How Long Did Americans Support America’s Longest War?
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | February 21, 2023
In an op-ed in today’s Los Angeles Times, Alexander J. Moytyl, a professor of political science at Rutgers, asks, “How long will Russians tolerate Putin’s costly war?” After pointing out the many negative consequences of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Moytyl makes a pointed observation: “And yet, almost a year after the invasion of Ukraine, Russians continue to support strongman Putin and the war.” Moytyl just cannot understand how this can be.
Well, maybe if we look inward, which Moytyl certainly does not do in his op-ed, we can figure out the answer.
Let’s consider, for example, the U.S. government’s wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. There were lots of negative aspects of those two wars, beginning with the fact the U.S. invasions of both countries were illegal, both under International law and U.S. law.
It is undisputed that neither Afghanistan nor Iraq ever attacked the United States. That means that the U.S. was the aggressor in both wars.
Yes, I know, defenders of the Afghanistan invasion point to the fact that Osama bin Laden, who was accused of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks, was supposedly living in Afghanistan. Nonetheless, under International law, the U.S. had no legitimate legal authority to invade Afghanistan to arrest or kill him.
It is also undisputed that there was no extradition treaty between Afghanistan and the United States. Therefore, when President Bush demanded that the Afghan government extradite bin Laden to the U.S., under international law Afghanistan had the legitimate authority to say no. Under international law, Bush had no legitimate authority to invade the country simply because Afghanistan rejected his unconditional extradition demand.
It is also undisputed that neither the Iraqi people nor the Iraqi government had any connection to the 9/11 attacks. The U.S. invasion of that country was a pure war of aggression, one based on the flagrant and fraudulent pretense of uncovering non-existent “weapons of mass destruction.”
It is also undisputed that there was no declaration of war issued by Congress against either Afghanistan or Iraq, as required by the U.S. Constitution. That made both invasions illegal under our form of constitutional government.
It is impossible to know exactly how many people in Afghanistan and Iraq were tortured, injured, or killed by U.S. forces in those two wars of aggression. That’s because, early on, the Pentagon announced that it would not keep track of enemy dead. That’s because the lives of Afghans and Iraqis didn’t count.
However, according to the Watson Institute at Brown University, “Nearly 20 years after the United States’ invasion of Afghanistan, the cost of its global war on terror stands at $8 trillion and 900,000 deaths.”
That is a lot of money. And that is a lot of dead people. I would estimate that 99 percent of those dead people had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.
Yet, many Americans supported their government throughout all this mayhem, just as the Russian people are standing with their government during its current mayhem. In fact, I remember church ministers all across the United States beseeching their congregations for years to “support the troops, especially those in harm’s way in Afghanistan and Iraq.” I also recall how we were all encouraged to “thank the troops for their service” whenever we saw them in uniform. I also remember all those critical things that were said against those of us who opposed these wars of aggression and resulting occupations.
Supporting their government in time of war is what most citizens do in every nation, including Russia, the United States, and Germany. Most citizens are forced into the state’s educational system at a very young age, where their minds are molded to blindly come to the support of their regime during wartime. Children are inculcated with mindsets of deference to authority and blind trust in their political, military, and intelligence officials. That mindset continues well into adulthood. In the run-up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, I recall many people, including commentators in the mainstream press, exclaiming, “We need to trust our officials. They have access to information that we don’t have.”
So, what befuddles me is why Alexander J. Moytyl is befuddled by the overwhelming support by Russian citizens of their regime during wartime. If American citizens blindly support their regime during wartime, why would anyone expect that Russian citizens would respond differently?
Biden’s Kiev trip ‘a slap in the face’ to America – US Congressman
RT | February 21, 2023
US President Joe Biden’s trip to Ukraine was “a slap in the face to every American,” Republican Rep. Paul Gosar declared on Monday. Already under fire over the hundreds of billions of dollars he’s handed Kiev, Biden is now being savaged by Republicans for his handling of a disastrous chemical accident on US soil.
Biden made an unannounced visit to Kiev on Monday, where he told Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky that his administration was readying a $500 million military aid package for his forces. Biden’s administration has handed Zelensky almost $30 billion in military aid since last February, and has set aside more than $110 billion for continued military and economic assistance to Ukraine.
“Joe Biden visiting Ukraine is a slap in the face to every American, especially the people of East Palestine, Ohio,” Gosar tweeted. “Ukraine is not our friend, and Russia is not our enemy.”
