports, Biden officials were sitting on these reports. Figures like Fauci did nothing to support those academics being canceled or censored for raising the theory.

The very figures claiming to battle “disinformation” were suppressing opposing views that have now been vindicated as credible. It was not only the lab theory. In my recent book, I discuss how signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration were fired or disciplined by their schools or associations for questioning COVID-19 policies.

The suppression of the lab theory proves the ultimate fallacy of censorship. Throughout history, censorship has never succeeded. It has never stopped a single idea or a movement. It has a perfect failure rate. Ideas, like water, have a way of finding their way out in time.

Yet, as the last few years have shown, it does succeed in imposing costs on those with dissenting views. For years, figures like Bhattacharya (who was recently awarded the prestigious Intellectual Freedom Award by the American Academy of Sciences and Letters) were hounded and marginalized.

Others opposed Bhattacharya’s right to offer his scientific views, even under oath. For example, in one hearing, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.) expressed disgust that Bhattacharya was even allowed to testify as “a purveyor of COVID-19 misinformation.”

Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik decried an event associated with Bhattacharya, writing that “we’re living in an upside-down world” because Stanford University allowed dissenting scientists to speak at a scientific forum. Hiltzik also wrote a column titled “The COVID lab leak claim isn’t just an attack on science, but a threat to public health.”

One of the saddest aspects of this story is that many of these figures in government, academia and the media were not necessarily trying to shield China. Some were motivated by their investment in the narrative while others were drawn by the political and personal benefits that came from joining the mob against a minority of scientists.

The CIA report does not resolve this debate, but it shows that there is a legitimate debate despite the overwhelming message of the media and the attacks on scientists. Of course, the same media and political figures responsible for this culture of intimidation have simply moved on. The value of an alliance with the media is that such embarrassing contradictions are not reported. At most, these figures shrug and turn to the next subject for groupthink and mob action.

January 27, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »