Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US Bombs Syria And Ridiculously Claims Self Defense

By Caitlin Johnstone | February 26, 2021

On orders of [proclaimed] President Biden, the United States has launched an airstrike on a facility in Syria. As of this writing the exact number of killed and injured is unknown, with early reports claiming “a handful” of people were killed.

Rather than doing anything remotely resembling journalism, the western mass media have opted instead to uncritically repeat what they’ve been told about the airstrike by US officials, which is the same as just publishing Pentagon press releases.

Here’s this from The Washington Post:

The Biden administration conducted an airstrike against alleged Iranian-linked fighters in Syria on Thursday, signaling its intent to push back against violence believed to be sponsored by Tehran.

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the attack, the first action ordered by the Biden administration to push back against alleged Iranian-linked violence in Iraq and Syria, on a border control point in eastern Syria was “authorized in response to recent attacks against American and coalition personnel in Iraq, and to ongoing threats.”

He said the facilities were used by Iranian-linked militias including Kaitib Hezbollah and Kaitib Sayyid al-Shuhada.

The operation follows the latest serious attack on U.S. locations in Iraq that American officials have attributed to Iranian-linked groups operating in Iraq and Syria. Earlier this month, a rocket attack in northern Iraq killed a contractor working with the U.S. military and injured a U.S. service member there.

So we are being told that the United States launched an airstrike on Syria, a nation it invaded and is illegally occupying, because of attacks on “US locations” in Iraq, another nation the US invaded and is illegally occupying. This attack is justified on the basis that the Iraqi fighters were “Iranian-linked”, a claim that is both entirely without evidence and irrelevant to the justification of deadly military force. And this is somehow being framed in mainstream news publications as a defensive operation.

This is Defense Department stenography. The US military is an invading force in both Syria and Iraq; it is impossible for its actions in either of those countries to be defensive. It is always necessarily the aggressor. It’s the people trying to eject them who are acting defensively. The deaths of US troops and contractors in those countries can only be blamed on the powerful people who sent them there.

The US is just taking it as a given that it has de facto jurisdiction over the nations of Syria, Iraq, and Iran, and that any attempt to interfere in its authority in the region is an unprovoked attack which must be defended against. This is completely backwards and illegitimate. Only through the most perversely warped American supremacist reality tunnels can it look valid to dictate the affairs of sovereign nations on the other side of the planet and respond with violence if anyone in those nations tries to eject them.

It’s illegitimate for the US to be in the Middle East at all. It’s illegitimate for the US to claim to be acting defensively in nations it invaded. It’s illegitimate for the US to act like Iranian-backed fighters aren’t allowed to be in Syria, where they are fighting alongside the Syrian government against ISIS and other extremist militias with the permission of Damascus. It is illegitimate for the US to claim the fighters attacking US personnel in Iraq are controlled by Iran when Iraqis have every reason to want the US out of their country themselves.

Even the official narrative reveals itself as illegitimate from within its own worldview. CNN reports that the site of the airstrike “was not specifically tied to the rocket attacks” in Iraq, and a Reuters/AP report says “Biden administration officials condemned the February 15 rocket attack near the city of Irbil in Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdish-run region, but as recently as this week officials indicated they had not determined for certain who carried it out.”

This is all so very typical of the American supremacist worldview that is being aggressively shoved down our throats by all western mainstream news media. The US can bomb who it likes, whenever it likes, and when it does it is only ever doing so in self defense, because the entire planet is the property of Washington, DC. It can seize control of entire clusters of nations, and if any of those nations resist in any way they are invading America’s sovereignty.

It’s like if you broke into your neighbor’s house to rob him, killed him when he tried to stop you, and then claimed self defense because you consider his home your property. Only in the American exceptionalist alternate universe is this considered normal and acceptable.

This sort of nonsense is why it’s so important to prioritize opposition to western imperialism. World warmongering and domination is the front upon which all the most egregious evils inflicted by the powerful take place, and it plays such a crucial role in upholding the power structures we are up against. Without endless war, the oligarchic empire which is the cause of so much of our suffering cannot function, and must give way to something else. If you’re looking to throw sand in the gears of the machine, anti-imperialism is your most efficacious path toward that end, and should therefore be your priority.

In America especially it is important to oppose war and imperialism, because an entire empire depends on keeping the locals too poor and propagandized to force their nation’s resources to go to their own wellbeing. As long as the United States functions as the hub of a globe-spanning power structure, all the progressive agendas that are being sought by what passes for the US left these days will be denied them. Opposing warmongering must come first.

Standing against imperialism and American supremacism cuts directly to the heart of our difficulties in this world, which is why so much energy goes into keeping us focused on identity politics and vapid energy sucks which inconvenience the powerful in no way whatsoever. If you want to out-wrestle a crocodile, you must bind shut its mouth. If you want to take down a globe-spanning empire, you must take out its weapons. Opposing warmongering and killing public trust in the propaganda used to justify it is the best way to do this.

February 26, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , | 4 Comments

Biden Bombs Syria: A New World Record?

By Daniel McAdams | Ron Paul Institute | February 25, 2021

According to breaking news reports, including by Reuters, [proclaimed] President Biden has ordered and the Pentagon has carried out military airstrikes on Syria, attacking a structure inside the country that the US government claims houses “Iranian-backed” militia.

US missiles struck tonight near the Syrian town of Al-Bukamal, on the Iraqi border. The strike is said to be in retaliation for recent rocket attacks against US facilities in Iraq. After another rocket attack earlier this month, the US State Department pointed the finger at Iran and threatened a US military response.