Gosar has bitterly opposed Biden’s bankrolling of Ukraine, and sponsored a resolution earlier this month that would halt US aid to Kiev. The resolution, signed by 11 members of the anti-interventionist ‘Freedom Caucus’, calls on Russia and Ukraine to reach a peace agreement.
Republicans from the Freedom Caucus and beyond have hammered Biden for his handling of the East Palestine chemical spill. A train carrying vinyl chloride and other hazardous chemicals derailed in this small Ohio town earlier this month, and a controlled burn of these substances blanketed the town in a cloud of black smoke.

Biden has not visited East Palestine, nor has he approved a disaster declaration. Biden’s transportation secretary blamed the derailment on former President Donald Trump, and although Biden has sent Environmental Protection Agency and Health and Human Services officials to the location to declare it safe, residents have complained of alarming physical symptoms as well as dead pets, livestock and fish.
“That was the biggest slap in the face,” East Palestine Mayor Trent Conway said of Biden’s trip to Kiev. “That tells you right now he doesn’t care about us. He can send every agency he wants to, but I found out this morning that he was in Ukraine giving millions of dollars away to people over there and not to us…on President’s Day in our country, so I’m furious,” he told Fox News.
Moldova acts in a destabilizing way in Transnistria
By Lucas Leiroz | February 21, 2023
Moldova insists on the threat and blackmail strategy against Transnistria. The country’s new head of government has called on Russian troops to withdraw from the autonomous republic in order for the region to be “demilitarized”. In fact, the Western-backed Moldovan tactic of trying to intimidate the Transnistrian people will only lead to more conflict and insecurity, creating a scenario of instability in the face of which Moscow will not remain inert.
The new Prime Minister of Moldova, Dorin Recean, said on February 20 that Transnistria must be demilitarized, and the Russian troops must be expelled from there. The statement made clear the position of the new head of the Moldovan government, eliminating any doubts about the possibility of the emergence of more peaceful tendencies towards Russia in Chisinau with the recent change in the team of ministers. The country seems increasingly willing to cooperate with the West to advance anti-Russian political projects in the region.
According to Recean, Moldova is currently in a very vulnerable security situation, the solution of which depends in the first place on the immediate demilitarization of the “left bank of the Dniester”. The prime minister made it clear that even economic and social issues should only be discussed after demilitarization is achieved. In this sense, the withdrawal of Russian forces from Transnistria is the highest priority of the Moldovan government.
“[There are] real threats of escalation of either military or hybrid operations [in Moldova] (…) We must calibrate our defenses so that it would be tough for any aggressor to attack us (…) The left bank of the Dniester (Transnistria) should be demilitarized by evacuating Russian troops and demilitarizing local residents (…) We must achieve one fundamental thing – demilitarization. Everything else follows after that, and the economic and social integration of our citizens who are there is very important, but in the first place is demilitarization. It depends on many things, but at some point, it will be decided”, he said.
As expected, the reaction of the Russian and Transnistrian authorities was immediate, with several criticisms against the Moldovan position. Kremlin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov commented on the topic saying that “Moldova is slipping into anti-Russian hysteria”. In the same vein, Transnistria’s Foreign Minister Vitaly Ignatyev said: “It (the Moldovan side) is not ready for dialogue (…) In reality, Chisinau is sparing no effort to destroy the negotiating structures we have and to create new problems to dodge the implementation of its liabilities”.
In fact, it is curious to analyze what the Moldovan government understands by “demilitarization”. The withdrawal of Russian forces from Transnistria would not mean the mere “demilitarization” of the region, but its weakening, thus enabling Chisinau to intervene and resolve the issue through force and hostility. At no time did the Moldovan government show interest in advancing the negotiations towards a peaceful solution – it only emphasizes the Transnistrian issue as a national security matter, which makes it seem that the demand for the Russians to leave has the objective of facilitating a possible armed intervention in the region.
The presence of Russian peacekeepers in Transnistria is not any kind of occupation. On the contrary, the permanence of the forces is supported by the vast majority of the local population, who see in the Russian military a guarantee of protection against the constant threats of aggression by the central government. Politically, Moscow has respected Moldovan sovereignty, recognizing Transnistria as an autonomous region, with its right to self-administration, in coexistence with the Moldovan government. However, for Chisinau, there seems to be no other possible end to the conflict than an eventual military, violent recapture of the area.
Considering that Moldova has acted over the years as a proxy for NATO, given its alignment with the countries of the western alliance, mainly Romania, for Moscow it is absolutely unacceptable to allow Moldovan military growth in the region, as this would jeopardize not only the security of the Transnistrian people, but would also threaten Russia itself, since the Russian strategic environment would be vulnerable in the face of yet another focus of conflict.
Therefore, threat and blackmail really do not seem like good tactics for the Moldovan government to deal with the Transnistrian issue. The only interesting way to resolve the dispute is through peace negotiations that guarantee Transnistria’s right to political autonomy. Demanding that the Russians leave the region is meaningless, as obviously Moscow cannot remain inert while another threat of war arises within its strategic environment. In fact, either Chisinau adheres to diplomacy or the militarization of Transnistria will continue.
Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.
Putin Announces Suspension of New START Treaty, Orders New Strategic Systems Be Put on Combat Duty
Sputnik – 21.02.2023
Russia will be suspending its participation in the New Strategic Arms Reduction (New START) Treaty, President Vladimir Putin has announced.
The Russian president made the announcement during the course of a major annual address to lawmakers on Tuesday that focused on the security crisis in Ukraine and the broader global tensions between the West and Russia.
“They [the West] seek to inflict a strategic defeat on us and to creep onto our nuclear sites. In connection with this, I am forced to announce today that Russia is suspending its participation in the New START Treaty. I repeat – not exiting from the treaty, but suspending its participation,” Putin said, speaking to gathered lawmakers in Moscow during his speech to the Federal Assembly.
Putin explained that “at the start of February, the North Atlantic Alliance made a statement factually demanding that Russia ‘return to the implementation of the strategic offensive arms treaty,’ including the admission of inspections to our nuclear and defense facilities.”
“I don’t even know what to call this – some kind of theater of the absurd. We know that the West is involved directly in attempts of the Kiev regime to strike the bases of our strategic aviation,” Putin said, pointing to recent Ukrainian drone attacks on Russia’s Engels Air Base, home to part of the airborne contingent of Russia’s nuclear triad.
The drones used in these attacks were “equipped and modernized with the assistance of NATO specialists,” Putin said. “And now they want to inspect our defense facilities. In the current conditions and today’s confrontation, this simply sounds like some kind of nonsense.”
“A week ago, I signed a decree putting new ground-based strategic weapons systems on combat duty. Are they going to stick their nose in there too?” Putin asked.
The Russian president suggested that NATO’s collective statement essentially amounted to an application to join the New START Treaty, and said Moscow would only welcome such a move.
“We agree, please go ahead. Furthermore, we think that such a formulation of the issue is long overdue. After all, NATO contains not just one nuclear power – the USA. Britain and France also have nuclear arsenals, which are being developed and improved, and which are also directed against us, against Russia,” Putin said.
Slamming the US and NATO over the “hypocrisy” of their demands, Putin recalled how the Western bloc has attempted to assure Moscow that “there is no connection between issues related to strategic offensive arms and, say, the conflict in Ukraine, or other hostile actions against our country,” while at the same time seeking to “defeat” Russia militarily.
“This is either the height of hypocrisy and cynicism, or the height of stupidity. You can’t call them idiots, they are not stupid people: they want to inflict a strategic defeat on us,” the president said.
What is New START and Why Is It Important?
The New START Treaty is the last major strategic arms limitation agreement between the nuclear superpowers – Russia and the United States. The agreement, drafted in 2009 and signed by then-Russian and US Presidents Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama in Prague, Czech Republic in 2010, limits the two countries’ deployed arsenals of strategic weapons and nuke stockpiles, and features a series of measures aimed at increased transparency and trust, including the broadcast of telemetry data, limits to missile testing activities, and the exchange of other information.
The Trump administration threatened to let the clock run out on New START in late 2020 after withdrawing from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty – a late Cold War-era pact which eliminated Soviet and US ground-based nuclear missiles in the 500-5,500 km range, in 2019. The Biden administration agreed to renew New START for five years in early 2021. Pentagon planners have repeatedly criticized the strategic treaty for its failure to account for the nuclear arsenal of China. Beijing has said that it would be happy to sign a nuclear agreement with Washington if the US reduced the size of its nuclear arsenal to China’s level.
The post-Cold War strategic security order began to be dismantled in late 2001, when the George W. Bush administration announced that it would scrap the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty – a landmark 1972 agreement designed to limit anti-missile defenses and thus reduce the danger of a global nuclear war. Washington quit the treaty despite proposals by Moscow at the time to establish a joint missile defense system in the Caucasus to eliminate any threats posed to the US or Europe.
‘US, Not China, Pouring Weapons Into Ukraine’, Says Chinese Foreign Ministry
By Wyatt Reed – Sputnik – 21.02.2023
With the US accusing China of looking into selling weapons to the Russian military, China’s foreign ministry says that – having pumped tens of billions in heavy weapons to Ukrainian militants – Washington is “not qualified” to lecture Beijing about international arms trafficking.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry has struck back at Washington for suggesting China is evaluating the possibility of supplying Russia with weapons, saying Monday that it’s the American government pumping weapons into the conflict zone – not China’s.
“It is the US, not China, that has been consistently pouring weapons into the battlefield,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said in a press briefing Monday.
Over the weekend, several high-level US officials began to suggest they had reason to believe that China was considering sending military supplies to Moscow.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken accused China on Saturday of “considering providing lethal support to Russia” in what he labeled Moscow’s “aggression against Ukraine.” He said that if his allegation turned out to be true, it “would have serious consequences in our relationship” with China.
Biden’s ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, echoed the threat Sunday, telling CNN that China would be crossing a “red line” if it decided to provide Russia with lethal aid.
But Wang said Monday that the US is “not qualified” to issue such ultimatums. He told reporters that the rest of the world knows who’s really to blame for the hostilities in Ukraine, and called on the Biden administration to publicly admit that it’s fanned the flames of the ongoing conflict.
“The international community is fully aware who is calling for dialogue and striving for peace, and who is fanning the flames and stoking confrontation,” Wang said.
Unlike Washington, he noted that Beijing has been “supporting talks for peace” since the beginning of the Ukraine conflict, adding “we urge the US side to seriously reflect on the role it has played, do something to actually help de-escalate the situation and promote peace talks, and stop deflecting the blame and spreading disinformation.”
The back-and-forth comes after Wang Yi, China’s highest ranked diplomat, defended his country’s posture towards Russian military operations before an audience of European officials during Saturday’s Munich Security Conference.
“We do not add fuel to the fire, and we’re against reaping benefits from this crisis,” Wang said.
“Some forces might not want to see peace talks materialize,” Wang noted, in what was widely viewed as a thinly-veiled jab at the US government.
“They don’t care about the life and death of Ukrainians, nor the harm on Europe,” Wang suggested, adding “they might have strategic goals larger than Ukraine itself.”
Munich Conference signals Western isolation, advent of multipolarity
By Drago Bosnic | February 20, 2023
Although it has been only 16 years since President Putin’s historical speech at the 2007 Munich Conference, that event now seems like a distant past of a long-lost world. Back then, Russia was warning the political West that further NATO aggression would inevitably lead to the revival of the Cold War.
However, Washington DC and Brussels seem to have wanted exactly that. The political West has tried to present the 2023 Munich Security Conference as some sort of a groundbreaking global event that “sent a strong signal” and showed “just how isolated” Russia is. However, nothing could be further from the truth, given the comments of some of the most prominent participants, including NATO and EU member states.
For instance, during a Saturday meeting with US State Secretary Anthony Blinken, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi stated that Beijing finds Washington DC’s attempts to threaten Sino-Russian relations completely unacceptable, emphasizing that the relationship between the two superpowers is their sovereign right and that it is not aimed against any third party.
“We will never accept the instructions of the United States and even threats to put pressure on Russian-Chinese relations,” Wang was quoted as saying in a statement published on Sunday by the Chinese Foreign Ministry. “The Sino-Russian relations of comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation are based on non-alignment, non-confrontation and non-targeting against third parties. They are within the framework of the sovereignty of two independent states,” he added.
The comments were made in response to US accusations that China will “increase its support for Russia”. Wang also warned his American counterpart against the continued melodramatic reaction to the “balloon controversy”, which the US has been (ab)using lately to ensure detente between the two countries is virtually impossible. Beijing said that American high-altitude balloons have illegally entered China’s airspace many times over the last several decades, but the government chose not to cause panic and simply used existing diplomatic channels to communicate with their US counterparts.
“If the US continues to use this as an excuse, to promote further escalation and aggravate the situation, then China will definitely go to the very end. All the consequences of this will be borne by the American side,” Wang said.
China also called on the US to stop escalating the Ukrainian crisis and start promoting a peaceful settlement. Wang said that “Washington DC should stop adding fuel to the fire”. He noted that China’s position is constructive and called for the negotiation process to continue.
“Being a great power, the United States should contribute to the political settlement of the crisis, and not add fuel to the fire and look for opportunities to extract its own benefits,” Wang was quoted as saying.
Hungary also called for the de-escalation of the crisis and insisted on maintaining economic relations with Russia. During the traditional annual address to his fellow citizens, Prime Minister Viktor Orban stated that “the only way for Hungary to live peacefully is to stay out of the conflict, as it is not our war”.
“We will maintain our economic relations with Russia, and we advise the entire Western world to do the same, because without relations there will be no ceasefire or peace talks,” Orban said.
On the other hand, the European Union is doing exactly the opposite. The bloc’s top diplomat Josep Borrel called Russia “an existential threat” and urged all member states not to continue supporting the Kiev regime, but “help more”. He also insisted that “the EU should start an industrial techno-blitzkrieg to produce more weapons“, effectively nullifying the claim that the bloc was an economic union. Borrel added that member states will spend an additional €70 billion on defense by 2025.
“In the next two years, the EU countries intend to spend an additional €70 billion on defense. France will increase defense spending by 40%, while Poland will double it,” he stated.
Interestingly, India was also targeted. George Soros, a controversial oligarch infamous for providing financial backing for various groups responsible for destabilization and undermining of countries the political West sees as “uncooperative”, stated the following:
“India is an interesting case. It’s a democracy, but its leader Narendra Modi is no democrat. Inciting violence against Muslims was an important factor in his meteoric rise. Modi maintains close relations with both open and closed societies. India is a member of the Quad (which also includes Australia, the US, and Japan), but it buys a lot of Russian oil at a steep discount and makes a lot of money on it. […]
Modi and business tycoon Adani are close allies; their fate is intertwined. Adani Enterprises tried to raise funds in the stock market, but he failed. Adani is accused of stock manipulation and his stock collapsed like a house of cards. Modi is silent on the subject, but he will have to answer questions from foreign investors and in parliament. This will significantly weaken Modi’s stranglehold on India’s federal government and open the door to push for much-needed institutional reforms. I may be naive, but I expect a democratic revival in India.”
In response to the accusations, India’s Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar brushed Soros off and (quite accurately) described him as “old, rich, opinionated and dangerous”. Considering Soros has a history of Nazi collaboration, it can be argued that his attack could even be considered a compliment of sorts for Prime Minister Modi and India as a whole.
In essence, the Munich Conference not only failed to produce the desired results (Russia supposedly isolated), but it even strengthened the multipolar world, as neither India nor China proved malleable in any way, showing their sovereignty is untouched by the political West’s pressure. On the other hand, many Europeans are extremely unhappy by the EU’s militarization. According to varying estimates, the huge crowd of protesters in Munich numbered up to 50,000 people. In conclusion, while there are massive differences between Munich 2007 and Munich 2023, the latest conference is somewhat similar to the 1938 Munich Agreement between Nazi Germany and Western allies. Considering how that ended (along with any other invasion of Russia), the political West’s prospects against Moscow look rather grim, to say the least.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
China Warns US ‘Not to Add Fuel to Fire’ of Ukraine Conflict
Sputnik – 19.02.2023
Beijing has warned Washington against fueling the conflict in Ukraine, where Russia continues its special military operation.
Meeting US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on the sidelines of the 2023 Munich Security Conference on Saturday, head of the Communist Party of China’s Central Foreign Affairs Office Wang Yi stressed that “As a great power, the US should contribute to a political solution to the crisis, not add fuel to the fire and look for opportunities to benefit from it.”
According to Wang, China has adhered to a constructive position in relation to the crisis in Ukraine and supported the negotiating process.
Wang also made it clear that Beijing “will never tolerate US instructions or even threats to put pressure on Russian-Chinese relations.”
He earlier told the Munich Security Conference that China would draft and present a document, in which its position on the Ukraine crisis will be outlined by the end of February.
“On the Ukraine issue, China’s stance boils down to supporting talks for peace. We will put forth a paper on China’s position on the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis and stay firm on the side of peace and dialogue,” he underscored.
For its part, the US State Department said in a press release that during talks with Wang, Blinken “warned about the implications and consequences if China provides material support to Russia or assistance with systemic sanctions evasion.”
This came after a US media outlet quoted unnamed sources as saying that Washington believes that Beijing may be providing non-lethal military assistance to Moscow for use in Ukraine and that the Biden administration is concerned China considers sending lethal aid.
The outlet added that the sources declined to elaborate on the non-lethal military assistance, only claiming that it could include gear for the Russian military’s purported spring offensive, including uniforms or even body armor.
The US and its allies slapped a number of sanction packages against Russia shortly after it launched its special military operation in Ukraine following requests from the Donbass republics to protect them from Kiev’s attacks. Apart from the sanctions, western countries ramped up their military assistance to the Zelensky regime in a move that Moscow warns will add to further prolonging the Ukraine conflict.
Is the EU thanking Israel for stealing Palestinian gas to sell to its members?
By Motasem A Dalloul | MEMO | February 17, 2023
Early this week the European Commissioner for Energy Kadri Simson delivered the opening speech at the Egypt Petroleum Show 2023 Strategic Conference, the largest oil, gas and energy conference and exhibition across Egypt, North Africa and the Mediterranean.
Simson highlighted the EU’s need to diversify its energy sources, pointing out that this became a necessity after the Russian-Ukrainian war. In an attempt to decrease the bloc’s energy imports from Russia, Simson said, it had started to look for new energy sources. Fortunately, the EU found Israel and Egypt.
“The EU is serious about investing in trusted, reliable energy partnerships,” Simson told attendants. “That describes Egypt perfectly.” Referring to the base of their partnership, she said: “In the immediate wake of the crisis a year ago, the very first energy agreement the EU concluded was the Memorandum of Understanding with Egypt and Israel on trade, transport and natural gas cooperation.”
Simson referred to that MoU as a “remarkable political milestone for energy,” stressing that it was “something we are very proud of,” reiterating “how grateful” she is “to both Egypt and Israel, for their cooperation to turn the political vision of mutual cooperation into a reality.”
The European commissioner for energy also made it very clear that “the EU could count on the partnership” with Israel and Egypt due to the “landmark” agreement, which came “at the height of the energy crisis,” stressing “it was central to our efforts to diversify and stabilise the supplies for our citizens.”
But has Simson thought about the source of this energy? How much blood was shed, how many people were forced out of their homes, or how many villages and cities were destroyed in order to get this energy? Has she questioned the human rights situation of the countries which are selling this energy?
The energy which comes from Israel is stolen from Palestinians from whom the Zionists stole land with the help of many countries, mainly the United States and the United Kingdom. Israel was created on bodies of thousands of Palestinians, the ruins of their homes, mosques, schools, villages and cities. Israel has been stealing Palestinian land, resources, history and culture.
Has Simson not seen reports of the daily killing of Palestinians, their detention, the demolition of their homes, stealing of their land, suppression of their freedoms, the night raids, desecration of their holy sites, restriction of their movement, the apartheid policies imposed on them and the deadly blockade hindering life for those living in Gaza over the past 16 years?
Numerous international rights groups, even Israeli rights groups, have investigated Israeli aggression on the Palestinians and found that the Israeli occupation state has committed war crimes against the Palestinians. In February last year, Human Rights Watch issued a report that proved Israeli war crimes against Palestinians.
Gerry Simpson, associated crisis and conflict director at HRW, said: “Israeli forces carried out attacks in Gaza in May [2021] that devastated entire families without any apparent military target nearby.” The UN and many other official bodies have condemned the Israeli occupation and its continuous aggression against Palestinians.
In a statement issued in 2020, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Situation in the Palestinian Territory Occupied since 1967 said: “The Israeli occupation continues to deepen. The number of announced new Israeli settlement units has risen dramatically. Gaza remains besieged and beleaguered.”
Throughout its occupation, Israel has prevented Palestinians from accessing their natural resources, water, land and the offshore gas fields.
The UN Special Rapporteur said in his statement: “Israel has maintained a comprehensive land, air and sea blockade on Gaza … and it controls virtually everything and everybody that enters or leaves the Strip. The blockade has contributed mightily to the civilian suffering in Gaza, which has a collapsed health care system, an aquifer with almost completely undrinkable water, enormous rates of unemployment and poverty, intermittent electrical power and densely packed housing.”
While Simson is praising Israel for selling stolen Palestinian gas to the EU to help it through its energy crisis, Palestinians are languishing under a brutal occupation and suffering in the cold without access to electricity and gas.
There is so much I could highlight about the brutality of the occupation and how deals with it are emboldening it and encouraging the oppression of Palestinians. But here I lay down only the foundations for what Simon has to learn about the deal she is praising.
It is very clear the EU deals with the Russian occupation of Ukraine differently from the Zionist occupation of Palestine; ending trade deals with Moscow while strengthening ties to Tel Aviv. Proof of apartheid practices have done little to change the ‘moral’ EU’s stance on the occupation state because its needs are greater than its will to protect the lives and rights of others.
Soros’ Strong Support Of Lula Discredits The Brazilian Leader’s Multipolar Credentials
By Andrew Korybko | February 17, 2023
Brazilian President Lula was already suspected of recalibrating his worldview a lot closer to the US’ strategic interests ever since the start of his third term in office, including after he condemned Russia in his joint statement with Biden earlier this month, but Soros’ strong support of him removes all doubt. That liberal-globalist Color Revolution mastermind praised Lula during his speech at this year’s Munich Security Conference, which completely discredits the latter’s multipolar credentials once and for all.
