The US is fuelling wars and massacres, while the BRICS nations’ quest for mutual peace and prosperity, peace activist and writer KJ Noh said.
Visiting Israel on Wedneday, US President Joe Biden pledged unqualified support to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s operation in the Gaza Strip, home to 2.3 million Palestinians, in revenge for attacks launched by the Hamas movement and others on October 7.
Biden even endorsed Netanyahu’s claim that Palestinian guerrillas were to blame for the bombing of the al-Ahli Baptist Baptist hospital in Gaza on Wednesday evening that killed some 500 men, women and children.
Peace activist and writer KJ Noh told Sputnik that the “optics are very, very striking” — comparing Washington’s handouts of arms to its client states to China’s building of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) tri-continental transport and trade network.
“Right at the very moment that China is building infrastructure and saving lives all over the world through the BRI, the US is planning to assist Israel in destroying infrastructure and cause death,” Noh said. “The contrast could not be more clear.”
“[Russian President Valdimir] Putin goes to the BRI and Biden goes to Israel. I think that it’s very, very clear,” he added.
The activist said “the writing is on the wall” for the West’s vision of a unipolar world — and had been for a long time.
“All you had to do was just look at the correlation of forces to see that this was not going to shift or change,” Noh said. “And clearly Russia is now on the offensive.”
He also drew a sharp contrast between the “lack of civilian casualties” in Russia’s 20-month military operation to de-nazify Ukraine and the 3,500 Palestinians killed in Israel’s “massive shelling, bombing, murder of children that has happened in recent days in Gaza.”
“That, too, is another contrast, just the kind of the difference between [a special military operation] and wanton slaughter of people who are encaged in the world’s largest open air prison.”
The US shows hits hypocrisy by painting Russia and China as authoritarian dictatorships and threats to its self-defined “rules-based international order” while giving free reign to Israel to flout the United Nations charter, he said.
“International law says that the occupation is illegal, and certainly international law says that war of aggression against civilians is illegal,” Noh said. “Turning Gaza into a free fire zone is a crime against humanity… and the fact that China is coming out against that somehow goes against global norms, that it’s authoritarian — this is the world upside down.”
“Gaza is a real mask-off moment where you see the ‘rules-based international order’ for the unmitigated and naked violence and injustice that it really is,” he added.
The Israeli regime’s “deliberate, indiscriminate and disproportionate” targeting of civilians in the besieged Gaza Strip goes against all norms of civility and violates international law, says Pakistani ambassador to Tehran.
In an interview with the Press TV website on Tuesday, hours before an Israeli air raid on a Gaza hospital killed more than 700 Palestinians, Muhammad Mudassir Tipu said the “conscience of humanity has been shaken” by the unrelenting massacre of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip.
“The conscience of humanity has been shaken by watching innocent civilians, children, older people, pregnant woman being killed; buildings being razed to ground; water and electricity being cut off; massive blockades; and the use of massive ammunition by the Israeli military forces,” he stated.
“That is why people are showing solidarity with the Palestinians, who are symbolizing their struggle for justice, all over the world.”
Demonstrations have been held worldwide in recent days in solidarity with the oppressed people of Palestine amid the new wave of Israeli genocidal bombardment of the besieged coastal strip.
One of the biggest demonstrations was held in Pakistan’s port city of Karachi, where tens of thousands took to the streets following a call given by a local political party with the support of trade unions.
Tipu said the “sense of righteousness is deeply ingrained in the minds” of the people in Pakistan.
“We stand for those principles that are morally justified and right rather than the ones propagated for political and hegemonic ambitions. Pakistanis also believe in the equal application of international law and norms rather than using one set of laws for one country and another set of laws for another country,” he remarked in a conversation with the Press TV website.
“We can’t have double standards and false moral equivalences to justify unjustifiable and illegitimate positions,” the Pakistani envoy hastened to add.
The death toll in the Israeli aerial bombardment in the Gaza Strip has risen to 3,000, including at least 700 children, with tens of thousands of others displaced after the Israeli evacuation orders.
The Pakistani ambassador said massive pro-Palestine demonstrations must be seen in the context of years of forced and illegal occupation of Palestinian territory and repressive policies against its people.
“Our cause resonates with the cause of the hapless Palestinians who are facing unspeakable brutality and massive use of force on the civilians as well as an overwhelming use of military might over its innocent people,” he asserted.
Tipu also “appreciated” the role of the Iranian leadership in “standing up for the oppressed people of Palestine and making resolute efforts to halt and reverse the conflict in Gaza consistent with international norms.”
“The great Iranian leadership has also unambiguously urged for a just resolution of this historic injustice,” he remarked, adding that the foreign ministers of Pakistan and Iran had a phone conversation on Monday in which they “discussed this grave situation” in Palestine.
On Pakistan’s interim Prime Minister Anwaar ul Haq Kakar’s statement on Saturday that the Israeli aggression in the Gaza strip should be seen in the context of years of illegal Israeli occupation, the Pakistani envoy said he “clearly and unambiguously outlined Pakistan’s position on this crisis.”
He also dismissed any speculation about Pakistan mulling normalization with the Israeli regime.
“Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Mr. Jalil Abbas Jilani has categorically articulated that “there is absolutely no move to recognize Israel. Our position is very clear. We take decisions based on our interests and the interests of the Palestinians,” he told the Press TV website.
“I must emphasize that Pakistan is a sovereign country, with enormous capabilities, and would always take decisions of vital importance independently.”
He hastened to note that Islamabad “wishes to seek a just resolution” of the issue of Palestine so that “regional peace, development, and growth can take place and a sense of equity and justice prevails.”
As Western politicians line up to cheer on Israel as it starves Gaza’s civilians and plunges them into darkness to soften them up before the coming Israeli ground invasion, it is important to understand how we reached this point – and what it portends for the future.
More than a decade ago, Israel started to understand that its occupation of Gaza through siege could be to its advantage. It began transforming the tiny coastal enclave from an albatross around its neck into a valuable portfolio in the trading game of international power politics.
The first benefit for Israel, and its Western allies, is more discussed than the second.
The tiny strip of land hugging the eastern Mediterranean coast was turned into a mix of testing ground and shop window.
Israel could use Gaza to develop all sorts of new technologies and strategies associated with the homeland security industries burgeoning across the West, as officials there grew increasingly worried about domestic unrest, sometimes referred to as populism.
The siege of Gaza’s 2.3 million Palestinians, imposed by Israel in 2007 following the election of Hamas to rule the enclave, allowed for all sorts of experiments.
How could the population best be contained? What restrictions could be placed on their diet and lifestyle? How were networks of informers and collaborators to be recruited from afar? What effect did the population’s entrapment and repeated bombardment have on social and political relations?
And ultimately how were Gaza’s inhabitants to be kept subjugated and an uprising prevented?
The answers to those questions were made available to Western allies through Israel’s shopping portal. Items available included interception rocket systems, electronic sensors, surveillance systems, drones, facial recognition, automated gun towers, and much more. All tested in real-life situations in Gaza.
Israel’s standing took a severe dent from the fact that Palestinians managed to bypass this infrastructure of confinement last weekend – at least for a few days – with a rusty bulldozer, some hang-gliders and a sense of nothing-to-lose.
Which is part of the reason why Israel now needs to go back into Gaza with ground troops to show it still has the means to keep the Palestinians crushed.
Collective punishment
Which brings us to the second purpose served by Gaza.
As Western states have grown increasingly unnerved by signs of popular unrest at home, they have started to think more carefully about how to sidestep the restrictions placed on them by international law.
The term refers to a body of laws that were formalised in the aftermath of the second world war, when both sides treated civilians on the other side of the battle lines as little more than pawns on a chessboard.
The aim of those drafting international law was to make it unconscionable for there to be a repeat of Nazi atrocities in Europe, as well as other crimes such as Britain’s fire bombing of German cities like Dresden or the United States’ dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
One of the fundamentals of international law – at the heart of the Geneva Conventions – is a prohibition on collective punishment: that is, retaliating against the enemy’s civilian population, making them pay the price for the acts of their leaders and armies.
Very obviously, Gaza is about as flagrant a violation of this prohibition as can be found. Even in “quiet” times, its inhabitants – one million of them children – are denied the most basic freedoms, such as the right to movement; access to proper health care because medicines and equipment cannot be brought in; access to drinkable water; and the use of electricity for much of the day because Israel keeps bombing Gaza’s power station.
Israel has never made any bones of the fact that it is punishing the people of Gaza for being ruled by Hamas, which rejects Israel’s right to have dispossessed the Palestinians of their homeland in 1948 and imprisoned them in overcrowded ghettos like Gaza.
What Israel is doing to Gaza is the very definition of collective punishment. It is a war crime: 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks of every year, for 16 years.
And yet no one in the so-called international community seems to have noticed.
Rules of war rewritten
But the trickiest legal situation – for Israel and the West – is when Israel bombs Gaza, as it is doing now, or sends in soldiers, as it soon will do.
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu highlighted the problem when he told the people of Gaza: “Leave now”. But, as he and Western leaders know, Gaza’s inhabitants have nowhere to go, nowhere to escape the bombs. So any Israeli attack is, by definition, on the civilian population too. It is the modern equivalent of the Dresden fire bombings.
Israel has been working on strategies to overcome this difficulty since its first major bombardment of Gaza in late 2008, after the siege was introduced.
A unit in its attorney general’s office was charged with finding ways to rewrite the rules of war in Israel’s favour.
At the time, the unit was concerned that Israel would be criticised for blowing up a police graduation ceremony in Gaza, killing many young cadets. Police are civilians in international law, not soldiers, and therefore not a legitimate target. Israeli lawyers were also worried that Israel had destroyed government offices, the infrastructure of Gaza’s civilian administration.
Israel’s concerns seem quaint now – a sign of how far it has already shifted the dial on international law. For some time, anyone connected with Hamas, however tangentially, is considered a legitimate target, not just by Israel but by every Western government.
Western officials have joined Israel in treating Hamas as simply a terrorist organisation, ignoring that it is also a government with people doing humdrum tasks like making sure bins are collected and schools kept open.
Or as Orna Ben-Naftali, a law faculty dean, told the Haaretz newspaper back in 2009: “A situation is created in which the majority of the adult men in Gaza and the majority of the buildings can be treated as legitimate targets. The law has actually been stood on its head.”
Back at that time, David Reisner, who had previously headed the unit, explained Israel’s philosophy to Haaretz: “What we are seeing now is a revision of international law. If you do something for long enough, the world will accept it.
“The whole of international law is now based on the notion that an act that is forbidden today becomes permissible if executed by enough countries.”
Israel’s meddling to change international law goes back many decades.
Referring to Israel’s attack on Iraq’s fledgling nuclear reactor in 1981, an act of war condemned by the UN Security Council, Reisner said: “The atmosphere was that Israel had committed a crime. Today everyone says it was preventive self-defence. International law progresses through violations.”
He added that his team had travelled to the US four times in 2001 to persuade US officials of Israel’s ever-more flexible interpretation of international law towards subjugating Palestinians.
“Had it not been for those four planes, I am not sure we would have been able to develop the thesis of the war against terrorism on the present scale,” he said.
Those redefinitions of the rules of war proved invaluable when the US chose to invade and occupy Afghanistan and Iraq.
‘Human animals’
In recent years, Israel has continued to “evolve” international law. It has introduced the concept of “prior warning” – sometimes giving a few minutes’ notice of a building or neighbourhood’s destruction. Vulnerable civilians still in the area, like the elderly, children and the disabled, are then recast as legitimate targets for failing to leave in time.
And it is using the current assault on Gaza to change the rules still further.
The 2009 Haaretz article includes references by law officials to Yoav Gallant, who was then the military commander in charge of Gaza. He was described as a “wild man”, a “cowboy” with no time for legal niceties.
Gallant is now defence minister and the man responsible for instituting this week a “complete siege” of Gaza: “No electricity, no food, no water, no fuel – everything is closed.” In language that blurred any distinction between Hamas and Gaza’s civilians, he described Palestinians as “human animals”.
That takes collective punishment into a whole different realm. In terms of international law, it skirts into the territory of genocide, both rhetorically and substantively.
But the dial has shifted so completely that even centrist Western politicians are cheering Israel on – often not even calling for “restraint” or “proportionality”, the weasel terms they usually use to obscure their support for law breaking.
Britain has been leading the way in helping Israel to rewrite the rulebook on international law.
Listen to Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour opposition and the man almost certain to be Britain’s next prime minister. This week he supported the “complete siege” of Gaza, a crime against humanity, refashioning it as Israel’s “right to defend itself”.
Starmer has not failed to grasp the legal implications of Israel’s actions, even if he seems personally immune to the moral implications. He is trained as a human rights lawyer.
His approach even appears to be taking aback journalists not known for being sympathetic to the Palestinian case. When asked by Kay Burley of Sky News if he had any sympathy for the civilians in Gaza being treated like “human animals”, Starmer could not find a single thing to say in support.
Instead, he deflected to an outright deception: blaming Hamas for sabotaging a “peace process” that Israel both practically and declaratively buried years ago.
Confirming that the Labour party now condones war crimes by Israel, his shadow attorney general, Emily Thornberry, has been sticking to the same script. On BBC’s Newsnight, she evaded questions about whether cutting off power and supplies to Gaza is in line with international law.
It is no coincidence that Starmer’s position contrasts so dramatically with that of his predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn. The latter was driven out of office by a sustained campaign of antisemitism smears fomented by Israel’s most fervent supporters in the UK.
Starmer does not dare to be seen on the wrong side of this issue. And that is exactly the outcome Israeli officials wanted and expected.
Israeli flag on No 10
Starmer is, of course, far from alone. Grant Shapps, Britain’s defence secretary, has also expressed trenchant support for Israel’s policy of starving two million Palestinians in Gaza.
Rishi Sunak, the UK prime minister, has emblazoned the Israeli flag on the front of his official residence, 10 Downing Street, apparently unconcerned at how he is giving visual form to what would normally be considered an antisemitic trope: that Israel controls the UK’s foreign policy.
Starmer, not wishing to be outdone, has called for Wembley stadium’s arch to be adorned with the colours of the Israeli flag.
“The media is playing its part, dependably as ever“
However much this schoolboy cheerleading of Israel is sold as an act of solidarity following Hamas’ slaughter of Israeli civilians at the weekend, the subtext is unmistakeable: Britain has Israel’s back as it starts its retributive campaign of war crimes in Gaza.
That is also the purpose of home secretary Suella Braverman’s advice to the police to treat the waving of Palestinian flags and chants for Palestine’s liberation at protests in support of Gaza as criminal acts.
The media is playing its part, dependably as ever. A Channel 4 TV crew pursued Corbyn through London’s streets this week, demanding he “condemn” Hamas. They insinuated through the framing of those demands that anything less fulsome – such as Corbyn’s additional concerns for the welfare of Gaza’s civilians – was confirmation of the former Labour leader’s antisemitism.
The clear implication from politicians and the establishment media is that any support for Palestinian rights, any demurral from Israel’s “unquestionable right” to commit war crimes, equates to antisemitism.
Europe’s hypocrisy
This double approach, of cheering on genocidal Israeli policies towards Gaza while stifling any dissent, or characterising it as antisemitism, is not confined to the UK.
Across Europe, from the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, to the Eiffel Tower in Paris and the Bulgarian parliament, official buildings have been lit up with the Israeli flag.
Europe’s top official, Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, celebrated the Israeli flag smothering the EU parliament this week.
She has repeatedly stated that “Europe stands with Israel”, even as Israeli war crimes start to mount.
The Israeli air force boasted on Thursday it had dropped some 6,000 bombs on Gaza. At the same time, human rights groups reported Israel was firing the incendiary chemical weapon white phosphorus into Gaza, a war crime when used in urban areas. And Defence for Children International noted that more than 500 Palestinian children had been killed so far by Israeli bombs.
It was left to Francesca Albanese, the UN’s special rapporteur on the occupied territories, to point out that Von Der Leyen was applying the principles of international law entirely inconsistently.
Almost exactly a year ago, the European Commission president denounced Russia’s strikes on civilian infrastructure in Ukraine as war crimes. “Cutting off men, women, children of water, electricity and heating with winter coming – these are acts of pure terror,” she wrote. “And we have to call it as such.”
Albanese noted Von der Leyen had said nothing equivalent about Israel’s even worse attacks on Palestinian infrastructure.
Sending in the heavies
Meanwhile, France has already started breaking up and banning demonstrations against the bombing of Gaza. Its justice minister has echoed Braverman in suggesting solidarity with Palestinians risks offending Jewish communities and should be treated as “hate speech”.
Naturally, Washington is unwavering in its support for whatever Israel decides to do to Gaza, as secretary of state Anthony Blinken made clear during his visit this week.
President Joe Biden has promised weapons and funding, and sent in the military equivalent of “the heavies” to make sure no one disturbs Israel as it carries out those war crimes. An aircraft carrier has been dispatched to the region to ensure quiet from Israel’s neighbours as the ground invasion is launched.
Even those officials whose chief role is to promote international law, such as Antonio Gutteres, secretary general of the UN, have started to move with the shifting ground.
Like most Western officials, he has emphasised Gaza’s “humanitarian needs” above the rules of war Israel is obliged to honour.
This is Israel’s success. The language of international law that should apply to Gaza – of rules and norms Israel must obey – has given way to, at best, the principles of humanitarianism: acts of international charity to patch up the suffering of those whose rights are being systematically trampled on, and those whose lives are being obliterated.
Western officials are more than happy with the direction of travel. Not just for Israel’s sake but for their own too. Because one day in the future, their own populations may be as much trouble to them as Palestinians in Gaza are to Israel right now.
Supporting Israel’s right to defend itself is their downpayment.
A United Nations special rapporteur has slammed the European Union’s unwavering support for Israel in its aggression on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, and its double standards regarding Palestine and Ukraine.
Speaking to Middle East Eye, Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, said “Political action is lacking and double standards tarnish the values and the rule of law principle upon which our international order is premised.”
Albanese made the remarks after European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen confirmed the EU’s unwavering support for Israel in recent days, saying that “Israel has the right to defend itself – today and in the days to come. The European Union stands with Israel.”
After von der Leyen’s tweet, Israel has intensified its strikes on Gaza and cut off fuel, water, energy, and food supplies to the coastal strip, which is home to over two million Palestinians and has already been suffering under a 16-year-old Israeli blockade.
Von der Leyen’s recent remarks drew widespread criticism, especially after her previous comments on Russia’s alleged targeting of such utilities.
Last year, Von der Leyen said Russian “attacks against civilian infrastructure, especially electricity, are war crimes.”
“Cutting off men, women, children of water, electricity, and heating with winter coming – these are acts of pure terror,” she said back then.
The UN rapporteur urged Von der Leyen on the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, to make the “same declaration” she did against Russia towards the Israeli offensive on Gaza.
“If not, people could think that European institutions do not value the protection of Palestinian children, women and men as much as that of Ukrainians,” said Albanese.
Albanese said it was important to make such a statement because it meant “giving full meaning to the universality of human rights and equality of all human beings, to enable Israelis and Palestinians to live in dignity and freedom.”
“I do not understand the lack of commensurate empathy with the Palestinian people, as well as the lack of accountability for Israel’s protracted occupation and crimes perpetrated for over 56 years,” Albanese said.
While Tel Aviv was backed by its staunch Western allies, the US and the EU, over the past week, the reaction among Latin American leaders was more varied.
The most vocal commentator among Latin American leaders has been Colombia’s leftist president, Gustavo Petro, who took to X to decry Israel’s recent attacks on Gaza, widely sharing photos and footage of Palestinian victims. In his tweets, Petro also likened the Israeli military to Nazis.
Meanwhile, the Venezuelan government stressed that the escalating tensions “is the result of the inability of the Palestinian people to find a space in international law to assert their historical rights”.
In Bolivia, former President Evo Morales reiterated his support for Palestine and broke with the leftist government’s more diplomatic statement.
“The statement from the Bolivian Foreign Ministry does not reflect the feeling of solidarity of the Bolivian people towards Palestine. The Bolivian people will always condemn the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian Territories,” Morales, who is once again running for office, said on X.
On Saturday, the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas launched the al-Aqsa Storm operation against Israel in response to the occupying regime’s decades-long campaign of bloodletting and devastation against Palestinians.
The military operation killed around 1,300 Israeli forces, and injured thousands more. Nearly 150 others were also captured by the resistance forces.
Meanwhile, the Israeli bombing campaign on Gaza killed more than 1,500 people, nearly half of whom were children and women, and injured over 6,600 others.
European Commission Vice President Margaritis Schinas has demanded that Türkiye either openly declare its support for NATO, the EU and the “ethos of the West,” or side with Russia and an assortment of Muslim states and militant groups.
Speaking at an event in Brussels on Wednesday, Schinas weighed in on the recent violent flare-up between Israel and Palestinian fighters in Gaza, noting that all 27 EU member states supported Israel’s “right to defend itself” and denounced terrorism following a deadly Hamas attack last weekend.
Addressing Türkiye, the official declared that the country must “choose which side of history it wants to be on,” suggesting it could not seek a middle ground between world powers or remain neutral.
“[Türkiye will be] with us – the European Union, NATO, our values, the ethos of the West – or with Moscow, Tehran, Hamas, and Hezbollah,” Schinas said, as cited by Greek newspaper Ekathimerini, adding that “the answer needs to be clear.”
While the vice president did not elaborate on what Ankara should do to prove its allegiance to the West, his comments came just days after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said his government was prepared to coordinate peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.
“Türkiye … is ready for all kinds of mediation, including prisoner exchange, if the parties request it,” the president said in a lengthy statement, which was issued following separate discussions with Israeli President Isaac Herzog and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.
However, Ankara has been highly critical of Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians in the past, and Erdogan has slammed Israel’s latest military operations in Gaza as “shameful” and “a massacre.”
Although Schinas implied that Russia had sided with Palestinian militants, Moscow has urged for a peaceful resolution to the conflict and stressed that civilians were suffering on all sides. On Thursday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated calls to implement past UN resolutions and create a Palestinian state – commonly known as the “two-state solution.”
“All of us had the same opinion… that this confrontation must be stopped immediately, that the parties should respect international humanitarian law, prevent any terrorist actions and the indiscriminate use of force,” Lavrov said.
The surprise attack by Hamas last Saturday marked one of Israel’s greatest national security breaches in decades, with local officials reporting some 1,300 fatalities in the aftermath. The Israeli military has launched days of airstrikes in retaliation, with around 1,500 reportedly killed in Gaza and thousands more wounded on both sides.
In a nationwide televised address, U.S. President Joe Biden did his best to sound righteous and angered by the eruption of violence in the Middle East.
“There are moments in this life − I mean this literally − when pure unadulterated evil is unleashed on this world,” Biden intoned with phony gravitas. “The people of Israel lived through one such moment this weekend.”
This American duplicity is nauseating. Slurring his words, Biden has no idea what he is talking about or how culpable he and his nation are in the violence.
Then we have White House spokesman John Kirby breaking down and crying on live TV, overcome with emotion about Israeli deaths. Meanwhile, this same person advocates pumping arms into Ukraine, killing hundreds of thousands of people, without a tear shed for those deaths.
This American disconnect is equally nauseating.
Biden promised the immediate supply of advanced weapons to Israel to defend itself against Hamas, the Palestinian militant group, even while hundreds of Palestinian civilians are being slaughtered in revenge by the Israeli military in Gaza.
A U.S. aircraft carrier, missile destroyers and squadrons of fighter jets are also being deployed to the region, in the words of Washington, “deter” any wider violence.
How sickening is this knee-jerk recourse to more militarism and inevitably more violence?
Biden’s invocation of a mysterious “pure evil” to account for the surge in deadly violence may sound righteous and indignant, but the truth is the appalling destruction of life and ongoing war is the result of something more mundane and deliberate – the failure of criminal U.S. policy.
As a long-time Senator, as well as two-time U.S. Vice President and for the past three years incumbent President, Joe Biden must take a sizable share of the blame for this systematic failure and the concomitant bloodshed.
First of all, there is the abject failure of the so-called Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Decades of neglect and indifference from Washington towards the rights of Palestinians for statehood have created a dead-end that has exploded in violence. Furthermore, successive American administrations have relentlessly and unconscionably green-lighted the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands and despicable oppression. Biden has been a particularly slavish booster for Israel’s apartheid regime, saying previously on several occasions in his smart-ass cloying way that if “Israel didn’t exist then the United States would have to have invented it”.
Washington’s cynical pretence of being a neutral peace broker between Israel and Palestinians has served to prolong the historic injustice that makes violence a recurring cycle. Western media have highlighted the deaths of over 1,000 Israelis during the past week while many more Palestinian victims over the years hardly register any coverage. That hypocritical double standard is fomented by U.S. policy.
The chronic diseased state of the Middle East, with its toxic tensions and seething conflicts largely stems from the deliberate failure of U.S. policy.
Added to this are the countless illegal wars and proxy interventions sponsored by Washington, including the covert manipulation of terror groups like Islamic State (ISIS, Daesh) for regime-change objectives.
The rampant militarism and arms dealing that underpin U.S. foreign policy and its hegemonic ambitions are further fuel for the maelstrom of violence.
The devastating attacks launched by Hamas against Israel have apparently been enabled by the acquisition of American weaponry from stockpiles abandoned in Afghanistan.
Two decades of illegal occupation in Afghanistan were brought to a chaotic end by President Biden in 2021 when he hurriedly pulled U.S. troops out, finally realizing that the endless war was a lost cause.
America’s imperialist warmongering all over the planet leaves a trail of weapons and black market vice.
Ukraine is the latest U.S. killing field along with NATO allies who have pumped that country with up to $100 billion worth of weapons in a proxy war against Russia (cynically under the pretext of “defending democracy and Europe”). The hopelessly corrupt NeoNazi regime in Kiev has siphoned off up to 70 per cent of weapons for lucrative black market business.
Russia and other observers have repeatedly warned with evidence that the American and NATO arsenals supplied to Ukraine were making their way to other continents and conflict zones.
It appears that as well as obtaining American weaponry from Afghanistan, the Hamas militants also stocked up with NATO arms sourced from Ukraine.
Yet the Ukrainian comedian President Vladimir Zelensky who is implicated in the massive Kiev corruption has the brass neck to accuse Russian leader Vladimir Putin of triggering the violence towards Israel.
The wicked absurdity of it all is that American weapons plied to supposed allies and proxies are being deployed to kill civilians in Washington’s top foreign ally Israel.
Among the victims of the latest violence are dozens of U.S. citizens, as acknowledged by Biden in his nationwide address this week. The U.S. president also admitted that several American citizens remain unaccounted for in Israel, some of them feared to have been taken hostage. Washington’s support for Israeli revenge is putting its own citizens at risk of being killed.
It is no wonder that Biden and other U.S. politicians and their news media would prefer to invoke mysterious “pure evil” when they talk about the horrific suffering in the Middle East.
Such meaningless, vacuous talk serves to obscure and mystify what is the reprehensible truth.
Washington’s criminal warmongering, reckless militarism and double-dealing foreign policy are the fountainhead for violence and the enemy of peace in the Middle East and beyond.
Sending more aircraft carriers, warplanes, troops and munitions is the wretched response of a failed policy begetting more violence, death and ultimately more failure.
Biden is a warmonger. Trump is no less a warmonger as was evident from his shameless support for Israeli state violence and oppression of Palestinians while he was in the White House. So-called “independent” presidential candidate Robert F Kennedy Jr. has also declared his fulsome support for Israel in recent days.
America’s problem is way beyond individual politicians. It is rooted in its systematic criminal policy that sows and breeds violence across the world.
Many Americans have come to accept that corruption and lying is the name of the game in Washington and, increasingly, at both state and local levels of government, in part because lying and stealing by those who run the country has become virtually consequence free. To cite only one example, the current ruinously expensive war against Russia began when the US and other NATO powers lied to Mikhael Gorbachev about their intentions regarding expansion of the “defensive” alliance into Eastern Europe. They then lied again in 2014 with the Minsk Accords, which were supposed to give some measure of autonomy to the Russian ethnic regions of Ukraine in the Donbas, an apparent concession that served as cover for arming and training the Ukrainian Army. Finally, the US and its friends arranged for regime change in Ukraine in 2014 to replace the friendly-to-Russia President Viktor Yanukovych with a pro-western candidate selected by the fanatical State Department neocon Victoria Nuland, who boasted how Washington had spent $5 billion to bring about the flip in government. That move warned Russian President Vladimir Putin regarding what was going on so he quickly annexed Russian ethnic majority Crimea, where the Russian Black Sea Fleet is based.
Driving all the US led aggression against Russia is the neocon foreign policy embraced by most of the two major political parties which demands that the United States have military superiority over all competitors everywhere around the world where it has interests or allies. That has meant by one count something like 1,000 foreign military bases. By way of comparison, Russia has only one overseas base, in Syria. And the maintenance of all those bases as well as the network of installations inside the US costs lots of money which fattens defense contractors and also winds up in the pockets of aspiring politicians while increasing the national debt to unsustainable levels. And it is no surprise to learn that when generals and admirals retire from active service, 80% of them wind up employed by contractors to lobby their former colleagues on the latest weapons systems that are so urgently required to maintain supremacy.
The recent exposure of Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey’s apparent tendency to accept bribes in exchange for various kinds of favorable treatment and protection was a particularly lurid tale in part because much of the loot consisted of $480,000 in cash stuffed into jacket pockets, closets and in a safe, along with 13 gold bars, two of them marked as 1 Kilogram in weight to the value of more than $100,000. In the garage was an upscale $60,000 Mercedes-Benz convertible that was a gift to Menendez’s then girlfriend, who had wrecked her own vehicle in an accident in which she had struck and killed a pedestrian. The car came from one of the New Jersey businessmen currently involved in the corruption and bribery investigation and no one can quite explain how an accident in which someone had died was never properly investigated by police. Menendez had allegedly helped the businessman by arranging to block a criminal investigation into his company’s activities.
