MEMO | February 8, 2024
A new £5.5 million ($6.9 million) pro-Israel initiative aimed at students has been launched by the UK. It’s reported that the initiative will seek to propagate the highly controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) “working definition” of anti-Semitism, to young children and students.
Details of the initiative were revealed by the UK government on Tuesday as part of what it calls an initiative to tackle anti-Semitism in education. According to the government website, the British Department of Education is seeking to tender a contract worth $6.9 million for potential suppliers to undertake the task of delivering its programme to schools and universities.
The successful bidder will be required to deliver the contract across the UK in the North East, North West, Yorkshire and the Humber, East Midlands, West Midlands, East of England, London, South East, South West. Bids have to be placed by 7 March this year.
The procurement is split into two distinct lots: The first is to develop and implement a programme of initiatives aimed at tackling anti-Semitism in universities. “The cornerstone” of the contract is the anti-Palestinian IHRA, which will be rolled out across the country and used to set basic guidelines.
The second lot requires the supplier to develop and implement a programme of initiatives aimed at tackling anti-Semitism in schools and colleges. This will involve the development and rollout of training for school and college staff and student engagement opportunities.
Concerns have been raised over the government’s deployment of the discredited IHRA definition of anti-Semitism for an initiative targeting children and universities. The so-called “working definition” of anti-Semitism favoured by Israel has been weaponised against critics of the apartheid state.
This week saw advocates of the IHRA suffer a major blow in their effort to proscribe anti-Zionist and anti-Israel views. In the landmark case involving Professor David Miller, a Bristol-based Employment Tribunal ruled that “anti-Zionist beliefs qualified as a philosophical belief and as a protected characteristic.”
The case is seen as being not only a vindication of Miller, who successfully sued the University of Bristol for wrongful dismissal, but the verdict has also exonerated those who have been warning for years about the weaponisation of anti-Semitism by the pro-Israel lobby against critics of the apartheid state.
Miller was a victim of a toxic anti-free speech culture generated after UK institutions adopted the IHRA definition. Governments, political parties, employers and universities began to impose speech codes with the clear aim of policing the boundaries of free speech regarding Israel and Zionism.
As an expert on the threat to democracy posed by corporate lobbying who exposed, among other things, the role of the global Zionist movement in fuelling anti-Muslim hatred, Miller became an obvious target. He was accused of breaching the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism. The University of Bristol adopted in full the “working definition” in 2019, three years before firing Miller.
Miller’s victory has sent shockwaves through the pro-Israel lobby in Britain. Already there are calls for reckoning to take place over the way in which anti-Semitism has been weaponised through the adoption of the IHRA definition in order to purge members from the Labour Party for their avowedly anti-Zionist views.
UK flagship aircraft carrier breaks down before it has even fired a shot. If ever there was a fitting image for its modern true state, this is it.
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 7, 2024
British rulers think they can start a war against Russia. They can’t even contain Yemeni fighters in the Red Sea. And its top-notch aircraft carrier just got towed away before it even saw action.
Delusions about “Great Britain” and its military power are laughable. Britain is nothing but a rogue state whose arrogance and delusions are – like its American overseer – a danger to global security and peace.
Britain’s Royal Navy flagship, the recently built aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth, has embarrassingly been forced to pull out of a major NATO war drill due to a mechanical breakdown.
HMS Queen Elizabeth is supposed to be the showpiece of Britain’s military firepower. Built for $5 billion, the warship is spanking new. It is billed as a “super-carrier”. The vessel is not just a flagship for the Royal Navy. It is a flagship for Britain.
At the last minute, the ship had to cancel participation in the huge NATO war exercises currently underway across Europe. One of its propellers was discovered to be faulty. Instead of leading Britain’s contingency in the biggest NATO mobilization since the Cold War, the aircraft carrier is now laid up in the repair yard.
The weeks-long NATO war maneuvers known as Steadfast Defender are intended as a demonstration of robust military power to Russia. Coming at a time of heightened tensions over the war in Ukraine, the NATO exercises across Northern Europe and Scandinavia are viewed by Moscow as a veiled threat. The rehearsal for a war involves 90,000 troops from over 30 nations, an armada of warships, and nuclear-capable fighter jets flown from the U.S.
The failure of HMS Queen Elizabeth to muster at the crucial moment only adds to Britain’s embarrassment. It underscores criticism voiced even by British military experts that the country is not fit to wage a modern war contrary to the bellicose posturing of British politicians and military commanders. Certainly not against Russia whose advanced firepower has been proven against NATO-backed Ukraine.
Moreover, several independent military analysts contend that the entire U.S.-led NATO alliance is no match for Russia, nor China for that matter. After all, the U.S. and NATO allies were forced to retreat from Afghanistan in 2021 unable to defeat Taliban insurgents despite 2o years of occupying that country.
During the past two years of conflict in Ukraine, Russian forces have been able to destroy a vast array of weapons supplied by NATO. Admittedly, the Ukrainian regime has occasionally been able to inflict grievous damage on Russia. The killing of 28 people at the weekend in the city of Lysychansk with U.S.-supplied HIMARS rockets is a case in point. The shooting down of a Russian transport plane with U.S. Patriot missiles on January 24 with the loss of 74 onboard is another example.
Nevertheless, the NATO arsenal at the disposal of Ukraine has not succeeded in enabling any strategic gain against Russia. As former Pentagon advisor Doug Macgregor and others have noted, Russia has all but won the proxy war. The implication is that the U.S. and its NATO allies are outgunned by superior Russian military technology.
Therefore, the deployment of NATO’s forces in the current war maneuvers in Europe is something of a toothless tiger. That said, however, the provocation to Moscow is still a dangerous escalation in hostilities considering the potential for miscalculation between nuclear powers.
The saga of Britain’s super aircraft carrier is an apt metaphor. Britain and its NATO allies are more and more a projection of image without substance. It’s more psychological operation to intimidate rather than actual effective offensive capability.
Soon after completing sea trials only a couple of years ago, HMS Queen Elizabeth’s first assignment was a world tour to show off “Global Britain”. For post-Brexit Britain with the bumptious Boris Johnson in Downing Street, the spectacle was meant to advertise “Rule Britannia” in the modern age. The nostalgia for former imperial glory is cringe-making but it is essential to the British myth of “greatness”.
Fast forward to the present, Britain’s navy is deployed in the Red Sea helping the Americans bomb Yemen, the poorest country in the Arab region. The Anglo-American duo are supposedly defending international shipping from Yemeni forces who have interdicted the vital sea route in an act of solidarity with Palestinians being slaughtered in Gaza by U.S.-armed Israel.
After the last salvo of missiles on Yemen at the weekend, British Foreign Minister David Cameron warned the Yemeni armed forces “to stop” targeting merchant ships trying to transit the Red Sea. Who does “Lord Cameron” think he is? The Yemenis have told the Eton-educated ponce to shove his edicts. They say their blockade on shipping will continue until Israel’s genocidal offensive in Gaza is ended. The United States and Britain could stop the Gaza horror immediately if they ceased supporting Israel with weapons and political cover.
The Yemeni Ansar Allah government is allied with other “resistance” groups in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon as well as Iran. They all say it is the United States and Britain who are destabilizing the region with their “reckless aggression” and support for the Israeli genocide in Gaza.
The Biden administration is currently bombing three countries: Iraq, Syria and Yemen, and threatening to attack Iran – all in support of Israel’s criminal annihilation of Palestinians.
Britain has deployed a guided-missile destroyer HMS Diamond to hit Yemen along with American warships. Turns out though that the British destroyer does not have the missiles capable of striking Yemeni land from the sea. The Royal Air Force is having to fly Tornado fighter jets to Cyprus in the East Mediterranean from where they take off to drop bombs on Yemen. That’s roughly a 10,000-kilometer round trip. This “show of might” is farcical if not pathetic.
For such a supposedly “vital” defense of international shipping, one would think that Britain should have dispatched its flagship aircraft carrier to partner with the American counterpart USS Dwight Eisenhower in the Red Sea.
Just as well London did not. With a broken propeller, the HMS Queen Elizabeth would have been a sitting duck for the Yemenis. Rather than the Union Jack, the Brits would have quite possibly been running up the white flag.
Several respected military analysts say the American and British forces in the Red Sea have badly underestimated the Yemeni operation. Former CIA analyst Larry Johnson and former U.S. Marine intelligence officer Scott Ritter have both said that the Yemenis possess drones and ballistic missiles capable of sinking the U.S. and British ships. With mounting attacks by the Yemenis, it’s only a matter of time before one of the American or British warships is sunk.
The multiple barrages that the U.S. and Britain have carried out on Yemen since January 12 – at least 16 rounds of air strikes on dozens of locations – have not deterred the Yemenis in the slightest. Scott Ritter says that is because the Yemeni weapons are buried deep underground or are highly mobile systems that can evade strikes.
To say the least, Britain has a serious image and reality problem. It proclaims to be defending freedom of navigation and international law. The reality is Britain is once again acting as America’s attack dog – as it always does. This time, the Brits are more like an old bulldog whose legs are gone.
Arrogant, delusional British politicians haven’t realized yet that “Great Britain” is nothing but a broken-down has-been empire whose heyday was over a century ago. Its economy and society are decrepit and falling apart from a failed capitalist system that generates rampant inequality and poverty.
There was a distant time when Britain was a formidable naval power.
Now its flagship aircraft carrier breaks down before it has even fired a shot. If ever there was a fitting image for modern Britain’s true state, this is it.
By Kym Robinson | The Libertarian Institute | February 6, 2024
The war drums are beating, and public officials and the media are certain that the enemy must be conquered. The war is over there, away from home, in someone else’s land. The public is conditioned to accept that war is inevitable, that for the liberal democracies of Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States it is an “obligation.” It seldom matters whether the voting tax base wants war or not. As bombs drop in Yemen, Syria, and Iraq, as Israel destroys Gaza and the Russians fight in Ukraine, Washington and its allies talk about expanding the warfront to include Iran, China, and North Korea. Perpetual war is the health of empire, the glory of the nation, and the profit for a few. But who fights these wars?
Many of the veterans who fought in the Global War on Terror in Iraq and Afghanistan are past their prime, dead, injured, or cynical of the government that exploited them. The recruitment drives, even as the criteria are lowered, are seducing less and less willing bodies to fill the uniforms. The career incentive to join the military is not as appealing when war is a guarantee. Eligible young men are not so naive and removed from the understanding that their mental and physical health may be at risk that they’ll venture into another overseas war. Those who traditionally joined to protect and defend are less inclined to do so given that the mlitary is an offensive instrument of policy, recklessly used without regard for consequence.
In 2024 it’s hard enough for employers to find capable young workers who can handle physical or moderately skilled work, and who will turn up consistently. It’s easier for a lot of people to lean into the welfare state, to seek comfortable, inconsequential jobs or to find careers that don’t involve killing. Physical and mental health is a meandering factor in a culture that swells with obesity and has a populace riddled with depression and anxiety over the mundane. In Australia it is easier and far more profitable for someone to either go on a disability pension (for a litany of real or imagined reasons), or to become a high paid support worker for said pensioners rather than diving into military or even police service.
War is often a voyeur’s experience, where some are cuckolded for the entertainment or cynicism of others. War is the religion of the Anglosphere. Every generation has its war, a foreign land that rolls off the tongue with ease only to return to forgotten obscurity in a generation’s time. Some, however, like Vietnam or Iraq linger permanently. But most are forgotten as war zones and now only exist as destinations for the soldier’s grandchildren to visit, enjoy the food, or marry from, like Korea and Malaysia. The adventurers, true believers, mercenaries, and those with seemingly no other options do still enlist, but there’s less of them.
It’s not just that the military is struggling to get new recruits, but also re-enlistments. The relationship between the military and its members is disfigured as inefficiency and dysfunction become more openly discussed. On social media anti-military voices are competing against their slogans and the empty promises of recruiters in a tug of war between the warfare state and those who are skeptical of its very existence. Social media “influencers” like the Island Boys are paid to push recruitment for the Army alongside the advertising of energy drinks and other affiliate marketing thrown their way—though it is unlikely that they themselves would enlist or be capable of doing so. The children watching are impressionable, all the same.
Woke cultural messaging has also harmed the military, as it has disenfranchised its traditional base while attempting to appeal to those who have no stomach for training, let alone warfare. The wars themselves, along with the government’s own woke cultural shift and attempts at inclusion, have deranged the recruiters task of satisfying numbers and valuable candidates for the services. Confused advertising and a disdain for the people who usually fill the uniforms in warfare has hamstrung the military when it needs bodies to kill and die for it. A woke window dressing to satisfy the academic and corporate zeitgeist may seem empowering, but in reality is another form of mandated delusion.
The government’s will for war exceeds its population’s capacity to wage it. Conscription tends to not be a viable solution. Ukraine and Russia have embraced such traditions of martial slavery and it has unveiled a force of fodder to be killed. Another generation of “McNamara’s Morons” is an unsatisfactory solution which may lead to liability for both commanders and what few skilled and motivated professionals remain in the military.
Regardless of the human attrition and how thinly spread the capable and willing may become in such a war, the high maintenance of modern weapon systems will erode their capabilities over time. Skilled crews and technicians will be required to work almost non-stop, not to mention the manufacture and logistics required to feed such machines for prolonged operations, especially in combat against an enemy who is near peer or in some theaters a peer level threat. It is one thing to attack Houthis in Yemen who are recovering from years of war against the Saudi coalition but it is another to wage war against Iran or China on their home turf, a war they have been preparing for. Let’s not forget, neither of them have ambitions to invade Australia, the United States or United Kingdom. But the reverse is a constant.
Images of drones chasing Russian or Ukraine soldiers around their AFVs, only to detonate once in proximity, exposes us to the modern realities of war. The distance between the killer and the killed is not a new thing. The drone and remote weapon system is becoming smaller, with a greater range and versatility that may have people logging on for a few hours a day from home to assassinate strangers thousands of miles away with as much regard as though they are killing NPCs in a computer game. That in itself is not how wars are to be won. That same technology and efficiency of distance will be used against the invader as well. The likeliness of sympathetic outsiders “logging on” to join the fight is a reality that may also occur. Those who will fight for either side given any incentive is also a reality, so long as they have a device that allows them to connect to the remote killing machines. The future remains.
Contractors are becoming more common, professionals who are not constrained by government religion when it comes to how a military must serve and act in matters of formal tradition and legal status. They’re killers and operators who serve the government, work alongside the military, and should they die will not become a statistic that influences politics at home. Many are ex-servicemen of the government that they now are hired by, trained and motivated elements that perform tasks as a service to their singular customer. The Russians on the other hand have a more varied mercenary custom, one that is made up of contractors while also using prisoner units, inspired by the promise of pay and freedom. Both ancient aspects of war are to be dug up in a modern context.
Mercenaries and even drone operators are still only a finite resource, and automated systems are a little ways off. Wars of such a grand scale on so many fronts will still require boots on the ground. The imaginations of the stoic German soldier manning the Atlantic wall in the weeks before D-Day betray the reality that many of the defending Wehrmacht were former Soviet soldiers and a rag tag of convalescing others. Horse-drawn weapons from those captured to mutations of expedience with men in ill fitting uniforms crisscrossing a frontier that consumed men and material was the other reality far in the East. Contrary to the mechanized depictions of a technologically superior, super race of warriors, the reality, then as it is now, is that logistics, man power, and attrition are immutable factors in war.
Waging numerous small wars on a limited scale or even as an occupying force in an attempt to “civilize” a wilderness will always consume. They can become black holes that suck the life, money, and material out of an invader. Yet, still mostly men will be required for these prolonged operations and the well for such men is running dry. The post-9/11 era provided many eager bodies who felt the euphoria for vengeance against enemies. The terrorists and their “alien religion” was an easy to hate specter as the twin towers smouldered into smoke and ash. Over two decades later and the reality of such wars is more apparent to the wider public, while those willing men are now dead, injured, or robbed of their youth. The next generation does not have the eagerness for war, and the crusader’s zeal is not so widely felt.
So, as the drums of war beat and the call to arms is made by those who will never fight it, the question remains: who will? No matter what the claimed reasons for war is—spreading democracy, human rights, humanitarianism, security, or hegemonic expedience for many at home—many may very well. But agree enough to enlist? Unlikely. Many who do believe in the need for war are the creatures of Facebook or social media bobble heads, spectators and opinion spewers alike. They are most welcome to form their own battalions to fight for their cause. They won’t, but rather instead they will merely support the government in its ambition to send mostly men to die and kill. Those killers, however, are becoming fewer. Improving technology so that the human element for war is less important and finding incentives to pay, reward, and motivate human beings so that they will kill strangers with little regard are weak solutions.
The one constant, regardless of the means and methods, is that war will always hurt the innocent. Perhaps in time, as the liberal democracies depress into ill health and rely on automated machines to do the killing, it will be from the minds of the weapons who grow the morality to say, “No more.” For now, while some minds in government seek more war, the public’s flesh is less willing or too flabby to make it so.
Press TV – February 5, 2024
A sociology professor sacked by the University of Bristol over his anti-Zionist comments has won a landmark decision by an employment tribunal, which decided that he was discriminated against because of his beliefs.
In its judgment on Monday, the Bristol employment tribunal ruled that Professor David Miller’s anti-Zionist beliefs qualified as a philosophical belief, which are protected under the Equality Act 2010.
It added that Miller was subject to direct discrimination because of his anti-Zionist beliefs.
Rahman Lowe Solicitors, who represented Miller at court, called the judgement a significant triumph, establishing that anti-Zionist beliefs are legally protected in the workplace.
“Prof. Miller successfully claimed discrimination based on his philosophical belief that Zionism is inherently racist, imperialist, and colonial, [which is] a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010, alongside a finding of unfair dismissal,” a statement issued by the solicitors said.
“This judgement establishes for the first time ever that anti-Zionist beliefs are protected in the workplace,” they added.
“I am extremely pleased that the tribunal has concluded that I was unfairly and wrongfully dismissed by the University of Bristol. I am also very proud that we have managed to establish that anti-Zionist views qualify as a protected belief under the UK Equality Act,” Miller said.
Professor Miller was fired by the University of Bristol in October 2021 after he made statements about the role of the Zionist movement in promoting Islamophobia.
Following his dismissal, Miller asserted that he was subject to an organized campaign by groups and individuals opposed to his anti-Zionist views, which was aimed at getting him sacked.
He took the University of Bristol to the Employment Tribunal on the basis of unlawful discrimination for his beliefs in breach of the Equality Act 2010.
In a post on X social media platform after winning the case, Miller said, “This is not just a victory for me, but also a victory for pro-Palestine campaigners across Britain.”
“Over many years, anti-Zionists have faced harassment and censorship in Britain due to the efforts of the Israel lobby. Many people have faced disciplinary procedures and lost their jobs for manifesting their anti-Zionist beliefs,” he added.
Miller expressed hope that “this case will become a touchstone precedent in all the future battles that we face with the racist and genocidal ideology of Zionism and the movement to which it is attached.”
“This verdict is also a vindication of the approach I have taken throughout this period, which is to say that a genocidal and maximalist Zionism can only be effectively confronted by a maximalist anti-Zionism,” he noted.
Right across the Anglo-American mainstream media, the killing of Palestinians is seen as normal. It’s only Israeli lives that matter.
BY DES FREEDMAN | DECLASSIFIED UK | JANUARY 30, 2024
Twenty-four Israeli soldiers were killed in two separate incidents in Gaza on 22 January. Mainstream media outlets around the world reacted in unison: that this was the “deadliest day” for Israel since 7 October.
This exact phrase was used in headlines on 23 January carried by news agencies such as Reuters and AFP, and major broadcasters including the BBC, CBS, NBC, CNN, ABC and ITV News.
The exact same phrase was also used by leading news titles including the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Time magazine, Daily Telegraph, the Sun, Jerusalem Post, Guardian, London’s Evening Standard, Financial Times, Independent and Yahoo News.
On the same day, Israeli forces killed almost 200 Palestinians in Gaza including at least 65 people in Khan Younis alone.
These deaths received no headlines in the above outlets. Where they were reported, they were listed as part of the regular daily round-up of events in an unfolding genocide that has now seen more than 26,000 people killed in Gaza.
How is it possible that the world’s media could embrace exactly the same phrase in relation to Israeli victims but largely ignore the identities of the much higher number of Palestinians killed?
Why would 22 January be described as “deadly” for one group of people but not for another?
Unequal value
You might expect that editors took the “deadliest day” phrase from press statements from the Israeli government or military.
Yet Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesperson Daniel Hagari did not use this phrase in his statement and neither did the IDF Chief of the General Staff, Herzi Halevi, who instead simply called it a “difficult day”.
Prime minister Benjamin Netanhayu also described it as “one of the most difficult days” while Israel’s President, Isaac Herzog, spoke of “an unbearably difficult morning”.
He used the same language as both Knesset speaker Amir Ohana and minister Benny Gantz, both of whom referred to a “painful morning”.
Of course, it is possible the phrase was used in private and informal briefings to the press on the morning of 23 January. It is, however, equally conceivable that this was a trope that came “naturally” from a deep-rooted idea in the western media that the lives of Israelis and Palestinians are not of equal value.
And, therefore, that measuring the “deadliness” of a particular day should only be done for Israelis (where every life matters) and not for Palestinians (whose individual lives clearly appear to count for less).
‘Deadliest day’
Indeed, a search of the Nexis database of UK national and local news (including BBC broadcast bulletins) reveals that there were 856 uses of the phrase “deadliest day” from 7 October 2023 until 25 January 2024, none of which directly referred to evidence of Palestinian deaths in Gaza.
The only exception to this were some BBC bulletins on 25 October which mentioned “Palestinians reporting the deadliest day in Gaza” (emphasis added).
Otherwise, there was not a single reference during this period across the British media to “the deadliest day for Palestinians” or “for the people of Gaza”.
The other approximately 850 references directly related only to Israeli casualties. Some 28 per cent of them focused on the killing of IDF soldiers on 22 January.
The vast majority referred to the events of 7 October, described either as “the deadliest day for Jews” or “the deadliest day for the Jewish people” which accounted for some 25% of all references.
Many of these stories were focused on the words of US president Joe Biden who, in a much publicised speech to Jewish leaders at the White House, described the Hamas attack on 7 October as the “deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust”.
Biden’s words alone make up 20% of all references to the “deadliest day” trope.
Perhaps Biden’s words were on the minds of editors across the world as they listened to Israeli spokespeople on the morning of 23 January and that the deaths of 24 IDF soldiers merited such a phrase when talking about Israeli lives.
Framing the war
But why has the phrase not been used in relation to Palestinians and, indeed, why is there so little preoccupation with days when particularly large number of Gazans are killed?
Precisely because the war is not framed in a way which recognises the equal worth of all those affected – in other words, a situation where every instance of significant Palestinian casualties would deserve a headline – it’s hard to be certain of which have been the very deadliest days for the residents of Gaza.
However, it’s clear that the period immediately after the temporary ceasefire in the last week of November saw particularly intense airstrikes and there were, according to Al Jazeera, at least 700 Palestinians killed on 2 December alone.
Yet there was no mention in the UK media about this being the “deadliest day” for Palestinians. Instead, the Guardian simply ran with a headline of “‘Israel says its ground forces are operating across ‘all of Gaza’” while the Sunday Times wrote that “Fears for hostages as Gazans say bombardment is worse than ever”.
According to the Mail Online, “Israel says it is expanding its ground operations against Hamas’ strongholds across the whole of the Gaza Strip as IDF continues to bomb territory after terrorists broke fragile truce”.
The BBC’s TV news bulletins on 3 December carried distressing footage of casualties but also featured a quote from an adviser to Netanyahu saying that “Israel was making the ‘maximum effort’ to avoid killing civilians” without carrying an immediate rebuttal of this outrageous claim.
In other words, despite the fact that 30 times more Palestinians were killed on 2 December than when the 24 IDF soldiers were killed, there was no recognition of the “deadliness” of that day.
Instead, the framing was all about the strategic plans of the Israeli military rather than the mass slaughter of Palestinians.
‘Intensive strike’
On 26 December, a further 241 people were killed by Israeli bombs. Britain’s “newspaper of record”, The Times, responded with the headline: “Israel-Gaza war: Palestinians hit by ‘most savage bombing’” with a sub heading that “Israel launches most intensive strike since Hamas attack on October 7”.
You could be forgiven for thinking that there was nothing deadly about this episode because, after all, Palestinians were only being “struck” as opposed to brutally killed.
But this was hardly an exceptional day given that Oxfam reported earlier this year that Israel’s military was killing Palestinians at an average rate of 250 people a day, a figure it said exceeded the daily death toll of any other major conflict of recent years.
There is clearly a brutal politics to counting the dead. The New York Times ran an article on 22 January headlined “The Decline of Deaths in Gaza” arguing that average daily deaths across a 30-day period have now fallen below 150.
For the NYT, it is “plausible that a lower percentage of deaths are among civilians now that Israel’s attacks have become more targeted and the [average] daily toll has declined”.
Not only, however, is there little evidence that the IDF is in any way opposed to killing civilians but the idea that casualties are declining at a time when we are soon likely to see a total of 30,000 Palestinian deaths is profoundly shocking.
Any slowdown in the rate of killing is hardly a consolation to the millions who still live in fear of IDF raids and rockets.
Media consensus
The media consensus that only Israelis are the victims of the “deadliest days” in the region and not Palestinians, despite the latter accounting for 95% of deaths since 7 October, is one of the many illustrations of the unequal and profoundly distorted coverage of this war.
Until the South African government submitted its partially successful claim to the International Court of Justice, news organisations were unwilling even to investigate the genocidal language of Israeli political and military leaders.
The media also routinely uses dehumanising and differential language where Israelis are “massacred” while Palestinians simply “die”. This illustrates the awful role of the mainstream media in paving the way for the ethnic cleansing we are currently seeing.
The real reason you don’t see or hear the media talk about a “deadly day” for Palestinians is that every day is deadly when you live in Gaza.
The Cradle – February 4, 2024
US and UK warships and fighter jets bombed Yemen on 4 February, in a wave of missile strikes US officials claim hit 36 targets.
The US said in a CENTCOM statement that it hit “36 targets at 13 locations,” striking “underground storage facilities, command and control, missile systems, UAV storage and operations sites, radars, and helicopters.”
According to the statement, the US, UK, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, and New Zealand took part in the attacks.
The strikes were in response to Yemeni efforts to target Israeli-linked commercial ships passing through the narrow Bab al-Mandab Strait in the Red Sea. The Yemeni attacks are in response to Israel’s genocidal bombing campaign in Gaza.
Rather than press its ally Israel to stop its military campaign, which has killed over 27,000 Palestinians, the majority women and children, the US has joined forces with the UK to bomb Yemen.
Saturday’s strikes were launched by US F/A-18 fighter jets from the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower aircraft carrier, British Typhoon FGR4 fighter aircraft, and the Navy destroyers USS Gravely and the USS Carney firing Tomahawk missiles from the Red Sea, according to US officials and the UK Defense Ministry.
The Yemen Armed Forces issued a statement detailing where the attacks took place, reporting 13 raids on Sanaa, 9 on Hodeidah, 11 on Taiz, 7 on Al-Bayda, 7 on Hajjah, and one on Saada.
“These attacks will not deter us from our moral, religious, and humanitarian stance in support of the steadfast Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip, and will not go unanswered and punished,” read the statement.
The strikes come one day after the US sent B-1 bombers to target 85 locations affiliated with the Islamic Resistance of Iraq in eastern Syria and western Iraq, killing at least 16. This was in response to an operation by the Islamic Resistance in Iraq that targeted US military outpost Tower 22 in Jordan last week, killing three US soldiers.
US officials reportedly told Al-Jazeera that the strikes on Yemen are “considered a next round of retaliation for the killing of the [US] soldiers in Jordan.”
Like Ansarallah, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq coalition, formed after 7 October, has also targeted Israel, as well as US bases in Syria and Iraq. The groups say their attacks are in response to Israel’s genocide in Gaza, which the US has supported militarily and diplomatically.
Ansarallah leaders in Yemen say they have no intention of scaling back their campaign despite pressure from the US and UK bombing.
Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, an Ansarallah official, said, “military operations against Israel will continue until the crimes of genocide in Gaza are stopped and the siege on its residents is lifted, no matter the sacrifices it costs us.” He wrote on social media that the “American-British aggression against Yemen will not go unanswered, and we will meet escalation with escalation.”
By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 04.02.2024
The UK has urged its NATO allies to consider sending the alliance’s expeditionary force to Ukraine, an informed source told Sputnik. According to the source, the alleged move came “in connection with the unfavorable developments in the Ukrainian theater of military operations for Kiev”.
The insider added that Britain also called on NATO to consider imposing a no-fly zone over the territory controlled by the Zelensky regime and to increase military aid to Ukraine.
”The UK’s reported plans about deploying NATO’s expeditionary corps to Ukraine is “a fantastical delusion on the part of the Brits and has no foundation in reality,” retired CIA intelligence officer and State Department official Larry Johnson told Sputnik.
“But just because the Brits are insane does not mean Russia can ignore them. It is a serious proposal,” he added.
Johnson was partly echoed by Matthew Gordon-Banks, an international relations consultant, former member of Parliament and retired senior research fellow at the UK Defence Academy, who said he didn’t think the rumors of a NATO force in Ukraine should be taken seriously.
“The suggestions I have heard are quite unrealistic at present,” Gordon-Banks stated.
Asked to comment on the “unfavorable development of events” for Kiev on the battlefield, he emphasized that “things are collapsing in Kiev quite quickly”.
“[Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky has not been able to fire his top general, and I think he is now very much a ‘lame duck’ president,” Gordon-Banks argued, referring to the commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces, Valery Zaluzhny.
The same tone was struck by Earl Rasmussen, a retired US Army lieutenant colonel turned geopolitical and military affairs consultant, who warned that if the information about London’s plans is true, and “if this is somebody’s dream, it could quickly become a nightmare for British and NATO forces.
“But it is not a realistic solution or proposal. Russia has complete air dominance, escalatory dominance, logistical dominance, ammunition dominance. This would be catastrophic for any UK forces and definitely would show a symbol of direct NATO involvement, which could really be dangerous, as far as escalation goes,” Rasmussen emphasized, noting that “the British forces would probably be wiped out, fairly rapidly.”
The US Army veteran suggested that someone in the UK military might be having “some type of delusional experience” for even suggesting such a scenario. “It’s a suicide mission for those troops. And it definitely would pull NATO into a much more dangerous situation and direct confrontation [with Russia],” Rasmussen concluded.
By Professor Angus Dalgleish | TCW Defending Freedom | January 30, 2024
I have previously reported on my concern about the rise in stable cancer relapses that I have witnessed in my melanoma clinic.
None of these patients of mine presented with the classic prodrome of relapse that I had always noticed previously, such as severe depression due to bereavement, divorce or bankruptcy. Indeed the only thing I found they had in common was to have had a recent booster mRNA covid vaccine. I phoned around my colleagues not only in the UK but also in Australia to check their experience. In no case did they deny such a link. Indeed, they were equally alarmed at the association between booster vaccines and relapse that they too were witnessing, as well an increase in new cancers, particularly in those below 50 years old. In addition to melanoma these colleagues were also very concerned about a sudden big increase in young patients with colorectal cancer.
Rather than instigating a proper inquiry to investigate this when we raised these concerns, the medical authorities told us all that what we were witnessing was a coincidence, that we had to prove it and above all, not to upset our patients.
Recently the American Cancer Society (ACS) has warned of a surge in new cancer cases in the US this lastyear of over 2million, with many of these cases occurring in younger patients. Indeed, the chief scientific officer of the ACS, William Dahat, announced in addition that cancers were presenting with more aggressive disease and larger tumours at the time of diagnosis, especially in younger patients. Of further interest it noted a difference in the microbiome (the community of micro-organisms such as fungi, bacteria and viruses that exist in a different environment) between patients under 50 compared with those over 50.
This surge mirrors a report from Phinance Technologies of late last year which analysed in detail data from the UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) which showed that disability and deaths in 2021 and 2022 had increased dramatically in all age groups, but especially in the 15-44 age group.
The Lancet also published an article before Christmas reporting excess deaths post covid pandemic to be up by 11-15 per cent over than expected for under-25s and for between 25-49 year olds. This is in fact the pattern found in many countries that have looked at the data. Germany for example has reported excess deaths rising from 7 per cent in 2020 to 24 per cent in 2023.
What makes this all the more surprising is that negative deaths should be the norm after a pandemic as you cannot die twice!
The link between covid vaccines and myocarditis and early death particularly in the young, highlighted by Peter McCullough and colleagues as well as by Aseem Malhotra here in the UK, is incontestable. Now we have a confirmatory report from the CDC in the US, data that the authorities here have refused to act on so as not to alarm vaccinated patients!
Although it is obvious that these excess deaths are real and are continuing to rise, all we get from our Chief Medical Officer, Sir Chris Whitty, are risible attempts to explain away the increase, such as that it is a result of patients not getting their statins in lockdown (hey, patients under 55 do not get statins routinely!) The situation is no better in the US where Harvard researchers have put the blame on sleep disturbance!
The first obvious candidate is lockdown itself when the National Health Service became the National Covid Service and all screening was cancelled or delayed, resulting in an increase in cancer detection and late presentation. Many negative lifestyle factors almost certainly increased as a result of lockdown, such as a lack of exercise and too much food, especially takeaways.
What very few of these reviews consider is that this rise in excess deaths could be a result of the booster vaccine programme, even it clearly follows the vaccine rollout programme starting in 2021 and increasing in 2022 and 2023.
With regards to the link to cancer, there are numerous reports in the literature of cancers arising within days of the vaccines being administered, especially in the case of lymphomas and leukaemias. There are several reports of PET scan mapped tumours exploding at the site and draining area of covid injections with the advice to inject covid vaccines away from known cancers! Outside my clinical observations, several friends have developed cancer after a totally unnecessary covid booster taken only to facilitate travel.
For a possible association between a booster vaccine and the appearance of cancer we need a plausible scientific causal explanation. Unfortunately for those who still insist that these cases are mere coincidences, there are several compelling ones to choose from:
Firstly, it has been reported that T cell responses are suppressed after the boosters (not the first two injections) and that this is especially marked in some cancer patients.
Secondly, the antibody repertoire switches after the first booster from a protective IgG1 and IgG3 dominant B cell response to a tolerising IgG4 one, made worse by further boosters, as reported in a recent Science Immunology paper. As many cancers are controlled by effective T cell led immunity, the sudden perturbation of this control would clearly explain the development of B cell leukaemia and lymphomas, melanoma renal cell cancers and colorectal ones, all tumours which can respond to immunotherapy.
Another report by Loacker et al in Clin Chem Lab Med shows that mRNA vaccines increase PD-L1 on granulocytes and monocytes, which means they effect the very opposite of what the immunotherapy agents do against these tumours, and whichin turn explains why many of these tumours appear to be resistant to this otherwise effective therapy. Taken together, the effect on the immune response of these boosters can easily explain the relapses and so-called turbo-charged cancers appearing.
Other reports document the presence of DNA plasmids and SV 40 (a known cancer-inducing gene) sequences, as well as the ability of mRNA to bind to important suppressor genes. Although this is controversial and has been challenged, it has led to the realisation of significant batch-to-batch variation that could enhance the cancer process yet probably not manifest itself for a few years. The very possibility that we could be sitting on a vaccine-inducing cancer time bomb means that we must never again get involved into a mass vaccine programme for another possible Disease X.
But unless the government wakes up to this now, we will be at the mercy of the World Health Organization doing the very same thing when they decide to release the Disease X virus in order to take back control and destroy our lives all over again.
RT | February 1, 2024
The US and its allies have shown little interest in launching an international probe into last week’s crash involving a Russian aircraft that was carrying Ukrainian captives, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Thursday. President Vladimir Putin called for an investigation on Wednesday.
A Russian Il-76 military transport aircraft with 65 Ukrainian POWs on board crashed in Belgorod Region on January 24. All of the Ukrainians, as well as six crew members and three Russian military personnel, died in the crash. Moscow immediately blamed Kiev for the incident.
On Wednesday, Putin said Moscow had asked “for international experts to be deployed [here] to conduct an analysis, assess the existing material evidence” as part of an international probe.
According to Peskov, Western nations have demonstrated no interest in the Russian initiative. “The president stated it publicly and openly yesterday that we are ready for an international investigation,” he said, adding that the US and its allies were demanding official written requests and refusing to consider the issue without such documentation.
The West’s position came as no surprise for Russia, since it is a “direct participant” in the ongoing conflict, Peskov said. “It is clear that not one of them [the US and its allies] would be interested in conducting a probe and stumbling upon themselves as a result,” he added.
Earlier, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky had disputed Moscow’s claims and called for an international probe into the incident as well.
On Thursday, the Russian Investigative Committee confirmed that the aircraft had been shot down by a US-made Patriot air-defense system. Such systems have been provided to Kiev’s troops by the Western backers.
BY THOMAS BROOKE | REMIX NEWS | JANUARY 30, 2024
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has been accused of intervening in the U.K.’s domestic politics by warning Chancellor Jeremy Hunt against tax cuts so that net zero targets can be achieved.
In the latest update to its economic forecasts, IMF analysts said that the U.K. Treasury should not be considering cuts to taxation — as hinted at recently by Hunt ahead of March’s budget statement — and should instead raise it in particular areas — all at a time when ordinary Brits continue to struggle with the cost of living.
“Preserving high-quality public services and undertaking critical public investments to boost growth and achieve the net zero targets, will imply higher spending needs over the medium term than are currently reflected in the government’s budget plans,” an IMF spokesperson said.
“Accommodating these needs… will already require generating additional high-quality fiscal savings, including on the tax side.
“The IMF has recommended strengthening carbon and property taxation, eliminating loopholes in wealth and income taxation, and reforming the pensions triple lock.
“It is in this context that staff advises against further tax cuts,” they added.
U.K. conservatives, however, hit back at the global financial institution and accused it of meddling in domestic affairs ahead of a general election expected later this year.
Speaking to Remix News, Conservative MP Dame Andrea Jenkyns said: “It is simple, as Conservatives we should have lox taw and freedom of choice.
“We cannot be telling people how to heat their homes or what cars to drive. Say no to net zero!” added the former government minister.
Former Brexit Party MEP Martin Daubney accused globalist elites of wanting ordinary people to be “poorer, colder, and hungry to fund their eco-vanity projects and keep the taxes rolling in.”
“Supranational super-quango interferes in British domestic affairs in an attempt to keep us saddled with high taxes. Globalism is awful,” added the London-based Bruges Group think tank.
Ahead of the Spring Budget, Chancellor Hunt reiterated his desire to cut taxes but added that “it is too early to know whether further reductions in tax will be affordable.”
“We continue to believe that smart tax reductions can make a big difference in boosting growth,” he added.
Sputnik – 30.01.2024
More bad news for Ukraine – Japan and the UK fail to carry out preliminary agreements on supplying the struggling army with more artillery, as the silver lining at the end of the tunnel goes dim for the Kiev regime.
Efforts by the UK and Japan to replenish Ukraine’s artillery stocks have fallen through, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has reported, citing sources privy to the draft.
There are two core aspects to the issue – the technical mismatch of the British and the Japanese military blueprints, and the limited production capacity of the supposed Japanese contractor.
By the initiative, Japan was to produce 155 mm shells under an official license granted by the BAE Systems company, one of the leading global defense contractors.
The shells in question were to be manufactured at local Japanese facilities and then were supposed to be shipped over to the UK. Thus, Japan was essentially getting tacitly involved in supplying the Kiev regime with foreign arms without ever having to openly side with Ukraine in the ongoing conflict.
Last December, The Financial Times reported on a similar plan being considered between Japan and the US. The draft was aimed at replenishing the now depleted Western armory stockpiles, so that Kiev’s sponsors were in a better place to provide even more supplies without having to compromise their own military potential.
However, both plans stalled. According to the WSJ sources, British officials have assessed whether the military could use 155 mm projectiles produced by the Japanese Komatsu manufacturer, and have ultimately decided to scrap the plan altogether.
The main issue reportedly stems from troubles in using weapons and arms systems that come from different manufacturers. Besides, the WSJ also noted Komatsu’s limited manufacturing capacity of the shells.
The US and its allies ramped up their military assistance to Kiev shortly after Russia launched its special military operation in 2022. Moscow has repeatedly warned that NATO countries are “playing with fire” by supplying arms that the Kremlin said adds to prolonging the conflict in Ukraine. Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, for his part, underscored that any cargo with weapons for the Zelensky regime would become a legitimate target for Russian forces.
The Cradle | January 27, 2024
Yemen’s Al-Masirah TV reported on 27 January that US and UK warplanes bombed the port of Ras Issa, the country’s main oil export terminal, located in Hodeidah province.
The news followed an announcement by the US Central Command (CENTCOM), which claimed: “On Jan. 27 at approximately 3:45 a.m. (Sanaa time), US Central Command Forces conducted a strike against a Houthi anti-ship missile aimed into the Red Sea and which was prepared to launch. US Forces identified the missile in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen.”
No casualties have been reported from the latest US-led aggression on Yemen.
The attack came a few hours after the country’s armed forces carried out a successful operation against the Marshall Islands-flagged and UK-linked Martin Luanda oil tanker in the Gulf of Aden, setting the vessel on fire.
No deaths or injuries were reported among the crew as a US navy ship was providing assistance, CENTCOM said.
The attack on the oil tanker was described as “a victory for the oppression of the Palestinian people, and a response to the US-UK aggression against Yemen” by armed forces spokesman Brigadier General Yahya Saree.
Singapore-based multinational commodity trading company Transfigura confirmed the Martin Luanda was operated on its behalf and that it was carrying Russian naphtha “bought below the price cap in line with G7 sanctions.”
“We are aware of reports that the M/V Marlin Luanda, a Marshall Islands-flagged tanker, has sustained damage from an attack in the Gulf of Aden. Current reports suggest no casualties, and nearby coalition vessels are on the scene,” a UK government spokesperson said following the attack.
Shortly after the attack, the Free Spirit vessel, chartered by Swiss-based Dutch multinational energy and commodity trading company Vitol to carry crude oil, did a U-turn before reaching the Gulf of Aden, according to data from LSEG Shipping Research.
Although US, UK, and Israeli-linked vessels are being forced to avoid the Red Sea altogether thanks to Sanaa’s pro-Palestine operations, Saudi and Chinese shipments are continuing to transit the vital waterway unimpeded.
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
By Lisa Pease | Consortium News | September 16, 2013
More than a half century ago, just after midnight on Sept. 18, 1961, the plane carrying UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld and 15 others went down in a plane crash over Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia). All 16 died, but the facts of the crash were provocatively mysterious. … continue
Aletho News If Americans Knew No Tricks Zone
Aletho News 