In Soros’ own words as shared on his official website:
“There are many other regional powers that can influence the course of history. Brazil stands out. The election of Lula at the end of last year was crucial.
On January 8th there was a coup attempt much like January 6th, 2021, in the US. Lula handled it masterfully and established his authority as president.
Brazil is on the front-line of the conflict between open and closed societies; it is also on the front-line of the fight against climate change. He must protect the rainforest, promote social justice, and reignite economic growth all at the same time.
He will need strong international support because there is no pathway to net zero emissions if he fails.”
Quite tellingly, Lula hasn’t distanced himself from this strong support and almost certainly revels in it.

After all, Soros stands in full solidarity with Biden so disrespecting one would be disrespecting the other, which Lula would never do after traveling to DC to kiss the second’s ring as thanks for fully supporting his re-election. The Brazilian leader is so heavily under his US counterpart’s influence right now that he even tweeted that he’s partnering with Biden partially in “defense of democracy” despite him having been Vice President during Ukraine’s “EuroMaidan” and Brazil’s “Operation Car Wash” regime changes.
Lula seemingly no longer cares that Biden played a role in undemocratically overthrowing him through lawfare-driven Hybrid War means so it therefore follows that he also wouldn’t care about Soros’ Color Revolution spree across the world either. In complete contradiction to everything that Russia has said thus far about the US indefinitely perpetuating its proxy war on it in order to fight until the last Ukrainian, Lula then tweeted that “I think Biden is clear that the war has to stop.”
His political love affair with Soros’ allies goes beyond Biden and extends to fellow faux leftists Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), both of whom met with Lula during his trip to DC. Lula was so enamored with AOC after their meeting that he responded with a heart emoji under her retweet of their pics together, while Bernie predicted that “the United States and Brazil will build a stronger partnership” as result of the Brazilian leader’s re-election.
As can be seen from Soros’ strong support of him, his enthusiastic praise of Biden, as well as the mutual shoulder-rubbing between him and Sanders-AOC, Lula has surrounded himself with the world’s most infamous liberal-globalists. This confirms the prior assessment from last November that the US’ Democrat Party has infiltrated Brazil’s Workers’ Party through these means, though it couldn’t have been known until now that this infiltration literally reached the height of its leadership.
Considering these “politically inconvenient” factual observations about Lula’s new ideological allies in the US, there’s no doubt that his multipolar credentials are discredited once and for all. This doesn’t mean, however, that he can’t continue helping to make gradual progress in that direction amidst the ongoing global systemic transition. Rather, it simply reinforces the perception hyperlinked in this analysis’ first sentence that whatever he does might inadvertently or deliberately advance US interests.
The abovementioned insight shouldn’t be misinterpreted as implying that Lula is “controlled” by Soros, Biden, or Sanders-AOC, but just that he’s definitely their “fellow traveler” since the Brazilian leader indisputably shares their worldview nowadays to a large extent. Even though he still shouts socialist slogans, Lula’s priority during his third term is less about improving the living conditions of his country’s impoverished and more about geostrategically realigning Brazil with the US-led West’s Golden Billion.
US State Department funds UK think tank that aids in censorship of Americans

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | February 16, 2023
The US State Department funds UK-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), an organization that partners with platforms to flag misinformation and disinformation. The organization has been accused of classifying conservative viewpoints as hate and disinformation.
In September 2021, the State Department awarded ISD a grant to “advance the development of promising and innovative technologies against disinformation and propaganda” in the UK and Europe after it won the US-Paris Tech Challenge. The challenge was also won by the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), an organization that has been accused of demonetizing conservative news websites by putting them on a blacklist used by advertisers, the Daily Caller reported.
The State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC) funded the ISD to research Russian disinformation tactics on Wikipedia. However, the department insisted that it does not engage in content moderation on social media.
ISD has several partnerships with social media platforms on content moderation decisions. The organization is a member of Spotify’s Safety Advisory Council, which advises the platform on how to respond to misinformation.
ISD is also part of YouTube’s Trusted Flagger program, whose members are tasked with improving the platform’s enforcement of its guidelines and can flag more content than other users. Google said that it “prioritizes flags from Trusted Flaggers.”
The organization also has partnerships with Google to counter hate and extremism in the UK and Europe. It also partners with Amazon’s Audible, Facebook, and Microsoft.
ISD is mostly focused on extremism and terrorism. However, it has also been targeting what it deems misinformation and hate.
Ireland’s protests – will Varadkar go full Trudeau?
By Gavin O’Reilly | OffGuardian | February 15, 2023
Since Russia began its special military operation in Ukraine almost a year ago, one of the key features of the collective West’s response, alongside sanctions and the expulsion of Russian diplomats, has been the accommodation of refugees fleeing the conflict, with millions of Ukrainians being housed across Europe since last February, including 70,000+ in the 26-County Irish State.
The first question that springs to mind regarding this approach however, is that if it is being done out of genuine concern for those fleeing conflict in Ukraine, then why was it not implemented in 2014 when that war first began?
In April of that year, following five months of Western-instigated violence in response to then-President Viktor Yanukovych’s decision to suspend an EU-trade deal in order to pursue closer ties with neighbouring Russia, the ethnic Russian Donbass region in the east of the country would break away to form the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, their residents having little choice lest they face genocide and ethnic cleansing at the hands of the anti-Russian neo-Nazi elements which composed the new Western-backed Kiev government.
A war on both Republics would follow, involving neo-Nazi paramilitaries such as Azov Battalion and Right Sector, which despite efforts to resolve the conflict peacefully via the federalisation solution offered by the Minsk Accords, would ultimately result in 14,000 deaths over the space of 8 years.
Despite this slaughter, no mainstream campaign existed in Ireland during the same period intended to expel Ukrainian diplomats or to welcome those fleeing conflict in the Donbass.
Likewise, no similar campaign has existed for those fleeing other conflicts such as that in Yemen, classed as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis by the United Nations, with a paltry 70 Yemenis being granted access to social services in the 26 Counties in the past year, in comparison to 72,609 Ukrainians in the same period following Russia’s intervention.
It must also me asked that if Leinster House genuinely cared about the plight of refugees fleeing conflict, then why contribute to the conflicts that created those refugees in the first place by allowing US warplanes to land in Shannon Airport over the past 20 years?
Since the Russian operation began in Ukraine last February, talks of the 26 County State joining an EU army have increased amongst establishment voices also, with the stated aim of such an alliance being to ‘act in complementarity’ with NATO, the coalition having been a key contributor to the refugee crisis over the past two decades by laying waste to Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria.
With these facts established, it can safely be concluded that Leinster House’s ‘concern’ for refugees has little to do with helping those fleeing war, and much like the wider West’s support of Ukrainian ‘freedom fighters’ being a cover to use Ukraine as a proxy to tie Russia down in an Afghan-style military quagmire.
Further, the Fine Gael-Fianna Fáil coalition is using emotive media coverage of the Ukrainian conflict as a means to swell the labour market and to keep wages stagnant on behalf of the corporate class.
Indeed, protests related to the effects of such a move would arise in late November, when upwards of 300 migrants were suddenly moved into a disused office block in East Wall, a working-class area of inner-city Dublin.
Residents would begin what would go on to become weekly demonstrations over the move, citing the lack of consultation with community officials beforehand, the suitability of the office block for accommodation, and the lack of transparency on whether those who had been moved into the office block had been vetted.
Despite these protests receiving support from residents of the office block themselves, the Irish mainstream media would, in lockstep, decry them as being ‘anti-refugee protests’ and ‘organised by the far-right’, a label that would also be applied to similar protests that emerged around Dublin and other locations in response to other wildly unsuitable locations chosen by Leinster House to accommodate adult migrants, including a school in Drimnagh, like East Wall, another working-class area of Dublin.
This dismissal of ordinary working class people’s concerns as ‘far-right’ bears a stark similarity to mainstream media descriptions of last year’s Freedom Convoy in Canada, when in response to a government mandate requiring all truck drivers re-entering from the US having to be vaccinated, a nationwide protest would begin in the second-largest country in the world.
The government of Justin Trudeau – like Leo Varadkar, another ‘Young Global leader’ of the World Economic Forum – would respond in an authoritarian fashion, freezing the bank accounts of protest organisers and attacking demonstrators with mounted Horses and teargas.
An approach, that with the head of the 26-County police force condemning the current protests and secretive police units monitoring organisers, may soon become a reality on the other side of the Atlantic.
Gavin O’Reilly is an Irish Republican activist from Dublin, Ireland, with a strong interest in the effects of British and US Imperialism; he was a writer for the American Herald Tribune from January 2018 up until their seizure by the FBI in 2021, with his work also appearing on The Duran, Al-Masdar, MintPress News, Global Research and SouthFront. He can be reached through Twitter and Facebook and supported on Patreon.