Menendez is indeed a powerful senator even though there is more than a whiff of suspicion surrounding him and his activities. A Cuban American who is prominent in the Hispanic caucus, he was regarded as a political hardliner from his bully pulpit as Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In 2015, Menendez was indicted on federal corruption charges but the jury was unable to reach a verdict, and the case was dropped in 2018. In April 2018, the United States Senate Select Committee on Ethics “severely admonished” Menendez for accepting gifts from donor Salomon Melgen without obtaining committee approval, for failing to disclose certain gifts, and for using his position as a senator to advance Melgen’s interests. This time around, however, the evidence for wrongdoing is much more compelling and it even involves a foreign country, Egypt, so he has resigned his chairmanship but has refused to leave the Senate. He claims he is innocent, of course and continues to promote Biden’s view of the world, to include identifying the “core American foreign policy values” as “democracy, human rights, and the rule of law” even though it does not apply to him. And, of course, as a Cuban that worldview includes perpetual hostility to Havana and all its works, including its links to Russia.
Bob Menendez is up for reelection in 2024, but opinion polls taken just after the reports of his corruption surfaced indicate that he has no chance of winning against several Democrats who will challenge him. He will certainly receive some favorable press and significant campaign donations as he’s long been linked to Jewish lobbying groups like AIPAC and is closely aligned with Israel on foreign policy issues to include opposing in 2015 the President Barack Obama nuclear deal with Iran, asserting falsely that Iran is already working on a nuclear weapon. In March 2017, Menendez co-sponsored the Israel Anti-Boycott Act (S.270), which sought to make it “a federal crime, punishable by a maximum sentence of 20 years imprisonment, for Americans to encourage or participate in boycotts against Israel and Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.” More important perhaps, Menendez has twice advanced legislation through his committee supporting Ukraine in its war with Russia, so the White House will presumably do everything it can to protect him, but only up to a certain point.
Menendez has been replaced by Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, who will not be running for re-election in 2024. Cardin, who is Jewish, is a strong and consistent supporter of Israel, like Menendez, and an outspoken critic of Vladimir Putin of Russia. He was a co-sponsor of a Senate resolution expressing objection to the UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which condemned Israeli settlement building in the occupied Palestinian territories as a violation of international law. Cardin warned that “Congress will take action against efforts at the UN, or beyond, that use Resolution 2334 to target Israel.” Cardin also voted with Republicans to support President Donald Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. He declared that the time that “Jerusalem is the capital of the State of Israel and the location of the US Embassy should reflect this fact.” Cardin and Senator Rob Portman of Ohio, like Menendez, were strong supporters of the proposed Israel Anti-Boycott Act in late 2018, described above, and they also called for a sanctions mechanism to punish international organizations that seek to boycott Israel or its illegal settlements.
Oddly, Cardin has sometimes been credited with being a “human rights advocate,” a label which the Palestinians and others might object to. The claim is based on his authorship of US legislation referred to as the Magnitsky Act. According to Cardin and his allies in Washington, Sergei Magnitsky was a Russian lawyer hired by Bill Browder head of Hermitage Capital Management Fund, an Anglo-American investment fund operating in Moscow, to investigate the apparent diversion of as much as $230 million in taxes due to the Russian government. Hermitage was a hedge fund that was focused on “investing” in Russia, taking advantage initially of the extremely corrupt loans-for-shares scheme under Boris Yeltsin, and then continuing to profit greatly during the early years of Vladimir Putin’s ascendancy. The loans-for-shares scheme that made Browder his initial fortune has been correctly characterized as the epitome of corruption, an arrangement whereby foreign investors worked with local oligarchs to strip the former Soviet economy of its assets paying pennies on each dollar of value. Along the way, Browder was reportedly involved in making false representations on official documents and bribery. Nevertheless, by 2005 Hermitage was the largest foreign investor in Russia.
Magnitsky allegedly became a whistleblower after discovering that the missing money had been stolen by the police, organized crime figures and other government officials. After he went to the authorities to complain he was unjustly imprisoned for eleven months. When he refused to recant he was both beaten and denied medical treatment to coerce him into cooperating, resulting in his death in jail at age 37 in November 2009. He has become something of a hero for those who have decried official corruption in Russia.
The Magnitsky case is of particular importance because both the European Union and the United States have initiated sanctions against the Russian officials and entities that were allegedly involved. In the Magnitsky Act, sponsored by a Russia-phobic Cardin and signed by President Barack Obama in 2012, the US asserted its willingness to punish foreign governments for violations of human rights. Russia reacted angrily, noting that the actions taken by its government internally, notably the operation of its domestic judiciary, were being subjected to outside interference. It reciprocated with sanctions against US officials as well as by increasing pressure on foreign non-governmental pro-democracy groups operating in Russia. Tension between Moscow and Washington increased considerably as a result and Congress subsequently passed the so-called Global Magnitsky Act as part of the defense appropriation bill in 2016. It was signed into law by President Barack Obama in December. It expanded the use of sanctions and other punitive measures against regimes guilty of egregious human rights abuses though it has never been applied to US friends like Saudi Arabia and Israel. It has been used to punish China and Cuba. It was also sponsored by Senator Cardin and was clearly primarily intended to intimidate Russia.
The tit-for-tat that has severely damaged relations with Russia is based on the standard narrative embraced by many regarding who Magnitsky was and what he did, but is it true? Many now believe that there was indeed a huge fraud related to Russian taxes but that it was not carried out by corrupt officials. Instead, it was deliberately ordered and engineered by Browder with Magnitsky, who was an accountant not a lawyer, personally developing and implementing the scheme used to carry out the deception.
To be sure, Browder and his international legal team have presented what they regard as evidence in the case. But while it might be that Browder and Magnitsky have been the victims of a corrupt and venal state, it just might be the other way around. To cite only one example, much of the case against the Russian authorities is derived from English language translations of relevant documents provided by Browder himself. The actual documents in Russian sometimes say something quite different.
So there we go again. As the wheel turns in Washington nothing really changes. Benjamin Cardin as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs will promote the same policies of unrelenting hostility towards countries like Russia and China as did his recently resigned predecessor Bob Menendez. And as fighting between Israel and Gaza has just broken out, you can count on how the United States will line up even as hundreds of Palestinian children die as a powerful Israel pummels and pounds and largely civilian population in Gaza. Those are the sorts of things that American citizens can count on these days, unfortunately.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
I would like to open this column by stating that I have long had a great relationship with Amazon, which has sold far more of my books than have ever been sold in bookstores. I have also been extremely grateful to Amazon’s Kindle Direct Publishing program for empowering me to publish whatever nonfiction books I please, quickly and efficiently, while retaining the rights and earning the best royalty in the business.
In May 2022, Dr. McCullough and I published our book, The Courage to Face COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex, directly on Amazon. Quickly the book became a hit and within a year it had earned over 1000 5-Star Reviews. For almost 3 weeks in July 2022 it was a top 100 seller.
In the autumn of last year, Tony Lyons, President and Publisher of SKYHORSE in New York, graciously offered to bring out a special, handsome hardcover edition with a preface by U.S. presidential candidate, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who warmly endorsed our work.
A bit of Covid fatigue this year caused sales to decline, but in September the book got a second wind as more and more Americans seem to be recognize that Dr. McCullough has been right all along.
To my gratitude and delight, Amazon actually supported the effort by running a deep discount promotion while still paying the same royalty to us—an act of generosity to authors that is unheard of in traditional publishing.
And then, on September 29, seemingly out of nowhere, Amazon Account Review sent me the following notice:
We have temporarily suspended your KDP account because we found offensive content that violates our Content Guidelines in the title(s) listed below:
ASIN: B09ZLVWMD9 –
Title: THE COURAGE TO FACE COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex – Author: John Leake
Upon receiving this message, I humbly beseeched Account Review to restore my account and to let me know what “offensive content” was found in our book. Amazon restored my account and published my latest book—a conventional work of true crime—but refused to reinstate The Courage to Face COVID-19. Yesterday my third appeal was turned down without answering my query about what in our book is offensive.
My question seemed especially pertinent, given that Account Review provided me with a link to its Content Guidelines, which include a section on Offensive Content.
Offensive content
We don’t sell certain content including content that we determine is hate speech, promotes the abuse or sexual exploitation of children, contains pornography, glorifies rape or pedophilia, advocates terrorism, or other material we deem inappropriate or offensive.
Obviously, nothing in our book even remotely touches on any of these subjects. Upon reading this description, it occurred to me that it was a perfection description of 120 Days of Sodom, by the Marquis de Sade, which contains hundreds of pages that glorify the abuse and sexual exploitation of children, violent pornography, and glorifications of rape and pedophilia. I did a quick search for the title, and voila, there it is, for sale on Amazon in three formats.
None of my polite entreaties to Content Review was answered with an explanation of what, in our book, is offensive or in violation of any other published guideline. This strengthened my suspicion that the decision was the result of a sudden imposition of power for which the Content Review staff was not prepared.
Even more stunning than banning my softcover edition was Amazon’s decision to ban Tony Lyons’s SKYHORSE hardcover edition from the site without even sending the publisher notice. He learned of his edition’s demise from me.
This is a developing story about arbitrary censorship and book banning. Generally speaking, Amazon has a robust history of resisting pressure to ban books. Even during the COVID Pandemic, Amazon bucked the censorship regime that was established at Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.
I believe it is no exaggeration to state that Amazon’s decision to ban our work of medical and historical scholarship, carefully vetted by Dr. Peter McCullough—who has published over 600 peer-reviewed papers in top academic medical journals—is the most egregious act of arbitrary censorship in the history of American publishing.
Many works of literature have been banned from public school systems and libraries and censured by religious organizations. However, I cannot find a single example of a banned nonfiction book that contains zero sex, zero violence, zero expletives, zero harshly expressed opinions, and zero assertions that aren’t grounded on rock solid scholarship.
Indeed, the book is a strictly factual narrative based on hundreds of published sources ranging from academic papers to standard works of medical history to documents published by U.S. federal agencies. The longest chapter in the book recounts Dr. McCullough’s U.S. Senate testimony on November 19, 2020.
This is a developing story about a gross infringement of the freedom of speech that is enshrined in the First Amendment of the U.S Constitution. Coincidentally, tomorrow (October 10) I have been invited to address the Republican Women of Greater North Texas about the critical importance of maintaining free speech for the maintenance our Constitutional Republic. I can now speak from very personal experience.
I would like to conclude by stating that I believe this decision is almost certainly the result of outside pressure being brought to bear on Amazon—the sort of outside pressure from the U.S. Executive Branch that was revealed in discovery in Missouri v. Biden.
At companies like Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Amazon, the upper management levels had always included veterans of the national security establishment. But with the new alliance between U.S. national security and social media, the former spooks and intelligence agency officials grew into a dominant bloc inside those companies; what had been a career ladder by which people stepped up from their government experience to reach private tech-sector jobs turned into an ouroboros that molded the two together.
I strongly suspect that the banning of our book from Amazon has the fingerprints of Biden administration or intelligence agency goons all over it.
For those who would still like to purchase our book, please visit our website by clicking on the image below.
Malaysia’s former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad has censured Western states and their media outlets for their hypocrisy toward the recent Palestinian operation against Israel.
In a Monday post on X, formerly known as Twitter, Mahathir said the narrative run by certain Western states was far from truth given the “seven decades” of atrocities by Israel against the Palestinians.
“With that narrative, they stoked fear in the Western community, claiming that it is an attack on democracy and peace-loving people and that the United States in particular felt justified to extend military support to Israel to retaliate against Palestinians attacks.”
“Instead of addressing the conflict for what it actually is, they chose to continue with their deceptive narrative that it is an attack on Israel by terrorists,” Mahathir said.
“They are outright lies which have been perpetuated unashamedly by Western leaders and their media.”
“The truth is actually very simple, the Israelis had been committing war crimes, massacres, genocide and unthinkable atrocities against the Palestinians.”
“These are not one-off acts but rather systematically conducted without respite throughout the seven decades.”
‘West an active partner to Israeli apartheid, genocide’
Mahathir said Washington and its Western allies have been active partners to Israeli crimes against the Palestinians.
“The Western powers and the US are party to apartheid, genocide and crimes against humanity for as long as they support the heinous Israeli regime.”
The former Malaysian prime minister said the Western camp remains silent when Israeli settlers forcefully seize Palestinian land and farms across the occupied territories.
“The Palestinians are chased out of their land and any attempt to seek some form of restitution from the Israeli authorities are met with violence backed most times by the Israeli forces.”
“The Palestinians, pushed to the corner, while Gaza was turned into an open-air prison, attempted sporadic retaliations, which in turn were met with the full force of the IDF with weapons supplied by superpowers in particular the US,” Mahathir said, referring to the Israeli military.
“This episode is not any different from previous retaliations except that probably this time around they are more focused with a bit more assistance externally.”
Mahathir said peace will not be achievable until the Palestinians are granted full rights. “With that, any attempt towards finding a just and fair solution for the Palestinians becomes an exercise in futility.”
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has condemned Israel’s ongoing attacks on the people in Palestine. The OIC says the principal cause of the latest bloody conflict is the regime’s disregard for the legitimate rights of the Palestinians.
Israel has launched deadly airstrikes on the besieged Gaza Strip.
The bombardment came after the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas began a multi-pronged operation from Gaza into the occupied territories in response to weeks of violence against the Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and the continued presence of Israeli extremists in the al-Aqsa Mosque.
“We know next to nothing about the vast majority of compounds in our diet … ‘Our understanding of how diet affects health is limited to 150 key nutritional components,’ says Albert-László Barabási at Harvard Medical School, who coined the term nutritional dark matter.
“‘But these represent only a small fraction of the biochemicals present in our food’ … The idea that food is a rich and complex mix of biochemicals is hardly news.
“Even the well-known macronutrients — proteins, carbohydrates and fats — are hugely diverse. There’s also a vast supporting cast of micronutrients: minerals, vitamins and other biochemicals, many of which are only present in minuscule quantities, but which can still have profound health effects.”
As noted by New Scientist : “With the USDA as your guide, 99.5% of the components in food are a mystery,” and as noted by Barabási, “It would be foolish to dismiss 99.5% of the compounds we eat as unimportant … We will not really understand how we get sick if we don’t solve this puzzle.”
Searching for nutritional ‘dark matter’
Disturbed by the information gap, an international team of researchers started working on a more comprehensive database a decade ago called FooDB, which as of 2020 contained information on some 70,000 nutritional compounds.
Yet even this database still has a long way to go. An estimated 85% of the nutritional components listed remain unquantified, meaning they know a food contains a particular component, but they don’t know how much.
The health implications of most compounds also remain largely unknown.
New Scientist notes:
“This is also true of individual micronutrients. ‘Consider beta-carotene,’ says Barabási. ‘It tends to be positively associated with heart disease, according to epidemiological studies, but studies adding beta-carotene to the diet do not show health benefits. One potential reason is that beta-carotene never comes alone in plants; about 400 molecules are always present with it. So epidemiology may be detecting the health implications of some other molecule.’
“Another probable cause is the effect of the microbiome on dark nutrients, says [FooDB founder David] Wishart. ‘Most dark nutrients are chemically transformed by your gut bacteria.’
“That’s probably why studies on the benefits of different foods give relatively ambiguous results. We don’t properly control for the variation in gut microflora, or our innate metabolism, which means different people get different doses of metabolites from their food.”
Processed foods are an even greater mystery
The reason I started with that background is because we know even less about the constituents of processed foods and synthetic foods that ignorantly claim to be “equivalents” to whole foods, such as “animal-free meats” or “animal-free milk.”
Food processing alone will often alter the composition of bioactive molecules in a food and hence the food’s impact on health, but today, processed foods also contain a wide array of synthetic chemicals that, prior to the modern era, were never part of the human diet.
As such, they pose incredible risks to long-term health and well-being. Processed foods may also have intergenerational effects.
In recent years, the idea that we can simply replace whole foods with synthetic, genetically modified or lab-grown alternatives that are wholly equivalent to the original food has taken root. In reality, that’s simply impossible.
How can scientists create equivalence when they don’t even know what 85% or more of the whole food they’re trying to replicate consists of?
Common sense will tell you they can’t. It might look, smell and even taste similar, but the micronutrient composition will be entirely different, and as a result, the health effects will be incomparable as well.
Animal-free equivalence is a PR fraud
Take cultured meat, for example. It’s said to be equivalent to real animal meat because it’s grown from animal cells. The cells are then grown in a nutrient solution inside a bioreactor until they become a meat-like slab.
Similarly, Bored Cow animal-free milk is a dairy alternative made with whey protein obtained through a fermentation process, plant-based fats (in lieu of milk fats), citrus fiber (for creaminess) and added vitamins and minerals.
Defenders of cultured meat insist that this product is not “fake meat” but “actual meat,” the only difference is that no animal had to be slaughtered to create it.
Cultured meat and other synthetic foods are also said to be more environmentally friendly. But nothing could be further from the truth.
Their impact is far more akin to that of the pharmaceutical industry than the food industry.
Based on this assessment, each kilo of cultured meat produces anywhere from 542 pounds (246 kilos) to 3,325 pounds (1,508 kg) of carbon dioxide emissions, four to 25 times greater than that of conventional beef.
And this information is only provided to refute those who believe the global warming fallacy.
As noted by the authors, investors have poured billions of dollars into the animal cell-based meat sector based on the theory that cultured meat is more environmentally friendly than beef.
However, according to these researchers, that hype is based on flawed analyses of carbon emissions.
A paper published in the April issue of Animal Frontiers also warned that there are several implications of cell-based meat that need to be considered but aren’t, including the fact that cultured products are not nutritionally equivalent to the meats they’re intended to replace.
The claim that no animals are killed in the process is also false. At present, most cultured or cell-based meats are created by growing animal cells in a solution of fetal bovine serum, which is made from the blood of unborn calves.
In short, pregnant cows are slaughtered to drain the unborn fetus of its blood.
Is it safe to eat tumors?
There are also many unanswered questions surrounding safety. For example, to get the cell cultures to grow, some companies are using immortalized cells, which technically speaking are precancerous and/or fully cancerous.
The reason for using immortalized cells is that normally behaving cells cannot divide forever. Most cells will only multiply a few dozen times before they become senescent (old) and die.
This won’t work when your intention is to grow thousands of pounds of tissue from a small number of cells, hence they use immortalized cells that have no off switch for their replication and can divide indefinitely.
Meat substitutes cultured in this way could therefore be thought of as tumors, seeing how the flesh is entirely made up of precancerous or cancerous cells. Is it safe to eat tumors? We don’t know.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology biologist Robert Weinberg, Ph.D., has proposed that humans can’t get cancer from these cells because they’re not human cells and therefore cannot replicate inside your body.
However, there’s no long-term research to back this theory.
Dietary headaches to come
It’s also important to realize that the nutritional composition and safety of synthetic foods will vary depending on the brand.
When you’re dealing with beef, for example, the meat from one cow will be relatively identical to that of any other cow (one major exception being the way they’re raised and fed).
One wild-caught salmon is comparable to any other wild-caught salmon and each russet potato is more or less identical to every other russet potato.
However since each synthetic food brand uses proprietary ingredients and processes, no two will have identical composition or safety, so even if one is eventually proven safe and nutritious, those results cannot be applied to any other brand.
This variance has the potential to create major problems in the future when all sorts of foods have been replaced with synthetic non-equivalents.
How do you determine which cultured beef, chicken or salmon brand might be best for you? How will you devise a sensible diet plan when every food comes in myriad variations of varying composition and safety?
Synthetic foods pose unique food-safety hazards
Many synthetic food proponents claim lab-created food will bypass a host of food-safety problems, but the converse is far more likely to be true.
Sure, beef, for example, can be contaminated during processing, packaging, transport or storage, or during the cooking process.
But in cultured meat, every ingredient and processing step brings with it the potential of contamination and any of the hundreds of ingredients could have toxic effects, alone or in synergy.
Indeed, an in-depth analysis of the available evidence by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and a World Health Organization expert panel, published in May, concluded there are at least 53 potential health hazards associated with lab-grown meat.
Among them are the possibility of contamination with heavy metals, microplastics, nanoplastics and chemicals, allergenic additives, toxic components, antibiotics and prions.
What’s more, some of the ingredients that go into synthetic biology like cultured meat are regulated as “non-detectable manufacturing aids,” and you won’t even know what they are. Israeli startup Profuse Technology, for example, has developed a growth media supplement that massively encourages protein growth.
As reported by Food Navigator Europe in an article titled, “Cultivated Meat ‘Breakthrough’: Media Supplement Achieves Full Muscle Maturation on Scaffold Within 48 Hours,” the supplement reduces the time to grow filets and steaks by 80% and augments the protein in the final product by a factor of five.
An unsustainable model
The cultured meat process also produces toxic biowaste — a problem that doesn’t exist in conventional agriculture and food processing. In the video above, Alan Lewis, vice president of government affairs for Natural Grocers, reviews what goes into the making of synthetic biology.
The starting ingredients are typically cheap sugars and fats derived from genetically engineered corn and soy, grown in environmentally destructive monocultures with loads of herbicides, pesticides and synthetic fertilizers.
As a result, they’re loaded with chemical residues. Hundreds of other ingredients may then be added to the ferment to produce the desired end product, such as a certain protein, color, flavor or scent.
The most often used microorganism in the fermentation process is E. coli which has been gene-edited to produce the desired compound through its digestive process.
The microorganism must also be antibiotic-resistant since it needs to survive the antibiotics used to kill off other undesirable organisms in the vat.
As a result, antibiotic-resistant organisms also become integrated into the final product, and the types of foodborne illness that might be caused by gene-edited antibiotic-resistant E. coli and its metabolites are anyone’s guess.
In addition to the desired target metabolite, these gene-edited organisms may also spit out non-target metabolites with unknown environmental consequences and health effects. But that’s not all. Once the target organisms are extracted, what’s left over is hazardous biowaste.
While traditional fermentation processes, such as the making of beer, produce waste products that are edible by animals, compostable and pose no biohazard, the biowaste from these synthetic biology ferments must first be deactivated and then must be securely disposed of. It cannot go into a landfill.
Protect your health by avoiding ‘frankenfoods’
Making food that requires genetically modified organisms inputs and produces more CO2 than conventional farming and hazardous biowaste to boot is hardly a sustainable model.
But then again, synthetic biology and processed foods are not being pushed out of true concern for sustainability.
If that was the goal, everyone would be looking at regenerative agriculture where every part of the system supports and sustains other parts, thereby eliminating the need for chemical inputs, radically reducing water needs while optimizing yields.
No, synthetic biology is pursued because it is a formidable control mechanism. Those who own all the synthetic food production will control the world in a very literal sense. To learn more about this plot for control, see “The Fake ‘Food as Medicine’ Agenda.”
In short, the globalists already own and control most of the carbohydrates grown in the world today. By replacing real animal foods with patented lab-made protein alternatives, they’ll have unprecedented power to control the world’s population.
It’ll also grant them greater control over people’s health. It’s already known that the consumption of ultra-processed food contributes to disease, and the benefactor of ill health is Big Pharma.
The processed food industry has spent many decades driving chronic illness that is then treated with drugs rather than a better diet. Synthetic foods will likely be an even bigger driver or chronic ill health and early death.
The fact is, fake meat and dairy cannot replace the complex mix of nutrients found in grass-fed beef and dairy, and it’s likely that consuming ultra-processed meat and milk alternatives may lead to many of the same health issues that are caused by a processed food diet.
So, if you want to really protect your health and the environment, skip pseudo foods that require patents and stick to those found in nature instead.
The New Zealand Ministry of Health granted vaccine exemptions to hundreds among its key staff whilst hypocritically insisting that the public be vaccinated.
An Official Information Act (OIA) request to the ministry dated August 2, 2023 asked the following question:
‘According to the legislation at the time in 2021, there were operational exemptions available for those who were not getting vaccinated against Covid-19. How many requests were received? How many were approved by the ministry?’
Matt Hannant, Interim Director, Prevention, National Public Health Service, replied:
‘From 13 November 2021 to 26 September 2022, a total of 478 applications for Significant Service Disruption exemption (SSD) were received. 103 applications were granted, covering approximately 11,005 workers. Please note that it is not possible to provide the exact number of workers that were covered by SSDs. This is because it was possible for an organisation to submit an application to cover more than one worker.’
So exactly how many Ministry of Health staff and associated contractors benefited from the vaccine exemptions? I have made inquiries and found some staff prepared to leak information. One source has told me that 95 consultants in the Dunedin region alone benefited from vaccine exemptions. Another source has pointed to a group of doctors working in Northland who arranged among themselves to remain unvaccinated. The total appears to run to hundreds and possibly more.
It seems that those granted exemptions were restrained by gagging orders so that they could not tell anyone that they had been granted exemptions: it was a secretive process that the Ministry of Health was anxious to hide from the public.
In any case, any doctor advising a patient that mRNA Covid vaccination might be risky faced disciplinary action, and many were suspended.
So medical staff allowed themselves to be manipulated into a position whereby, if they were unvaccinated themselves, they were still required to advise their patients to vaccinate, a recipe for widespread hypocrisy in the health service.
This process was certainly approved by Dr Ashley Bloomfield (then chief executive of the Ministry of Health) who gained considerable notoriety by refusing vaccine exemptions to those among the public severely injured by their first jab, insisting that they continue with a vaccination schedule. Given Dr Bloomfield’s close working relationship with Jacinda Ardern and Chris Hipkins (then Health Minister, now Prime Minister) it is quite likely that they approved it. The opposition leaders were also likely kept in the loop.
The criteria for granting exemptions apparently entailed an assessment concerning how vital staff were to the working of the health service. In other words, senior figures and those holding key surgical positions could insist that they remain unvaccinated and continue to be allowed to work. Meanwhile unvaccinated nurses, for example, could not gain exemptions and lost their positions.
If senior staff who wished to remain unvaccinated had spoken out publicly, the issue of Covid vaccine safety might have been given a public airing. Instead the Ministry of Health and the government kept a lid on all and any discussion. It did so through liaison with mainstream and social media outlets to censor content and through tight control of staff.
Senior medical staff who chose to remain unvaccinated may have been aware of a 2019 paper in Frontiers in Oncology journal entitled Gene Therapy Leaves a Vicious Cycle which reported:
‘Gene therapy has been caught in a vicious cycle for nearly two decades owing to immune response, insertional mutagenesis, viral tropism, off-target activity, unwanted clinical outcomes (ranging from illness to death of participants in clinical trials), and patchy regulations.’
As someone who has analysed social data over the last fifty years, I do sympathise with the doctors who opted for caution. That would be a normal reaction to new medications. It takes years to assess safety. So how unsafe is the mRNA Covid vaccine? Extremely unsafe, as shown by the 2023 excess death data across OECD nations.
The most highly Covid vaccinated nations in the OECD are in order Portugal, Chile, Canada, Iceland, New Zealand, Spain and Australia. Their average percentage of the population vaccinated is 91 per cent. Their average rate of excess deaths so far in 2023 is 12 per cent above the five-year historical average.
The least Covid vaccinated nations in the OECD are Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Poland, Estonia, Czech Republic, Hungary and Switzerland. Their average percentage of the population vaccinated is just 63 per cent. Their average rate of excess deaths so far in 2023 is 0 per cent compared to the five-year historical average. In other words, they have averaged a normal death rate.
Anyone who suggests that the death rate among the unvaccinated is higher than the vaccinated is running against the tide of evidence. This view doesn’t fit with the international data.
The standard way to resolve this inconsistency would be to refer to prospective studies which assemble two matched groups, vaccinate one group and leave the other unvaccinated and measure what happens over a significantly long period. In the normal course of vaccine approval this would have been done for around ten years prior to approval. No one has done this.
In the Pfizer trial the unvaccinated control group were all vaccinated after a few months, ensuring that long-term comparative outcomes are unavailable. In any case, during those few months more people died in the vaccine group than the unvaccinated control group. There are also many studies differentiating the outcomes of the vaccinated and unvaccinated that we have reported including journal citations.
How concerning is the excess death problem? According to the OECD there were 1.2 million excess deaths in 2022 among their member countries, with a combined population of 1.2 billion: one excess death in every 1,000 people.
Now it is becoming accepted that both Covid and Covid vaccination began their lives in a biotech lab, it doesn’t seem to much matter what proportion of excess deaths are due to Covid and what to Covid vaccination, but for the record in 2022 there were approximately 200,000 deaths ‘with Covid’ in the OECD. In summary, OECD excess deaths not attributable to Covid were one million in 2022 alone. This probably extends to a few millions worldwide, about the same as the annual deaths during World War one.
You can see why it is so important for those involved in creating Covid policy and enforcing mandates to make sure that everyone continues to believe that more unvaccinated die than vaccinated because otherwise their narrative that Covid policy is saving millions of lives completely falls apart.
In this light we can now assess the motivations of those still poking fun at the vaccine injured or accusing the ‘vaccine hesitant’ of seeking to undermine the government. For example the New Zealand Disinformation Project, funded by the Prime Minister’s Office, in common with many politicians, have described vaccine injury as a conspiracy theory. They are trying to hide their own mistakes which have undermined the health of the nation.
For the last couple of years the Hatchard Report has had a simple lament: ‘No one in authority seems prepared to ask why excess deaths are occurring at an unprecedented rate’. Deaths are in fact a very stable part of life. In a normal year there are no excess deaths. Insurance actuaries calculate how many of us will die and when with great accuracy, and set life insurance premiums accordingly. Right now, actuaries must be having sleepless nights because something has gone terribly wrong that has not happened at any other time during the last 100 years outside war and conflict zones: a great many people are falling ill and dying when they should be alive and well.
The Ministry of Health has been hiding these disturbing facts while quietly and hypocritically acknowledging their staff have a right to avoid these risks. They have not just gaslighted the public, they have recklessly put the public’s lives at great risk. This has broken families and communities, pitting one against another. It has caused tragedies affecting families across the nation, while the Ministry of Health and the government are going through tortuous and secret processes in order to conceal what is happening. Moreover they have plans to continue to roll out more experimental vaccines.
Russia considers NATO’s incursion into Ukraine to be an existential threat, and NATO has openly stated its intention to make Ukraine a member state after the war. Without a political settlement that restores Ukraine’s neutrality, Russia will therefore likely annex the strategic territories it cannot accept ending up under NATO control and then turn what remains of Ukraine into a dysfunctional rump state. As the war is being lost, the rational policy for the Europeans would therefore be to offer an agreement based on ending NATO’s eastward expansion to save Ukrainian lives, territory and the nation itself. Yet, no European leader has been able to even suggest such a solution publicly. Why? … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.