Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Insider reveals truth about Covid-19 pandemic from within the National Health Service

How the misdiagnosis of deaths occurred and was due to changes from 2016

The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | January 15, 2023

An ex-director at one of the largest hospital trusts in the UK decided they wanted to reveal what really happened during the pandemic. They have kindly allow me to reproduce their thoughts. The catalyst for this revelation, according to the insider, was Dr. Malhotra speaking out about cardiac problems post vaccination.

This is an interesting take on what happened inside the National Health Service (NHS) and confirms, with more details, what we already knew and suspected.


Introduction (Long but important to understand the rest)

In 2016, the British Government proposed & piloted a change to the process of how deaths were certified across all hospitals in the UK. I have attached a link to this Department of Health (DoH) document.

The DoH document proposed a switch to the “Medical Examiner” (ME) System and was sent to a number of different audiences for feedback and consultation. The ME system was already being piloted at two hospitals up north. The results of the consultation are here.

Prior to the Covid-19 Pandemic, the death certification process involved treating doctors of a patient to attend Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs to discuss the death and either:

a) refer the death to the Coroner or

b) write a Medical Certificate of Cause of Death (MCCD).

The MCCD states the cause of death. Whereby a direct cause (1a) or contributing causes (1b) (1c) (1d) are stated along with co-morbidities (not directly causing the death) being written in (2) on the MCCD. The MCCD is only ever a probable cause of death, it is not definitive.

The only definitive way of determining an accurate and plausible cause of death is to refer the deceased patient to HM Coroner (if certain criteria is met), for HM Coroner to accept and take on the case, resulting in a Post Mortem (PM) being conducted by a Histopathologist. When a death is seen as natural and there is nothing untoward, the MCCD is written by the treating doctor of a deceased patient. Usually this is an F1, F2, SHO or Registrar that attends. It is rare for a treating Consultant to attend, but they will finalise the cause of death.

A strict hospital hierarchy exists within the NHS for doctors. It is as follows – from lowest to highest rank: Foundation Year 1 (FY1), Foundation Year 2 (FY2), Senior House Officer (SHO), Registrar (Reg), Consultant, Clinical Lead, Medical Director. Junior doctors will very rarely speak up or challenge their seniors. A senior decision is seen as final and it will be carried out and executed without any hesitance or questioning. In my 5.5 years of experience in End of Life Care, I have only ever seen one junior doctor disagree with a proposed cause of death and challenge their consultant.

With the number of deaths that occur in a hospital, as you can imagine, there is a great deal of variation with regards to causes of death, as we have numerous different doctors writing an MCCD and coming up with various different potential diseases in different orders.

The proposed ME system would change this, as the government would now hire and pay one Medical Examiner, to sit in every hospital and write all MCCD’s for all deceased patients. This would effectively eliminate any variation in causes of death.

In 2016, when I heard of this proposal, I worked as a Bereavement Officer at a hospital in Central London. My mentor/line manager at the time was a former Chief Nurse who managed Bereavement Services and all hospital deaths would be controlled by her and the department.

We essentially carried a huge amount of power with regards to decision making, as we would go through all patient notes following the death of a patient, and essentially guide and advise doctors on what would need to be written with regards to an MCCD or Coroners Referral.

In my personal opinion, our role was to sit on the fence and act in the best interests of a deceased patient (and their families), but also protect the hospital and our doctors from any potential negligence. As you can imagine many battles were fought over decisions about a cause of death of a patient or a referral to the coroner with a vast amount of doctors over the years.

F2’s and SHO’s were particularly the worst with regards to carrying an arrogance of knowing what should be written on an MCCD or stating that a patient didn’t need to be referred to the Coroner (often stating that their Consultant had given them instructions). It is worth noting that Consultants are also only human and can be incorrect at times too. We have to remember that they are succeeded in hierarchy by a Clinical Lead and beyond that a Medical Director. Who have far more experience and knowledge.

When I asked my mentor in 2016, how the ME system would change things, I was told that Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs would become purely administrative and that the clinical judgement would fall to the Medical Examiner.

The power and decision making with regards to MCCD/Coroners Referrals was being taken away not only from treating doctors but also from Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs/Bereavement Officers/Bereavement Service Managers/Directors of End of Life Care.

This decision making power was being handed solely to the Medical Examiner, who has not been involved in the treatment of a patient during an admission. I took all this information in at the time and acquired as much knowledge as I could from my mentor/line manager.

In 2016, I also happened to make a move and take up an opportunity to manage my own Bereavement Services at one of the largest hospital trusts in the whole of the UK. On average, I would oversee MCCD/Coroner Referrals for approx 1750 deaths on an annual basis. I developed a very close working relationship and friendship with one of the Medical Directors (a doctor with the highest ranking in a hospital). This was especially helpful when having to challenge doctors with regards to MCCDs/Coroners Referrals.

Progressing to Director of End of Life Care, I became involved with the reporting of mortality rates, conducting mortality reviews and writing hospital policies. I had also developed an excellent working relationship with the HM Coroner who oversaw our Trust. HM Coroner holds the power to investigate any hospital or trust with regards to a death or a number of deaths. A slight problem may arise, in that HM Coroner has an allegiance to the Crown and the Government.

When a death is reported to the Coroner. This was previously reported via telephone call by the treating doctor. A discussion was had with the Coroners Office and a direct outcome and instruction would come from the Coroner’s Office, by way of HM Coroner (via a phone call).

There is a fundamental flaw to this system, as there is no documentation of the decision and instruction from the Coroner’s. It comes via word of mouth. There is always room for error without any electronic documentation. Every Hospital/Trust & HM Coroner will have a different system of reporting deaths. I personally made a decision to safeguard my hospital and the trust, by developing an electronic coroners referral form, which I proposed to our Coroner and developed after their agreement. We now had documentation of every death being reported and every outcome.

When reporting a death, the Coroner will look at a proposed cause of death and accept it, or reject the cause of death and take on the case (death of the patient), leading to an Inquest or a PM.

In 2019, our Medical Director, came into my office one morning and stated that the Board of Directors at the Hospital had made a decision to switch to the Medical Examiner System. Hearing the words ME system was a massive case of Déjà vu (conversation with my mentor in 2016). I knew exactly what the ME system was, but I chose instead, to play the fool and enquire what exactly the ME system was and what it meant for our service, my staff and our roles. Everything the Medical Director mentioned to me that day was a carbon copy of what I already knew

I knew that my time in End of Life Care had come to an end. I’d reached the top and there was no more progress for me. Losing all power and decision making to any ME coming into the hospital did not appeal to me. I’d already made up my mind that I needed to leave. Seeking a new challenge and experience, I made a move in 2019 to another major hospital in Central London, this time side tracking into operational management. I was in charge of the operational management of Nephrology, Rheumatology, Dermatology and Diabetes & Endocrinology.

2020 – Covid Arrives

In Jan 2020, I remember hearing about the first case of Covid-19 at our hospital, with a patient arriving from China and walking into our A&E. A&E was shutdown and steam cleaned that day, I recollect the moment I heard about this. In my mind, I saw the reporting of Covid-19 in the media as nothing more than Bird Flu or Ebola, which had caused panic but yet passed. I wasn’t worried in the slightest bit.

Things began to escalate around in Feb 2020, around the time I was going on holiday. Due to the reporting by the media, I bought N95 masks as a precaution for my trip and to give to my parents and younger sister. I was blessed to have had an opportunity to spend a few days in Sri Lanka for a wedding and then nearly a whole month in Australia (March 2020). I watched as the narrative of a deadly infectious disease continued to grow with every day that passed. I made a decision to cut my holiday short by a couple of days so that I could make sure I got back to my family and not end up being stranded in Australia.

Upon returning to the UK in late March 2020. One of the immediate things that struck me was the lack of any temperature monitoring or questioning at Heathrow Airport. This seemed odd for a potentially deadly infectious disease that was spreading around the world. This was especially odd, as Sri Lanka & Australia had questioned me/checked temperatures upon arrival, with even Singapore monitoring temperatures during transit.

My mother had just recovered from Cancer, my father was over 70 and my younger sister was born with Down’s Syndrome alongside having multiple other conditions. I had three high risk individuals to Covid-19 in my family and I was scared/fearful of giving them Covid-19. I asked my hospital to allow me to work from home. They refused. I wasn’t deemed high risk, although I lived with my parents at the time. I needed to help my mum and my sister. The hospital held no regard for the safety of it’s employees. They forced me to come into work. I spent two months isolating in my bedroom, I barely came out of my room, for fear of spreading an infectious disease. Never once did I think about the situation or my prior experience or knowledge, I was just reacting to the media frenzy. I was full of panic and stress.

The first irregularity I noticed, was the government and media stating that Covid-19 was an infectious disease. However just before the first lockdown was implemented, I noted that the government had downgraded the status of Covid-19 stating it was no longer infectious. This made no sense to me. Why would we need to isolate if they downgraded the status? My circle of friends contained many medics and dentists. They were all panicking at the time, saying they had inadequate surgical masks and that they needed N95 masks.

N95 masks were seen as the only way to prevent medical professionals from becoming infected with Covid-19. The public being asked to wear surgical masks made no sense to me. The virus would be able to go straight through. Something didn’t seem right.

I ended up meeting and dating an FY1 doctor (my ex gf) around October 2020. We clicked because she was different from every other doctor, I had previously spoken to about Covid-19. She also had her suspicions and believed it wasn’t as infectious as it was made out to be. We both started to slowly realise that Covid-19 was a real disease (as it was showing up on X-rays in patients) but that it wasn’t infectious at all [NE – I have since confirmed with them that they mean not as infectious as was being made out], despite all the reporting in the media.

I needed to experience working in a Covid-19 hotspot and see all the action for myself. In March 2021, I quit my job at the hospital in Central London and took up an opportunity to manage A&E and AMU (Acute Medical Unit) at a hospital in South London. The 6 months that I spent working in A&E/AMU confirmed all my suspicions and culminated in my decision to end my career in the NHS.

The entire 6 months, I was not tested once with a PCR Test, despite walking into wards full of Covid-19 Positive patients on a daily basis. Yet we were required to test multiple times when visiting another country.

The PCR Test that the NHS was using to test patients, is known to have false-positive results. This is shown in numerous studies which can be found online, an example of which is:

Are you infectious if you have a positive PCR test result for COVID-19? – The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

If a patient tests positive for Covid-19 with a PCR Test, this doesn’t mean they are infected. If tested again, they may well turn out with a negative test. However in the NHS, patients are only tested once and this stays on their record throughout their admission. Hospital policies were changed alongside the implementation of the Medical Examiner System, to ensure that any patient who died within 30 days of positive test, would have to have Covid-19 as their primary cause of death. This was regulated by the Medical Examiner.

The highest cause of death at every hospital per annum pre Covid-19 is Pneumonia. Pneumonia is a Respiratory Disease like Covid-19. Pneumonia can be broken down into 4 different causes of death: Bronchopneumonia, Aspiration Pneumonia, Community Acquired Pneumonia & Hospital Acquired Pneumonia.

These four causes when added together kill the largest number of people on an annual basis prior to the pandemic.

The Medical Examiner (one individual in each hospital), was certifying all these Pneumonia deaths as Covid-19 deaths. When 4 different diseases being grouped and now being called Covid-19, you will inevitably see Covid-19 with a huge death rate.

The mainstream media was reporting on this huge increase in Covid-19 deaths due to the Medical Examiner system being in place. Patients being admitted and dying with very common conditions such as Old Age, Myocardial Infarctions, End Stage Kidney Failure, Haemorrhages, Strokes, COPD & Cancer etc were all now being certified as Covid-19 via the Medical Examiner System.

Hospitals were switching to and from the Medical Examiner system and the Pre Pandemic System as when they pleased. When Covid-19 deaths needed to be increased, the hospital would switch to the Medical Examiner System. Doctors were one week being told they needed to complete an MCCD, to then be told the following week that they weren’t required to fill out an MCCD, as the Medical Examiner was handling this.

Hospitals were incentivised to report Covid-19 deaths over normal deaths, as the government was paying hospitals additional money for every Covid-19 death that was being reported. The Medical Examiner system ensured that Covid-19 was being put down as the cause of death. The government sends out the annual NHS budget to Primary Care Trusts. This is split to fund Hospitals and GP Surgeries. A clinical coding team at each hospital will assign codes to each treatment or death, so that money is paid out to the hospitals.

Any doctor who argued against Covid-19 as a cause of death was bullied and vilified. The General Medical Council maintains a register of all doctors within the UK. This ensures that there is a fear of being struck off for speaking out against an agenda. The GMC effectively controls all doctors in the UK. Even if a doctor realises what is going on and wants to speak out. They will think twice about talking, as they would be risking their entire career and everything that they’ve worked so hard for.

Doctors essentially have their hands tied, many have families, kids, mortgages and mouths to feed. If I was in their situation, I would think twice about speaking out, for fear of being struck off by the GMC and losing everything.

The NHS Track & Trace App, which was introduced to try and control the spread of the virus, did not apply to medical professionals. We were all asked to turn this off, as Doctors and staff isolating for 14 days disrupted patient flow, beds and the discharge of patients.

Any doctor that I spoke to regarding taking the Covid-19 vaccine, were insistent that they were going to wait for a period of time, before taking it themselves, to ensure that it was safe. How is it ethical to give a vaccine to your patients, but not want to take it yourself? In my 12 years of NHS service, never has a doctor pushed or influenced the public to take a vaccine. Yet on social media, I was seeing close friends who were doctors, starting to post on social media that they have taken the vaccine and that the public should. I wouldn’t be surprised if doctors were being forced to promote the vaccine by their superiors or if they were receiving monetary gain in doing so.

I have no doubt in my mind, that the Government has planned the entire pandemic since 2016, when they first proposed the change to medical death certification. Stress leads to disease and illness. Panic leads to people following whatever orders and instructions that are given to them by authority, such as prolonged mask use, which leads to an increase in admissions in to the NHS system due to hypoxia and bacterial pneumonia.

The NHS treatment pathway involved patients being placed onto ventilators. There is a 50% chance of death from this clinical decision alone. How many innocent people have died from the clinical decision to place them onto a ventilator.

During boardrounds (where every admitted patient is discussed), we were seeing patients on a daily basis being admitted due to suffering from adverse affects of taking the vaccine. Patients were blacking out after taking the vaccine or suffering from clots or strokes.

The NHS is all about money and making money. The safety of a patient didn’t seem like the most important thing. It was more about how do we make more beds available so that another patient can be treated. Patients with no next of kin are discharged to nursing homes with care packages. I can’t comment on what happened to these patients in nursing homes, during the pandemic, as I have no experience of their inner workings.

Patients are seen as money, even upon death, hospitals receive money for each death. Is there an actual concern for patient health and safety? I know numerous doctors who are driven primarily by money and monetary gain.

THE REASON WHY I LEFT THE NHS in 2021

56 yr old male, admitted into A&E with end stage kidney failure, has a previous history of regular dialysis treatment for this. No respiratory symptoms on admission and no temperature. However when tested with a PCR Test he unfortunately tests positive. This stays on his record throughout his admission. Our hospital is relatively small in comparison to others I have worked at, we have no dialysis machine as a result. We urgently need to transfer this patient to another hospital otherwise this patient will die. Our treating doctor calls up larger hospitals with a dialysis machine to organise his transfer. All doctors pick up the phone and request the Covid-19 status of the patient. A transfer is declined due to a Covid-19 infection protocol. Our doctors again reiterate the point that this patient will die without dialysis. We are told there is nothing that can be done and that the patient cannot be accepted for transfer.

This gentleman ended up dying without dialysis. Now please tell me what goes on the MCCD….

1a) Covid-19

2) End Stage Kidney Failure

Not written by the treating doctor who disagreed with this cause of death, but by a medical examiner, put in place by the government and the hospital.

When innocent people are being killed by a corrupt organisation and system, for pure monetary gain, I can’t stand by and be part of this anymore. My conscience was clear and I no longer wanted to be a part of this anymore. I am very blessed and lucky that I was in a position to walk away. I’ve been able to speak out, because my hands are not tied and I am not regulated by any organisation or governing body. I believe in speaking the truth and in doing so, I am only just an instrument for God.

I joined the NHS, 12 years ago because I had a desire to help those in need, but the moment I realised that I was not doing this anymore was the time for me to walk away. I apologise to you all if the above thread is confusing with regards to terminology or you cannot understand it’s contents. I’m hoping that at the very least, it can be understood by my fellow medical professionals or by journalists who would like to report the truth.

January 15, 2023 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

Pro-mask propaganda cranks up a couple of notches

By Gary Sidley | Coronababble | January 11, 2023

It’s happening again. After a period of welcome sanity – where those covering their faces in community settings could accurately be described as a deviant minority – the pro-mask propaganda machine has gone into overdrive. In what seems to be a co-ordinated enterprise, in the last couple of weeks our mainstream media has spread a variety of news stories pushing for more of us to hide our faces behinds strips of cloth and plastic. These include:

1. The announcement, at the end of 2022, that Northampton and Kettering General Hospitals have decided to re-impose mask requirements on all patients and visitors. This policy change provides further evidence of the mask postcode lottery operating within our healthcare system, where the decisions are left to the whims of local bureaucrats.

2. The pro-mask baton was taken up in the new year when Professor Susan Hopkins (chief medical advisor at the UK Health Security Agency) urged people who feel ill to wear a mask should they venture outside. In the grand scheme of masking zealotry, this was a modest recommendation, but – ominously – it does perpetuate the dubious assertion that wearing face coverings in the community reduces viral transmission, as well as preparing the ground for further incremental restrictions.

3. Throughout 2020/21, fear porn was highly effective in leveraging compliance with Covid restrictions, so no wear-a-mask propaganda drive would be complete without some scary stories and images from China. Our mainstream media were only too keen to oblige, with headlines about Covid deaths soaring, funeral homes overwhelmed and bodies being burnt in the streets in the aftermath of China’s relaxing of restrictions.

4. And then – predictably – the arch ‘nudgers’ (aka behavioural scientists) put their heads above the parapet, pushing their collectivist agenda. In a Guardian article, Professor Stephen Reicher repeated the tired trope that those opposed to mass masking were right-wing activists engaged in a culture war. He then urges the psychological manipulation of the masses by equating mask wearing with virtue (otherwise known as the ‘ego’ nudge) when he recommends, ‘reframing mask wearing as a community issue: less about individuals exercising personal responsibility; more about a collective exercising social responsibility, looking after each other, making sure we all come through this well’.

Meanwhile, Professor David Halpern (chief executive of the Behavioural Insights Team, the UK’s ‘Nudge Unit’) was promoting a similar narrative. In an interview for the Daily Telegraph (funded by the Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute), Halpern celebrates the use of ‘informal social pressure’ to get people to wear masks throughout the Covid era, and champions the concept of a ‘collectivist mindset’.

In effect, these two high-profile behavioural scientists are urging more covert shaming and peer pressure to get people to do the ‘right’ thing.

5. Reinforcements for the pro-mask push then arrived in the form of spokespeople for the World Health Organisation (WHO) – a prominent mouthpiece for the global pandemic industry – who have been doing the rounds again, regurgitating the messages we heard throughout the Covid era. For instance, Dr Maria Van Kerkove (an epidemiologist at the WHO’s ‘Health Emergencies Program’) has been popping up on social media sharing scary stories about variants and urging us all to mask up when ‘around other people’. While Dr Abdirahman Mahamud (an ‘Incident Manager’ at the WHO) stridently proclaims that ‘masking saves lives’, a preposterous assertion that would – in a rational world – send the official fact-checkers into overdrive.

6. If – God forbid – mask mandates were to return, public transport is likely to be the first target. So a story highlighting the risks associated with air travel would be gold dust for the propagandists. And, hey presto, we have one. Evidently, some researchers have been rummaging in the waste-water systems of 29 aeroplanes and found that, in 28 of them, they contained the virus responsible for Covid-19. (I wonder how many millions of other bugs they would have found among the excrement?).

7. And to cap it all, Nicola Sturgeon – the mask matriarch from north of the border – appears again at a press conference to urge us all to wear masks on public transport.

If our public health specialists had been following the science, the requirement to wear masks in community settings would never have been imposed; the bulk of the more robust, real-world evidence concludes that community masking has no appreciable impact on viral transmission. Also, it is apparent that the mask U-turn in 2020 – when our experts shifted from a ‘masks don’t work’ narrative to an authoritarian one involving mandates – was driven by ideology rather than empirical research. Taking these two observations into account, it is now morally appropriate to resist this latest push by the pro-mask lobby for the re-imposition of this ineffectual and dehumanising restriction.

And what would be the most effective way to counter further mask mandates? DO NOT COMPLY.

January 14, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Will Japan and India become permanent members of the UN Security Council?

By Petr Konovalov – New Eastern Outlook – 14.01.2023

On December 12, 2022 in London, during a meeting of the British Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, its head, James Cleverly, said that he was in favor of expanding the number of permanent members of the UN Security Council (UNSC) by including Japan, India, Brazil and Germany.

The British diplomat believes that the current world order allows a much larger number of people to live much better than before, but today it needs some changes. According to Cleverly, the UK is interested in reflecting the needs of as many countries as possible in the UN. He also noted that the inclusion of Japan, Brazil, India and Germany would allow London to expand interaction with these countries and thus accelerate the growth of global prosperity.

The British Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs said that the established system of international relations, which was approved as a result of the victory of the Allies after the Second World War, is allegedly outdated due to the fact that since 1950 the volume of world trade has increased by about 40 times, which has led to a radical change in the balance of power in the world. Furthermore, he emphasized that demographic changes had also made their own adjustments to the modern world order.

The rhetoric of the British leadership is quite logical. The UK no longer represents the military and economic power that it used to be during the second half of the previous century. London is aware that it needs allies to support it internationally. The countries listed by James Cleverly, which, in his opinion, should become permanent members of the UN Security Council, maintain close relations with the US and the UK and are highly likely to pursue a common policy with London and Washington on many issues.

In accordance with the norms of international law, the UN Charter can be revised only with the unanimous consent of all the permanent members of the UN Security Council. France, which is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and is loyal to the policy pursued by Washington and London, will support the proposal of the UK, however, Russia and China, who are also permanent members of the UN Security Council, may not approve its expansion, as this may upset their geopolitical plans.

Russia welcomes the inclusion of India and Brazil in the list of permanent members of the UN Security Council. The Russian Federation has fairly warm relations with these states, and it is unlikely that Moscow will have any international disputes with them in the foreseeable future. Back in 2010, Russian President Vladimir Putin, who was serving as Prime Minister of the Russian Federation that year, during a meeting with Indian diplomats, said that India should be included in the list of permanent members of the UN Security Council. Subsequently, the Russian president has always adhered to this rhetoric. As for Russian-Brazilian relations, they have always been at a high level, and Lula da Silva, elected for the third time as President of Brazil in October 2022, is known for his pro-Russian views. During the previous presidency of Lula da Silva, the international organization BRICS was created (in 2006), which includes Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Consequently, the Russian Federation is likely to approve the inclusion of Brazil in the list of permanent members of the UN Security Council.

However, the Kremlin has a negative stance when it comes to the inclusion of Germany and Japan in the list of permanent members of the UN Security Council, since these states are pursuing an unfriendly policy towards Russia, and Tokyo completely casts doubt on the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation, claiming control over the Kuril Islands.

It should be noted that the inclusion of Germany, Brazil, Japan and India in the list of permanent members of the UN Security Council is not beneficial for China either, since these states maintain good relations with the United States and will adhere to a pro-American position in numerous international disputes.

Germany and Brazil are in close economic relations with London and Washington and therefore, with a high degree of probability, they will act in the interests of the US and the UK if they become permanent members of the UN Security Council. Of course, China will prevent such a development of events.

In China, the memory of Japan’s war crimes against the Chinese population during the Second World War is still fresh. Beijing also disapproves of Tokyo’s pro-American policy and is wary of the impressive number of US military installations in Japan.

Relations between Beijing and New Delhi are also at a fairly low level. India and China are competing for influence in places like Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. The Chinese authorities do not want the strengthening of Indian international influence and will do everything in their power to prevent India from being included in the list of permanent members of the UN Security Council.

It is important to emphasize that skirmishes have periodically occurred between Indian and Chinese border guards over the past 45 years. As recently as December 9, 2022, another conflict broke out between the military of China and India along the Indian line of actual control in the Tawang district in the west of the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh in an area of the disputed territory. As a result of the collision, the military personnel of the two countries were slightly injured.

Despite the rationality of the idea of expanding the list of permanent members of the UN Security Council, Russia and China are unlikely to take such a step. Russia will not vote for granting this privilege to Germany and Japan, which today openly support the Ukrainian army participating in hostilities against the Russian Armed Forces. In turn, China is not interested in increasing the clout in the international arena of Tokyo and New Delhi, which are on cool terms with Beijing. Also, China will not give an opportunity to Germany and Brazil to become permanent members of the UN Security Council since both countries sympathize with the policies of the states of the Western bloc. As noted above, without the unanimous consent of all the permanent members of the UN Security Council, changes in the norms of international law are impossible.

The West is pursuing its own interests and engaging in geopolitical confrontation with China through the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD), which includes Australia, the US, Japan and India. Within the framework of this organization, annual military exercises of the participating countries are held.

On May 24, 2022, a QUAD summit was held in Tokyo, the main agenda of which, according to Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, was to discuss how to counter the growth of China’s influence in East and Southeast Asia.

As it stands now, there will be no expansion in the number of countries that are permanent members of the UN Security Council any time soon, since this comes into conflict with the plans of several current permanent members of the UN Security Council. However, the absence of Japan and India in the UN Security Council is offset by their participation in the QUAD, as well as their close cooperation with the United States in the field of defense.

January 14, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

NATO’s Ominous Tank Orders for Ukraine… The Historic Spots of a Leopard

Strategic Culture Foundation | January 13, 2023

German-made tanks, the Panzer Leopard 2, are to be deployed in Ukraine in a war that is increasingly becoming an open confrontation between the U.S.-led NATO alliance and Russia.

Germany’s Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck has given approval for the move following the announcement on Wednesday by Polish President Andrzej Duda that a “company” of Leopards was being supplied from Poland to Ukraine.

There are a reported 2,000 German-made Leopards in service across 13 European countries. Officially, Berlin has to give its approval for countries to re-export the tank, which is seen as one of the world’s best in its class of main battlefield armored vehicles. That approval was swiftly forthcoming in Habeck’s affirmative response.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is now under intense pressure to authorize the additional supply of Leopards directly from Germany to Ukraine. For months, Scholz has been refusing to provide the heavy armor out of concern not to provoke Moscow which would perceive it as a definitive escalation. Figures within the Berlin government, especially Habeck’s Green Party, have been cajoling the chancellor to increase the supply of weapons. It is a foregone conclusion that Scholz will cave in and give the green light, as he has done on several previous occasions concerning prohibitions on other categories of weaponry.

What is abundantly clear is that the United States and its NATO allies are coordinating a larger-scale involvement in the war in Ukraine against Russia. They are marching in lockstep.

Last week, U.S. President Joe Biden announced an agreement with Germany to supply “light tanks” in the form of Bradley and Marder fighting vehicles. That move was coupled with an unprecedented decision by France to send AMX-10 RC light tanks to Ukraine. This week, Britain upped the ante by trumpeting that it was ready to supply Challenger 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine.

Polish President Duda was in the western Ukrainian city of Lviv on Wednesday accompanied by Lithuanian counterpart Gitanas Nauseda and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. The day before, on Tuesday, the German Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock (another warmongering Green member), made a surprise visit to Ukraine’s eastern city of Kharkiv where she hinted that Leopard tanks would be forthcoming.

Speaking alongside Germany’s top diplomat, the Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said cryptically: “I have no doubt Germany will send Leopard tanks to Ukraine… The German government somewhere deep down understands that the decision will be made and the tanks will be transferred to Ukraine.”

The implied fait accompli echoed the words of Joe Biden who warned just before the eruption of conflict in Ukraine in February last year that the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia would never become operational regardless of Berlin’s position.

In Lviv, the Polish leader also spoke about the deployment of Leopard tanks as part of an “international coalition” for sending such weaponry.

“A company of Leopard tanks will be handed over as part of a coalition that is being built because, as you know, a large number of formal requirements, agreements, and so on must be met, but primarily we want this to be an international coalition,” said Duda.

What that means is the German-made tanks are going to be sent to Ukraine as part of a much larger, coordinated NATO effort. There is an air of inevitability that the Leopards will be joined by U.S.-made M1 Abrams as well as British Challengers.

The narrative that is being propounded is that the heavy weapons must be ramped up to Ukraine in order to prevent an alleged Russian offensive from taking the capital Kiev and also to consolidate supposed gains made by Ukrainian military. This narrative is obviously contradictory and belies the Western disinformation peddled by its news media and governments which swivels between imminent defeat or imminent victory for the Kiev regime.

The significant military victory by Russian forces this week in taking control of Soledar, the salt mining town in Donbass, is being cited by NATO figures as evidence that heavier weapons and tanks must be urgently supplied to Ukraine.

What is astounding is the dearth of public debate in the Western states about the relentless supply of weaponry to Ukraine. Hundreds of billions of dollars and euros are given away to a corrupt cabal in Kiev without the slightest oversight. Despite unprecedented economic and social hardships for their general populations, the ruling elites of Western states are pumping more and more weaponry into a conflict that has got nothing to do with alleged “freedom and democracy” in Ukraine.

Western nations are being dragged deeper into a war against Russia with no public knowledge let alone democratic consent about the real reasons for the war. Those reasons are to do with promoting U.S.-led Western imperialist interests, which are profoundly at odds with those of ordinary citizens.

The move to supply main battle tanks by NATO powers is typical of the stealth that has driven the build-up to this war. Typically, the decision has been made in secret and everything else is all about delivering on the decision. Shameless lies about “defending democracy and freedom” are spouted, even though the regime being supported in Kiev by Western taxpayers’ money is one infested with NeoNazis.

Nations are being swept towards an all-out war between the U.S./NATO and Russia by elite rulers in hock to corporate interests and unaccountable deep-state planners.

Despicably and criminally, there is no call among Western governments or media for diplomatic initiatives to end the conflict in Ukraine and to address the deeper geopolitical causes. All elite discourse is about the imperative of “defeating Russia” and “regime change” in Moscow as if it is a doctrinal ordinance.

The conflict in Ukraine was sown in 2014 by the U.S. and NATO-backed coup against democracy and the subsequent weaponizing of a NeoNazi regime. But the seeds for that were borne from a more evil fruit that goes all the way back to the Second World War and Nazi Germany’s failed conquest of the Soviet Union.

The imperial designs of the Third Reich and its expansionist “lebensraum” have been inherited by the U.S.-led NATO axis. The deployment of Leopard tanks – in place of Panzer Tigers – trundling towards Russia is a visceral sign of antecedent and of who stands on the right side of history.

January 14, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Electric car makers put the brakes on UK production because they are too expensive to sell

“It is now expected that the UK will produce 280,000 fully electric cars and vans in 2025, down from previous estimates of 360,000.”

By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | January 13, 2023

Sales of pure electric cars, BEVs, were 267,000 last year, so this new forecast suggests flatlining.

I am not surprised in the least. A large proportion of EV sales are for company cars, due to the various tax advantages bestowed. Most private buyers however appear to be numpties who think they are saving the planet.

EVs offer nothing to the vast majority of the driving public, and it is hard to see any real breakthrough arriving anytime soon.

By coincidence, I was chatting with a BMW Sales Manager this week, who had just been turfed out of his X6 and given the IX electric model (which he says is crap!). The reason was that BMW had been pre-registering a lot of EVs before the end of the year, in order to meet government targets.

He says BMW were under government pressure to do so, though what that pressure is I cannot tell.

And all of this highlights the immense problems facing our car industry as the 2030 deadline nears. They are being forced to invest billions in setting up new assembly lines and engine plants to cater for the new models, whilst at the same time running down conventional car operations. On top of that, they may find that they cannot sell all of the EVs they are producing; or alternatively if they cut back on EV output, they risk losing market share.

January 14, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | | Leave a comment

Western sanctions, not Ukraine war, causing global recession: Analyst

Press TV – January 13, 2023

The recession of the world economy has little to do with the military conflict in Ukraine, according to a commentator, saying the main reason is Western sanctions against countries such as Russia, which is the main source of energy and food in the world.

Clive Menzies, a researcher and political economy analyst, made these remarks in an interview with Press TV’s Spotlight program.

The World Bank slashed its 2023 growth forecasts on Tuesday to levels teetering on the brink of recession for many countries as the impact of central bank rate hikes intensifies, Russia’s war in Ukraine continues, and the world’s major economic engines sputter.

The development lender said it now expected global GDP growth of 1.7 percent in 2023 — the slowest pace outside the 2009 and 2020 recessions in nearly three decades. In its previous Global Economic Prospects report, in June 2022, the bank had forecast 2023 global growth at 3.0 percent.

Menzies said the global economic collapse was predictable.

“We were warning seven years ago that we are heading for a global economic collapse and last summer when the governor of the Bank of England was suggesting that they were going to adhere to their two percent inflation target, that seemed somewhat laughable,” he remarked.

“The primary mechanisms that are causing this crisis have been long-standing… So there’s been money supply or money printing by the central banks; the major central banks ever since 2008 and that has accelerated in the last three years since September 2019.”

The World Bank says major slowdowns in advanced economies, including sharp cuts to its forecast to 0.5 percent for both the United States and the eurozone, could foreshadow a new global recession less than three years after the last one.

“The World Bank cited Ukraine as one of the factors in all this but actually it has nothing to do with Ukraine. It has to do with the sanctions,” Menzies noted.

“I was on a program in May 2022 where all of the commentators including myself were suggesting that the EU primarily shot itself in the foot with America’s encouragement; because it’s the sanctions that have created this acute problem.”

“The West believes that they can control the world centrally, they believe that there are too many of us on the planet, so they’re looking to reduce the population and at the same time exercise control and if you control food then you control populations.”

Russia launched a military operation in Ukraine in late February, following Kiev’s failure to implement the terms of the Minsk agreements and Moscow’s recognition of the breakaway regions of Donetsk and Luhansk.

At the time, Russian President Vladimir Putin said one of the goals of what he called a “special military operation” was to “de-Nazify” Ukraine.

Since the outbreak of war, Western countries, led by the United States and the United Kingdom, have announced unprecedented sanctions on Russia while supporting Ukraine militarily, steps that Russia has warned would only prolong the war.

World Bank President David Malpass said in a statement that weakness in growth and business investment “will compound the already devastating reversals in education, health, poverty and infrastructure and the increasing demands from climate change”.

“We’ve been at war since 2001 and it is the war of the structure,” read the statement.

The World Bank noted that some inflationary pressures started to abate as 2022 drew to a close, with lower energy and commodity prices, but warned that risks of new supply disruptions were high, and elevated core inflation may persist.

The bank called for increased support from the international community to help low-income countries deal with food and energy shocks, people displaced by conflicts, and a growing risk of debt crises.

It further said new concessional financing and grants are needed along with the leveraging of private capital and domestic resources to help boost investment in climate adaptation, human capital and health.

January 13, 2023 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

Nobody is safe from the Nudgers

Even Prime Ministers

The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | January 11, 2023

The Behavioural Insights Team (BIT) was set up in 2010 by the UK Cabinet Office to nudge the population into doing things they might not necessarily decide to do without prompting. Since then it has gone from strength to strength, massively expanded and its methods exported around the world.

David Halpern, a British psychologist, has been in charge of the BIT since its formation. In an astonishing admission in a recent Telegrapharticle’, David revealed how he and his team even used their techniques on Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of the UK at the time.

Professor Halpern and his team had decided that everyone needed to wear masks but Boris wasn’t as convinced. This was probably due to all the previous advice, trials and science showing that masks did little to help during a pandemic. However, the behavioural scientist thought it was their jobs to push back against Boris’ leadership that saw masks as “nonsensical”.

“We did share with him a slide pack at one point. It had a series of images of pretty much every single world leader wearing a mask, and then a picture with him not,” he recalls. This nudge was used to point out that “a normal thing for a world leader to do right now is wear a mask”.

David Halpern brazenly tells the British public how he used psychological techniques to change the mind of the man running the country. From his point of view, it is perfectly acceptable to use nudging on anyone and everyone, no matter their position, on an issue that he has decided is the correct path to take.

And this is the nudging he admits to, what else did he nudge Boris Johnson or other members of the government to do without them realising it?

The ‘article’ was in fact a piece commissioned for the Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute an “independent, not-for-profit founded in 2020 to generate practical, high-quality scientific research and behavioural insights in the area of health hygiene”.

But how ‘independent’ and ‘not-for-profit’ is an institute set up by a company motivated by profit? The Institute was set up by the Reckitt Benckiser Group (trading as Reckitt) whose brands include Dettol (antiseptics), Disprin & Neurofen (pain killers), Strepsils (sore throat medicine), other health and cleaning brands and…you guessed it…masks.

For example, in 2018, Reckitt teamed up with the Cambridge Mask Co to produce masks combatting the effects of air pollution.

So where is the line between nudging and advertising? Here we have a company motivated by profit, setting up a behavioural insights research team which no doubt advises the BIT on health hygiene issues. The BIT then nudges the population to buy and wear masks, which in turn leads to a healthy profit for the original company.

And if something gets in the way, like the leader of a country, no matter, we’ll just nudge them to do what we want.

The Telegraph ‘article’ notes how, in the US, mask wearing became a political issue, which happened to a much lesser extent in the UK. They determine that not wearing masks in the UK is due to cultural, not political reasons.

Comparing mask-wearing in East Asia to the UK, they seem to suggest that the way forward is for the state to be given more power.

“Because of that experience [past pandemics], they have changed their statutory laws to allow the state to have certain rights during a pandemic that trump individuals’ liberty.”

Another reason masking in the West is so controversial, according to the ‘article’ is that we don’t have a collectivist mindset.

“it’s harder to get people to do something they don’t want to do for the common good,” Prof Kwong said. “Even if it’s something as simple or as easy as wearing a mask.”

David Halpern thinks there is a link between experience and collectivism. Therefore because of Covid-19 “the response to a future pandemic may be more prepared and less individualistic”.

In a glimpse at what may be in store for the West, Professor Halpern explains how ‘behavioural and cultural imprinting’ may be used to create ‘habit loops’.

“in the same way that your body reacts to seeing the virus before… behaviourally some of the same is true. You can respond because the behavioural pathway is ready.” This allows for a “much clearer habit loop” for everyone, as well as for society.

So to encourage future masking there will be several focus points. Using key figures to create a ‘thread’ or ‘prompt’ to declare a social norm. Religion will also be targeted to create ‘social cues’ as well as clear messaging.

All of this combined creates a ‘scaffolding’ which can then be removed once mask wearing becomes habit.

“It’s like a little booster shot for your vaccination,” said Prof Halpern. “Occasionally you need to be reminded of wearing a mask. Then it can become quite a robust habit.”

In this revealing insight in to how the head of the BIT thinks, we can see that David Halpern has no problem into nudging world leaders to follow an agenda that he has deemed to be the correct one. Everything must be done for the common good so individuals can’t stand in the way.

With a complete lack of transparency in the BIT, especially now that it is private company, we have no idea what ‘common good’ agendas they are pursuing. The common good might benefit society as a whole but be detrimental to a segment within it. Is that ok?

We have learnt recently that children were forced to wear masks in school purely to appease teaching unions who threatened to stop teaching. So in this case the common good can be defined as keeping children in school, justifying nudging the use of masks. It is easy to find a common good to pursue which can then result in the justification of something bad.

And using the common good can quickly get out of hand. The defence cultural specialist unit, which co-incidentally was launched in the same year as the BIT, works “side-by side with psychological operation teams”. This unit is part of the infamous 77th Brigade which has been used against Covid misinformation.

This in turn can lead to a whole legion of fake doctors pushing for masking and lockdowns.

The masking nudging/propaganda is returning again which can be seen in this Times article. Wear a mask to help the health service. Wear a mask voluntarily so that we don’t succumb to another bout of Covid. Wear a mask, it’s the responsible thing to do.

Clear as day when you understand what is going on but for the rest of the population the masks will start being worn again.

January 12, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , , | Leave a comment

Gotcha! Gleeful Tories knife Andrew Bridgen

By John Hale | TCW Defending Freedom | January 11, 2023

The Tories, with the political establishment and mainstream media cheering on in the background, have finally got rid of that irritant MP Andrew Bridgen, who (albeit belatedly) keeps prodding them in the side with truth about Covid vaccine harms.

They have used the expedient of the Holocaust being referenced in a comment he quoted from a doctor: ‘As one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust.’

Chief whip Simon Hart proclaimed: ‘Andrew Bridgen has crossed a line, causing great offence in the process. As a nation we should be very proud of what has been achieved through the vaccine programme. The vaccine is the best defence against Covid that we have. Misinformation about the vaccine causes harm and costs lives. I am therefore removing the whip from Andrew Bridgen with immediate effect, pending a formal investigation.’

Rishi Sunak effectively smeared the North West Leicestershire MP as an anti-Semite in the Chamber of Lies (aka House of Commons): ‘Obviously, it is utterly unacceptable to make linkages and use language like that, and I’m determined that the scourge of anti-Semitism is eradicated. It has absolutely no place in our society. And I know that the previous few years have been challenging for the Jewish community, and I never want them to experience anything like that ever again.’

The establishment knives have found their target, and comments from the likes of John Mann, the government’s independent anti-Semitism adviser, and Andrew Percy, the Conservative MP and vice-chair of the All-Party Group against anti-Semitism, are calling for Bridgen to be barred from standing for the Conservative Party again.

The BBC, Sky News and Guardian have published their hit pieces, as have most other news outlets. Sky News further smeared Bridgen’s vaccine position by stating: ‘About 20million lives were saved by the Covid vaccine in its first year, Imperial College London research published in June last year found. The Imperial research suggests another 600,000 deaths could have been avoided if a World Health Organisation (WHO) target of vaccinating 40 per cent of the global population by the end of 2021 had been met.’

Michael Fabricant MP said of his former colleague: ‘If this deters people from being vaccinated and causes deaths as a direct consequence, he’ll have blood on his hands. His tweets are wholly irresponsible.’

This may come across as a piece of party political revenge, purging the Tories of a renegade MP who questioned one of its star ‘achievements’. But it may have deeper consequences.

It appears that the political establishment has circled its wagons and decided it will make a stand against any and all who voice questions regarding Covid vaccine.  No gradual rolling back on vaccine efficacy or safety, but a doubling down on the dishonest propaganda that espouses the importance and essential need for the vaccine and ongoing vigilance, and acceptance of Government as the only source of truth for future emergencies (e.g. catastrophic climate change).

The expulsion of Andrew Bridgen is a shot across the bows of any other MPs who might consider raising their heads above the parapet. The claims of vaccine safety and effectiveness will be amplified, false data re-asserted as truth, and opposition quelled by any means.

This is authoritarianism coming out into the light, ready to use its recently found power over our lives. Over the last three years it has taken control over almost all aspects of our lives, and now it has decided it is going to go on the offensive to cement its position of dominance over the shaping of all our futures, and it will not be forced to relinquish its grip without drastic action by us, the electorate.

Bridgen refutes anti-semitic smears

Statement by Andrew Bridgen MP

I’m disappointed that the Chief Whip, Simon Hart, with the support of the Prime Minister, has chosen to suspend me as a member of the Conservative Parliamentary Party. My tweet of 11th of January was in no way anti-Semitic. Indeed, it alluded to the Holocaust being the most heinous crime against humanity in living memory. Of course, if anyone is genuinely offended by my use of such imagery, then I apologize for any offence caused.

I wholeheartedly refute any suggestions that I am racist and currently I’m speaking to a legal team who will commence action against those who have led the call suggesting that I am. Indeed, the Israeli doctor I quoted in my tweet has stated that there was nothing at all antisemitic about the statement. The fact that I have been suspended over this matter says much about the current state of our democracy, the right to free speech and the apparent suspension of the scientific method of analysis of medicines being administered to billions of people.

As I’ve consistently maintained, there are very reasonable questions to be asked about the safety and effectiveness of the experimental MRNA vaccines and the risks and benefits of these treatments. There are reasonable questions to ask of a government that is considering extending the use of these experimental vaccines to children as young as six months of age. These, ladies and gentlemen, are babies.

There are reasonable questions about the side effects of MRNA vaccines, especially when we know categorically that the current risk of harm to most of the population, and especially young people, from COVID 19, is minuscule. We have a government who indemnifies vaccine manufacturers from claims against the harms caused by their products, and a government, who, it appears, actively look to remove MPs who raise questions about those harms.

I was saddened to hear yesterday of my suspension, but I’m not downhearted. I’ve received huge support from ordinary people, medical workers, who are too intimidated to speak out and of course from those who’ve experienced vaccine harms themselves or to a loved one. Hopefully the media interest around my suspension will finally get the issue of vaccine harms into the media who have been so reluctant to cover this issue for so long, an issue which is clearly of huge and growing concern to many people across the globe.

Reasonable questions about the safety and effectiveness of MRNA vaccines must continue to be asked, and I will continue to ask them. If I cannot do that as a Conservative member of Parliament, then so be it. Highlighting these important questions. Questions about life, death, serious injury, must override party loyalty. I owe that not only to my constituents in North West Leicestershire, but also to the wider British public and especially to our children and young people who are the very future of our great nation.

Thank you very much for listening to me.

Notes

Andrew’s statement can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/LD2lhNnlDbQ

January 12, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Yemen’s medics: Saudi-led coalition using biological weapons in war

By Yousef Mawry – Press TV – January 12, 2023

Sanaa – Doctors and medical experts in Yemen believe that Saudi Arabia and its coalition forces are using biological weapons which are believed to be the reason for the increased cancer and birth defect cases in Yemen. Yousef Mawry has the special story.

Sana is dying. She was born just a few days ago, but because of a rare birth malformation, doctors believe she only has a few days to live.

Sana is one of the thousands of Yemeni babies facing similar fate. Here at the Sabeen Hospital in the Yemeni capital Sana’a doctors say they have been receiving birth defect cases at an alarming rate since 2015. That’s when the Saudi-led coalition launched its war on Yemen. Doctors here are convinced that biological weapons were employed by the Saudis.

Cancer cases are also on the rise. The spokesperson for Yemen’s Ministry of Health says the data and statistics recorded since the war started indicate that biological weapons used by the Saudi-led coalition are the main cause of the steady increase in cancer and birth defects.

We visited the registration office at Yemen’s only oncology center. It was packed with people pushing their way to register for cancer treatment.

According to Yemen’s Ministry of Health, the number of cancer patients increased by more than 50% since the war was launched in 2015.

The Yemeni Ministry of Health says it will form a committee to officially investigate the main cause for the increase in birth defects and cancer cases in the areas that have been hit the most by Saudi airstrikes. Even if it’s evident that prohibited weapons were utilized by Saudi Arabia and its coalition forces, it is unlikely they will face prosecution since most of the weapons used in the war are supplied by the American and British governments.

Doctors and medical experts say the increase in cancer and birth defect cases is rooted in the eight-year Saudi-led war that has polluted Yemen’s air, water and food. They blame the Saudi-led coalition’s use of prohibited weapons such as biological weapons, cluster bombs and toxic gases.

January 12, 2023 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Britain and Japan to sign defense pact

UK and Japanese troops will be deployed on each other’s territory, as Tokyo deepens its alignment with NATO powers

RT | January 11, 2023

UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and his Japanese counterpart, Fumio Kishida, will sign a major defense agreement on Wednesday, Sunak’s office has announced. With Britain and its NATO allies focused on opposing both Russia and China, Japan is deepening its cooperation with the Western military machine.

The ‘Reciprocal Access Agreement’ will allow both countries to deploy troops on each other’s soil, and to hold “larger and more complex” joint military exercises, according to a statement from Downing Street.

While Japan already hosts around 50,000 US troops, Wednesday’s signing will make the UK the first European nation to have a reciprocal access deal with Japan. Australia has had such an agreement with Japan since 2007, although this pact became non-binding when it was renewed in October.

The signing comes a month after Japan, the UK, and Italy announced that they would team up to develop a sixth-generation fighter jet, merging separate national jet programs.

These developments mark a significant step by Japan away from its post-WWII constitution, which commits the country to a pacifist foreign policy and mandates that its military be a strictly defensive and peacekeeping force.

However, Japan joined the renewed Quadrilateral Security Dialogue – a loose military alliance with the US, India, and Australia explicitly aimed at countering China in the “Indo-Pacific” region – in 2017, and in December announced a doubling of its military budget, citing missile “missile threats” from China and North Korea.

Tokyo also joined the West in sanctioning Russia over the conflict in Ukraine, and plans on stationing supersonic missiles near Russia’s northeastern islands. Moscow considers this plan to pose “a serious challenge” to its security.

Sunak and Kishida are set to discuss both Ukraine and China on Wednesday, with the British prime minister’s office stating that they would talk about “the need to maintain our collective support” for Kiev and strengthen its military.

January 11, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Will 2023 be Worse Than 2022?

Is Joe Biden willing to destroy the world to “weaken Russia”?

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • JANUARY 10, 2023

Even though one has become accustomed to seeing the United States government behaving irrationally on an epic scale with no concern for what happens to the average citizen who is not a member of one of the freak show constituencies of the Democratic Party, it is still possible to be surprised or even shocked. Shortly before year’s end 2022 an article appeared in the mainstream media and was quite widely circulated. The headline that it was featured under in the original Business Insider version read “A nuclear attack would most likely target one of these 6 US cities — but an expert says none of them are prepared.” The cities were New York, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and San Francisco.

The article seeks to provide information and tips that would allow one to survive a nuclear attack, repeating commentary from several “experts” in emergency management and “public health” suggesting that a nuclear war would be catastrophic but not necessarily the end of the world. One should be prepared. It observes that “those cities would struggle to provide emergency services to the wounded. The cities also no longer have designated fallout shelters to protect people from radiation.” It is full of sage advice and off-the-cuff observations, including “Can you imagine a public official keeping buildings intact for fallout shelters when the real-estate market is so tight?” Or even better the advice from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)’s “nuclear detonation planning guide” that for everyday citizens in a city that has been nuked: “Get inside, stay inside, and stay tuned.” Dr. Ron Paul asks “Are they insane? They act as if a nuclear attack on the United States is just another inconvenience to plan for, like an ice storm or a hurricane.”

The article argues that the six cities would be prime targets as they are centers for vital infrastructure. The bomb blasts would kill hundreds of thousands or even millions of Americans with many more deaths to follow from radiation poisoning, but the article makes no attempt to explain why Russia, with a relatively sane leadership, would want to start a nuclear war that would potentially destroy the planet. Also, the targeting list of the cities provided by the “experts” is itself a bit odd. Surely Russia would attack military and government targets as a first priority to limit the possible retaliation while also crippling the ability of the White House and Pentagon to command and control the situation. Such targets would include both San Diego and Norfolk where the US Atlantic and Pacific fleets are based as well as the various Strategic Air Command bases and the underground federal government evacuation site in Mount Weather Virginia.

Reading the article, one is reminded of the early years of the Cold War that sought to reassure the public that nuclear war was somehow manageable. It was a time when we elementary school children were drilled in hiding under our desks when the air raid alarm went off. Herman Kahn was, at that time, the most famous advocate of the school of thought that the United States could survive the “unthinkable,” i.e. a nuclear war. An American physicist by training, Kahn became a founding member of the beyond neocon nationalist Hudson Institute, which is still unfortunately around. Kahn, who served in the US Army during the Second World War as a non-combat telephone lineman, started his career as a military strategist at the RAND Corporation. Kahn endorsed a policy of deterrence and argued that if the Soviet Union believed that the United States had a devastating second-strike capability then Moscow would not initiate hostilities, which he explained in his paper titled “The Nature and Feasibility of War and Deterrence”. The Russians had to believe that even a perfectly coordinated massive attack would guarantee a measure of retaliation that would leave them devastated as well. Kahn also posited his idea of a “winnable” nuclear exchange in his 1960 book On Thermonuclear War for which he is often cited as one of the inspirations for the title character of Stanley Kubrick’s classic film Dr. Strangelove.

The appearance of the Business Insider article dealing with a cool discussion of the survivability from a nuclear war suggests that the nutcases are again escaping from the psychiatric hospital here in the US and are obtaining top jobs in government and the media. While one continues to hope that somehow someone will wake up in the White House and realize that the deep dark hole that we the American people find ourselves in mandates a change of course and a genuine reset, there is little daylight visible in the darkness.

My particular concern relates to the entangling relationships that have kept our country permanently at war in spite of the fact that since the Cold War ended in 1991 no potential adversary has actually threatened the United States. Now, the federal government appears to be in the business of cultivating dangerous relationships to justify defense spending and placing the nation on the brink of what might prove to be catastrophic. The current US mission to “weaken Russia” and eventually also China in order to maintain its own “rules based international order” includes such hypocritical and utterly illegal under international law anomalies as the continued military occupation of part of Syria to deny that country’s leaders’ access to their oil fields and best agricultural land. A recent UN humanitarian agency investigation determined that the Syrian people are suffering and even starving as a result of that and US imposed sanctions that the Biden Administration maintains against all reason and humanity.

At the present time, however, the most entangling of all relationships, even more than with Israel, has to be the engagement of the US in the proxy war being fought against Russia on behalf of Ukraine, which is exactly what threatens to turn nuclear if someone blinks at the wrong time. Billions of dollars in direct aid as well as billions more in the form of weapons stripped from arsenals in Europe and the US have been given to the corrupt regime of President Volodymyr Zelensky while Zelensky continues to work assiduously to milk the situation and draw Washington into a deeper war directly confronting Moscow.

In fact, by some reckonings the war has already begun, with the US and its allies clearly dedicated to crippling the Russian economy while also getting rid of President Vladimir Putin. The 101st Airborne is now in place in Romania next to Ukraine to “warn” the Kremlin while the Pentagon has recently admitted that some American military personnel are already in Ukraine, contrary to the denials by White House spokesmen. The British have also revealed that some of their elite Special Ops personnel are on the ground. And there are reports that more American soldiers will soon be on the way, ostensibly to “track the weapons” being provided to Zelensky, which will include US-made, Patriot Missile batteries some of which might even be placed in NATO member Poland to provide air cover over Western Ukraine, a definite act of war as seen by Russia, which has warned that such a move would mean that the US and its allies had “effectively become a party” to the war in Ukraine and there will be “consequences.” “Consequences” means escalation.

The soldier-“trackers” mission may be in response to reports that weapons provided by NATO have been corruptly sold or given to third countries by the Ukrainians. The several US initiatives taken together could produce a rapid escalation of the conflict complete with dead Americans coming home in body bags and an inevitable direct US involvement in combat roles that could lead anywhere, but at this point it is the Russians who are acting with restraint by not targeting the NATO and US “advisers” who are already active in Ukraine.

Suspicion is also growing that the United States “green-lighted” in advance recent cruise missile attacks carried out by Ukraine against military targets deep inside Russia. Since the attacks, the White House has declared that Ukraine has “permission” to attack Russia and has basically conceded to the unbalanced Zelensky the right to make all the decisions and run the war that the US is largely funding, which is a formula for disaster. It is already known that Ukraine is receiving top level intelligence provided both by the US and also other NATO states. The precision attacks on Russia suggest that the Ukrainian army was given the coordinates of possible active targets, something that the US would be capable of providing but which would have been beyond the abilities of Ukraine, which possesses no satellite surveillance capability. If it is true that the White House was involved in escalating the conflict it would be a very dangerous move, inviting retaliation by Moscow.

To be sure, some idiots in Washington, mostly of the neocon variety, continue to see war against Russia as something like a crusade for world freedom. Rick Newman, Yahoo’s top Finance Columnist, observes how “Budget hawks in Congress are worried about granting President Biden’s request for an additional $38 billion in aid for Ukraine to help defeat the invading Russians.” He concludes “They’re right. Thirty-eight billion isn’t enough. Make it $50 billion. Or even $100 billion. The more, the better, until the job is done.”

Apparently, the bellicose Rick does not quite get that Russia has made clear that if it is about to be defeated by force majeure it will go nuclear. And Congress and the White House don’t seem to get it either, with both the Republican and Democratic parties oblivious to the real danger that confronts the American people. Nuclear war? Sure! Just hide in your basement, if you have one, and tune in.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

January 10, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

UK businesses to see energy bills soar as government cuts subsidy to firms by 85%

Press TV – January 10, 2023

The UK government is set to scrap the energy subsidies for businesses in the next financial year by 85 percent, leaving small businesses in a dire economic situation, as the cost-of-living crisis squeezes Britons’ lives.

British businesses will see their energy bills soar from April after the government announced the stoppage of the current bills support scheme for firms at the end of March when the price caps for energy bills will expire.

Describing the current level of support as “unsustainably expensive”, the government has decided to reduce the support rate from £18bn to £5.5bn in the planned six-month period.

Speaking to the House of Commons on Monday, Treasury Minister James Cartlidge was at pains to confirm that: “It is not sustainable for the exchequer to continue to support large numbers of businesses at the current level.”

“No responsible, serious government anywhere in the world can permanently shield businesses from this energy price shock,” Cartlidge said, acknowledging the soaring energy costs across the country.

Cartlidge also insisted it was necessary to “cap the taxpayer’s exposure to volatile energy prices” rather than providing open-ended support.

According to the government’s own calculations, a typical pub will see its bills rise by almost £3,000 a month when the new scheme takes effect, while a small shop would pay more than £450 a month, as an increase to its energy bills.

As Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is trying to restore fiscal credibility following the economic shock across the country, manufacturers say they may need to cut jobs and production due to rising energy costs.

Martin McTague, national chair of the Federation of Small Businesses, criticized the government’s new plan and said the reduction in help is a “huge disappointment”.

“This is so out of touch,” McTague said in an e-mailed statement. “The government will inevitably have to come back.”

The cost-of-living crisis across the UK has brought the industries and labor forces under intense pressure, prompting tens of industrial actions over payment disputes each month.

Moreover, the worst impact of the cost-of-living crisis is yet to hit the already struggling Britons, a leading think tank has said, warning that families across the UK have only experienced half of the lost income they are expected to suffer during 2023.

January 10, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | | Leave a comment