IHR amendments were approved last night at the World Health Assembly.
James Roguski and I just had a chat about what this means.
https://x.com/lawrie_dr/status/1797344388667814140
Corbett | June 4, 2024
After years of build-up and anticipation, the 77th World Health Assembly has come and gone. So, what did the would-be lords of global health gavel down on? And what does it mean for the future of the fight for health freedom? Joining us today to talk about these important issues is James Roguski.
WATCH ON: 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
or DOWNLOAD THE MP4
SHOW NOTES
James Roguski Substack
All WHA docs
IHR amendments
The Amendments to the IHR have been adopted
Watch the World Health Assembly sessions
Oklahoma SB 426 (prohibiting enforcement of policies required or recommended by the World Health Organization)
Louisiana SB 133 (anti WHO, WEF, UN)
“Climate change and health” resolution adopted at the World Health Assembly
James Roguski:
The old system is crumbling, and we must build its replacement quickly.If you are fed up with the government, hospital, medical, pharmaceutical, media, industrial complex and would like to help build a holistic alternative to the WHO, then feel free to contact me directly anytime.
JamesRoguski.com
JamesRoguski.substack.com/about
JamesRoguski.substack.com/archive
310-619-3055
June 5, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | Human rights |
Leave a comment
By Lucas Leiroz | June 4, 2024
The persecution of political dissidents in the US is becoming commonplace. People who oppose Washington’s aggressive foreign policy are being seen as enemies and treated as criminals, even when there is no plausible reason to charge them. Recently, military analyst Scott Ritter had his passport confiscated by US authorities without any specific reason, showing the advanced levels of tyranny in the country.
Ritter was on a plane at the New York airport. His plan was to travel to the Russian Federation, as he had a special invitation to participate in the St. Petersburg Economic Forum, which will begin in the next few days. Ritter was already boarding when three policemen suddenly forcibly removed him and seized his documents. When asked about the reason for this action, the policemen said they were following orders from the US State Department and refused to clarify any details about the case.
“I was boarding the flight. Three [police] officers pulled me aside. They took my passport. When asked why, they said ‘orders of the State Department’. They had no further information for me (…) They pulled my bags off the plane, then escorted me out of the airport. They kept my passport,” he told journalists.
Without his passport, Ritter is unable to leave the US territory. In practice, he will begin living under a regime similar to house arrest, not only being monitored by American authorities, but also being prevented from leaving the country. It is curious that this happened precisely during a trip by Ritter to Russia. It seems that Washington is trying to make it clear to all its citizens that there will be no tolerance for citizens who maintain any form of ties with Moscow.
Ritter has long been one of the most vocal critics of military support for Ukraine. In his interviews and articles, he openly advocates for an end to arms supply and for a friendly policy between the US and Russia. Ritter has repeatedly exposed the truth about Ukrainian Nazism and Western collusion with ultranationalism and racism. In addition, his main work as a military analyst consists of providing detailed, technical analyses that show the situation of the sides in the conflict.
While Western media have long claimed that Kiev is “winning the war,” Ritter has emerged as a dissenting voice proving the opposite, saying that military control of the conflict belongs to the Russian Federation. He has refuted fallacious narratives such as the “Ukrainian victory in Kiev” or the “Kherson counteroffensive.” Using impartial and technical military analysis, Ritter has substantiated each of his arguments about Russia winning the war. Today, his work is recognized as one of the best among military experts around the world, with many of his predictions having come true.
This is not the first time that Ritter has suffered persecution in his own country. In the past, he has been criticized, defamed and even detained by American authorities because of his stance against Washington’s war initiatives. Ritter severely criticized the American decision to invade Iraq, stating that there were no weapons of mass destruction in the country. At the time, he was a UN weapons inspector and had privileged information about the real situation in the Middle East.
Currently, in addition to providing military analysis on the war in Ukraine, Ritter has also been strongly critical of Israeli violence in the Gaza Strip, which has certainly generated discontent among radical Zionists in American domestic politics. In addition, he has worked to refute fallacies and stereotypes about Russia and the Russian people, making frequent trips to Russia to show the local reality. Recently, Ritter was in Chechnya, Moscow and St. Petersburg and spoke to the Western media about what real life is like in Russia today, explaining that the country is in a favorable economic situation, without any effect of Western sanctions.
It is already clear that persecution is the fate of any American dissident. When US citizens disagree with their country’s policies, the authorities attack, arrest and defame them. Unfortunately, this is the reality in the country that claims to be the global guardian of democracy. However, this lie is increasingly discredited. Despite all the propaganda efforts, it is already clear to the world that the US is no longer a democracy.
Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.
You can follow Lucas on X (former Twitter) and Telegram.
June 4, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | Human rights, United States |
Leave a comment
Western governments are increasingly turning towards overt methods of repression as they lose their grip on control of the masses.
The Clooney Foundation for Justice (CFJ) has been forced to disavow comments by a legal director with the organization calling for the arrest of Russian journalists after intense backlash.
Anna Neistat, who leads the foundation’s The Docket project, claimed Thursday that her team is urging international authorities to prosecute Russian reporters.
“We want them to travel to other countries and be arrested there,” said Neistat, revealing that she is pressuring the European Union and International Criminal Court to pursue the matter. Neistat made the comments during an interview with the US state-backed propaganda outlet Voice of America.
The organization has since backpedaled on the provocative claim with a statement asserting that “someone in our foundation misspoke,” but observers see the proposal as yet another sign of the West’s growing authoritarianism and intolerance of dissenting voices.
Author and political analyst Caleb Maupin joined Sputnik’s The Critical Hour program Monday to discuss the incident.
“There’s a lot of things to keep in mind in reaction to this news story,” said the author and reporter. “The first of which is that the European Union has basically already outlawed all Russian media within the EU space, right? You can’t watch RT. Websites are suppressed, blocked, and it’s pretty hard to look at Russian media in the EU.”
“RT France has been shut down. You can’t watch RT in Belgium, you can’t watch RT in EU countries,” he continued. “What is a little bit different, though, about this is that this was specifically aimed at journalists who would report in Russian, for Russian audiences, but would do so from EU countries. And the idea was that they would be charged, and what’s interesting also is that the warrants for their arrest would be secret.”
“They would be arrested upon arrival and it would be a way to basically just kidnap these reporters and journalists and hold them hostage. And, if you look at it, it’s a particularly nasty proposal. And that’s probably why I noticed that George Clooney is now backing away from it and saying, ‘oh, people from our foundation misspoke, we didn’t mean this,’ etcetera.”
European countries have made increasingly aggressive attempts in recent years to restrict media and control the flow of information across the continent. The EU has outright banned Russian media outlets from broadcasting within the 27-nation bloc, but measures have been taken against third-party platforms, as well. The video sharing website Rumble was forced to block French users from accessing the platform after refusing to comply with government demands to block Russian content.
Politicians in the UK have also explored blocking the website, and the country recently detained journalist Kit Klarenberg at an airport in London, questioning him for five hours about his political views.
Across the Atlantic, the United States has famously condemned journalist Julian Assange to 12 years of effective confinement after the Wikileaks founder published leaked material revealing US war crimes in Iraq. Former CIA director and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made plans to kidnap and murder the firebrand transparency activist, it was recently revealed.
The uproar over the CFJ’s comments comes as Sputnik contributor Scott Ritter was denied travel to speak at a conference in Russia Monday, having his passport confiscated by authorities on apparent orders from the US State Department. Free speech concerns have also been raised over police crackdowns on campus pro-Palestine encampments, a move demanded by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“I will say, though, that the Ukrainians have been saying this from the beginning,” said Maupin of the calls to arrest Russian journalists. “I mean, they have this list of ‘information terrorists’ – which I’m proudly on, by the way, I’m listed by the Ukrainian government as an ‘information terrorist’ – and they have been calling for the assassination and murder of journalists, and they’ve done it since the war has begun.”
“This is not a change for Ukraine. What’s changed here is that the Clooney Foundation made such a statement and wanted to enlist EU governments in carrying it out.”
Western governments are usually more subtle in their attempts to control information, noted Maupin, typically relying more on efforts to influence popular narratives rather than outright censorship. The move towards more overt repression may be seen as a response to the increased transparency allowed by the Internet, or perhaps another sign of the West’s loss of power as a multipolar world order comes into view.
“They like subtly bringing up points they like,” Maupin noted. “Finding people who say things that they agree with and boosting them rather than saying it themselves. This is how the intelligence world works, and a huge amount of what the American intelligence apparatus does is construct media narratives and insert ideas into media discourse.”
“A lot of what the intelligence apparatus does is just boost certain messages and try to control the conversation in a subtle way to advance US foreign policy goals.”
June 4, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | European Union, Human rights, UK, United States |
Leave a comment
I’ve long criticized our current US justice system – on all levels – as becoming much more about political justice than blind justice. The bizarre trial and conviction of former President Donald Trump last week on 34 felonies only reinforces my concerns.
The New York District Attorney, Soros-backed Alvin Bragg, has been notorious for downgrading felony charges against others to misdemeanor charges. According to a recent article in the Daily Mail, Bragg had downgraded 60 percent of felony cases to lesser charges, resulting in violent criminals being released on the streets and a crime wave across New York City.
But when it came to Donald Trump, Bragg lurched in the other direction, upgrading what normally would have been misdemeanor charges against anyone else to 34 felony charges against the former president. How can this sudden “about-face” be explained other than politics?
Jonathan Turley, who is no fan of Donald Trump, has been covering the trial closely and has found more than a little disturbing the exuberant celebrations of Trump’s conviction among the mainstream media and his political opponents. Recently, he wrote:
“The conviction of former President Donald Trump in Manhattan of 34 felonies produced citywide celebrations [which] extended to the media, where former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman told MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace that it was ‘majestic day’ and ‘a day to celebrate.’ When I left the courthouse after watching the verdict come in, I was floored by the celebrations outside by both the public and some of the media.”
Regardless of one’s view of Donald Trump, it is a disturbing development in our society when justice is treated more like a football game where you root for your “team” rather than a way of preserving our freedom and liberty in an equal way for all.
The real goal of the trial was political. None other than George Soros’ son Alex let the cat out of the bag recently when he advised fellow Trump-haters how to take advantage of the trial result. He posted on Twitter after the verdict, “Democrats should refer to Trump as a convicted felon at every opportunity. Repetition is the key to a successful message and we want people to wrestle with the notion of hiring a convicted felon for the most important job in the country!”
It was not about justice in any way. It was all about being able to call the likely Republican presidential nominee a “felon” so as to undermine his support among voters. In other words, election interference.
The market has a way of prevailing, however. The repeated attempts at using “lawfare” to remove Trump from the political scene have all backfired and actually have served to make the former president even more popular among voters. Immediately after Trump’s conviction on the 34 charges he began sending out fundraising appeals based on his “persecution” by the state of New York. As of this writing, he has, according to press reports, raised over $200 million for his campaign.
The politicization of justice is not limited to the Democratic Party. The wind sown by political opponents of Donald Trump may well become the whirlwind they reap when their own political opponents are in positions of power. When that is the case, we all lose.
Copyright © 2024 The Ron Paul Institute
June 3, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties | Democratic Party, Donald Trump, Human rights, United States |
Leave a comment
Scott Ritter. © David McNew/Getty Images
The US State Department has seized the passport of former Marine and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter, he told RT on Monday.
Ritter was on his way to Russia for the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) when he was pulled off the plane and had his documents confiscated.
“I was boarding the flight. Three [police] officers pulled me aside. They took my passport. When asked why, they said ‘orders of the State Department’. They had no further information for me,” Ritter told RT. “They pulled my bags off the plane, then escorted me out of the airport. They kept my passport.”
Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer, who later served as the US and UN weapons inspector in Iraq. He is also a RT contributor, writing about international security, military affairs, Russia, and the Middle East, as well as arms control and nonproliferation.
He most recently visited Russia in January, spending time in Chechnya, Moscow and St. Petersburg, among other places.
The most recent post on Ritter’s Telegram channel put the Clooney Foundation for Justice on notice for its alleged crusade against “Russian propagandists.”
“Here I am. In your face. If telling the truth about Russia makes me a propagandist in your book, then I accept the title,” he wrote. “Bring it on. I’ll school you on the First Amendment.”
“You have zero concept of what free speech is. Try and arrest me and you’ll find out. In spades. It’s war,” he added.
June 3, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | Human rights, United States |
Leave a comment
Copper cannot be mined quickly enough to keep up with current policies requiring the transition to electric vehicles (EVs), according to a University of Michigan study.
Copper is fundamental to electricity generation, distribution and storage. According to GlobalData, there are more than 709 copper mines in operation globally, with the largest being the Escondida mine in Chile, which produced an estimated 882,100 tonnes of copper in 2023.
This may sound like a lot but with electrification ramping up globally it is not. The Michigan study, Copper mining and vehicle electrification, has focused on the copper required just for the production of EVs over the coming years.
Many countries across the world are putting forward policies for EVs. For instance, in the US the Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law in 2022, calls for 100% of cars manufactured by 2035 to be electric.
However, an EV requires three to five times more copper than petrol or diesel cars, not to mention the copper required for upgrades to the electricity grid.
“A normal Honda Accord needs about 40 pounds of copper. The same battery electric Honda Accord needs almost 200 pounds of copper,” said Adam Simon, professor of earth and environmental studies at the University of Michigan.
“We show in the paper that the amount of copper needed is essentially impossible for mining companies to produce.”
The researchers examined 120 years of global data from copper production dating back to 1900. They then modelled how much copper is likely to be produced for the rest of the century and how much copper the US electricity infrastructure and fleet of cars would need to upgrade to renewable energy.
The study found that renewable energy’s copper needs would outstrip what copper mines can produce at the current rate. Between 2018 and 2050, the world will need to mine 115% more copper than has been mined in all of human history up until 2018 just to meet current copper needs without considering the green energy transition.
To meet the copper needs of electrifying the global vehicle fleet, as many as six new large copper mines must be brought online annually over the next several decades. About 40% of the production from new mines will be required for EV-related grid upgrades.
The research concluded that instead of fully electrifying the entire US fleet of vehicles, they should focus on manufacturing hybrid vehicles.
“We know, for example, that a Toyota Prius actually has a slightly better impact on climate than a Tesla. Instead of producing 20 million EVs in the US and, globally, 100 million battery EVs each year, would it be more feasible to focus on building 20 million hybrid vehicles?”
Apart from EVs, copper is, of course, vital in other sectors: for instance, building infrastructure in the developing world such as an electricity grid for the approximately one billion people who don’t yet have access to electricity.
“What we will end up with is tension between how much copper we need to build infrastructure in less developed countries versus how much copper we need for the energy transition,” warned Simon.
“We are hoping this study gets picked up by policymakers who should consider copper as the limiting factor for the energy transition, and to think about how copper is allocated.”
© 2024 The Institution of Engineering and Technology
June 2, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | Human rights, United States |
Leave a comment
One of the major universities in Belgium has broken off relationship with all Israeli universities and research institutions which it says no longer align with its human rights policy.
University of Ghent (UGent) said in a statement that an investigation by the public research center highlighted concerns regarding connections between Israeli academic institutions and the Israeli administration, military, or security services.
UGent had 18 ongoing partnerships with Israeli academic institutions, it added.
The investigation also referenced a recent World Court ruling which ordered Israel to halt its offensive in the southern Gaza city of Rafah and withdraw from the besieged territory, in a case brought by South Africa saying Israel is committing genocide in the narrow Strip.
The development comes two weeks after UGent announced in a statement that it was severing ties with three Israeli educational and research institutions.
The university’s rector, Rik Van de Walle, said at the time that ties were being cut with Holon Institute of Technology, MIGAL Galilee Research Institute and the Volcani Centre, which carries out agricultural research.
“We currently assess these three partners as (very) problematic according to the Ghent University human rights test, in contrast to the positive evaluation we gave these partners at the start of our collaboration,” Van de Walle said.
Partnerships with MIGAL Galilee Research Institute and the Volcani Centre “were no longer desirable” due to their affiliation with Israeli ministries, an investigation by the University of Ghent found, and collaboration with the Holon Institute “was problematic” because it provided material support to the army for actions in Gaza.
A spokesperson for the university said the move would affect four projects.
Pro-Palestinian protesters in Ghent have been demonstrating and occupying parts of the university campus since early May protesting against the Israeli regime’s military onslaught in Gaza killing nearly 36,400 Palestinians so far.
The protesters told Belgian broadcaster VRT they welcomed the decision, but want to see it extended to include the six non-academic Israeli institutions that UGent currently partners with.
Earlier this week, two other Belgian universities announced changes in their partnership with Israeli institutions.
The University of Antwerp said it would continue its ongoing research projects with Israeli educational institutions, but will put new projects on hold.
The Université Libre de Bruxelles announced that it will no longer initiate projects with Israeli partners.
June 1, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | Belgium, Holon Institute, Human rights, Israel, MIGAL Galilee Research Institute, Palestine, Volcani Centre, Zionism |
Leave a comment
After the failed attempt to keep digital passports online after the pandemic, Jefferey Jaxen discusses how a newly passed digital ID bill in the Australian parliament may be paving the way for the country to go completely cashless. Then, learn how private banks are using your purchasing data to sell to advertisers, and how fast food restaurants are beginning to use biometrics when you buy your next burger.
June 1, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular, Video | Australia, Human rights |
Leave a comment
For 20 days now, the occupation army has been committing massacres that have caught the attention of the entire world in Jabalia and the city’s refugee camp.
Everyone is asking what makes this small spot the subject of this continuous destruction. This narrow area, which does not exceed 1.4 square kilometres, holds the highest population density in the world. It is home to 116,000 people and is the largest refugee camp in Palestine.
At the beginning of the current war, the occupation army poured out its anger on Jabalia camp, carrying out four of the most violent and brutal massacres of this war so far.
It later announced victory over Jabalia and began to head south. So why has it returned?
Due to Jabalia’s steadfastness, the occupation army bombed its neighborhoods with dumb bombs, killing hundreds of people in each strike. It went on to starve Palestinians in the north.
And now, Netanyahu’s army is trying a second entry/invasion, perhaps wanting to destroy the camp.
What is happening is a repeat and intensification of what happened long ago, as my father told me. In 1967, Jabalia camp was the site where the first resistance against the occupation began. The occupation went crazy then, wondering how a freedom fighter dared to shoot at a helicopter.
They sent truckloads of soldiers and carried out field executions and the army dropped napalm bombs.
To this day, no one knows how many were killed in that crime, but in the camp, entire families were erased from the civil registry.
And in 1987, the spark of the First Intifada was ignited from Jabalia. After that, everyone started calling it “the revolution camp.”
Among its brave freedom fighters was Hatem Al-Sisi who was the first martyr of the intifada, which extended from 1987 until the Oslo Accords in 1993. The shedding of his blood was the catalyst to the spread of the intifada across the West Bank and Gaza. This inspired my father to name my brother Hatem in his honor. The martyr fell in our neighborhood, near my grandfather’s house.
During the era of the war criminal Ariel Sharon, known as “the bulldozer of Israel”, the occupation’s tanks and planes destroyed Jabalia camp in 2003. The same criminal repeated the attack in 2004. Despite all his attempts, he failed to diminish the resistance, which forced him to withdraw from the Gaza Strip, defeated in 2005.
And today, after 20 years, his successor Netanyahu returns to attack Jabalia camp in multiple assaults. It seems that the desperate Netanyahu has not learned anything from history.
The policy of the “parents die and children forget” will not succeed with Palestinians. In Palestine, parents are martyred and children grow up and do not forget. Rather, they follow the same path as their parents. They call upon the world in all languages, wanting a dignified life and a future for their children.
But the occupation practices genocide against them.
The leaders of the occupation army discuss openly and secretly, shouting and holding conferences all the time; in their minds there is only one question: How do we erase Jabalia camp from the map? Should we drop a nuclear bomb on it, as if 40,000 tonnes of explosives have not quenched their thirst for death.
As if they are asking: “How many tonnes of bombs do we need to drop on them to make them die?”
In 1998, Jabalia camp was visited by then-UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. No other place could make the official understand our cause better.
I was 13 years old then, and I remember participating in the campaign to clean the school that he was visiting and the main street from the market to the school gate. I was a member of my school’s health committee, which Annan visited. I was the diligent student who greeted him in English, proudly saying, “Welcome to Jabalia camp.”
Yes, I am the son of Jabaliya and I am proud to have been born in that crowded spot. And I am saddened by what I am witnessing today.
For seven months, the occupation starved the people of northern Gaza, focusing on Jabalia camp. Perhaps they hoped the people would die of hunger or flee, making it easier to accomplish their mission of destroying the area completely, levelling it as they did to Beit Hanoun, Beit Lahiya and Khan Yunis.
But Jabalia camp remained unbreakable; many were killed, but it stood firm and tall.
Yes, I know that those who remain in the camp are starving, tired and exhausted, but they are steadfast.
As if this steadfastness is a curse, the Israeli occupation’s tanks return to Jabalia as if the war has begun anew. Bombs drop from the sky. 1000lb, 2000lb bombs fall from warplanes aiming to kill more innocent civilians inside homes. Their only fault is that they said: “We will not leave our homes, we will not flee.”
It pains me to hear that the rabid army has now destroyed about 70 per cent of the camp’s landmarks. Its most prominent locations have disappeared.
Today, the news tells us that tanks are besieging the street which has four UNRWA schools; two primary and two elementary. This is the same street that Kofi Annan visited.
Those who remain in Jabalia know what displacement is. They lived as displaced people. They know it means permanent exile. They know another displacement means leaving Palestine and moving to Sinai, which would mean the end of our cause forever. They understand the occupation’s lies.
We see and hear them on television, dying of hunger and thirst, eating grass and animal feed, but they will not leave their land. Among them was my uncle, Abu Taysir Al-Ajrami, the father of three martyrs from the resistance who were martyred at the beginning of the Second Intifada between 2002 and 2003. He appeared on Al Jazeera saying: “We eat animal feed, but we will not leave our land. We die but do not leave.”
Everyone knows that if it weren’t for the steadfastness of Jabalia Camp and the patience of its people and the people of Gaza, Netanyahu’s goals of displacing them to Sinai would have been achieved.
Perhaps this is the reason for Netanyahu and his army’s anger towards Jabalia and its residents.
But, as they rebuilt Jabalia Camp after the first massacre in 1967 and the First Intifada in 1987, the second massacre in 2003, and the third massacre in 2004, Palestinians will rebuild the camp once again after the current massacres.
May 31, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Gaza, Human rights, Israel, Palestine, Zionism |
Leave a comment
Anna Neistat, the Legal Director of the Clooney Foundation for Justice’s Docket Project, revealed that the organization is seeking to obtain secret arrest warrants for Russian journalists in Europe.
Neistat explained that some European countries have laws against “war propaganda” in their criminal codes.
“We are submitting requests to initiate criminal proceedings in countries where this provision exists in the criminal code,” Neistat told the US state-controlled ‘Voice of America’ radio (listed as a foreign agent in Russia).
“Prosecutors can issue an arrest warrant,” she said. “If the warrant is issued, it essentially becomes an EU-wide warrant through Europol. This means journalists could potentially be arrested and extradited to the country investigating them.”
Neistat added that no requests have been submitted yet, and the names of the journalists targeted by the project have not been disclosed. She mentioned that the focus is on “the most prominent Russian propagandists.”
“We are asking prosecutors to issue secret arrest warrants… so the names are not revealed,” she added. “We want these individuals to travel to other countries and be arrested there. It’s better if they are left guessing rather than receiving a clear warning.”
However, Neistat acknowledged that no cases have ever been initiated under the “war propaganda” articles in the criminal codes of the relevant countries.
The project is also considering approaching the International Criminal Court (ICC) to hold journalists accountable and investigate their involvement in “incitement to genocide.”
Neistat noted this would be a legally complex process, requiring evidence of the crime. Moreover, the court is currently dealing with a large number of cases.
Western countries overlook the persecution and murder of Russian journalists and threats against them from the Kiev regime.
Dmitry Polyanskiy, Russia’s First Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, stated that the Kiev regime openly boasts about its involvement in the killings of Russian journalists.
He mentioned recent deaths at the hands of Ukrainian special services, including Darya Dugina, Vladlen Tatarsky (real name Maxim Fomin), Oleg Klohov, Sputnik war correspondent Rostislav Zhuravlev, Rossiya-24 war correspondent Boris Maksudov and Izvestia war correspondent Semyon Yeremin. Polyanskiy added that the West deliberately turns a blind eye to these crimes by Kiev.
Additionally, Russian law enforcement authorities have uncovered Kiev’s plans to commit terrorist acts against several Russian journalists, including Vladimir Solovyov, Margarita Simonyan, Dmitry Kiselev, Olga Skabeeva and Yevgeny Popov.
May 31, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Deception | European Union, Human rights |
Leave a comment
In a new lawsuit, Webseed and Brighteon Media have accused multiple US government agencies and prominent tech companies of orchestrating a vast censorship operation aimed at suppressing dissenting viewpoints, particularly concerning COVID-19. The plaintiffs, Webseed and Brighteon Media, manage websites like NaturalNews.com and Brighteon.com, which have been at the center of controversy for their alternative health information and criticism of government policies.
We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.
The defendants include the Department of State, the Global Engagement Center (GEC), the Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and tech giants such as Meta Platforms (formerly Facebook), Google, and X. Additionally, organizations like NewsGuard Technologies, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), and the Global Disinformation Index (GDI) are implicated for their roles in creating and using tools to label and suppress what they consider misinformation.
Allegations of Censorship and Anti-Competitive Practices:
The lawsuit claims that these government entities and tech companies conspired to develop and promote censorship tools to suppress the speech of Webseed and Brighteon Media, among others. “The Government was the primary source of misinformation during the pandemic, and the Government censored dissidents and critics to hide that fact,” states Stanford University Professor J. Bhattacharya in support of the plaintiffs’ claims.
The plaintiffs argue that the government’s efforts were part of a broader strategy to silence voices that did not align with official narratives on COVID-19 and other issues. They assert that these actions were driven by an “anti-competitive animus” aimed at eliminating alternative viewpoints from the digital public square.
According to the complaint, the plaintiffs have suffered substantial economic harm, estimating losses between $25 million and $50 million due to reduced visibility and ad revenue from their platforms. They also claim significant reputational damage as a result of being labeled as purveyors of misinformation.
The complaint details how the GEC and other agencies allegedly funded and promoted tools developed by NewsGuard, ISD, and GDI to blacklist and demonetize websites like NaturalNews.com. These tools, which include blacklists and so-called “nutrition labels,” were then utilized by tech companies to censor content on their platforms. The plaintiffs argue that this collaboration between government agencies and private tech companies constitutes an unconstitutional suppression of free speech.
A Broader Pattern of Censorship:
The lawsuit references other high-profile cases, such as Missouri v. Biden, to illustrate a pattern of government overreach into the digital information space. It highlights how these efforts have extended beyond foreign disinformation to target domestic voices that challenge prevailing government narratives.
Webseed and Brighteon Media are seeking both monetary damages and injunctive relief to prevent further censorship. They contend that the government’s actions violate the First Amendment and call for an end to the use of these censorship tools.
As the case progresses, it promises to shine a light on the complex interplay between government agencies, tech companies, and the tools used to control the flow of information in the digital age. The outcome could have significant implications for the future of free speech and the regulation of online content.
May 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, Human rights, United States |
Leave a comment
On May 20, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court announced that he was seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant as well as for Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh, and Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri.
Officials in Washington lashed out against the court and began preparations to pressure the ICC to back off on pursuing the arrests. Netanyahu and Gallant, the United States insisted, should be left alone or left to Israel’s courts.
The Hamas officials should be held accountable, according to the State Department, but not by the ICC. “The Israeli government should hold them accountable on the battlefield. And if not a battlefield, then a court of law,” State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said. “We absolutely believe that Hamas should be held accountable. That could either be through the prosecution of the war effort by Israel. It could be by being killed. It could be by being brought to justice in an Israeli court.”
Congress is looking to take the lead in punishing the ICC. House Speaker Mike Johnson said, “Congress is reviewing all options, including sanctions, to punish the ICC and ensure its leadership faces consequences if they proceed.”
During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary of State Antony Blinken was asked if the White House would cooperate on legislation that “includes the question of the ICC sticking its nose in the business of countries that have an independent, legitimate, democratic judicial system.” Blinken responded that he is “committed to doing that.” He added, “We want to work with you on a bipartisan basis to find an appropriate response” and that “there’s no question we have to look at the appropriate steps to take to deal with, again, what is a profoundly wrong-headed decision.”
Blinken also told the Senate Appropriations subcommittee he would “welcome” working on “bipartisan” sanctions against the ICC. However, the White House may be considering other steps to deal with the ICC that do not include sanctions.
On May 28, White House spokesperson John Kirby said that sanctions were “not the right answer” to deal with the ICC arrest warrants. It is not that the White House would not punish the ICC, but that “Sanctions on the ICC are not an effective or appropriate tool to address U.S. concerns,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, adding that the White House “will work with Congress on other options to address the ICC overreach.”
Still, the White House remains firmly committed to thwarting the ICC deliberation into issuing an arrest warrant for Netanyahu. “Let me be clear,” Biden said, “We reject the ICC’s application for arrest warrants against Israeli leaders.”
Washington has centered its argument on the grounds that a democratic nation’s legal system should be given priority to act first. Marjorie Cohn, emerita professor of law at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and dean of the People’s Academy of International Law, told me that “the ICC operates under the principle of ‘complementarity.’ That means the Court will assume jurisdiction over a case only if the home country of the accused is unable or unwilling to hold him legally accountable.”
The White House also argued that Israel is not a member of the ICC, so the court lacks jurisdiction over Tel Aviv. Additionally, the Biden administration said that because the United States is not a member, it should not have to support or follow the court.
But, the U.S. fully supported the recent ICC arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over actions taken in Ukraine. Russia and Ukraine are also not members of the ICC.
Biden endorsed the arrest warrant for Putin. “Well, I think it’s justified,” he said. “But the question is—[the ICC is] not recognized internationally by us either. But I think it makes a very strong point.” Blinken urged all member nations of the ICC to comply with Putin’s arrest warrant. Asked if European allies should “turn over” Putin, Blinken answered, “I think anyone who’s a party to the court and has obligations should fulfill their obligations.”
A reporter asked if the administration’s policy for Israel would impact the Defence Department’s work “with the ICC to provide evidence about Ukraine.” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin answered, “Regarding the question of whether or not we’ll continue to provide support to the ICC with respect to crimes that are committed in Ukraine, yes, we continue that work.”
The separate standard for friends and enemies has consequences beyond the ICC. It nourishes the perception of the global majority and the newly emerging multipolar world that the U.S. has abandoned the universal application of international law for the self-serving application of the rules-based order. In doing so, it further damages the United States’ standing in the world and its pursuit of hegemony.
The ICC had jurisdiction to issue an arrest warrant for Putin because Ukraine accepted ad hoc jurisdiction of the court in 2014, meaning that crimes against humanity or genocide, but not crimes of aggression, committed on Ukrainian territory can be tried by the ICC.
But Palestine is an observer state in the UN General Assembly and also granted the ICC jurisdiction over its territory, including Gaza. On February 5, 2021, the ICC ruled that it does have jurisdiction over Palestine. What’s more, unlike Ukraine, Palestine is a signatory to the ICC’s Rome Statute.
The United States does not recognize the ICC. In 1998, 160 countries attended a conference to formulate the Rome Statute. Many of those countries advocated for universal jurisdiction that would give the new court jurisdiction over crimes committed anywhere in the world. The U.S. blocked that universal jurisdiction and insisted that the ICC have jurisdiction only over crimes committed in countries that voluntarily signed the Rome Statute. This was a loophole the U.S. planted for future exploitation.
In 2000, President Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute but did not send it to the Senate to be ratified. Two years later, President George W. Bush withdrew the signature. That ensured that the ICC could not prosecute Americans for war crimes.
That has always been an important concern for the United States. Current and former officials told The New York Times in 2023 that “American military leaders oppose helping the court investigate Russians because they fear setting a precedent that might help pave the way for it to prosecute Americans.” Following the decision to seek an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, Mike Johnson said, “If the ICC is allowed to threaten Israeli leaders, ours could be next.”
To ensure that never happens, in 2002, the Bush administration enacted the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act, or the “Hague Invasion Act,” as it came to be known. The act authorizes the U.S. to use “all means necessary… to bring about the release of covered U.S. persons and covered allied persons held captive by, on behalf, or at the request of the Court.”
To be doubly sure, the Act banned “the provision of U.S. military assistance… to the government of a country that is a party to the court.” That prohibition was extended in 2004 by the Nethercutt Amendment to include several other types of economic assistance. NATO countries and major non-NATO allies were exempt. For all other countries—unless the president deemed it important to the national security of the United States– there was only one route to exemption. That was by entering a Rome Statute Article 98 agreement with the United States, ensuring that they agree not to surrender Americans to the ICC, “preventing the International Criminal Court from proceeding against United States personnel present in such country.”
WikiLeaks revealed hundreds of cables that show how the U.S. used the threat of sanctions to force countries into Article 98 agreements. A confidential December 2002 U.S. cable from Honduras states, “The U.S. will help those countries that sign Article 98 agreements and cut aid to those that do not.”
The United States sought agreements from 77 countries who joined the ICC “to make extraditions of Americans to the Hague impossible.” They exerted significant pressure. Romania’s foreign minister said he “can’t remember anything they put so much weight or interest into.”
The European Union told member states that entering into an Article 98 agreement with the U.S. “would be inconsistent” with their ICC obligations. Human Rights Watch said the American goal was “to exempt U.S. military and civilian personnel from the jurisdiction of the ICC” and that signing the “impunity agreements… would breach their legal obligations under the Rome Statute.” In the end, at least one hundred countries signed Article 98 agreements with the United States.
The long list of sanctioned countries eventually boomeranged against the United States, leading countries to look to Russia and China for help and impeding the U.S. wars on terror and drugs. They were gradually dropped.
In 2020, when the ICC tried to investigate the American use of torture against terrorism detainees, the U.S. imposed sanctions on court officials. The Biden administration revoked the sanctions order in 2021. When the ICC resumed its investigation into Afghanistan, it decided to focus on the Taliban and the Islamic State in Khorasan Province and allow alleged U.S crimes to “take a back seat.”
Whatever the U.S. intent is—whether it is to protect its friend or itself—the hypocritically selective application of its policy undermines the universality of international law. It also reinforces the perception of the global majority and the newly emerging multipolar world that the U.S. is no longer a sponsor of international law but of a rules-based order that is invoked when it suits them or their friends and is not invoked when it doesn’t.
May 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite, War Crimes | Human rights, Israel, Palestine, United States |
Leave a comment
The label for Humira, once the best-selling drug in the world, lists its risks in plain print. One of them, in the label’s own words, is new “autoimmune” disease.
