Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Moscow comments on Trump’s ‘only two genders’ move

RT | January 21, 2025

The decades-long US promotion of the diversity and inclusion agenda should be investigated on an international level, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said.

Zakharova made the remarks on Tuesday, a day after newly inaugurated US President Donald Trump ended protections for transgender rights and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within the federal government.

“Can you imagine how many people’s lives have been ruined over the years of promoting this nonsense?” Zakharova wrote on Telegram.

“What should hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people do now, who have been forced to accept the ideology of amputating healthy genitals and replacing them with artificial ones?” she added.

Zakharova stated that officials in Washington have been forcing other countries “to show solidarity with what they called anti-scientific narratives,” which in essence was “the very propaganda that kills both the body and the soul.”

This “inhumane doctrine” was linked with aid, sanctions, and political and financial pressure, as well as the “humiliation of human dignity and bullying,” Zakharova claimed.

On his first day back in office, Trump repealed 78 executive orders signed by his predecessor, Joe Biden, including at least a dozen measures supporting racial equity and combating discrimination against gay and transgender people.

Federal US agencies and departments have 60 days from the order’s signing to end DEI-related practices.

The order followed a promise Trump made during his inaugural address earlier on Monday, when he vowed to end “the government policy of trying to socially engineer race and gender into every aspect of public and private life” in favor of a society that is “colorblind and merit-based.”

Trump also said it will be official US policy that “there are only two genders: male and female.”

The order is meant to create “equal treatment” and requests “a plan to dismantle the DEI bureaucracy,” a Trump aide told the New York Post. More actions on DEI are reportedly coming soon that would impact private business.

The rollback of DEI programs drew an immediate backlash from civil rights groups, who promised to “fight back against these harmful provisions.”

Some corporations, including the largest US private employer, Walmart, had already started reversing DEI initiatives in the weeks following Trump’s election in November. Meta recently dismantled its DEI department, citing a shifting legal and policy landscape. McDonald’s has scaled back diversity targets for senior leadership. Other companies such as Costco and Apple reportedly remain committed to diversity policies.

January 21, 2025 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Trump One, Biden Nothing

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | January 21, 2025

Before the first day of Donald Trump’s second term in office, he already had more diplomatic achievements than Joe Biden did on the last day of his. The entrance of the Trump team into the negotiations was the difference in Gaza. Biden opened his administration with the promise of “a new era of relentless diplomacy.” But after four years of wasted opportunity, the Biden administration would struggle to name a single diplomatic accomplishment.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s inclusion in his January 2 exit interview with The New York Times of the Biden administration’s “core goal” of making “sure that the war [in Gaza] wouldn’t spread, the conflict wouldn’t spread to other fronts, to other countries” and that they have “been working” on that “every day since,” is risible because it spread to Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iran.

Blinken was asked how he looks back on the decision “to support Ukraine’s military offensive without a parallel diplomatic track to try and end the conflict.” His answer, as America’s chief diplomat, is no less humiliating. He defined bringing fifty countries together, who waged war on Russia militarily and economically, as “extraordinary diplomacy,” while conceding that, since the war began, there was not one “opportunity to engage diplomatically in a way that could end the war on just and durable terms.”

Biden opened his presidency with the promise to “offer Tehran a credible path back to diplomacy,” to “promptly reverse the failed Trump policies that have inflicted harm on the Cuban people and done nothing to advance democracy and human rights,” to correct the course on Trump’s “abject failure” in Venezuela, and to bring in a new approach to North Korea that “is open to and will explore diplomacy.”

Biden failed on all four. Instead, he ushered in an era in which the State Department has been reduced to the hawkish arm of the Defense Department.

At the end of his term, far from reversing Trump’s policies, Biden’s Cuba policy looks more like Trump’s than like Barack Obama’s. Biden maintained, and even increased, sanctions. The United States continued to support dissident activists and to fund regime change. Most importantly, and most devastatingly, the Biden administration continued to uphold the illegal embargo of Cuba in every single vote at the United Nations. In October 2024, only one other country in the world joined the U.S. in support of its embargo with one other abstaining.

On January 14, with less than a week in his term, Biden announced that he would, at last, remove Cuba from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list. Four years ago, that would have counted as a diplomatic accomplishment. Now, it is an ineffectual gesture that will simply be erased. William LeoGrande, professor of Government at American University and a specialist in U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, told me that “with just days left in his presidency, [Biden] relaxed sanctions he should have relaxed four years ago—sanctions that will almost certainly be reimposed by Donald Trump.” Mike Waltz, Trump’s pick for national security advisor, told Fox News that “anything they [the Biden Administration] are doing right now we can do back, and no one should be under any illusion in terms of a change in Cuba policy.”

LeoGrande summarized Biden’s diplomatic legacy in Cuba by telling me that “Joe Biden’s Cuba policy accomplished nothing—actually, worse than nothing, because it left both Cubans and the United States worse off. He reneged on his campaign promise to return to Obama’s policy of engagement, a policy that was enormously popular in Latin America, Europe, and in the United States—everywhere except south Florida. In a vain quest for votes in Miami, Biden left most of Donald Trump’s extreme sanctions in place, immiserating the Cuban people in the midst of the pandemic.”

Biden’s diplomatic legacy in Iran is no less disappointing. Biden promised a quick return to the JCPOA nuclear agreement. Instead, he refused to end sanctions—the flesh of the agreement—and refused to promise that the U.S. would not break the deal again even for the duration of Biden’s term—the soul of any agreement. Though it was the United States that illegally pulled out of the deal, Biden demanded additional concessions from Iran.

Instead of following Obama’s diplomacy with Iran, Biden followed Trump’s maximum pressure on Iran. In order “never to allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon,” Biden said the U.S. “is prepared to use all elements of its national power to ensure that outcome.”

But the United States does not believe Iran is trying to acquire a nuclear weapon. The 2022 U.S. Department of Defense’s Nuclear Posture Review concludes that “Iran does not today possess a nuclear weapon and we currently believe it is not pursuing one.” CIA Director William Burns has repeatedly said that there is no evidence Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb. Most recently, Burns reiterated in a January 10 interview, “We do not see any sign today that any such decision has been made.”

The election of Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian brought a reformist back to the presidency of Iran. Pezeshkian has emphasized the need to mend relations with the U.S. and the West. He has called for bypassing intermediaries in favor of direct negotiations. But that did not influence the Biden administration in its stubbornness not to negotiate. When asked at a July 8 press briefing if “the U.S. now ready to resume nuclear talks, other talks, or make any diplomatic moves with Iran in light of this new president,” National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby responded, “No, we’re—we’re not in a position where we’re willing to get back to the negotiating table with Iran just based on the fact that they’ve elected a new president.” Another missed diplomatic opportunity.

Lack of willingness to engage with Iran diplomatically has, instead of the strategically important goal of mending relations between Iran and the West, pushed Iran closer to China and Russia. During the Biden years, Iran joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS, two China-Russia led international organizations. On January 17, 2025, Iran signed a comprehensive strategic partnership with Russia. The details are not yet public, but Russian President Vladimir Putin says it includes bilateral cooperation in “politics and security” and collaboration on “the development of nuclear power plants.”

During Biden’s presidency, diplomacy with China has been set aside in favor of increased confrontation. Biden has sullied the One China policy, declared Taiwan a critical strategic location for U.S. defense, said that the U.S. would send troops to Taiwan if China attacked and weaponized and militarized the conflict.

Perhaps most dangerously of all, Biden pursued the opposite of diplomacy in the Russia-Ukraine war. When diplomacy offered a real chance to avoid the war before it began and to end the war in the weeks after it did, the U.S. refused to negotiate with Russia in the first instance and discouraged and blocked Ukraine from negotiating with Russia in the second. Since then, Biden and Blinken have abdicated diplomacy. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has barely, if ever, officially spoken to Russia foreign minister Sergei Lavrov since the war began, and President Biden has not met with President Putin once. By the summer of 2024, Biden was still maintaining that “I have no good reason to talk to Putin right now.”

Relations with Russia and China are more dangerous as Biden leaves office. Relations have not improved in Cuba and Iran, despite Obama setting the platter to which Biden could have easily returned. Biden’s promise of “relentless diplomacy” devolved into the abdication of diplomacy and a tragically wasted opportunity.

January 21, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

The Practicing Physician’s Case for Kennedy

By Clayton J. Baker, MD | Brownstone Institute | January 20, 2025

I am a practicing physician. I see patients, and I diagnose and treat their illnesses. I have been doing so for more than a quarter of a century. It is how I earn my living.

I heartily endorse Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to be the next Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The fact that I take care of patients distinguishes me from the overwhelming majority of the captured politicians, legacy media pundits, and Pharma lobbyists who are trying to torpedo Mr. Kennedy’s nomination.

The uproar surrounding this nomination is telling in itself. Since when has there been such crying and gnashing of teeth over a nomination for the Secretary of Health and Human Services? How many Americans can even name the last three HHS Secretaries? I’m a physician who follows these things, and off the top of my head, I could only recall the last two – former Congressman Xavier Becerra and former Pharma executive and lobbyist Alex Azar.

When a public figure is being viciously attacked from all sides, as Mr. Kennedy is at present, we should consider the attackers. Depending on who they are, such extreme disapproval may in fact represent the strongest possible endorsement.

Consider Mr. Kennedy’s Attackers

On the Democrat side, Kennedy has been attacked by the likes of Massachusetts Congressman Jake Auchincloss. On CNN, he said that if Kennedy were named HHS Secretary, with respect to American children, Kennedy would “give them polio.”

Auchincloss is a lawyer, so his total ignorance of pathophysiology might be forgivable. However, his father is Dr. Hugh Auchincloss, who served as none other than Anthony Fauci’s right-hand man at NIAID, the NIH agency over which Fauci wielded immense and almost complete power for decades, and through which he funded Ralph Baric and the Wuhan Institute’s genetic manipulations of the SARS CoV-2 virus that caused Covid, using our tax dollars. If there is one HHS department that best exemplifies the capture, corruption, and unaccountability of the present medical-industrial complex, it is NIAID. Hugh Auchincloss left NIAID in 2024.

But wait, there’s more. Auchincloss’s mother is Dr. Laurie Glimcher, former president and CEO of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. In 2021, the Boston Globe exposed her simultaneously serving on the boards of multiple Big Pharma companies, including Bristol Myers Squibb and GlaxoSmithKline, while in charge of Dana-Farber. Furthermore, in 2024, multiple research papers Glimcher had authored were exposed for falsification of data, and at least 6 of the papers were retracted. Laurie Glimcher resigned as head of Dana-Farber in 2024.

On the Republican side, there is Dr. Scott Gottlieb, who stated on television that a Kennedy HHS “will cost lives in this country.”

Many may recall Gottlieb as the FDA commissioner during much of the first Trump administration. Gottlieb left the FDA in 2019, shortly before the pandemic, and quickly joined the Board of Directors at Pfizer, where he remained throughout the pandemic and still is today. A more thorough review of his history shows multiple prior stints at the FDA. Over the years, he has bounced back and forth between that key HHS regulatory agency and Big Pharma and healthcare venture capital firms – the exact industries the FDA should be overseeing.

These are the kinds of people who want to stop Mr. Kennedy from leading HHS. Their prime motivation, it seems, may not be positive reform of medicine or the well-being of patients.

If prominent figures such as these revile Mr. Kennedy, why do I endorse him?

Because medicine desperately needs reform. Mr. Kennedy has been nominated to be a quintessential reformer. He has deep knowledge of the problem, and he has a proven track record of success in reforming corrupt systems. He is being viciously attacked because the last thing that those currently in control of medicine want is meaningful reform.

Medicine Is a Mess, and Desperately Needs Reform

I can tell you from nearly three decades of first-hand clinical experience what the state of medicine is right now.

It’s a mess.

Medicine has been in decline for decades. Autonomy has been gradually stripped away from physicians and patients, as protocols and guidelines have replaced clinical decision-making. Doctors have become employees rather than independent professionals. The doctor-patient relationship has been eroded as care has been fragmented and as the Electronic Medical Record has intruded. Most importantly, control of the entire medical industry has been seized by Big Pharma, captured and corrupt government agencies, and the insurance industry.

Then Covid happened, with two results – one intentional, the other accidental. First, the entire medical system was intentionally hijacked by what was really a military operation. The pretense of a medical emergency was used to shut down both society as a whole, and the routine practice of medicine in particular. Second, this takeover accidentally revealed who actually controls the medical industry – and it sure isn’t doctors and patients.

Patients have caught on. For patients, trust in physicians and hospitals and acceptance of vaccines have both cratered. This is not due to “anti-science” stupidity or “misinformation.” It is due to the fact that patients have simply been lied to too many times. It doesn’t matter how much money and power you have – you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

Patients know – some explicitly, others intuitively – that the official narrative of Covid was riddled with lies. They know that they were deliberately made to live in fear. They have friends and family who suffered and even died from the excesses of the lockdown policies, and others who were injured or even killed by the hospital protocols and the mandated shots. They know that Big Pharma and their Government were behind it. They know that their own local hospitals and even their own healthcare providers were complicit to some extent.

Patients also know that health care is captured. Patients know that Big Pharma and other corporate and ideological forces drive health care policy and messaging – all they have to do is turn on their TVs to see the endless barrage of idiotic commercials for drugs.

Patients know the NIH, CDC, and FDA are corrupt, and captured by Big Pharma. Patients have wearied of the constant fear-mongering about “pandemics” that they now know are almost always man-made. Most importantly, patients realize that none of this is intended to improve their health.

How do I know that patients know all this? They tell me every day.

What about rank-and-file doctors? Most clinical physicians I speak with privately acknowledge the excesses of the Covid era. I’m not aware of a single practicing doctor who has taken all the CDC-recommended Covid boosters. I have copious evidence, both from my patients and from communications with other doctors, that the extreme virophobia and vaccine fervor of 2021 and 2022 has faded among my colleagues just as it has in the rest of the population.

Most doctors have heard the news that public trust in them and their profession has nosedived. Most realize that the system is in chaos in many respects – all one has to do is stop by any emergency room to see that. Many acknowledge that the profession of medicine and the healthcare industry have been hijacked by Pig Pharma and other malign forces. Many who can are leaving the profession altogether.

However, beyond those already speaking out, I see few new colleagues calling out for reform. Like many other people, it seems that most rank-and-file doctors just want the nightmare to end. A great many don’t really know how things got so bad. To paraphrase Bob Dylan, they know something has happened, but they don’t know what it is.

For these reasons, meaningful reform of medicine will not come from a groundswell from the rank and file. They saw what happened to those who spoke out during Covid and want no part of that. They wouldn’t know where to begin to fix a system in which they have very little agency. However, I truly believe the great majority of physicians, nurses, and other healthcare professionals would welcome and support meaningful reform.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is the very best choice to lead medical reform. If you doubt his expertise on the subjects of the corruption and capture of medicine, and the regulatory capture of agencies like the CDC, NIH, and FDA, I recommend his books The Real Anthony Fauci and The Wuhan Cover-Up. Not only do these books demonstrate his encyclopedic knowledge of the problem, but as Joe Rogan and others have pointed out, they have never been directly challenged by the medical establishment – because they are factually accurate.

Furthermore, given his experience and successes as an environmental lawyer, including against large corporations such as Monsanto, DuPont, and Ford, Mr. Kennedy has the know-how to affect meaningful reform.

Rest assured that under a Kennedy-run HHS, medicine will not revert to the time of Galen. Polio will not run rampant, although vaccines may finally be held to the same standards as other drugs – which of course should have always been the case. Even a partial reversal of the nearly total capture that Big Pharma and its allies have over medical research, academia, education, medical licensing, and certification will only benefit doctors and patients.

Medicine is in desperate need of thorough reform. It must be decoupled from the control of Big Pharma, captured governmental agencies, and other rich and powerful forces that currently dominate the industry. Patient autonomy and the doctor-patient relationship must be restored as central to the practice of medicine. Informed consent must be re-established as the inalienable and fundamental value of the profession as encoded at Nuremberg.

Humans are autonomous individuals with rights. Patients must not be “managed” like herd animals, as the current population-based public health approach to medicine insists. Covid proved this approach to be a disaster, and it must end.

This is why I, a practicing physician, heartily endorse Robert F. Kennedy as the next Secretary of Health and Human Services.

C.J. Baker, M.D. is an internal medicine physician with a quarter century in clinical practice. He has held numerous academic medical appointments, and his work has appeared in many journals, including the Journal of the American Medical Association and the New England Journal of Medicine. From 2012 to 2018 he was Clinical Associate Professor of Medical Humanities and Bioethics at the University of Rochester.

January 20, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Can Trump Fix Our Broken Foreign Policy?

By Ron Paul | January 20, 2025

By the time most of you read this column, we will have a new US President. Donald J. Trump will be inaugurated for his second term today at 11:30 AM, Eastern time, and many Americans are hopeful that the disastrous foreign policy of the past four years under Biden will be improved. There is good news and bad news.

First the good news. It is no surprise that Trump’s appointees to foreign policy and national security positions are to the person very hawkish on China. However Trump, as he often does, has defied conventional wisdom on what his China policy might be by not only inviting Chinese leader Xi Jinping to attend the inauguration, but actually picking up the telephone and having a conversation with his Chinese counterpart.

According to a read-out of the call, the two discussed “trade, fentanyl, TikTok, and other subjects” and agreed to remain in regular contact. Winston Churchill is often (inaccurately) credited with the phrase “jaw-jaw is better than war-war,” but nonetheless it is an accurate statement. It is much better to engage even with “adversaries” than to refuse contact and add more sanctions. Those who prefer sanctions over communications are the true isolationists.

On TikTok, the popular application has credited Trump with preventing the Congressional ban from taking effect. If true, it is another good Trump move in favor of our Constitutional free speech guarantees.

Likewise with Russia, media reports suggest that holding a conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin will be among the first things Trump does as President. That is great news for all of humanity, as Biden’s dangerous proxy war in Ukraine and refusal to communicate with the Russian president has brought us to the very edge of a once-unimaginable nuclear exchange. When the end of life on earth is at stake, it is reckless to ignore the possibility of de-escalation.

In the Middle East, incoming President Trump is being credited with securing a ceasefire in Gaza, an achievement the Biden Administration seemed incapable of or uninterested in seriously attempting for the past year. Does Trump deserve all the credit? We don’t know. But we do know that thousands have been needlessly slaughtered while Biden dithered and sent more weapons. The wholesale destruction of Gaza with US bombs and financial support will be Biden’s enduring legacy and a stain on everyone involved.

The bad news is that because of President Trump’s decision to appoint the most hawkish advisors, he will be surrounded by individuals who will constantly encourage him to confront rather than disengage. For example, his special envoy on the Ukraine war has recently boxed Trump in on Iran by declaring a return to the failed “maximum pressure” campaign of his first Administration. The policy failed to achieve the desired results when first implemented and it will fail again if adopted again. Why? Iran has developed far more extensive trade ties outside the influence of the US government, for example among the BRICS countries. It is not possible to isolate Iran as it has been in the past. As with China and others, with Iran it would be far better to jaw-jaw than to war-war. Let’s hope President Trump understands that.

We will no doubt see some disappointments in incoming President Trump’s foreign policy, but there are solid reasons to be cautiously optimistic. Particularly when measured against his predecessor.

January 20, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

UK knew about Israel’s brutal torture of Palestinian detainees 50 years ago, but refused to act, British documents reveal

The UK knew about Israel’s brutal torture of Palestinian and Arab detainees nearly 50 years ago but refused to act, British documents reveal. The papers, unearthed by MEMO in the British National Archives, also reveal that the US opted to address the issue solely through non-governmental organisations.

Israeli soldiers lead blindfolded Palestinian detainees across the Israel-Gaza border after they were detained by Israeli forces operating inside Gaza, 1 August 2007. [DAVID FURST / AFP/ Getty Images]
By Amer Sultan | MEMO |January 20, 2025

Documents from the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office show that Britain was aware that Israeli authorities were systematically torturing Palestinian and Arab detainees in mid-1977 but declined to pressure Israel to halt these practices.

In June 1977, the Sunday Times published a shocking dossier exposing the brutal torture of Palestinian and Arab detainees in Israeli prisons and detention centres. The report described the torture as “systematic” and “organised so methodically that it cannot be dismissed as a handful of ‘rogue cops’ exceeding orders”.  It found that torture “appears to be sanctioned at some level as deliberate policy” and detailed 17 different methods of abuse, including beatings, genitalia squeezing, insertion of foreign objects into body orifices, hanging upside down, cigarette burns, and torture of family members in front of prisoners.”

The Sunday Times’ dossier was based on interviews with former detainees who described other physical abuse and psychological pressure during their detention.

At the time, the FCO reports indicated there were 3,200 Palestinian and Arab detainees from the occupied territories, Egypt, Syria and Jordan held in Israeli prisons or detention centres in Israel and the territories occupied by the Israeli military in the 1967 war.

The documents show that before the report’s publication, the Sunday Times shared its findings with then-UK FOreign Secretary David Owen. British diplomats in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem conducted confidential interviews with officials from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Quaker Service (QS), a Northern Ireland charity, to explore their views on the torture allegations.

James Fine of QS confirmed to Mike Jenner, the British consul-general in East Jerusalem, that “all forms of torture used in Northern Ireland had been used [against the Palestinians] here [by Israel].” He gave examples such as “hooding, sleep deprivation, and bread-and-water diets.” Fine added that “in all interrogations, some beating up was used,” and in a minority of cases, “serious” beatings occurred. He further noted that more sophisticated torture such as “electric shocks, bottles up the anus and objects inserted into the penis” were used in “a few cases”. While Fine acknowledged the evidence came from Palestinian and Arab detainees and prisoners, he emphasised that “exaggeration must be discounted”.

Jenner informed his bosses in the FCO that Fine believed that the body of evidence was “so consistent that, at the very least, there was a prima facie case for a full enquiry into allegation of torture.”

The ICRC representative in Jerusalem, Alfredo Witschi, supported the Sunday Times findings, calling the report “a very fair presentation of the available evidence,” despite it containing “some mistakes”. Witschi stated that the ICRC possessed “similar evidence though in much greater quantity”, alerting the British diplomat that the weight of the ICRC’s evidence of beating, which he said was very severe in some cases, was such that he “considered it amounted to proof” of torture.

He suggested that Israeli interrogators “were unlikely to be acting without instructions” and these instructions “were possibly to give them a free hand provided that they didn’t go too far”. Witschi also highlighted that the Sunday Times report “paid too little attention” to psychological techniques of torture used by the Israelis  such as “threat of torture after exhausting the suspect by sleep deprivation and rigorous exercises.” The ICRC official was keen to alert Jenner that their conversation should be confidential.

The FCO Research Department reviewed the Sunday Times report and concluded that the allegations were “consistent with the available evidence from other sources, including the ICRC.” It acknowledged that psychological pressure was “probably condoned by higher authorities in Israel,” and more serious cases of maltreatment were probably isolated but did occur. The department drew the attention of FCO officials that the more serious allegations are “against Shin Bait [Israeli Internal Security Service] personnel in Moscobia, Hebron and Sarafand prisons.”

The Near East and North Africa Department (NENA) within the FCO noted that the sources for the allegations were primarily Arab prisoners and their legal representatives, making the accounts potentially one-sided. However it admitted the allegations of torture in the Israeli prisons “is not entirely inconsistent with that which emerges from the other material available to us and in particular with what the ICRC representative in Jerusalem told the Consulate-General there in confidence.”

William R. Tomkys, head of NENA, recommended raising the issue discreetly with Avraham Kidron, the Israeli ambassador to London, rather than involving the UK ambassador in Tel Aviv, to avoid straining relations with the Israeli government. “We may get off on the wrong foot with Mr Kidron as a result but this is less damaging than the risk that HM ambassador at Tel Aviv might lose the confidence of Mr Begin’s government,” Tomkys wrote.

He suggested advising Israel to conduct “a public inquiry”, arguing it would be “consistent with Israel’s close concern for human rights” and address widespread public concern in the UK about the allegations about the Israeli treatment of prisoners.

However, Foreign Secretary Owen instructed the FCO to wait till he addressed the issue with US Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance.

Commenting on Tomkys’ report and recommendation, Owen ordered “No action to be taken” instructing the issue “should be raised at a political level not Ambassadorial.” But he stressed that raising the issue should be “certainly not immediately”. Owen stressed to his staff that “we will also need to discuss with the Americans whom I know need time to consider” the issue.

He also disclosed that he had spoken to Sunday Times Editor Harry Evans about the report but the documents did not show whether he had shared the details of their conversation with his staff.

When the British ambassador raised the issue with the US State Department, officials confirmed they “had taken the report of the Sunday Times seriously.” However, Walter Smith, head of Israeli and Arab-Israeli Affairs, told the ambassador he was preparing a paper for Vance and the Americans “would encourage one or two members of the American Bar Association to get in touch with their Israeli opposite numbers to see whether further investigation leading to remedial action would be possible.”

The Sunday Times report sparked significant public and political concern in the UK. Thirty-three Members of Parliament signed a motion to discuss the issue in July 1977, while others wrote letters to Owen and his ministers. David Watkins, an MP and member of the Labour Middle East Council, strongly criticised the government’s “failure” to address the violations of Palestinians’ rights and to raise the issue “more vigorously and more openly” with the Israeli government given the available evidence. He warned that the UK risked being accused of “applying double standards” if it did not act as it had in the case of South Africa.

 The MP pressed the ministers to inform him whether the UK has done all it should to find out the truth about “the persistent of allegations of torture” in Israeli prisons. He slammed what he described as “covering up” the Israeli ill-treatment of the Arab prisoners and detainees “both officially and on the news media”, giving an example of a US State Department document, which he confirmed he has seen, reporting on Israel observance of human rights in both Israel and the occupied territories. The MP described the document, prepared for Jimmy Carter, the then-US president, as “remarkably dishonest”. Watkins believed that the paper “was designed to assure the President that in difficult circumstance, Israel is making commendable, even if not wholly successful, effort to provide for and observe the Palestinian human rights both in Israel and in the occupied territories.”

In his response to Watkins, Frank Judd, minister of state for the Middle East, acknowledged that the allegations published by the Sunday Times were “disturbing” and stressed the need for Israel to address them.

Judd stressed that if true, these stories “would also reflect a situation which we, as a government committed to the promotion of human rights worldwide, would view most seriously.”

He suggested an “independent inquiry”, but he noted that its success would require Israel’s full cooperation. He rejected any idea to press Israel, expressing fears that if the UK raised the individual cases of human rights violation with the Israelis, such a move “would almost certainly be misinterpreted as an attempt to put political pressure on Israel over the wider issues of a Middle East settlement.”

Watkins, however, insisted that pressure on Israel was necessary, arguing that Israel would never withdraw from occupied territories or recognise Palestinian rights “except under pressure”.

January 20, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Joe Biden issues last minute family pardon

RT | January 20, 2025

Outgoing US President Joe Biden used his last moments in office to roll out a blanket pardon for members of his family, effectively shielding them from potential repercussions they could face under Donald Trump.

Biden claimed on Monday that his family has long been targeted in a concerted effort to harm him politically.

“My family has been subjected to unrelenting attacks and threats, motivated solely by a desire to hurt me – the worst kind of partisan politics. Unfortunately, I have no reason to believe these attacks will end,” Biden said in a statement.

The pardon concerns “any nonviolent offences against the United States” five of Biden’s family members might have committed starting from January 1, 2014 to the end of his term as president.

“I am exercising my power under the Constitution to pardon James B. Biden, [his wife] Sara Jones Biden, [first sister] Valerie Biden Owens, [her husband] John T. Owens, and [first brother] Francis W. Biden,” the outgoing president said, adding that the “pardons should not be mistaken as an acknowledgment that they engaged in any wrongdoing.”

The pardon effectively buries the years-long James Biden influence peddling affair, being probed by Congressional Republicans and journalists. While he did not face any criminal charges, Biden’s brother James, a former nightclub owner, broker and political consultant, has been accused by Republicans of lying to Congress, as well as acting as an unregistered foreign agent.

James and the president’s son, Hunter, were subpoenaed over the alleged involvement of President Biden in their business dealings in the US and abroad, namely in China and Ukraine. Hunter Biden was pardoned by his father late last year, months after his conviction on gun and tax charges and as he faced sentencing in a separate case.

The controversial pardon came despite Joe Biden’s repeated promises not to intervene in his son’s criminal cases.

January 20, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , | Leave a comment

Trump can use corruption scandals to get out of Ukraine conflict and blame Democrats

By Ahmed Adel | January 20, 2025

Since entering the electoral campaign, Donald Trump has criticised the military and financial aid provided to Kiev. As Trump takes office on January 20 and has the right to appoint officials at the highest level of justice, the new American leader could use corruption scandals to pull support from Ukraine and open investigations into the Biden administration.

Even before assuming the presidency of the United States, Trump already boasted a major achievement: a ceasefire agreement between Israel and the Palestinian militant movement Hamas. During the election campaign, the then-candidate for a second term stressed that he would continue to support Israel. However, officials and diplomats involved in brokering the ceasefire highlight the pivotal role Trump played in putting pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stop his military incursion into Gaza.

On January 11, Trump’s envoy for Middle East affairs, Steve Witkoff, arrived in Israel. Four days later, the billionaire announced that the parties had reached an agreement. If Trump so quickly achieved a truce in one of the most horrific conflicts of today, without even making it a campaign promise, then there are good prospects to end the Ukrainian conflict, one of the main issues of his election campaign.

The new Oval Office occupant has previously expressed his desire to meet personally with Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss this and other issues of global importance. The Kremlin, however, stressed that it believes the conflict is too complex for an easy solution. Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, said the same, estimating a period of 100 days for the creation of a peace plan.

Military and financial aid could be one strategy Trump uses to pressure Ukrainian leaders into entering into peace negotiations with Moscow. This stems from a very clear issue – Ukraine’s dependence on Western support to continue the war. Without this support, Kiev’s capabilities to sustain the war effort would be substantially reduced.

Permanent aid is the main factor in the continuation of the conflict and has delayed possible peace negotiations. In particular, it is because of the desire of the US and the Western bloc to inflict this strategic defeat on Russia at any cost.

It is recalled that Russian and Ukrainian delegates met in Istanbul to reach a diplomatic solution to the conflict, and they even drafted a peace agreement. However, Kiev was under pressure from its Western sponsors to abandon the negotiations. In October 2022, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky banned any peace negotiations with Russia by decree, thus preventing diplomatic approaches to ending the conflict.

For this reason, reducing aid to Ukraine will help resolve the conflict.

Trump has shown his dissatisfaction with the high costs of supporting Ukraine, arguing that the US should not bear the brunt of this burden. Endless taxpayer money flowing into Ukraine’s treasury is extremely unpopular, evidenced by the strengthening of international parties with inspiration from Trump, whose campaign slogan is the end of this aid. The most notable case now is that of Germany.

Nonetheless, Kiev’s reputation for embezzlement and corruption only worsened when Zelensky admitted in an interview with Russian-American computer scientist Lex Fridman’s podcast that half of the announced $177 billion never reached Ukrainian coffers.

“If we had $177 billion and if we get the half, where is the second half? If you find the second half, you will find corruption,” he said.

This statement is worrying since instead of exclusively meeting the country’s needs, international resources appear to be generating profits for private individuals or foreign companies. This scenario reinforces the debates about the real interests behind international aid.

Late last year, award-winning Ukrainian journalist Diana Panchenko reported on her social media accounts that as Ukrainians suffer from the severe economic crisis, 13 Rolls-Royce luxury cars, each worth $650,000, were purchased by members of parliament and government officials in 2024.

The conflict is extremely lucrative, not only for the companies of the US military-industrial complex in Ukraine and their executives but also for the Pentagon budget. It is a “black box” that cannot explain where its resources have been allocated. For this reason, it cannot be discounted that there is also corruption on the American side.

Suspicions of improper relations between members of the Democratic Party and Ukrainian officials increased after former US President Joe Biden granted a presidential pardon to his son, Hunter Biden, for all crimes committed since 2014 when he began working with Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company. In this regard, Trump can use these corruption scandals to distance the US from the conflict and to associate these cases with the Democratic Party.

Trump reclaiming his place in the White House also marks the arrival of his nominees to the highest level of justice in the US, such as the new head of the FBI, Kash Patel, and the new attorney general, Pam Bondi. With so many tools in his favour, there is a real possibility that Trump will use the judicial system to investigate any Democrat’s corruption relating to the Ukrainian conflict.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

January 20, 2025 Posted by | Corruption | , , , | Leave a comment

Americans say US spends too much on Ukraine – poll

RT | January 20, 2025

The majority of Americans believe the US government is spending too much on aid for Ukraine, a recent New York Times/Ipsos opinion poll suggests.

According to the findings, 51% of respondents say the country is “spending too much” on Kiev, while 28% believe the current amount is appropriate. Only 17% say the country should boost spending on Ukraine.

Similarly, 53% of those surveyed say US aid to Israel is excessive, with 30% considering it adequate. The survey, conducted from January 2 to 10, involved 2,128 people nationwide.

Public sentiment reflected in the survey suggests that most Americans want Washington to prioritize domestic issues over foreign aid. Among the respondents, 60% say the US “should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate on problems here at home,” while only 38% believe the country should continue to be active in global affairs. The poll also indicates that 60% believe the US government is “almost always wasteful and inefficient,” while 72% say it is “working to benefit itself” and its own agenda, not the people.

This comes after the government’s recent decision to provide Ukraine with an additional $500 million military aid package, announced on January 8. Congress has appropriated a total of over $175 billion on assistance for Kiev since the conflict with Russia escalated in February 2022, of which $65.9 billion has been direct military assistance, according to the latest data from the Pentagon.

US spending on Ukraine has recently drawn criticism from Marco Rubio, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of state in the upcoming administration. Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as part of his confirmation last week, he said the US should no longer give Kiev indefinite support and criticized the outgoing administration of President Joe Biden for failing to clearly delineate the “end goal” of the funds it has been pouring into the conflict.

“What exactly were we funding? What exactly were we putting money towards?” he asked, saying the current approach of “however much it takes for however long it takes” is not realistic.

Moscow has warned that Western aid to Ukraine only serves to prolong the conflict without changing the outcome. It has said it is willing to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict, but maintained that any settlement must begin with Kiev ceasing military operations and acknowledging the reality that it will not regain control of former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia. Moscow has also insisted upon Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification.

January 20, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Blinken overruled America’s top general on Ukraine peace talks – NYT

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken in front of a memorial for fallen Ukrainian soldiers, Kiev, Ukraine, May 14, 2024. © Getty Images / STR/NurPhoto
RT | January 20, 2025

Outgoing US State Secretary Antony Blinken urged Ukraine to continue its military efforts against Russia rather than pursue peace negotiations in 2022, the New York Times reported on Saturday.

In late 2022, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley advised Kiev to capitalize on its battlefield successes by seeking peace talks with Moscow. However, Blinken insisted that Ukraine should press on with its military campaign, the newspaper wrote.

“Less a peacemaker than a war strategist,” the US diplomat frequently argued against more “risk-averse Pentagon officials,” lobbying for advanced American weaponry to be sent to Ukraine, NYT wrote.

Washington has spent “approximately $100 billion” on Ukraine since the conflict escalated in February 2022, while allies and partners have contributed an additional $150 billion, Blinken said during a January appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations.

The outgoing Biden administration has expedited arms deliveries to Kiev ahead of the inauguration of US President-elect Donald Trump, who has indicated that he might reduce military aid to Ukraine in favor of addressing domestic priorities.

The Biden administration had been covertly arming Ukraine months before the conflict intensified, Blinken admitted in a January interview with the NYT. “Starting in September and then again in December, we quietly got a lot of weapons to Ukraine to make sure that they had in hand what they needed to defend themselves – things like Stingers, Javelins that they could use,” he said.

Russia and Ukraine initially engaged in peace negotiations in early 2022 in Istanbul. Both sides provisionally agreed to a truce under which Kiev would renounce its NATO membership ambitions, adopt neutrality, and limit its military size in exchange for international security guarantees. However, Ukraine later withdrew from the talks at the urging of then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, according to David Arakhamia, a Zelensky-allied MP and chief negotiator for Kiev.

Last month, Swiss diplomat Jean-Daniel Ruch similarly accused the US and UK of derailing peace talks between Kiev and Moscow. Speaking to the French-language media outlet Anti-Thèse, Ruch claimed that Johnson acted “on duty for the Americans.”

Moscow has reiterated its willingness to resume peace negotiations, provided they are based on the Istanbul draft agreements and reflect the “new territorial realities,” including the accession of four former Ukrainian regions to Russia and recent battlefield developments.

January 20, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

FDA BANS RED FOOD DYE; NEW SCIENCE LINKS HFCS AND SEED OILS TO CANCER

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | January 16, 2025

January 19, 2025 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment

Russian Victory or Political Settlement in Ukraine?

Ambassador Chas Freeman, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen
Glenn Diesen | January 15, 2025

I had a conversation with Alexander Mercouris and Ambassador Chas Freeman, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. Besides being a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Freeman’s career included opening China with Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon in the 1970s and developing the post-Cold War security architecture in Europe.

We discussed the messy world that the Biden Administration is handing over to Trump. There is seemingly a genuine desire to end the proxy war in Ukraine, and Trump may also achieve a ceasefire in Palestine. However, NATO’s escalations in Ukraine to sabotage possible negotiations and the reckless support for HTS in Syria have reduced the possibilities available to Trump. Will the Ukraine War be resolved by a Russian victory or a political settlement?

January 19, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Graham Calls on Trump to Take Out Iran Nuclear Facilities

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | January 19, 2025

Ultra-hawkish Senator Lindsey Graham said incoming President Donald Trump should take out Iran’s nuclear facilities once he returns to power. Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program, but the South Carolina Republican said Trump should take advantage of Iran’s weakened position to strike the Islamic Republic.

Graham was interviewed Sunday by Margaret Brennan on “Face the Nation.” “The next topic I will be engaging in with President Trump, is to take this moment in time to decimate the Iran nuclear program,” he said. “I don’t think diplomacy works. [Iran’s] proxies [are] incredibly weakened. Israel can go anywhere they wanna go.”

Graham claimed Iran had been weakened in the Middle East, making it an opportune time to attack Tehran. That view is also shared by Trump’s envoy to the Ukraine conflict. Last week, retired General Keith Kellog said there was an opportunity “to change Iran for the better” but said it wouldn’t last for long. Adding, “We must exploit the weakness we now see. The hope is there, so must too be the action.”

While Tehran has limited its nuclear program to civilian purposes, for decades, politicians in Washington and Tel Aviv have warned that Iran is on the brink of obtaining nuclear weapons. The US intelligence community recently restated that the Islamic Republic is not attempting to weaponize its nuclear program.

In 2015, then-President Barack Obama negotiated a deal with Iran that placed unprecedented safeguards and inspections on Tehran’s nuclear program. Graham was a stalwart opponent of the Iran Nuclear Deal, and Trump broke the deal during his first term when Tehran was in compliance.

Trump brands himself a great negotiator and said on the campaign trail that he would “have to make a deal” with Iran if reelected. Graham told Brennan that it was impossible to engage diplomatically with Iran.

“This is a … religious Nazi regime,” he said. “They want to destroy the Jewish state. They wanna purify Islam and drive us out of the Mideast. It’d be like negotiating with Hitler. I am hoping there will be an effort by Israel to decimate the Iran nuclear program supported by the United States, and if we don’t do that, it’ll be a historical mistake.”

Earlier this month, Axios reported that there was a “real possibility” of American strikes on Iran during Trump’s second term.

January 19, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »