Two years ago, Morocco and Israel signed the US-brokered “Joint Declaration”, thus officially recognising Israel and instating diplomatic ties. Though other Arab countries had already done the same, the Moroccan official recognition of Apartheid Israel was particularly devastating for Palestinians.
Years ago, a close Moroccan friend told me that the ‘first time’ he was arrested was during a solidarity protest for Palestine in Rabat which took place many years ago.
The reference to the ‘first time’ indicated that he was arrested again, though mostly for other political activities, suggesting that Palestine, in many ways, has become a local struggle for many Moroccans.
Whenever Moroccans protest for Palestine, they would do so in large numbers, sometimes in their millions. Such solidarity has historically served as the foundation of regional and global solidarity with the Palestinian struggle.
Though ordinary Arabs have always considered Palestine a core struggle, the relationship between North Africans and Palestine is, in many ways, unique and rooted.
Despite a strong push for normalisation between Arab countries and Israel, countries like Algeria and Tunisia made it clear that no diplomatic ties between their respective capitals and Israel would be declared anytime soon.
Credit for this goes mostly to the Algerian and Tunisian peoples who have made their rejection of Israeli racism, and support for Palestinian freedom akin to local or national struggles. Palestinian flags have always accompanied flags of these countries during any large gathering, be it a political protest or a sports event.
Morocco is no exception. Solidarity with Palestine in this country goes back generations, and hundreds of activists have paid a price for confronting their government on its failure to stand up to Israel or to challenge Washington for its support for Tel Aviv.
The normalisation agreement between Rabat and Tel Aviv in 2020 was falsely assumed to be an end to popular solidarity with Palestine. In fact, such acts of normalisation, rightly considered a betrayal by Palestinians, were also meant to be the final delinking of Palestine from its Arab and regional environs.
However, this was not the case. Normalisation with Apartheid Israel is still strongly rejected by the vast majority of Arabs, as opinion polls indicate. Moreover, the pouring of love for Palestine during the Qatar World Cup demonstrated, beyond doubt, that Israel cannot possibly be accepted by Arabs while still an occupying power and a racist apartheid regime.
The little political gains achieved by the Moroccan government in exchange for sacrificing the rights of Palestinians shall prove irrelevant in coming years. In fact, signs of this are already on display.
The Moroccan government, led by the Development and Justice Party of Saadeddine Othmani, which had taken part in the normalisation efforts, was rejected en masse in the September 2021 elections. Only nine months earlier, Othmani was signing the “Joint Declaration” with Israel’s National Security Advisor, Meir Ben-Shabbat.
The US recognition of Rabat’s claim over Western Sahara as the political barter between Rabat and Washington, which led to the normalisation with Tel Aviv, shall eventually prove meaningless.
The US and Western superiority is increasingly being challenged throughout the African continent, especially in West and Central African regions. Powerful new players, like Russia and China, are gaining geopolitical ground, in some regions entirely replacing the West’s dominance. Thus, the US support for any country’s territorial ambitions is no longer a guarantor of political gains, especially as the African geopolitical spaces have become greatly contested.
When Morocco normalised with Israel, many Moroccans were taken by surprise. The assumption was that Morocco, like other Arab nations, was too consumed by their own problems to notice their government’s foreign policy shifts, whether regarding Palestine or anywhere else.
Whether that was the case or not, it matters little now. On the second anniversary of the “Joint Declaration” agreement, tens of thousands of Moroccans demonstrated against normalisation in 30 different cities, including Rabat, Agadir, Tangier and Meknes. The protests were mobilised by the Moroccan Front for Supporting Palestine and Against Normalisation.
The Front is reportedly a network that includes ‘over a dozen political and human rights organizations,’ the New Arab reported. Their chants included “The people want to bring down normalization”, a slogan that is reminiscent of the pan-Arab popular slogan of a decade ago, ‘The people want to change the regime’. The latter resonated throughout many Arab capitals during the years of political upheaval in 2011 and upward.
This popular movement and its chants indicate that Palestine remains a local and national struggle in Morocco, as well as other Arab countries.
But why Morocco, and why now?
The popular association of the Moroccan and Palestinian flags throughout the World Cup had an invigorating effect on the collective psyche of Moroccans, who were empowered by their national team’s impressive showing against legendary teams such as Belgium, Spain and Portugal. It was a matter of time before this confidence translated to actual solidarity on the streets of Rabat and other major Moroccan cities.
The fact that Moroccans are mobilising in large numbers against their country’s normalisation with Israel only two years after the agreement is a sign of things to come.
2022 was a particularly bloody year in Palestine, according to UN Mideast Envoy, Tor Wennesland, who said that it was “on course to be the deadliest year for Palestinians in the West Bank since … 2005.”
Moroccans, like other Arab nations, are following the news with alarm, especially following the swearing-in of Israel’s new extremist government of Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right fascist ilk – the likes of Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir.
These two individuals’ constant targeting of Al-Aqsa Mosque, in particular, has a great emotional impact on Moroccans, especially since Morocco serves as the Chair of the Al-Quds Committee of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, which is tasked with the protection of Al-Aqsa Mosque.
Israel wants to normalise with the Arabs and tap into their massive markets and economic largesse without having, in return, to relinquish its military Occupation or grant Palestinians basic freedoms. Politically engaged Arab masses understand this well, and are growingly mobilising against their governments’ betrayal of Palestine.
The self-serving and limited gains of normalisation are likely to turn into a political liability in coming years. It is time for Morocco and others to reconsider their ties with Israel, as they risk political isolation and social instability, a far greater price to pay than the empty promises of Washington and Tel Aviv.
The end of World War II resulted in a stand off with the Soviet Union. The practical solution was to rebuild and rearm West Germany to deter a Soviet invasion, but keep that nation under American rule.
After World War II, Germany remained occupied by a million foreign troops during the Cold war. After that ended in 1990, the Russians returned home and the Warsaw Pact alliance disbanded. There was no threat to the west and NATO troops returned home, except the Americans, who insisted on keeping several large bases in Germany.
Billions of dollars were spent on new military facilities to include a massive spy center at a newly expanded Wiesbaden base.
You do not have to look very hard to find historical information revealing that the CIA has been spying inside Germany for more than seventy years to bribe and blackmail political leaders and journalists.
In 2022, the United States destroyed the Nordstream pipelines and thus the German economy. This was the third time in a century the United States destroyed Germany. The innovative and productive German industry was shut down in 1919, 1945, and 2022. Germany is not a true democratic state, but a colony of the United States.
Reproducibility is the most fundamental yardstick in science. If a result can’t be replicated, it doesn’t count as science.
Yet in recent years, there has been much talk of a ‘replication crisis’. Many results that we assumed were robust simply cannot be replicated. The term is typically used in the context of psychology and medicine, though it may apply to other fields as well.
So how much of science is reproducible? One way of tackling this question is to select a large number of studies from a particular field and then attempt to replicate them. This has been done several times.
A 2012 paper was only able to replicate 11% of 53 studies from pre-clinical cancer. A 2015 paper was only able to replicate 36% of 97 studies from psychology. A 2018 paper did slightly better, replicating 54% of 28 studies from that field. A 2016 paper was able to replicate 60% of 60% of 100 economics experiments. Another 2018 paper was able to replicate 62% of 21 social science experiments.
These numbers are sobering. But there’s an important caveat: the ‘studies to be replicated’ were selected somewhat arbitrarily, so the corresponding percentage can’t be taken as representative of the entire field.
Another way of tackling the question above is to simply ask researchers what percentage of the studies in your field can be replicated – a sort of ‘wisdom of the crowds’ approach.
This was done in a 2016 survey by the journalNature. They got 1,500 responses – the vast majority from currently-working scientists. Respondents were asked, “In your opinion, what proportion of published work in your field is reproducible?”
The highest figure – 72% – was found in physics. The lowest figure – 52% – was found in “other” (which I suspect is mostly social scientists). Environmental science and medicine had intermediate figures – both 58%. Chemistry was a little higher at 65%. (Answers did not differ substantially between students and working scientists.)
These figures are again sobering. According to researchers themselves, close to half of published work in medicine, social science and environmental science cannot be replicated. Unsurprisingly, more ‘objective’ fields like physics and chemistry are perceived to have higher rates of replicability.
Overall, the two methods yield similar findings: a large percentage of results in more ‘subjective’ – dare one say ‘politicized’ – fields are not reproducible.
We did not die last year in the “Winter of Illness and Death for the Unvaccinated.”
We did not die of overheating, starvation, dust bowl, and massive ocean flooding that was supposed to kill or displace us by 2019.
Let’s talk about the last point: a 1989 AP article explains that the UN predicted a global climate disaster that was supposed to happen within 30 years, so by 2019.
The article is terrifying to read. Actual quotes:
Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.
Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees.”
Ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations.
The most conservative scientific estimate is that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years, said Brown.
You may be relieved to find out that the actual temperature change between 1989 and 2021, if you believe the official temperature numbers, is 0.85-0.27 degrees, or 0.58 degrees.
The 1989 UNEP report deals with degrees in CELSIUS, as does the chart above.
What about the global sea level that was supposed to inundate entire countries and turn people into eco-refugees? The NOAA ocean level chart helps us see what happened since 1989:
Instead of 3 feet, the sea level rose by 3 inches!
Some of my critically-thinking readers may ask: what if the dire prediction failed to materialize because of a success in curbing CO2 emissions? The helpful official carbon dioxide chart shows a continued rise of CO2 — so there was no real curbing of emissions.
But Climate Change is Real Now!
This RECENT photo illustrates that climate change is real and threatening. Please find the difference between these two pictures!
In the 2022 report, like the UN 30 years ago, the WEF is also warning us that in 30 years, we will have to deal with 200 million climate refugees:
Information continues to roll out about how Twitter knowingly became a conduit for US propaganda efforts abroad that only serve to produce more violence and chaos. Sadly, this news has seemingly been greeted with a collective yawn by both the US corporate press and the American public.
A recent article by The Intercept details how Twitter facilitated efforts by US Central Command, or CENTCOM, a division of the US Defense Department, to spread propaganda, particularly in and about the Middle East using fake accounts posing as private individuals in the region. These accounts were given special treatment by Twitter, which accorded them the same privileges as ‘blue-checked’ verified accounts, which, as The Intercept article describes, “would have bestowed a number of advantages, such as invulnerability to algorithmic bots that flag accounts for spam or abuse, as well as other strikes that lead to decreased visibility or suspension.” And, of course, this was being done at a time when Twitter was deleting hundreds of accounts it viewed as associated with the Russian government and designating other such accounts as “Russian-state affiliated media” even when, as in the case of some of my friends, such as Fiorella Isabel, these accounts were of private individuals writing in their own, personal capacity.
One example of an account given “priority service” by Twitter was @yemencurrent (now deleted), which, among other things, “had emphasized that U.S. drone strikes were ‘accurate’ and killed terrorists, not civilians, and promoted the U.S. and Saudi-backed assault on Houthi rebels in that country.” Such a whitewashing of the US-Saudi war on Yemen – a war barely covered in the US press and therefore barely known to most Americans – is especially infuriating given that that war has been marked by the targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure on a colossal scale and by the US government’s willful failure to even properly account for civilian casualties.
The US’ own Government Accountability Office has, in a restricted-access document reported upon by the New York Times in June, concluded that, since the war began in 2015, “[t]he State Department and the Defense Department have failed to assess civilian casualties caused by a Saudi-led coalition in the catastrophic war in Yemen and the use of American-made weapons in the killings . . . .” The NYT also reported that earlier, “in August 2020, the State Department inspector general issued a report that said the department had failed to take proper measures to reduce civilian deaths.” The result has been an estimated 150,000+ deaths, including nearly 15,000 civilians, and one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises in history.
And yet, Twitter aided and abetted CENTCOM’s misinformation campaign through fake accounts claiming that civilians were somehow not being harmed by US-manufactured weapons – claims that deceive American taxpayers about the war they are bankrolling, and which are designed to prime the government pumps for more aid to this unholy conflict that President Biden had promised to stop funding.
According to The Intercept article, other fake CENTCOM accounts given priority by Twitter “focused on promoting U.S.-supported militias in Syria and anti-Iran messages in Iraq.” Again, few Americans are aware that many of these militia groups the US has backed in Syria, while claiming to be “moderate rebels,” have themselves carried out terrible atrocities against civilians in that country. Fake Twitter accounts promoting such militia groups only further obfuscate this subject.
As for the “anti-Iran messages in Iraq” and elsewhere, The Intercept explains that, as reported earlier by the Stanford Internet Observatory, some of the fake Twitter accounts falsely “accuse Iran of ‘threatening Iraq’s water security and flooding the country with crystal meth,’ while others promoted allegations that Iran was harvesting the organs of Afghan refugees.” Such propaganda has a dual purpose: to gin up tensions and conflict between nations in the Middle East and to manufacture consent in the US for potential armed conflict between the US itself and Iran.
In other words, Twitter has been aiding and abetting the US Defense Department in war propaganda, an act that was established to be a crime in the post-WWII Nuremberg trials. If we had a fair and working system of international law, Twitter and Defense Department officials involved in such offenses would indeed be investigated. However, we do not have such a system. Therefore, it is up to the American people to act, having learned of such misconduct by their government and by the social media companies they so rely upon to hold them accountable. It is also up to Americans to finally realize that, when it comes to matters of war and peace, they are being lied to constantly, and they must withhold their consent for the wars that our government undertakes with the help of traditional and social media alike.
Daniel Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and is author of the recently-released No More War: How the West Violates International Law by Using “Humanitarian” Intervention to Advance Economic and Strategic Interests.
Twitter has reportedly collaborated with the Pentagon for at least five years to wage a secret “PsyOps campaign” across West Asia, in a scheme to sway public opinion in favor of Washington’s military interests in the region.
According to an investigation of Twitter’s archives, emails, and internal tools by The Intercept, the social media giant created a special “whitelist,” exempting accounts run by US Central Command (CENTCOM) from spam and abuse flags, granting them greater visibility on the platform.
According to the findings of investigative journalist Lee Fang, the Pentagon used this network of bots and US government-generated news portals to shape the discourse regarding the wars in Yemen and Syria, as well as the continued presence of US occupation troops across the region.
In particular, Fang revealed that much of the Pentagon’s covert social media ops focused on promoting the Saudi-led war in Yemen. Washington has recently boosted its military presence in the war-torn country, reportedly in a bid to control its natural resources like they do in Syria.
The investigation of the internal Twitter documents also shows that the PsyOps campaign promoted narratives that specifically demonized Russia, China, and Iran.
PsyOps – the military jargon for psychological operations – is defined as targeting foreign adversaries “to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately, the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.”
Twitter reportedly introduced the “whitelist” in 2017 after US military officials asked the company to improve the visibility of 52 Arab language accounts used to “amplify certain messages.”
And while Twitter executives claimed for years that the platform did not allow deceptive state-backed influence operations, the social media company was aware of the Pentagon’s propaganda campaign and tolerated the accounts’ presence until at least May 2022.
Over the same period of time, Twitter suspended or outright banned accounts that reported on Israeli war crimes in Palestine, as well as many that were linked to the governments of Iran, Russia, Cuba, and Venezuela.
The revelations come as part of the so-called “Twitter files” release, which compiles internal company documents provided for journalists following the purchase of the company by billionaire Elon Musk.
The bombshell report comes at a time when the US army and its proxy militias are accused of illegally occupying vast regions of Syria and Yemen, looting oil from both war-torn countries, just over a year after their brutal occupation of Afghanistan ended.
Just last week, the White House succeeded in stopping the senate from voting on a legislation that would have severely restricted their operations in Yemen.
On top of this, last month, the New York University School of Law’s Brennan Center for Justice issued a report detailing how the Pentagon has been allowed to covertly deploy troops and wage secret wars over the past two decades in dozens of countries across the globe.
Despite the damning revelations, in the coming days, US President Joe Biden is expected to sign into law the biggest annual defense budget in history, allowing the Pentagon to continue spending trillions of dollars despite being the only branch of the US government to have never passed a financial audit.
The Christmas story as it is told in the West contains timeless elements that have shaped our culture in significant ways. As we tell it, year in and year out, the story conveys to those who listen powerful themes evoking deep feelings.
It is, at its core, the tale of a helpless child born as an outcast whose role became transformative in human history.
Unrecognised at first, the importance of this birth was initially only understood by the lowly of the earth — “the shepherds of the field”. Later “kings from the East” came to pay homage bringing gifts. Their appearance raised the ire of local rulers forcing the baby’s parents to flee in order to save the life of their newborn child.
I want to take a moment to reflect on this story, seeing contemporary realities through its prism.
Two thousand years ago, Palestine was subject to a harsh occupation, much as it is today. In some ways, though, the conditions back then allowed the residents of occupied Palestine greater mobility than the current inhabitants of that land.
As we are told in the bible story, Joseph had to take his expectant wife from Nazareth, where they were living, to Bethlehem, their ancestral village, in order to fulfill a requirement imposed by the authorities to register as part of a nationwide census. Today, of course, all of that would be impossible.
In the first place, no Palestinian originally from Bethlehem could ever have moved to Nazareth. The occupation and closure of the West Bank makes that sort of movement impossible. Furthermore, Israeli law prohibits an Arab from Nazareth from marrying a Bethlehemite and bringing their spouse across the Green Line to live with them in Israel.
Additionally, while thousands of Palestinians in Bethlehem, both Muslim and Christian, can see Jerusalem from their homes, they cannot go to the Holy City to pray. And Arab Christians from Jerusalem, likewise, cannot easily go the Christmas services in Bethlehem to pray alongside their co-religionists at the seasonal event.
Bethlehem of old was overcrowded and under siege. Today, as well, the city itself is being strangled, hemmed in by settlements that have confiscated the town’s ancestral lands to make way for a 30-foot barrier wall and massive Jewish-only housing colonies that cut the Arab residents off from nearby Jerusalem. The constriction of growth and the lack of economic opportunity have forced Bethlehemites to flee in search of jobs and freedom, with tens of thousands of them and their descendants now living in the US and the Americas. They can return to visit Bethlehem with difficulty but are not permitted by the occupation authorities to take up permanent residency in the town of their origins.
While the kings of old, we are told, were able to travel from afar bearing gifts to honour the newborn child, one can only imagine the difficulties they would encounter today dealing with Israeli soldiers at the Allenby Bridge. Having personally endured their interrogations, I can hear the kings answering hours of questions, such as “Where are you from?” “Who are your parents, grandparents?” “Why are you here?” Who are you visiting?” “What are these gifts for?” The questioning is reminiscent of Herod’s interrogation of the biblical visitors. In today’s Israel/Palestine, it is doubtful whether those hapless “kings from the East” would have gained entry.
That Joseph, Mary and Jesus were able to flee to Egypt to escape Herod’s vengeful wrath was possible back then. Today, that option is unlikely. The barrier/wall that encapsulates the West Bank, the hundreds of checkpoints, and the closure of Gaza would make such a life-saving flight impossible.
Finally, as I reflect on the birth of Jesus, I cannot help but think of the almost 400 babies who will be born, this very day, to Palestinian parents in the West Bank and Gaza. I think as well of the number of those who will perish at birth because of inadequate medical services. (Some babies have been put at fatal risk at checkpoints, because Israeli soldiers would not permit their delivering mothers to pass.) And I think of Mary, 2000 years ago, and am grateful that, despite all she endured, there were no checkpoints blocking her way to Bethlehem.
Our traditions tell us that Mary’s joy at the birth of her son was tempered by foresight. She knew her child would grow and endure great suffering. Likewise, the joy that Palestinian parents experience when greeting new life these days must, no doubt, be accompanied by similar concerns. Not only must they question how they will provide for their new child, but they must face down their fears of bringing up a son or daughter under occupation, with its dangers and hardships. From the violence, pressures and humiliation encountered daily by Palestinians in the West Bank at the hands of the Israeli military and settlers, to the grinding poverty and despair facing those trapped in Gaza, life under hostile foreign rule can drain joy out of even the most blessed events.
There is a traditional Christmas carol that asks the question “What child is this?” — the answer, of course, being “Jesus, the son of Mary”. But given the universal message conveyed by the Christmas story we also understand that the child is for us, a reminder of our responsibility to care for the helpless and the unrecognised. And so, when we think of the vulnerable children born today not only in Palestine, but those born anywhere where life is at risk (including here at home), we are not to ask: “What child is this?” — because we know that they are ours — to acknowledge and protect, like the shepherds and kings, enabling all of these children to grow, receive health care, and be educated so that they can grow and help change our world. Because all these children are ours, we have a responsibility to protect and care for them.
James J. Zogby is a president of Arab American Institute.
All the clips in this video took place in Bethlehem (see the sources below). Bethlehem is in the Palestinian West Bank, which has been under Israeli occupation since 1967. It is encircled by a wall erected by Israel in 2002. All entrances and exits are controlled by armed Israeli soldiers. Israeli forces regularly invade the area, beating and abducting residents – see https://israelpalestinenews.org/unhol… and https://imemc.org/article/category/re…Israeli forces sometimes kill them, including prominent Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu-Akleh, from a Christian family from Bethlehem. See https://israelpalestinenews.org/shire… and https://israelpalestinenews.org/?s=sh…
The churches shown at the end of the video are the Church of the Nativity and Christmas Lutheran Church in Bethlehem. Please donate so we can continue to give Americans the facts on this issue.
The popular prints are flooded with climate and weather misinformation. Net Zero, seen by increasing numbers of people as a looming disaster, is lauded to the skies. Few journalists investigate the ‘unsettled’ science behind unproven claims that humans cause most, if not all, changes in the climate. To point out that there are not enough minerals in the ground to make batteries to power humanity’s basic transportation needs, let alone store the energy required to keep us all alive in the cold when renewables go on strike, is simply not allowed. Needless to say, as we have seen in a number of recent Daily Scepticarticles, this absurd state of affairs is partly the product of a carefully-curated public discourse targeting cash-strapped news rooms and funded by a vast supply of dark, green money.
Recently I reported that the Mirror had run a nonsense story about much of London disappearing beneath the waves within 80 years. I noted that this was not the handiwork of a crack team of investigative reporters, but rather the placed work of a U.S. green activist group called Climate Central. This operation specialises in ready-to-publish climate change material highlighting local landmarks allegedly due to disappear beneath the waves. Similar tactics are used by another activist group spreading fear and alarm called Covering Climate Now (CC Now). This operation is run out of the Columbia Journalism Review in New York, and is backed by the Nation and the U.K. Guardian. Both operations rely heavily on large gifts from Left-leaning U.S. foundations.
CC Now was started in 2019 and claims to feed over 500 media operations with written stories and climate narratives. Its “partners” include some of the biggest names in news publishing such asReuters, Bloomberg, Agence France-Presse (AFP),CBS News,ABC News and MSNBC News. Leading journals are said to include Rolling Stone, Huff Post and Teen Vogue. The founders seek a “reframing” of the way journalists cover climate change. What this means in practice is amplifying an invented ‘climate emergency’ by constant story catastrophisation, while denying any inconvenient science. The political aim is the promotion of the command-and-control Net Zero agenda.
There is plenty of advice for tame journalists aiming to ramp up climate hysteria. “The fastest way to catch up is to emulate outlets that are already covering climate change well. You can’t do better than the Guardian,” CC Now suggests. But what to do about the problem that paying readers tend to disappear when fed a diet of spun political messages? “Foundations like Knight, Ford, McCormick and Emerson Collective are rightly increasing their support for local news organisations,” it adds.
Relentless catastrophising of individual weather events is the favoured weapon to spread climate fear among the wider population. Using the recent experience of the Covid pandemic, activists have been emboldened to spread panic and alarm in controllable media to achieve their wider political aims. Despite oft-made claims, it is impossible to use models to ‘attribute’ single weather events to long term changes in the climate. CC Now skirts this obvious problem by providing a number of helpful explanations for gullible journalists to copy-and-paste. “Climate change isn’t solely to blame for extreme weather, but… it stacks the deck against us… it’s baked in with our weather and often a key ingredient in the outcome… it supercharges normal weather patterns, like steroids.” Journalists are told to emphasise the human impacts of extreme weather, noting that it affects “the poor, communities of colour, and indigenous groups first and foremost”.
All this sterling work, of course, deserves prizes. The 2022 CC Now Journalism Awards “honoured” writers producing the “strongest coverage of the onrushing climate emergency and its abundant solutions”. Winners are said to have come from the Guardian,AFP,Al Jazeera, PBS NewsHour and the Los Angeles Times. Journalist of the Year was Time Senior Correspondent Justin Worland. The judges singled out for particular praise an article he wrote ahead of COP26 titled, “The Energy Transition in Full Swing. It’s Not Happening Fast Enough“.
Billionaire-run foundations are spending enormous sums promoting junk alarmist science, in addition to funding on-side academic institutions and other influential bodies. Both Climate Central and CC Now are funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, while Climate Central takes support from the Grantham fund. This latter foundation is connected with the green billionaire investor Jeremy Grantham, and also partly funds three U.K. university institutes. At the LSE, this operation provides material that supports the Net Zero initiatives.
Jeremy Grantham is a long-time promoter of Net Zero and a future based on renewables. But it is not only journalists he has in his sights. Speaking in 2019 to a group of business people in Copenhagen about the approaching apocalypse, he asked rhetorically, “What should I do, you say”? His suggestion: “You should lobby your Government officials – invest in an election and buy some politicians. I am happy to say we do quite a bit of that at the Grantham Foundation… any candidate as long as they are green.”
The science writer and climatologist Dr. Judith Curry has become increasingly concerned about the effect of all this propaganda on children. In a recent essay, she wrote that it was difficult to avoid the conclusion that children are being used as tools in adults’ political agenda surrounding climate change. This is having adverse impacts on the mental health of children, she warned. The apocalyptic rhetoric surrounding the climate ‘crisis’ has numerous victims, she added. “Children and young adults rank among the victims of greatest concern.”
Children and young adults are being used as tools in national and international political campaigns, continued Dr. Curry. “Blaming this unfortunate situation of psychological stress on a changing climate is incorrect, and the use of the situation to achieve political goals is reprehensible behaviour that is acting to reinforce the children’s psychological injuries,” she charged.
Your correspondent’s advice: When you next see an identikit climate Armageddon story in the mainstream media, just laugh. You will be the sanest person in the room.
If you think that Volodomyr Zelensky is the first leader in the throes of a civil war (yes, I know, Russia invaded, but the war in Ukraine at its roots is a civil war) to visit Washington, DC and speak to Congress and be compared with Winston Churchill, think again.
I thank my friend, Helmholtz Smith, for noting this historical precedent and finding the relevant video.
While I am sure Zelensky is flattered to be described as a modern day Churchill, he was not the first accorded that honor. Did you know that Ngo Dinh Diem also was the Vietnamese Winston Churchill?
In May 1961, U.S. Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson visited Saigon and enthusiastically declared Diệm the “Winston Churchill of Asia”. Asked why he had made the comment, Johnson replied, “Diệm’s the only boy we got out there.” Johnson assured Diệm of more aid in molding a fighting force that could resist the communists.
Diem learned the hard way that once your U.S. backers anoint you as the next Churchill, your days are numbered. Diem was murdered as a consequence of a U.S. engineered coup.
Zelensky’s Wednesday appearance in Washington, D.C. and the accompanying accolades equating him with Winston Churchill is prima facie evidence that most pundits and news readers in American are certifiable ignoramuses. For starters, Churchill, notwithstanding his love affair with imperialism, was a towering intellect. He authored scholarly books and established himself as one of the greatest rhetoricians of all times. He had a knack for turning a phrase and creating iconic moments.
Zelensky? I challenge anyone to recite one memorable moment from Zelensky’s snooze fest before the U.S. Congress. Banality thy name is Volodomyr. But Zelensky can do something that Churchill never did — he can play the piano with his penis. Gives new meaning to the phrase, “banging out a tune.”
Now, set aside the levity. Remember this week as another watershed moment in U.S. history. At the very moment that Washington embraced a malevolent dictator masquerading as a Nazified version of Fidel Castro, Russia sent an unmistakable message to the United States and Europe — Russia acknowledged that a state of war exists, pitting Russia against NATO and the United States, and it is building up its conventional and nuclear forces in anticipation of a future clash.
My dear friend Paul, a retired Navy SEAL Commander, asked me the essential, pertinent question this morning:
The question that continues to nag me, Larry, is most basic. What is the Ukraine-Russia War’s endgame? What do we see as a Ukraine win? Russia’s withdrawal? What does Ukraine see as a win – old borders restored, Russia minds its own business, etc.? What does Russia see as a win – total or partial domination of Ukraine? A western border pushback to NATO’s backyard? Then fortify it (build a fucking wall)? I don’t see focused discussion of the endgame. No one seems to be asking or answering the endgame question. It appears we (the US) are dumping $$ billions into Ukraine’s defense without telling the taxpayers what the money is expected to achieve – the endgame.
So what do you think? What is the endgame in Ukraine?
Renowned Japanese Senator Muneo Suzuki called on the United States to honestly admit to Japan and the whole world that dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II was a mistake.
“Although 77 years have passed since the war ended, the United States, the country that dropped the atomic bomb, has never apologised or asked for forgiveness. It is the United States that still speaks loudly about ‘democracy, human rights and freedom’ for the actions of other countries. So why not tell Japan and the world honestly what the US has done?” the veteran politician said in an article posted on his website.
“During (the visit), you should say using an atomic bomb was a mistake,” stressed the Japanese MP.
Japanese media reported that Washington was negotiating with Tokyo on the possibility of Biden visiting Nagasaki in May 2023. Biden’s visit to Nagasaki is expected to take place within the framework of the G7 Leaders’ Summit to be held in Hiroshima on May 19-21.
Biden will become the first US President to visit Nagasaki if negotiations go well. It is recalled that in May 2016, former President Barack Obama, a fellow Democrat, became the first US leader to visit Hiroshima during the G7 summit in Japan, but he did not visit Nagasaki.
If the trip occurs, Biden would likely visit the city’s Peace Park, located near the epicentre of the nuclear blast. He, as a devout Catholic, would also expectedly visit Urakami Cathedral, a Catholic church rebuilt after being destroyed by the nuclear blast.
Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who has put forward his vision of a nuclear weapons free world since coming to power in October 2021, would likely accompany Biden on his visit to Nagasaki sometime before or after the summit, Japan Times reported, citing a source close to the matter.
The current Japanese prime minister visited Hiroshima with Obama when he was foreign minister, together with then prime minister Shinzo Abe. It is recalled that Biden served as vice president under Obama, who was controversially awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for his so-called attempts to free the world of nuclear weapons. According to Japan Times, Kishida hopes he and Biden can send a similar message to the world from the two Japanese cities.
The G7 summit, to be held from May 19 to 21, will be hosted by Kishida, who represents a constituency in Hiroshima, which was also destroyed by a US atomic bomb. For this reason, Tokyo and Washington are still contemplating if Biden’s trip to Nagasaki, a city which is forever linked with Hiroshima, is viable and to scope the opinions of local residents, including the hibakusha – the Japanese term to mean a survivor of the atomic explosions in 1945.
On August 6 and 9, 1945, the US military dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: 140,000 people died in Hiroshima and 74,000 people died in Nagasaki. Most of the victims of the two atomic bombings were civilians. Every year on these days, Hiroshima and Nagasaki hold memorials to remember the nuclear tragedy that claimed the lives of 214,000 people.
This massive loss of life has meant a firm element of anti-Americanism in Japan. At the same time though, because the country has been partially occupied by the US since World War II, Tokyo is firmly in the Atlanticist camp as its political elite are mostly controlled. None-the-less, Japan always held a pacifist policy, partly imposed by a US fearful of a Japan once again being military empowered.
However, Japan has evidently abandoned its long-held pacifist policy when considering the $320-billion defence plan recently announced by Kishida. This defence plan will make Japan the world’s third-biggest military spender after the United States and China, surpassing even India, the UK and France.
For this reason, the Russian Foreign Ministry accused Japan on December 22 of “unbridled militarisation”.
“It can be clearly seen that Tokyo has embarked on the path of an unprecedented build-up of its own military power, including the acquisition of strike potential,” the statement said. “This is a frank rejection by the F. Kishida administration of the peaceful development of the country, which was persistently declared by previous generations of politicians, and a return to the rails of unbridled militarisation.”
Japan’s actions will inevitably increase tension in the Asia-Pacific region despite the fact there should be no real reason why they should exist to begin with. In fact, they mostly exist on the influence of the US, a country which dropped two nuclear bombs on Japan and to this day still refuses to apologise, as Muneo Suzuki highlighted.
With Japan on the path of becoming a major military power, there is a high possibility that Biden will make the apology if it will deepen American influence in a country which Washington hopes, and seemingly now gives permission, to oppose and challenge Russia and China.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
In December 1945 and January 1946, the British Mandate authorities carried out an extensive survey of Palestine, in support of the work of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine. The results were published in the Survey of Palestine, which has been scanned and made available online by Palestine Remembered; all 1300 pages can be read here.
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.
• The Genocide Call… 
Aletho News
Aletho News 