The Iraqi parliament voted in January, 2020, to expel US troops from the country after then-President Trump ordered the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. The US government ignored the vote of the democratically-elected Iraqi parliament, however Trump later announced his decision to pull US troops out of Iraq.

President Biden wasted no time in reversing Trump’s disengagement strategy for the Middle East. After just over a month in office, President Biden is re-igniting the failed US intervention launched in 2014 against Syria under the Obama Administration.

Within 24 hours of Biden being inaugurated commander-in-chief, US military convoys began pouring into northern Syria. His Administration, from Secretary of State Tony Blinken on down, enthusiastically supported the US “regime change” policy for Syria under President Obama – a policy that only benefitted al-Qaeda and its affiliates in the region.

Earlier this month it was reported that the US was building a new military base in Syria, near the Iraq and Turkey borders. New military bases carry with them new missions, so there is plenty of reason to believe that Biden plans to return the US to the “Assad must go” policy of his former boss.

Biden coming out of the gate with bombs blazing should be of little surprise to those who have watched his early foreign policy appointments. For example, he tapped noted neocon and aggressive interventionist Dana Stroul to head his Middle East Desk at the Pentagon and no doubt this airstrike at least indirectly reflects her influence and that of many others like her who have taken up positions in the Biden Administration.

Stroul hails from the AIPAC-founded “think tank,” the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), where, as former CIA official Phil Giradi writes, “she has been the Shelly and Michael Kassen Fellow in the Institute’s Beth and David Geduld Program on Arab Politics.” She is an extreme Iran hawk and has advocated and worked for regime change in Syria and US retention of large areas of Syrian territory.

So within a month of assuming office, President Biden looks to be on the cusp of launching a new Middle East war.

February 25, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Militarism | , , , | 3 Comments

As deadline nears for Trump-negotiated Afghanistan withdrawal, press prepares public to accept its breach

RT | February 21, 2021

The Biden administration is expected to break the Trump-negotiated deal with the Taliban and keep NATO troops in Afghanistan, according to media reports, and this is supposedly the right thing to do.

The agreement signed in Doha in late February 2020 sets May 1 as the deadline for a full withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan. The Pentagon currently has 2,500 service personnel deployed in the country, with NATO allies fielding some 7,000 more. Under the agreement, the Taliban pledged to make sure the territory under its control is not used by international terrorist groups to launch attacks on the US and to negotiate a peace deal with the US-propped government in Kabul.

While the Taliban did deliver on the promise it gave a year ago not to attack foreign troops, any hope of a reduction in violence in Afghanistan has faltered in the year since. The Biden administration has therefore ordered a review of the agreement, and “the overwhelming consensus among Afghan leaders, foreign diplomats and Western army officers” is that “the US will abandon the deadline,” according to the Sunday Times.

The prediction in the British newspaper comes from veteran war correspondent Anthony Loyd and follows a slew of other news reports outlining Biden’s Afghanistan conundrum and opinion pieces that rationalize breaking the deal.

The Democratic president has inherited a “mess” from Trump and has no good options, according to CNN, which said NATO allies are “growing increasingly concerned” about the situation. If he does withdraw, he would share some of the blame “if there is a collapse of the elected Afghan government,” the New York Times said. And a Taliban takeover would be disastrous for human rights, especially for the rights of women, Deutsche Welle warned.

Keeping Trump’s word and leaving now “would carry a reputational risk for the United States,” because it would “embolden jihadists and perhaps rejuvenate their movement, which has been in retreat,” columnist David Ignatius said. “And there would be an unmeasurable cost to American credibility.” So, of course Biden should listen to his head, not his heart, and keep “a small but sustainable force in Afghanistan,” which would cost relatively little and give the benefit of “checking terrorists, supporting NATO allies, and giving the Kabul government a fighting chance.”

The nudging press stops short of calling the Doha agreement “the worst deal ever made” the way Trump did with the Obama-era nuclear deal with Iran, but they might just as well have done so. The accord with Tehran was scrapped by Trump, but Biden is reluctant to simply deliver on the commitments made by Obama, even if it was one of the crowning achievements of his former boss’ diplomacy. With the Doha deal, history may repeat itself.

But if Biden follows the advice and reneges on the terms agreed to by his predecessor, how will it be read by the Taliban? Or Tehran, or Pyongyang, or Beijing, or Moscow? Probably as the latest proof that a deal with Washington is not worth the paper it’s written on.

The pattern of the US back-pedaling on its promises once there’s a change of leadership in the White House existed long before Trump. This was the case with assurances made to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not expand into Eastern Europe after the reunification of Germany, for example.

The same thing happened with the 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea. It was meant to prevent Pyongyang from going nuclear, and thus offered it some concessions, such as building proliferation-proof nuclear power plants. But the George W Bush administration eagerly scrapped it, courtesy of one John Bolton.

Even if given to an ally, Washington’s word is not necessarily solid. Pakistan, for instance, was famously denied the right to purchase F-16 fighter jets after the Soviet withdrawal from neighboring Afghanistan in 1989 made Islamabad a less crucial partner for the US.

Proponents of US global dominance, such as Robert Kagan, say the US is indispensable as a custodian of liberal world order and lament the fact that many Americans are not willing to embrace this role. That they “refer to the relatively low-cost military involvements in Afghanistan and Iraq as ‘forever wars’ is just the latest example of their intolerance for the messy and unending business of preserving a general peace and acting to forestall threats,” the neoconservative commentator and spouse of Victoria Nuland, the Biden-nominated under-secretary of state for political affairs, said in a recent opinion piece.

The ‘low cost’ in Afghanistan was 3,500 dead coalition troops and over $2 trillion dollars in direct and indirect spending. So, what does the US have to show for it? The longest-lasting war in its history that nevertheless failed to produce a self-sustaining government in Kabul. Withdrawal may be perceived as the US losing the war to the Taliban, but what a victory is supposed to look like remains a mystery.

February 21, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

No decision on any NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan: Stoltenberg

Press TV – February 18, 2021

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg says defense ministers from the Western military alliance made no decision at a recent meeting in Brussels on whether or when to pull out of war-torn Afghanistan.

“At this stage, we have made no final decision on the future of our presence,” Stoltenberg said after a video conference with allied defense ministers on Thursday.

The defense ministers met to discuss the possibility of staying in Afghanistan beyond the May withdrawal deadline agreed between the Taliban militant group and the United States under the administration of former US President Donald Trump.

Key on the agenda at the two-day virtual conference in Brussels was the future of the US-led forces in the war-torn country.

The NATO chief said US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin promised to consult with partners on the way forward.

“As the May 1 deadline is approaching, NATO allies will continue to closely consult and coordinate in the coming weeks. We are faced with many dilemmas, and there are no easy options,” Stoltenberg said.

“If we stay beyond the first of May, we risk more violence, more attacks against our own troops … But if we leave, then we will also risk that the gains that we have made are lost.”

The administration of President Joe Biden is reviewing whether to stick to the looming deadline to withdraw or risk a bloody backlash from the Taliban.

Other NATO members have signaled a desire within the alliance to stay in Afghanistan beyond the deadline. They are willing to remain in Afghanistan if Washington does so.

German Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer said on Wednesday that the Taliban must do more to meet the terms of a 2020 agreement with Washington on the withdrawal of US.forces to allow a pullout of the foreign troops.

“We can already say that we are not yet in a position to talk about the withdrawal of international forces from Afghanistan,” the German minister said as she arrived for the meeting.

“This also means a changed security situation, an increased threat for the international forces, also for our own forces. We have to prepare for this, and we will certainly discuss this.”

Nearly two decades after the US-led invasion, Trump struck a deal with the Taliban in the Qatari capital of Doha early last year.

The former White House tenant reached the accord in February 2020, under which the US and its NATO allies are expected to withdraw all troops in 14 months in exchange for the Taliban to halt attacks on foreign forces.

President Biden, however, has said his administration would not commit to a full withdrawal by May.

The United Nations says more than 100,000 civilians have been killed or injured over the past decade across Afghanistan.

February 19, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Militarism | , , , | 1 Comment

Iraq’s Muqtada Al-Sadr warns of looming normalisation with Israel

MEMO | February 11, 2021

Leader of the Iraqi Sadrist Movement and prominent Shia cleric Muqtada Al-Sadr said yesterday that his movement will not allow normalisation between Iraq and Israel, even if the price is “blood”.

“Normalisation is at the door, and the parliament must prevent this. We will not allow normalisation at all, even if it costs us blood,” Al-Sadr told reporters in the southern city of Najaf.

Al-Sadr did not provide further details, however, in January a new movement named October 25 was formed under the leadership of Secretary-General Talal Hariri who called to have good relations with Israel.

The Iraqi government, led by Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi, has not issued a clear position on the movement’s demand.

Iraq does not officially recognise Israel, and there are no relations between the two sides.

In October 2017, the Iraqi Parliament passed a resolution prohibiting raising the Israeli flag and punishing violators with imprisonment.

Last year, the UAE, Bahrain , Sudan and Morocco signed normalisation deals with Israel. At the time of the first announcements, Iraq declared that its laws prohibited it from normalising relations with the occupation state.

February 11, 2021 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Arranging The Middle East Narrative To Push The Agenda Forward

South Front | February 11, 2021

The United States is returning to a level of activity in the Middle East unseen in nearly 4 years. This development has become obvious over the weeks since Joe Biden became US President, firstly with a large deployment into Syria, and subsequently with smaller ones.

On February 9th, the Pentagon said that it was no longer in Syria to protect and exploit oil fields.

It is now back to hunting ISIS. Back to the square one of 2014 and the Obama era. ISIS somehow obliged by ramping up their activities throughout Syria.

It is a mystery that they were able to make such a sharp and sudden resurgence. It should also be noted that the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces allegedly have about 10,000 ISIS terrorists imprisoned.

This statement of intent denotes a massive shift in posture for the US. When defending the oil fields the US troops were mostly static, when hunting ISIS they can, once again, roam around and carry out various operations.

It appears likely that Idlib is now also in focus – US combat drones were observed surveying Greater Idlib. Idlib is a mixed bag – it has Turkish troops, Russians, the Syrian Arab Army along with terrorists and the moderate opposition, although confusing these two groups can be forgiven. The newest, future, US ally is there – the soon-to-be-rebranded Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham.

An indication of expected escalations and attacks are the Russian and Syrian military drills being carried out near Aleppo during effective wartime. Russia, separately, carried out a naval drill near Tartus.

And, as if by design, long-range missiles attempted to strike Russia’s forces at the Hmeimim Air Base. Drones occasionally attempt to infiltrate its airspace, but missiles are a rare sight.

Meanwhile in Western Daraa, the rebel leaders submitted to Damascus, likely fearing the upcoming chaos and wanting to choose a side.

Finally, the Biden administration is also working to secure Israeli support. The State Department said it doesn’t endorse Trump’s recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, but doesn’t oppose it. It also provided a $9bn weapon sale as consolation. Tel Aviv is likely to use these weapons to counter its nemesis – Iran. It does so by targeting alleged Iranian interests in Syria.

Syria remains the lynchpin of US Middle East policy but the US posture in Iraq and Afghanistan has also changed. Withdrawing from the region is now out of the question – ISIS is making a resurgence, and there are other groups targeting American forces and convoys.

In Afghanistan, specifically, if the withdrawal does not move forward, the Taliban are also likely to begin targeting the US again.

The democrats are back in control and back to spreading democracy in the Middle East.

February 11, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | 1 Comment

How Macrocosmic Western Propaganda Launders Geopolitical Crimes

By Ronald Thomas West | February 10, 2021

This essay goes to the matter of Kosovo; where the Western states (NATO & the EU) have determined Serbia is not fit to govern a minority (of ethnic Albanians) on their own (Serbian) territory but the now purported (by the West) independent Kosovo is fit to govern a minority (of ethnic Serbs.)

The EU position seems to embrace an attitude of ‘never mind the inconvenient fact’ that recent Kosovo ‘leaders’ are being arrested and delivered to international tribunal for crimes against ethnic Serbs (includes organ harvesting), also not to mention what amounts to mere ‘lip service’ (no concrete action or enforcement) concerning the repatriation of 250,000 Serbs driven from Kosovo in an ethnic Albanian engineered cleansing pogrom following the NATO bombing of Serbia.

Insofar as an EU repatriation precedent, Croatia’s ethnic cleansing of Srpska Krajina shows the dishonesty of the EU position; there is no realistic expectation (and never was) by the European Union that the 200,000 Serbs expelled from this (formerly) Serb majority region would be allowed to return to Croatia and their homes. Meanwhile Croatia had been admitted to the European Union.

So, in the context of Serbs are not trustworthy to govern an ethnic minority of Albanians but Albanians are trustworthy to govern a minority of Serbs, the EU de facto embraces (actual outcomes, not political postures) just the sort of ethnic cleansing the NATO bombing was supposed to stop?

NATO ‘just allowed’ another massive pogrom to happen when they’d gained control over Kosovo? Huh. Maybe that Albanian ‘majority’ wasn’t statistically big enough to justify an independent Kosovo (and secure a now ostensibly ‘independent’ Kosovo a ‘right’ to host Camp Bondsteel.)

Now, in these tangled pressures of arbitrary jurisdictions imposed on Serbia by the EU, NATO and the American military occupation of Serbia’s southern-most province of Kosovo (Camp Bondsteel), it should do to breakdown the logistics of the Western democracies dishonest game.

“Camp Bondsteel is the main base of the United States Army under KFOR command in Kosovo. Located near Ferizaj in the eastern part of Kosovo, the base serves as the NATO headquarters for KFOR’s Multinational Battle Group East”

The order is interesting, as well, the nomenclature. The American army figures first (“main base of the United States Army”) ‘under’ (watch how this deceit plays out) KFOR command … serves as NATO’s headquarters for KFOR’s Multinational Battlegroup …” or in the deciphered military ‘Orwellian-speak’ the American dominated NATO (every NATO “Supreme Allied Commander Europe” has been an American general throughout NATO’s history) keeps a “Battle Group” in Kosovo. This language is entirely inconsistent with ‘peace keeping.’ It is worth noting here, it had been when this occupying force had been 50,000 strong and deployed across Kosovo, Kosovo’s ethnic Albanians were ‘somehow’ allowed to push 250,000 Serbian civilians out of Kosovo in a pogrom that can only be defined as ethnic cleansing in violation of international human rights conventions.

In short other words, the KFOR mission established to bring an end to the fighting, between the Serbian army and the Kosovo Liberation Army, after the Serb army was withdrawn, KFOR clearly took the side of the Kosovo Liberation Army and ‘stood guard’ as the KLA (an insurgent army) was allowed to push 250,000 Serb residents out of homes in their own country, an event the Serb army had prevented prior to NATO establishing control.

Now, the preceding evolving into a NATO ‘authority’ had been extrapolated from UN Resolution 1244 which language is quite inconsistent with the historical reality…

“to resolve the grave humanitarian situation in Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and to provide for the safe and free return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes”

… while noting Kosovo is entered into the UN record as territory belonging to Serbia (Yugoslavia being a union of Serbia & Montenegro at this time.)

In short, on the pretext of ‘humanitarian intervention’ via a UN Resolution that NATO had never intended to honor (‘the proof is in the pudding’), an illegal insurgency had been morphed, via geopolitical chicanery, into a rouge ‘state’ governed by KLA war criminals secured by NATO.

“Transcendent Corruption” is the value I have assigned to the parties embracing ‘color of law’ (a veneer of legality masking corruption) wherein law is made to serve the interests of autocrats (e.g. Merkel), plutocrats (e.g. the Clinton & Biden families), & oligarchies (e.g. the European Union) and when taken together amount to rule by the most powerful corporate board personalities (the puppeteers) in the 21st Century model of feudalism manifesting as fascism but is labelled democracy to assuage the peasants (the citizens) sensibilities.

All of this follows on historical facts overlooked by the Western propaganda machine; Eastern Orthodoxy’s majority Serbian population in the region of Srpska Krajina recently (90s Balkan Wars) had been ethnically cleansed from Catholic Croatia by “Operation Storm” (never mind the Serbs have been made the boogeyman for everything that went wrong with the breakup of Yugoslavia), as well the fact unnatural ethnic borders have been enforced in relation to Republik Srpska, ensuring there will be ongoing tensions within Bosnia on the border of Serbia and not least, the remnant Serb majority region in the North of Kosovo is denied their right of self determination to join with Serbia, ensuring perpetual inter-ethnic conflict that serves only to weaken the institutions of state via ongoing radicalization of both populations, Orthodox Christian Serb and Muslim Albanian. And then, we have Metohija or the bona fide historical spiritual center of the Serbian people of the past 1,000 years.

It must be noted that, similar to the Sioux Indians had founded their culture upon a spiritual relationship to the Black Hills of South Dakota from which they had been expelled, Serbia’s relationship to “Old Serbia” (Kosovo) is little different; imperial ambition had seen the Serbs ethnically cleansed by the Albanians on multiple occasions, first under the ‘patronage’ of the Ottoman Turks favoring the Islamic population, then a minority, and after, the Albanians were backed in further pursuing pogroms against Serbs of Kosovo by the fascist Axis powers of World War II (similar to Croatian Ustasha persecution of Serbs during the war) pushing more of the Serb population out, wherein a coup de grace of sorts was delivered by communism under Tito, who forbade ethnic Serbs to return to their homes in Kosovo following 1945. This is a legacy NATO has furthered as ‘enforcers’ of wresting away Kosovo from Serbia. Kosovo is the original “Old Serbia” that continues to hold the center of Serbian cultural identity via the (ongoing) monastic tradition of Orthodoxy in the region of Metohija.

Then, steps into this mess the last people (if they had any sense of shame at all) who should mediate the current tensions, the Germans, Angela Merkel, particularly, and more recently, Ursula von der Leyen, whose family pedigree is a who’s who of empire personalities that cannot help perception in a Serbia whose memories of the NAZI occupation are still sharp.

‘Mediating’ the current controversy where Kosovo’s criminal administration (under the ‘protection’ of NATO) is allowing radical Wahhabism to proselytize the ethnic Albanian population away from the more moderate mainstream of Islam in the cradle of the Orthodox Serb civilization, Europe demanding Serbia recognize and do business with a cabal of criminals couldn’t do a better job of promoting a war of civilizations if it had actually tried; if one were to presume it is mere incompetence derived from ego-narcissism has birthed this circumstance into the present. But maybe it is more than that, a weakened Serbia with artificial borders is ‘low hanging fruit’ with possibility of consolidating control over a region culturally tied to Russia, as well, historically coveted by the Catholic headquarters at Rome.

In the many geopolitical machinations employed by Merkel, von der Leyen, Trump (and now Biden), not to mention the ‘rolling over’ to sound of a dog-whistle by Serbian sell-outs Vucic & Brnabic, there is a canine turd on the table no one dares mention: the Western Christianity’s animus towards Eastern Orthodoxy, particularly Slav Orthodoxy. The smell is in the air.

“… keeping in mind the fact that Bishop Grigorije has a very strong influence among the bishops, the regime has decided to do everything possible to reduce the chances that a man opposed to the government would be elected the new patriarch.

“That is why the confrontation with Grigorije, who has repeatedly said what he thinks about the “golden age of Serbia”, is becoming more and more acute and dangerous. Although the reason for this is his interview given almost a month ago, the fact remains that Grigorije is a threat the regime’s plans on two fronts which is more than enough reason to present this priest from Herzegovina as Serbia’s greatest enemy and a man who “divides the believers”.

“The matrix is always the same – the opponent is first dragged through the mud by the media, with the media, which broadcast on national frequencies, usually discovering “unknown facts”, i.e. false information, about him and his life.

“If this is not enough, they move on to the recording of videos in which “brave”, albeit unknown reporters, question the human characteristics of the victim of persecution, which is also an open invitation to lynch. Those who do not understand this, just think back of how Oliver Ivanović died”

Finally, something a little closer the real reasons behind the invitation to make the assassination manifest:

“… the instigators of the smear campaign against the bishop decided to take advantage of the fact that he does not share the vision of “progressive” Serbia and the Church and thus mark him as a traitor, while creating the impression that it would be a patriotic act to remove [assassinate] such a person” [1]

The lie of the Serbian state (Vucic oligarchy) concerning Bishop Gregorije being in opposition to the church is egregious; the Church position has always been Metohija is, and always will be, Serbia. Insofar as ‘progressive’, the ‘progress’ of the (German controlled) European Union has been little short of demanding an European monoculture derive from the social tensions born of multiculturalism. It is unnatural process, devoid of community spirit, temporally corrupt in the extreme and founded upon geopolitical propaganda lies, as has been the entire business of an independent Kosovo. Post 1945, the Reich is realizing its vision ‘over the long game.’ Recalling Rome’s embrace of Sainthood for the Catholic (Nazi collaborator) Alojzije Stepinac, it is perfectly clarified Slav Orthodoxy has no place in this ‘vision.’

If there were the slightest intention to preserve the integrity of Serb Orthodoxy in the machinations of Western Europe in the Balkans, Vucic would propose, Brnabic would initiate and the European Union would endorse an exclave of Serbian territory in that remaining portion of Metohija that is majority Serb populated. It would have more population than some United Nations states and there is precedence in Azerbaijan’s exclave Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic. But, no, this is not on the table, it is intended Slav Orthodoxy will be strangled and made extinct (replaced with ‘Eastern Rite’ Catholicism) in the Balkans.

Populism, and related nationalism, manifest in two forms, the healthy and the unhealthy, the benign and the malignant, the tranquil and the rage. The EU, NATO, and yes, the Church at Rome, all, have a hand in fostering the unhealthy, the malignant, and the rage. The epilogue of this would be the conversion of Serbia to “progressive” European monoculture at the point of a gun.

“There is not the smallest reason for confounding nationalism, which is the desire of a people to be itself, with imperialism, which is the desire of a people to prevent other peoples from being themselves” -Cicily Isabel Fairfield

[1] https://archive.li/DrMu2

A former Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence for Special Forces, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald had lived over thirty years in close association with Blackfeet Indians (those who still speak their language), and is published in international law as a layman: The Right of Self- Determination of Peoples and It’s Application to Indigenous People in The USA or The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole. Ronald has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.

Contact: penucquemspeaks@googlemail.com

“Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as cooperation with the good” -Mahatma Ghandi

February 10, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Refuse bids from those ‘involved in Israeli war crimes’, legal groups tell UK rail construction company

MEMO | February 5, 2021

A new legal brief has deemed it legal for the company building the UK’s new high-speed railway, HS2 Ltd, to exclude firms “involved in Israeli war crimes” from its tender process.

Drafted by Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights and the European Legal Support Centre (ELSC), the legal brief states that the rail project is “legally entitled” to reject Spanish manufacturer Construcciones Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles (CAF)’s bid, on the grounds of “grave professional misconduct” and breaches of international law.

In 2019, CAF and the Israeli infrastructure company Saphir was chosen by Israel’s finance ministry to expand the settlement railway project, known as the Jerusalem Light Rail (JLR).

CAF and Saphir won the $2 billion contract to extend the railway to more illegal Israeli settlements, particularly in occupied East Jerusalem.

Under international law, the West Bank and East Jerusalem are occupied territories and all Jewish settlements there are illegal.

CAF is one of five companies which have issued bids to secure a £2.75 billion ($3.76 billion) contract to supply high-speed trains to the HS2 rail project.

ELSC, an NGO based in Amsterdam which defends and empowers the Palestine solidarity movement in Europe through legal means, said companies “involved in war crimes should have no standing in public tenders.”

“HS2 Ltd has the legal right and a moral obligation to exclude CAF from the tender procedure,” said the group’s Programme Director Giovanni Fassina.

The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) national committee’s Europe campaigns co-ordinator, Alys Samson Estape, added: “The JLR project is part of the ongoing process of entrenchment of Israel’s apartheid, illegal settlement enterprise and theft of Palestinian land in and around occupied East Jerusalem.”

JLR is so blatantly illegal that other multinationals which had participated in the initial stages of bidding for the project, including Alstom, Siemens, Systra, Bombardier and Macquarie, withdrew from the call for tenders, leaving just two consortiums bidding.

“Public institutions, including the UK government, should exclude CAF from its public tenders due to its violations of international law until it stops profiting from Israel’s illegal occupation.”

Palestine Solidarity Campaign Director, Ben Jamal, explained: “All public contract authorities must discharge their responsibilities to cease complicity in ongoing violations of international law.”

“This means HS2 Ltd must exclude CAF, and any other company violating Palestinian human rights, from the bid to provide rolling stock.”

February 5, 2021 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , | Leave a comment

Belgrade may postpone or end transfer of Serbian embassy to Jerusalem

By Paul Antonopoulos | February 5, 2021

After the Israeli recognition of the so-called independent state of Kosovo on Monday, Belgrade finds itself in a difficult position and will reconsider its decision to move the Serbian embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Serbia committed itself to this step by signing the September 2020 Washington Agreement suspecting that Kosovo and Israel would recognize each other eventually. Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić now says that his country will “build relations with the Jewish state in accordance to the new circumstances,” suggesting the embassy move might not occur at all.

The Washington Agreement was always tailored to the interests of Israel and Kosovo and not Serbia, yet Vučić still signed it to the dismay of Serbs. The agreement signed by Kosovo’s so-called Prime Minister Avdullah Hoti and then U.S. President Donald Trump states that Kosovo and Israel agree to mutual recognition. The agreement signed between Vučić and Trump specifies that Belgrade has an obligation to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by July 1, 2021.

As much as the move between Israel and Kosovo was expected, it was probably not anticipated that the last item from the Washington Agreement would actually become the first. This is especially painful for Serbia as Vučić agreed with Kosovo’s authorities that the two would not engage in efforts for countries to recognize or stop recognizing Kosovo. This will likely bring new consequences to Serbia’s engagement with Israel.

As Serbian Foreign Minister Nikola Selaković noted, it will be interesting to observe whether there will now be Muslim and Arab countries that will recognize Kosovo or stop recognizing the illegal entity after its normalization with Israel.

So what will Muslim countries do?

Last year, thanks in large to Trump’s efforts, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco normalized their relations with Israel, while Saudi Arabia and the Jewish state have been cooperating for many years behind closed doors.

Turkey, despite being the first Muslim majority country to recognize Israel, has hypocritically reacted to the signing of the agreement between Pristina and Tel Aviv. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan claims that it does “not serve the Palestinian issue” and undermines the vision of a two-state solution. Erdoğan’s outrage is despite his country having multi-billion-dollar trade exchanges with Israel that was increasing year-on-year before the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs also stated that by signing the agreement, Kosovo, which it also recognizes, “undertook to open its embassy in Jerusalem, which is contrary to international law.” Again, Turkey made another contradiction considering it violated United Nations Resolution 550 and 789 by partially reopening the town of Varosha in occupied northern Cyprus last year, and by violating the United Nations Charter Law of the Sea by illegally entering Greece’s maritime space for much of 2020.

The question of relocating the Serbian embassy also entails the question of the status of Jerusalem – while the Israelis consider it their capital, the Palestinians say it is an occupied city. Palestinian Ambassador to Serbia, Mohammed Nabhan, said immediately after the signing of the Washington Agreement that 57 countries from the Arab League and the Islamic Organization for Cooperation could withdraw their recognition of Kosovo due to their agreement with Israel. There have been no such announcements from these Islamic organizations or their members.

This is an empty threat by Nabhan as the position of Muslim and Arab states regarding Israel are no longer united, something the Palestinian Authority appears to be oblivious to. Islamic countries are extremely divided over the issue of Israel and Kosovo. Several Muslim states like Iran, Syria, Iraq and Morocco do not recognize the independence of the breakaway Serbian province. Self-proclaimed Kosovo has been recognized by leading Arab countries, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Egypt. It is difficult to expect that there will be any changes, especially since the voice of the Palestinian Authority is no longer as important as it used to be. The Palestinian question, which was once a major global issue, is now reduced, especially in the Arab World as they are now mostly focused on containing Turkish expansionism and Iranian influence.

Immediately after the signing of the Washington Agreement, it was speculated that Serbia might not fulfill what it signed if Israel recognizes the self-proclaimed independence of Kosovo. The very act of recognition is only a consequence of what was already signed in Washington last year. The new American administration are most likely not against Trump’s September 2020 Agreement, meaning they will try and implement it, or at the minimum not stop it. Belgrade’s only trump card is that they can postpone or end the transfer of the Serbian embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

February 5, 2021 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Armed conflict between Venezuela and Guyana will involve US forces

By Lucas Leiroz | February 3, 2021

A new focus of tensions is emerging in South America. Since the discovery of oil in Guyana, this country has been increasingly approaching Washington both as an economic partner and as a political ally. The Americans see the partnership with the Guyanese as an opportunity to fill the void left in the global oil market with the economic sanctions imposed on Venezuela. But, in addition to a mere economic alliance, the ties between both countries are also rising to the military sphere, which is generating concerns in Caracas.

On January 21, regional tensions reached their peak. Guyanese fishing boats Nady Nayera and Sea Wolf were intercepted by Venezuela after an illegal incursion into Venezuelan territory. Caracas, not having authorized the entry of the vessels, interpreted the maneuver as dangerous to national security and kept the boats under its control. However, this Venezuelan version of the facts was denied by Georgetown, which claimed that the ships were detained within Guyana’s Exclusive Economic Zone.

Some noteworthy factors preceded this escalation of tensions. On January 7, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro signed a decree that establishes the formation of a new maritime territory on the Atlantic coast. The decree includes part of the Essequibo region, in which there is a territorial dispute with Guyana. The so-called “Guyana Essequiba” refers to a territory currently under the rule of Guyana that previously belonged to Venezuela, having been transferred to Guyanese possession after an arbitrary sentence in an international court organized by the United Kingdom at the end of the 19th century.

Venezuela has since claimed sovereignty over Essequibo, but tensions have been mild most of the time. However, Guyana, since aligning with the US, has been adopting more aggressive measures in the region. The US armed forces recently began military exercises in Guyana and deployed several military ships along Essequibo’s 159,000 km². The territory is rich in oil and the American justification for the exercises is precisely to protect the oil extraction bases installed by the company ExxonMobil. In the midst of such circumstances, Venezuela has its national sovereignty violated and is therefore trying to establish minimum measures to guarantee its interests.

However, despite the rivalry having resumed an old territorial dispute, it is necessary to emphasize that there is an agreement in force on Essequibo that Guyana is directly violating. In 1966, Guyana and Venezuela signed the Geneva Agreement, mediated by the United Nations, which determined which activities would be permitted in which area of ​​Essequibo. In this document, oil exploration by foreign companies is not allowed. Since 2015, the Guyanese government has violated the pact, allowing multinationals to explore for oil there. In 2018, Venezuela had already intercepted ExxonMobil vessels that invaded its territory to explore oil. Now, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has determined the creation of a Special Strategic Zone to increase security over Essequibo because the tendency is for territorial violations to increase further, considering that regional diplomacy is already broken, and that Guyana has become a satellite nation of Washington’s interests – which publicly plans to overthrow Maduro. The Venezuelan decision was condemned by the president of Guyana, Irfaan Ali, which prompted Caracas to issue a statement saying that such positions suggested preparation for an armed confrontation.

The Guyanese attitude has not changed over time. Now, once again, ships have entered Venezuelan territory, leading to their capture by the Bolivarian forces. If that situation continues, the Venezuelan response to foreign incursions may become increasingly rigid and the armed forces are likely to start taking down invasive vessels, which will lead to Washington’s severe responses. Currently, we can no longer regard the South American scenario as “unlikely” for a war to arise. The security crisis is widespread and with Biden in power many experts suggest that American foreign policy will become more aggressive and interventionist. Guyana has a much weaker military apparatus than the Venezuelan State and cannot face the neighboring country with its own forces. It remains to be seen what Washington’s willingness to invest in a conflict in South America will be.

More than ever, a new international agreement is needed to establish a new regulation for the region. The agreement, however, must be impartial and try to favor both nations. In an ideal scenario, the other South American nations, being co-participants in the disputes, should mediate such an agreement. But, today, the political structure of South America is absolutely broken, and no nation has sufficient diplomatic strength to resolve a demand of this nature.

Lucas Leiroz is a research fellow in international law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.

February 3, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , , , | 1 Comment

Foreign Office maintains deafening silence on Chagos Islands despite UN ruling

Press TV – February 2, 2021

Five days after a legal body of the United Nations dismissed British claims of sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, the Foreign Office continues to avoid meaningful engagement the issue.

The United Nation’s International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea ruled on January 28 that Mauritius has sole sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, thus delivering a fatal blow to the UK’s weak legal position.

The UN body’s judgment follows a ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in February 2019 that the UK must end its occupation, which in turn triggered a vote to that effect in the UN General Assembly in May 2019.

Despite the gravity of the situation, the British Foreign Office has hitherto released just a single terse statement on the issue, essentially reaffirming the UK’s recalcitrant attitude.

“The UK has no doubt as to our sovereignty over the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), which has been under continuous British sovereignty since 1814. Mauritius has never held sovereignty over the BIOT and the UK does not recognize its claim”.

That curt statement, and the subsequent silence, underscores the UK’s resolve to flout international law and maintain a stranglehold over the occupied Chagos Islands.

But despite London’s oft-stated determination to hold onto the Chagos Islands indefinitely, there will inevitably be concerted legal push back by the international community, the state of Mauritius and even by individual aggrieved Chagos islanders.

On the issue of Chagos islanders – who were forcibly removed from their ancestral lands by the UK in the mid-1960s – the long-delayed issue of compensation by the British government is finally attracting attention.

According to the Observer (January 31), less than £12,000 of a £40 million fund set up to compensate Chagos islanders for the loss of their homeland has actually been given to those islanders living in Britain.

The fund was reportedly set up four years ago and yet the Foreign Office has distributed less than one percent in direct support to Chagos islanders who have lost homes and livelihoods as a result of the 55-year British occupation.

According to the Observer, which claims to have seen internal documents, the “English council” tasked with allocating the money has “abandoned the work” and “returned the funds” to the Foreign Office.

The FCO’s mistreatment of Chagos islanders over a 55-year period has even elicited criticism from some sections of the ruling Tories, a party committed to keeping occupied territories around the world.

The Tory MP Henry Smith, whose Crawley constituency is home to the majority of Chagossians living in the UK, has described the process of extracting compensation money from the Foreign office as “tortuous”.

“While there’s some uncertainty among the Chagos community about engaging with the UK government over these funds, it’s outrageous that next to none of this funding has actually been utilized. The fact that this sort of funding hasn’t been deployed is another failure of Foreign Office promises over half a century to the Chagossian community”, Smith said.

It remains to be seen if class action undertaken by the Chagossian community – coupled with pressure from the UN and the broader international system – will produce a shift in the UK’s position in the mid to long term.

February 2, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , , | Leave a comment

US forces ‘transporting by choppers’ Daesh terrorists in Afghanistan: Taliban

Press TV – February 1, 2021

The Taliban says the US occupation forces in Afghanistan are engaged in “transporting by their choppers” members of the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group in the war-torn country’s east.

Senior members of a Taliban delegation, who are on an official visit to Iran for talks on the Afghan peace process and relevant topics, made the assertion in a news conference in Tehran on Monday, saying that the US forces in Afghanistan are assisting the Daesh terrorists to escape the areas that are coming under the Taliban control.

“Daesh were in Nangarhar and Kunar; they existed in those areas. They were eliminated by the Taliban there but their members were transferred by choppers,” Suhail Shaheen, a negotiating member of the Taliban told reporters, adding, “When the Taliban laid a siege on them, we saw that only American choppers could fly as the Afghan airspace is fully under the control of Americans.”

The senior Taliban member also referred to the escalation of violence in Afghanistan after the US-Taliban deal last February and said the US forces were to blame as they defaulted on their obligation to end their occupation and resumed the assault.

“After the signing of the agreement, we gave a chance to the Americans to withdraw their troops from Afghanistan and we were committed not to launch any attacks, so if they terminated the occupation we were committed to refrain from any assaults or attacks so it would pave the way for intra-Afghan talks but unfortunately new attacks were launched against us and we were forced to defend ourselves and they even tried to capture our region and they conducted nightly attacks,” he said.

“We have no access to the media but they have. They attribute violence to us and that is not true. They start the violence. They start the violent action and that’s still continuing.”

During the news conference, the Taliban negotiator said the group was after an “inclusive system and establishment” in Afghanistan and not after “monopolizing power,” adding that they would reconsider the agreement with US ‎if foreign forces failed to withdraw from Afghanistan.

“We have resisted the occupation of Afghanistan for 20 years and we will continue resistance against occupation if foreign forces remain in the country,” the senior Taliban member said.

Last week, the Taliban political delegation arrived in Tehran at the invitation of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, the latest of such visits that have been paid several times over the past months.

Iran strongly supports the realization of peace and stability in Afghanistan, which has been embroiled in decades of militancy fueled by foreign military intervention.

The intra-Afghan talks started after the United States agreed to withdraw 12,000 US troops from Afghanistan in exchange for the Taliban’s halting of their attacks on international forces under a deal between the two sides in February 2020.

The deal was intended to result in the reduction of bloodshed, but violence continues to take a heavy toll on the country.

In recent months, deadly attacks and high-profile assassinations have seen a rise in Afghanistan. The Taliban have denied responsibility for the killings, but Afghan and US officials have pinned the blame on the group.

Despite the ongoing talks between Kabul and the Taliban, the administration of US President Joe Biden has said it would review the peace deal reached last year.

The US first invaded Afghanistan in 2001 under the banner of fighting “terrorism.” The invasion toppled the Taliban, but the group has never stopped its attacks, citing the foreign military presence as one of the main reasons behind its continued militancy.

Since the US invasion of Afghanistan, Washington has spent more than two trillion dollars for the war on the impoverished country, according to some estimates. Over 2,400 US soldiers and tens of thousands of Afghan civilians have been killed.

February 1, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »