Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Democrats Must Remove President Biden Now

IF ONLY WE CAN GET TO JANUARY 20

By LTG USA (RET) Michael T. Flynn | November 19, 2024

Today, the world is likely closer to nuclear war than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis.  In its closing days, the Biden Administration is stumbling our nation into a potential nuclear war with Russia. If you have not been paying attention for the past two days, you need to know the basic facts. Then, let me offer what I believe needs to happen, and quickly.

Just before midnight Sunday night, AP reported “Biden has authorized Ukraine to use U.S.-supplied missiles to strike deeper inside Russia, easing limitations on the longer range weapons…” The long-range, supersonic, ballistic missiles being unleashed on Russia most likely are ATACMs, standing for Army Tactical Missile System. These weapons were developed for offensive — not defensive — purposes. The configuration of the specific ATACMs sent to Ukraine is unknown, but they could have a range of from 100 to 190 or more miles. They can carry different types of weapons, including cluster bombs which can cause a multitude of civilian casualties. Despite many demands from Zelensky and the Ukrainian government, such long-range missiles had not been provided until last month, and until now — two weeks after the November election — their use had not been authorized.

There is a degree of speculation in all of these reports, since the White House has not seen fit to simply provide an advisory of exactly how it has ratcheted up the possibility of a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia. However, it does appear that other NATO members — including UK and France — have followed Biden’s dangerous lead in making similar offerings to Zelensky from their arsenals.

How should we view this shocking news? Perhaps the most succinct analyses came from Donald Trump, Jr., Tweeting: “The Military Industrial Complex seems to want to make sure they get World War 3 going before my father has a chance to create peace and save lives. Gotta lock in those $Trillions. Life be damned!!! Imbeciles!” Truly, I could not have said it better.

President Putin made clear in September how he would view this development: “Aggression against Russia by any nonnuclear state, but with the support of a nuclear state, is proposed to be considered as their joint attack on Russia.” He added: “Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in case of aggression, including if the enemy using conventional weapons poses a critical threat.” Do not take these words lightly. If Russia had announced it had provided missiles to Mexico and authorized their use to attack Americans living in San Diego, Los Angeles, Tucson, Phoenix, El Paso, and Corpus Christi, what would you expect the U.S. Government would do?

While the neocons who populate the Deep State, and their toadies in the establishment media tell us that it is President Putin who is to blame for everything that happens, as things stand now, these stupid, provocative acts that are endangering our nation are coming from the Biden Administration and not the Kremlin.

That summarizes the problem. Here is what needs to be done, now.

First, Vice President Harris and the Biden Cabinet must invoke the 25th Amendment, and remove Biden as President. Biden is sleep-walking us into a hot war with Russia without a Congressional Declaration of War. If he lives past January 20, Biden will take the position he took with Special Counsel Hur who nine months ago declared Biden could not be held responsible for crimes, as he was on old man with a poor memory. It’s past time to put Kamala in the Oval Office — then we will know the name of the person in charge — someone who was actually elected to office. And she would be a person who could be held accountable for what disaster might befall the nation. Bearing that type of responsibility might force Harris to act responsibly. No longer would decisions be made by Unknown and Unidentified Deep State Operatives who would scatter like roaches should a crisis occur.

Second, at the same time as we hope the Democrats will act, the duty also falls on the current House of Representatives to impeach Biden now for endangering the nation by taking steps that constitute acts of war without a Declaration of War — a power the Constitution gives only to Congress. The indictment should then go immediately to the Senate for trial and removal. President Trump was impeached after he (supposedly) lost the 2020 election. What’s good for the goose.

Third, incoming officials in the Trump Administration need to make contact with President Putin and his staff to de-escalate the situation as best as can be done. This is exactly what I was trying to do in my conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in January 2017. The same Deep State which intercepted my call and leaked it to the Press will do so again, because the Deep State is on the ropes and are desperate. No man who fears going to prison has the moral authority to lead America at this perilous time.

Fourth, the Trump Administration and incoming Attorney General Matt Gaetz need to make it clear that the identities of those Deep State operatives exercising the powers of the Presidency, now urging Biden to act recklessly, will be held to account personally, not just politically, but legally. If these operatives knew they would be named and the subject to prosecution, they just might straighten up, real quick.

Fifth, we need to pray that we have time for the will of the voters to take effect on January 20. Just two weeks ago, on November 5, 2024, the voters spoke on the great issue of war with great clarity. President Trump received a clear mandate for his promise to end the killing in the Ukraine and seeking peace. America had not seen that type of leadership since President Kennedy’s commencement speech at American University, and they voted for it overwhelmingly.

Will any of these approaches work? Maybe not. But we need to ask the Democrats to do their duty, and the Republicans to do their duty, and we need to do our duty to pray as well. We know President Trump will do his duty. If only we can get to Janaury 20.

November 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

“Shutting Down CISA” Senator Rand Paul’s Crusade Against Online Censorship

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | November 19, 2024

Senator Paul Rand, who is about to take over as chair of the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, has spoken in favor of shutting down the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

CISA, a part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), was established in 2018 to do just what its name says – but has in the meanwhile become weaponized to suppress free speech, opponents believe, citing a number of programs where CISA was involved in monitoring and flagging online posts for removal.

Senator Paul refers to the agency’s behavior – which he says included the ability to censor content and thus influence what information is available to people – as “intrusions into the First Amendment.”

“The First Amendment is important, that’s why we listed it as the First Amendment. I’d like to, at the very least, eliminate their ability to censor content online,” Paul said in a post on X.

The senator was referencing his previous statements made for Politico, when he revealed he is in favor of shuttering CISA completely, while at the same time conceding that this is “unlikely” to happen – but also promising there will be hearings, as the incoming committee starts probing this government entity “working” with social media.

According to Politico, Democrats in Congress would react “fiercely” against any attempt not only to dismantle but also to limit CISA’s powers.

CISA representatives, like senior adviser Ron Eckstein, continue to claim that the agency is merely doing its job, without ever overstepping the mandate and engaging in censorship. Quite the contrary, Eckstein told the press – according to him, CISA is in fact protecting Americans’ “freedom of speech, civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy.”

Taking into account what has come to light regarding CISA’s activities over the past four years in particular, that is an extraordinary claim, and one Senator Paul clearly disagrees with.

Even though established under President Trump’s first administration, CISA assumed an active role around the highly contentious 2020 election, allegedly to suppress those voicing their concerns online about the legitimacy of the vote.

CISA and legacy media supporting the policies the agency is executing – or has been until now – describe this as “countering domestic disinformation,” and suggest that CISA is these days more focused on fighting back adversaries from abroad.

November 19, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

US Congressional Leadership Remains United in Devotion to Israel after Selection of New Senate Republican Leader

By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | November 18, 2024

Some things changed in politics in Washington, DC when on Wednesday Republican United States senators via a secret ballot vote selected Sen John Thune (R-SD) to become Senate Republican leader, replacing Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) in the position. One of the things that remained the same, though, was that the Senate Republican leader position, along with the other three top leadership positions — Republican and Democrat — in the Senate and House of Representatives, remains held by a politician espousing devotion to the government of Israel and its war effort.

In July of 2022, I wrote about the peculiar situation where these top congressional leaders were then as well lined up in adamant support for the Israel government despite the fact that Americans’ views regarding the Middle East nation were roughly evenly divided between favorable and negative views. Of the people then holding the four top Republican and Democratic leadership positions in Congress, only Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) remains in the group. Nonetheless, the unanimity in over-the-top support for Israel persists, irrespective of how out of step it is with the thinking of the American people, even as over the last year Americans have increasingly opposed the US government’s unwavering supplying of military and intelligence support for Israel waging its expanding war with catastrophic consequences.

In January of 2023, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), a die-hard supporter of the Israel government, became the top Democratic leader in the House. Then, when Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) was ousted from the House speaker position in the fall of 2023, something astounding happened: All 11 candidates to succeed him as speaker — including ultimate winner Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) — had expressed both their devotion to Israel and their devotion to the US supporting Israel in Israel’s war.

Continuing the trend, all three Senate majority leader candidates — Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), and Sen. John Thune (R-SD) — competing last week were express devotees of the US government supporting Israel generally, as well as supporting Israel’s war effort.

Cornyn made his devotion to Israel and its war crystal clear in an October 3 Dallas Morning News editorial titled “America’s Next Commander in Chief Must Unapologetically Support Israel.” In the editorial, he declared:

Support for Israel ought to transcend party lines, religion, race and ethnicity. This is not an issue of opinion; this is a battle of right and wrong, of good and evil. Israel is our most steadfast ally in the Middle East, and it deserves our full support, both in words and action.

I was honored to visit Israel earlier this year, and I was also extremely proud to have voted for widely-supported legislation that sent critical aid and military resources to Israel.

Scott in, of all places, his America First plank of his Rescue America plan put succinctly his dedication to supporting Israel. “We will always defend our allies, starting with Israel,” Scott’s plan declares. Further, Scott made this promise in a September speech at the Republican Jewish Coalition Annual Summit: “And, as Senate leader, you can count on support for Israel and protection for our Jewish communities being top priorities.” In the speech, Scott also declared:

We need to show up for our friends and family in Israel right now. We need them to know we are with them, we will show up and we will fight with them.

Thune, the winner of the Senate Republican leader race, is on the same page as his Senate Republican leader race opponents in regard to Israel. Thune wrote an editorial last month titled “America Must Support Israeli Victory.” In the editorial, the senator criticized the Biden administration for not doing enough for Israel. This is the administration that has been pumping out weapons, intelligence, and military support to Israel at an incredible pace to aid Israel’s pursuit of its expanding war. After criticizing what he refers to as the Biden administration’s “tepid support for Israel at a time when it needs a strong ally in the United States,” Thune declared the US “needs to stand strongly with Israel as it faces enemies from every side that threaten its very existence.” And what did Thune do upon winning the leadership race? Thune called the prime minister of Israel, posting at Twitter for all to see a picture of Thune on the phone along with this message: “Spoke with Prime Minister @netanyahu and reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to standing with Israel, our closest friend and ally.”

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

November 19, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

NATO member says Russia has right to self-defense

RT | November 19, 2024

The West should pay attention to Russia’s updated nuclear doctrine, which reflects Moscow’s right and ability to defend itself from threats, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said.

Moscow unveiled the proposed changes to its strategic deterrent in September, while Ukraine was still clamoring for permission to use Western weapons for long-range strikes into Russian territory. The new doctrine was officially adopted on Tuesday, hours after Ukraine’s US-supplied missiles were used to target Bryansk Region.

“I think that this statement by Russia is, above all, a measure taken in response to the stance taken against it, concerning the use of conventional weapons,” Erdogan said on Tuesday at a press conference following the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

“I think that this issue must be considered by NATO officials. Russia has the right and ability to protect itself and to take measures for its defense. And it was compelled to take these measures,” Erdogan added.

NATO countries have the same right to self-defense, the Turkish leader said, but need to keep in mind that “there are no upsides to a war involving nuclear weapons.”

Multiple US outlets reported over the weekend that US President Joe Biden had lifted the restrictions on Kiev’s use of US-supplied rockets. The White House has neither confirmed nor denied the reports, but Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky claimed on Tuesday that they were true.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned the West that Kiev’s use of long-range missiles would change the character of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and make NATO a direct participant in the hostilities.

The US and its allies have funneled almost $200 billion worth of aid to Ukraine since 2022, while insisting this did not make them a party to the conflict. Although a NATO member state, Türkiye has not implemented sanctions against Russia and has maintained relations with both Moscow and Kiev.

Both Russia and Ukraine are Türkiye’s neighbors, Erdogan told reporters in Brazil, noting that Ankara must protect its bilateral ties with both. The three countries all border the Black Sea.

“I hope that we will achieve a definitive ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia as soon as possible and secure the peace the planet has been eagerly waiting for,” he added.
Türkiye hosted the initial negotiations between Russia and Ukraine in March 2022. The promising process collapsed after the West signaled unconditional support for Kiev and an unwillingness to make peace with Moscow.

November 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Australia’s risky gamble in aligning with Japan’s military expansion

By Jerry Grey | Global Times | November 18, 2024

Australia’s government must be mad! At least this is the view of many people in the know. Sky News in its own inimitable fashion of crafting a narrative to suit a purpose describes the announcement of regular joint military drills among Australia, US and Japan as a move “likely to anger China.” What it is more likely to do is anger a great number of Australian people, people who vote in the election for the decision makers in this crazy decision.

Just a few days ago, a reputable poll, cited by Paul Keating, the former Prime Minister, demonstrated clearly that the majority of Australians do not want to get involved in a US tussle in the Indo-Pacific Region. The Political Resolve Poll found that 57 percent of Australians polled would rather stay away from the US’ potential conflict with China. Meanwhile, the government is providing space for the US to build marine bases, allowing the refueling of bombers. Australia will spend up to $245.8 billion by 2055 on AUKUS nuclear submarine shipyard. And now, Defense Minister Richard Marles has gone one step further to announce that, instead of working to increase cooperation with its largest trading partner, Australia will commence regular military drills with Japan. There is a very good reason why this could be seen as a serious political misstep for the government.

These drills are designed to counter an imaginary China threat. The US and paid mouthpieces such as ASPI have manufactured a threat that doesn’t exist only to put Australia into a very dangerous position because, if there is conflict in Asia, it won’t be the US getting hit, it will be bases in Australia, some of which are very close to civilian populations.

An increasing number of people are becoming more concerned about the US’ potential conflict with China. Foreign policy experts such as John Lander, former diplomat, has highlighted several times. It is unlikely the US will go to war with China, it will insist that its proxies do; this is just one more example of how the US will encourage, coerce or simply force Australia into fighting their (losing) battles.

While China is not, and has never been an enemy of Australia, Japan is. There are only two countries in the world that have ever invaded Australia. The UK and Japan. Not only did the Japanese bomb Darwin, strafe the township of Broome and send a submarine into Sydney Harbour, the Japanese Imperial Army captured over 22,000 prisoners of war and 8,031 of them died in captivity. Most of them died in horrific conditions, including starvation, disease, slave labor. Some were nurses, including Sister Vivian Bullwinkel who will forever be remembered as being the only survivor of a hospital ship that was sunk with 65 nurses being evacuated from Singapore. Among the nurses, 22 survived and made it to the beach where 21 of them were murdered by Japanese soldiers, Sister Bullwinkel escaped and survived for 10 days before she was captured and imprisoned to become one of the lucky ones to survive the war and have a tale to tell.

Many will tell us that this is history and not the present; this is true. We don’t expect this would ever be repeated in this modern day, but we would be naïve to think it’s impossible. In order to learn from history, we must acknowledge wrong doing, make amends for it and move forward with the understanding that this behavior was an aberration never to be repeated.

China’s military building, as any expert will tell us, is not aggressive, it’s defensive. Japan’s expansion is moving into an aggressive phase and we all know where that took the world last time. Thinking Japan is a greater friend and aligning Australia with their military expansion will not provide more security for the region, it creates a much less stable region which seems to be exactly what the military industrial complex would like.

The author is a British Australian freelance writer who has studied cross-cultural change management in China and has lived in China, traveling extensively for almost two decades. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

November 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Leave a comment

The US Approves Long-Range Missile Strikes on Russia

Crossing the Line Between Proxy War & Direct War

By Glenn Diesen | November 19, 2024

The discussions about authorising long-range missile strikes on Russia are profoundly dishonest and misleading. The political-media elites present deeply flawed arguments to support the conclusion that attacking Russia with long-range missiles does not cross the line between proxy war and direct war. NATO may be successful in deluding itself, yet for Russia there is no doubt that this is an act of war.

1) “Ukraine has the right to defend itself”

The argument that Ukraine has the right to defend itself as a justification for NATO to authorise long-range strikes into Russia is very manipulative. The public is pulled in with a very reasonable premise, based on the universal acceptance of the right to self-defence. Once the public has accepted the premise, then it is presented as a foregone conclusion that Ukraine should be supplied with long-range missiles to attack Russia. The extent of NATO’s involvement in the war, as the main issue, is subsequently eliminated entirely from the argument.

The point of departure in an honest discussion should start with the right question: When is the line between proxy war and direct war crossed? These are US long-range missiles, their use is entirely dependent on US intelligence and targeting, they will be operated by US soldiers and guided by US satellites. Launching them from Ukrainian territory does not make it any less of a direct US attack on Russia. The US did not use these weapons against Russia for three years as it would amount to a direct attack, yet now the media is attempting to sell the narrative of this merely being uncontroversial military aid to enable Ukraine to defend itself. The US and some of its NATO allies have decided to attack Russia directly, and they should be honest about this intention. Attempts to present this as merely giving military aid to Ukraine to defend itself is an irresponsible effort to shame any dissent and avoid a serious discussion about attacking the world’s largest nuclear power.

It is imperative to place oneself in the shoes of opponents and ask how we would interpret the situation and what we would do if the situation were reversed. The US and NATO have invaded many countries over the years, so we do not need to delve too deep into our imagination to set up a hypothetical scenario. How would we react if Russia sent long-range missiles, dependent on Russian intelligence and targeting, operated by Russian soldiers and guided by Russian satellites, to attack NATO countries under the guise of merely helping Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen of another country to defend itself. We are deluding ourselves if we pretend that this would not be interpreted as a direct attack, and despite the great risks involved, we would be compelled to retaliate to restore our deterrent.

President Putin warned in September 2024 that Russia would interpret this as a direct attack and the beginning of a NATO-Russia War, and Putin argued that Russia would respond accordingly. The clarity in his language makes it nearly impossible to walk back the commitment to strike back at NATO, which is a deliberate tactic in the game of chicken as Russia cannot swirl away.

Stories about thousands of North Korean soldiers fighting in Ukraine or Kursk are used to legitimise the attack on Russia. This is most likely NATO war propaganda as there would be some evidence if thousands of North Korean soldiers were fighting. The North Koreans training in Russia are likely intended as a deterrent in case NATO would go to war against Russia, which is now seemingly the case. However, even if North Koreans involve themselves in the fighting, it does not make NATO any less of a participant in the war by attacking Russia.

2) Russia does not dare to retaliate against NATO

The reluctance by Russia in the past to sufficiently retaliate against NATO’s incremental escalations has been presented as evidence for the false conclusion that Russia does not dare to respond. There is no doubt that Russia’s restraints have emboldened NATO. President Biden once argued that sending F-16s would result in a Third World War, such warnings now are denounced as “Russian propaganda”. Russia’s failure to respond when the US crossed that line meant that the US could argue it did not amount to a direct attack. The rules of proxy war subsequently changed.

Russia’s dilemma over the past three years has been to either respond at the risk of triggering a Third World War, or to gradually abandon its deterrent and embolden the US. With every NATO escalation, Russia is facing an ever-higher price for its restraints. Russia has been under pressure to set a final red line, and NATO becoming directly involved in striking Russia is when the proxy war becomes a direct war.

How will Russia respond? There are several more steps on the escalatory ladder before pushing the nuclear button. Russia can intensify strikes on Ukrainian political targets and infrastructure, introduce North Korean troops that were likely intended as a deterrent for a situation like this, strike NATO assets in the Black Sea and logistic centres in Poland or Romania, destroy satellites used for the attacks on Russia, or attack US/NATO military assets in other parts of the world under the guise of enabling other countries to defend themselves.

Russia’s response will also depend on how these missiles are used. The New York Times suggested that the use of these missiles would be limited and primarily used to assist Ukraine with the occupation of Kursk, which also makes the US an even more involved participant in the occupation of Russian territory. Yet, Russia must respond forcefully to any breach of its red lines to counter NATO’s incrementalism / salami tactics that aim to chop away at Russia’s deterrent. The purpose of such incrementalism is to avoid an excessive response from Russia. The US will predictably impose restrictions on how these weapons can be used as it engages in direct attacks on Russia, but gradually these restrictions will be removed.

The extent of Russia’s response will depend on the extent to which these weapons are effective. The war is evidently being won by Russia, which is why Moscow is cautious about any escalations as it only needs time. However, if these weapons would actually turn the tide of the war, then Russia would consider itself compelled to launch a powerful attack on NATO as Russia considers this to be a war for its survival. NATO should therefore hope that these weapons are not effective, which undermines the reasoning for using them at all.

The missiles can turn the tide of the war

The war has already been lost, and Washington previously admitted that these long-range missiles would not be a game changer. There are two reasons for escalating the war at this point, to further bleed Russia and to sabotage Trump’s objective to end the war.

There is overwhelming evidence that the overarching objective for sabotaging all paths to peace and fighting the proxy war in Ukraine has been to weaken Russia as a strategic rival. Even Zelensky recognised in March 2022 that some Western states wanted to use Ukraine as a proxy against Russia: “There are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives”.[1] Both the Israeli and the Turkish mediators confirmed that the US and UK sabotaged the Istanbul peace agreement to fight Russia with Ukrainians, while interviews with top American and British diplomats revealed that the weakening of Russia and regime change in Moscow was the only acceptable outcome.[2]

The timing of Washington’s decision is also suspicious and appears to aim at sabotaging Trump’s plans to end the war. By comparison, Obama similarly threw a wrench into US-Russia relations in late 2016 as he was handing the White House over to Trump. The anti-Russian sanctions and expulsion of Russian diplomats were intended to sabotage Trump’s promise to get along with Russia. Biden appears to follow the same playbook by risking a Third World War to prevent peace from breaking out in Ukraine. Biden was too cognitively impaired to run for re-election, yet he is supposedly mentally fit to attack Russia as he prepares to leave the White House.

The world today is more dangerous than at any other time in history. The decision by the US to attack the world’s largest nuclear power is a desperate effort to restore global primacy. What makes this situation even more dangerous is the absurd self-deception across the West that results in us sleepwalking towards nuclear war. The public should be presented with more honest arguments when making the case for risking a third world war and nuclear annihilation.

[1] The Economist. ‘Volodymyr Zelensky on why Ukraine must defeat Putin’ The Economist, 27 March 2022.

[2] G. Diesen, ‘Sabotage of the Istanbul Peace Negotiations’, Substack, 13 October 2024, https://glenndiesen.substack.com/p/sabotage-of-the-istanbul-peace-agreement

November 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , | Leave a comment

Why Putin should ignore Biden’s pathetic ATACMS provocation

By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 18, 2024

As provocations go, the latest by President Joe Biden to permit the use of long-range missile strikes on Russia is certainly audacious. But, ultimately, in practice, it is a pathetic gesture by a lame-duck president that will have no impact on Russia’s anticipated military victory against the NATO-armed Kiev regime.

Biden’s reported decision is a desperate last-bid gamble to incite an escalation with Russia and to sabotage incoming plans by President-elect Trump to end the conflict in Ukraine. Biden’s move is reckless, reprehensible, and odious. But it should not be given any credibility as a serious threat.

Russia would be best to ignore it. Of course, Russia has to defend itself against any increased potential threat to its territory that such weapons may pose. Nevertheless, Moscow should continue exercising the strategic restraint that President Putin is renowned for, and not retaliate over the provocation.

Understandably, Russian politicians and media have reacted furiously to U.S. media reports that Biden gave the Ukrainian military the green light to deploy American-made ATACMS for striking deep into Russian territory. The ground-launched Mach-3 supersonic missiles have a range of up to 300 kilometers.

The audacity and arrogance of the American ruling class knows no bounds. It has sanctioned Russia to the hilt (to no avail mind you), it has weaponized a NeoNazi regime in Kiev, it has killed civilians in the Russian territory of Crimea already with ATACMS, and so on. Now Biden is ramping up the assault capability deep into Russia.

Two months ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that if the U.S. took such a move, then it would dramatically alter the very essence of the conflict in Ukraine, one where Moscow would see the United States and its NATO partners as “direct participants” in a war against Russia.

Putin’s reasoning was correct. The deployment of ATACMS and other sophisticated long-range missiles against Russia would inescapably mean that American and NATO personnel were manning these systems. The Ukrainian military – riven with desertion, in disarray, and suffering from poor morale – would not be capable of targeting and operating such munitions. The use of ATACMS, or air-launched JASSMs, and the British and French Storm Shadow and Scalp cruise missiles to hit Russia is tantamount to NATO’s direct involvement in a war against Russia.

The implication of what Putin said was grave and potentially catastrophic. If the Western states took that step, the result could mean an all-out war between nuclear powers.

When Putin issued his stark warning in September, Biden and other Western leaders, including Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer, appeared at the time to heed it and back down from considerations to permit the Ukrainian regime to use long-range missiles against Russia.

Now, however, Biden has flipped to finally give his approval, according to reports. The style of anonymous U.S. officials briefing the New York Times, Washington Post, and Associated Press has all the hallmarks of an orchestrated psychological operation.

What has changed?

Simple. Donald Trump won the U.S. presidential election on November 5 with a resounding victory in defiance of the political establishment that wanted Kamala Harris to win. The Republican president-elect takes over in two months when he is inaugurated on January 20. Trump has repeatedly said he will negotiate an end to the nearly three-year conflict in Ukraine, which has seen the U.S. and NATO allies bankroll a corrupt regime in Ukraine to the tune of $200 billion.

And yet after all that obscene wasting of Western public money to bloat the war machine, Russia is going to defeat the NATO proxy. The stakes for NATO’s future and the Western imperialist war machine could not be higher.

The impressive electoral mandate for Trump suggests that the American public wants the U.S. warmongering to stop and for their mounting economic and social needs to be taken care of as a priority.

Under Trump, the war racket could well be over. His nomination last week of Tulsi Gabbard – an outspoken critic of the NATO proxy war in Ukraine – as his Director of National Intelligence is a major sign of his bold intentions of negotiating a diplomatic settlement to the conflict. That means the end of the blood money flowing into the coffers of the Western military-industrial complex and Wall Street. Biden and the Democrat candidate Kamala Harris were the puppets of the war racket. To perform well, they mouthed endless Russophobia, making negotiations impossible with Moscow, and they swore to keep the conflict in Ukraine going “for as long as it takes.” European leaders like Starmer, Macron, and Scholz are equally contemptible.

As Biden packs his bags for his overdue retirement, he is rendering desperate last-minute services to the war racket that lies at the putrid heart of American capitalism. Last week, his Secretary of State Antony Blinken (another non-entity puppet) said the Biden administration would release a further $9 billion in military aid to Ukraine so that it could keep fighting the war well into next year.

Likewise, the reported green light from Biden on the use of long-range missiles is another ploy to keep the war racket going. Trump could reverse the decision when he enters the White House, but over the next two months, the Biden administration seems to be trying to sabotage Trump’s peace intentions by escalating the conflict to a dangerous point of no return.

Russia should not take the bait. For a start, the United States does not have a large supply of ATACMS to give to Ukraine. Any use of these missiles will be limited. The Kiev regime’s so-called president Vladimir Zelensky – he canceled elections months ago and rules by decree – has no chance of stopping the rapidly advancing victory of Russian forces, even with a few ATACMS.

No, this is not about defending Ukraine or enabling Zelensky’s ridiculous “victory plan”. It’s all about the American-led Western imperialist deep state wanting to provoke Russia into a dreadful escalation to keep the war profits churning.

Biden’s gesture is reckless, but it is something that should be treated with contempt. As he wanders off to the oblivion of his retirement dementia, people will soon forget about this failed politician. His 50-year career was one long shift of prostituting for U.S. imperialism.

Legally, Russia could respond to Biden’s provocation with reciprocal attacks on U.S. and NATO sites. But such an escalation is exactly what the imperialist deep state of the U.S. and its NATO lackeys are betting on.

The provocative gesture is more symbolic than a substantive threat. Russia should ignore it and focus on demolishing the NATO proxy regime in Kiev, and with that, thereby deal a fatal blow to U.S. and NATO credibility.

November 19, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Rant: This Isn’t Scientific, and It Isn’t American

Truthstream Media | November 10, 2024

Truthstream Media Can Be Found Here:

Our First Film: TheMindsofMen.net

Our First Series: Vimeo.com/ondemand/trustgame

Site: TruthstreamMedia.com X: @Truthstream

News Backup Ch: Vimeo.com/truthstreammedia

DONATE: http://bit.ly/2aTBeeF

Newsletter: http://eepurl.com/bbxcWX

November 19, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Video | , | Leave a comment

Former Biden Press Sec. Psaki Demands New Laws to Curb Online “Disinformation” After Harris Loss

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | November 18, 2024

Former White House press secretary, notorious for saying that the Biden administration had been flagging social media posts for “misinformation” recently voiced concerns on the Next Question podcast with Katie Couric about the pervasive spread of “disinformation” on social media, attributing it as a significant factor in Vice President Kamala Harris’s electoral defeat to President-elect Donald Trump. Psaki called for legislative changes to enhance accountability for social media platforms.

“One of the things that’s changed even since I got involved in politics is just the rise of the percentage of people who get their information off of platforms that have no fact-checking mechanism and no accountability for having disinformation spread,” Psaki said.

During their discussion, Psaki lamented the evolution of information dissemination, noting the increasing reliance on platforms free of legacy control. She highlighted the discrepancy in standards between local TV and social media, stating, “Local TV is held to a higher standard of accountability than social media platforms in terms of accurate information on their platforms. That is crazy!”

Psaki added, “Laws have to change. I don’t even know the entire answer to it but that seems to me to be a core issue.”

Psaki didn’t mention the First Amendment.

November 18, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Iranian engineer quits Google over tech giant’s collaboration with Israel amid Gaza genocide

Iranian software engineer Alireza Zakeri
Press TV – November 18, 2024

Iranian software engineer Alireza Zakeri has announced his resignation from Google over the American tech giant’s collaboration with Israel amid the regime’s genocidal war on Gaza, which has killed over 43,000 people in the territory since early October last year.

“I’m happy to announce that I have left Google!” he wrote in a post published on his Linkedin account on Monday, adding that “this decision reflects my values.”

“After learning about Google’s involvement in Project Nimbus, I voiced my concerns for several months. Unfortunately, despite the efforts of many employees, leadership chose to maintain its stance and dismiss our collective concerns,” he added.

Project Nimbus is reportedly a $1.2 billion deal between the Tel Aviv regime and Amazon and Google to provide artificial intelligence (AI) and cloud services that are also used by the Israeli military.

“Living in a way that conflicts with your core values is incredibly challenging. Choosing to step away was not easy, but it was necessary. For anyone facing similar situations, I hope you find the courage to prioritize your principles. What good is it for man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?” Zakeri pointed out.

Back on May 14, hundreds of pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel protesters demonstrated against Google’s relationship with Israel and the regime’s army at the tech company’s annual developer conference in Mountain View.

The protesters chained themselves together near the entrance to the conference, and carried a large banner reading “Google stop fueling genocide.”

A particular point of contention for the demonstrators was Project Nimbus. The project enables Israeli cabinet ministries and other entities to transfer servers and services into cloud data centers provided within the occupied territories.

The protesters, among whom were former and current Google employees, argued that the system is being lethally deployed in the Gaza war.

“We are here to say that we cannot stand by while this company fuels this genocide and profits off of it,” former Google employee Ariel Koren told The Guardian at the protest.

“[Google] not only creates the infrastructure for the Israeli military to scale out their crimes against humanity, but these tools are being tested and trained in Palestine to be exported out to militaries around the world, who can then commit the same types of violence,” she said.

Koren added she was fired from Google for opposing Project Nimbus.

November 18, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany has become Europe’s political wasteland

By Timofey Bordachev | Vzglyad | November 18, 2024

Germany is a political void in the center of Europe, even though it contributes significantly to the global economy and is influential in trade.

It’s also the Western country with which Russia has had the most historical, cultural and, until recently, economic contacts. A week ago the government in Berlin collapsed, and so far the leading German parties have agreed that early parliamentary elections will be in February 2025.

It’s very likely that the next government will be led by the main opposition force, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU).

At the start of the election campaign, CDU leader Friedrich Merz publicly announced that – if he wins – he’ll issue an ultimatum to Moscow over Ukraine. He’s promised that if this ultimatum is not accepted within 24 hours, his government will provide the Kiev regime with cruise missiles to attack Russian territory. The consequences of such a decision for Russian-Western relations are obvious. It is not surprising, therefore, that our main reaction was astonishment at the irresponsibility of such a high-ranking member of the German elite. There are even fears that Merz and those behind him intend to drag Germany into a destructive military conflict with Europe’s largest country.

But all this German talk means nothing in practice. Without US authorisation, or direct orders from Washington, the leaders in Berlin are not only incapable of starting a major war in Europe, they are incapable even of adjusting their shoelaces. Any statements by German politicians, the fall and rise of governing coalitions there, should only be seen in the context of how the Berlin establishment is trying to find a role in the shadow of total American dominance.

It’s deeply symbolic that Chancellor Olaf Scholz took a decisive step towards the collapse of the governing coalition on 6 November, the day on which the domestic political balance of power in the United States changed radically. In the context of significant changes at the center, the peripheral political systems must react as sensitively as possible: at the level of how a branch of a large corporation reacts to a change in its general management.

Berlin’s international position is defined by its crushing defeat in the Second World War, which ended any hope of determining its own future. Germany, like Japan and South Korea, is a country with a foreign occupying force on its territory, albeit under the NATO flag. The German elite, both political and economic, is, with few exceptions, even more integrated with the US than the British elite. To say nothing of those running France, Italy or other European countries.

Germany has no autonomy in determining its foreign policy, nor does it aspire to have any. It’s no coincidence that over the past two and a half years of the Ukraine crisis, it’s been Berlin that has provided the largest amount of military and financial aid to the Kiev regime. Almost ten times more than, say, France, whose president likes to make bellicose speeches.

Naturally, the representatives of the German establishment look like pale copies of what we used to consider real politicians. And this is a natural product of the loss of any possibility of determining their own destiny.

Of course, Berlin can still set the parameters of economic policy for the weak countries of the European Mediterranean. States such as Greece, Italy or Spain are given to Germany to ‘feed’ within the framework of the European Union and its single currency. But even Poland, which has a special relationship with the US, has managed to avoid tying itself to Germany’s industrial grip. France is resisting slightly. But it is gradually sinking to the level of southern Europe. The UK has left the EU, but retains its position as the main representative of the US in Europe.

It should be noted that such a state of affairs for Germany did not come about overnight. Even during the Cold War, the Federal Republic (FRG) was led by bright personalities. Under chancellors such as Willy Brandt (1969-1974), the Moscow Treaty was signed between the FRG and the USSR on the recognition of post-war borders in Europe. In the early 1970s, German politicians and business were able to persuade the US to allow Germany to establish energy cooperation with the Soviets. In our time, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder (1998-2005) pushed for European energy security based on German-Russian cooperation. But all this came to an end with the global economic crisis of 2008-2013, after which the US began to tighten the screws on its allies. In the spring of 2022, Olaf Scholz, who had previously been committed to dialogue with Russia, fully supported the military-political confrontation created by the Americans over Ukraine.

Now German politicians are not free to choose their own future. For most of them, with the exception of the non-systemic opposition, this is quite obvious. Why appoint bright personalities to the highest positions if nothing depends on their decisions? Gradually, the entire political system and the mood of the electorate are adapting to these conditions.

The differences in the parties’ platforms are becoming blurred. Observers are already talking about the likelihood that the government will be formed by the Social Democrats and their main opponents from the CDU. This means that disagreements on fundamental issues are a thing of the past. Only the technical aspects of forming a government need to be agreed upon, and the main goal of all efforts is to hold on to power as such.

The united and sovereign German state existed for 74 years (1871-1945). Its revival as such is not possible: even if Russia and China would look favourably on it, the Anglo-Saxon world will not allow it for several reasons at once.

Firstly, both German attempts – in the First and Second World Wars – to play a leading role in the West came close to succeeding. So nobody will give them a third chance. Just to be on the safe side. It should be borne in mind that the West takes order within its own community even more seriously than it does the defence of its privileges against the rest of humanity.

Second, Germany’s position at the center of Europe, its huge industrial base and its industrious population make it an ideal partner for the US and Britain, the maritime trading powers. Politically insignificant, Germany can economically control much of the rest of Europe, but cannot dictate the substance.

Third, the revival of visible German independence is in the interests of Moscow and Beijing because it would split the ranks of the consolidated West. A small front of countries like Hungary, Slovakia or even one a little larger cannot create such a split. And the unity of the West under the leadership of the US is a fundamental obstacle to the implementation of the plans for a multipolar world order promoted by Russia and China.

Germany is now a political wasteland in the heart of Europe. Tiny shoots of reason are, of course, breaking through the decades-old system based on pandering to the interests of American patrons. With some very obvious exceptions, the representatives of the non-systemic German opposition are talented people. But their prospects are still very dim because of the way things are manage.

In the future, we can expect to re-establish some economic ties with Germany but we must treat it as a political colony of the US, rather than thinking about try to establish full inter-state relations with Berlin.

Timofey Bordachev is the program director of the Valdai Club.

This article was first published by ‘Vzglyad’ newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team.

November 18, 2024 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

To secure peace in Ukraine, Trump must review misguided western sanctions

By Ian Proud | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 17, 2024

Following Trump’s election, there has been much speculation about how the war in Ukraine might end. But to understand how it might end, it’s vital to understand how it started.

The origins of the war in Ukraine can be traced back to the ouster of Ukrainian President Yanukovych in February 2014. Russia labelled it a coup, realists would say it was unconstitutional change in power, and U.S. & British officials would shrug their shoulders.

After Russia occupied Crimea and as insurgency broke out in the Donbas, the French and Germans launched a peace process involving the Presidents of Russia and Ukraine. From this so-called ‘Normandy format’ emerged two peace deals named the Minsk agreements. But the UK was sidelined from the peace process and the Americans suspicious of it.

Left out, Britian, supported by the U.S., pushed sanctions as the primary vehicle to contain Russia, running counter to what the French and Germans were trying to achieve. By the summer of 2015, the Minsk agreements had become sidelined, and sanctions were set in stone.

Since that time, Russia has become the most sanctioned country on the planet. Thirty-three western countries, led by the USA, imposed more than twenty thousand sanctions against Russian people and companies. That’s fifteen times more sanctions than Iran in a distant second place.

If we could completely cut Russia’s economic ties with the west, so the theory went, then that would be so damaging that Russia would have to withdraw from Ukraine. Western powers therefore sanctioned everything that they could, from money, ships, oil, gold, diamonds, weapons and all manner of hi-tech components. But from a very early stage, it was clear that sanctions weren’t altering Russian policy to Ukraine, quite the opposite.

When I left the Foreign Office in 2023, the UK government with its western partners, had gone through all the sanctions that they thought might weaken Russia. The west could probably find more people or entities to sanction. But policy makers never really gripped Russian gas, as some European countries still rely on it. And anyway, the destruction of the Nordstream pipeline solved that conundrum. Russian oligarchs that had political connections in the west were spared as were Russian companies that owned factories in the USA, to prevent American job losses. But we hit most things and neared the bottom of the barrel.

Yet, Russia’s economy always seemed to bounce back. That’s partly because, sanctions were never as big a deal as other events that moved the global economy, such as the oil price collapses in 2014 and 2016 and Covid. But it was also because Russia continually adapted its macroeconomic policy to absorb and, in the end, profit from sanctions. Following an immediate post-sanctions contraction of economic growth in 2022, Russia has grown more strongly than the western countries that imposed sanctions.

Western powers therefore needed something stronger, so sanctions evolved into a political tool to isolate Russia on the world stage. The USA, European Union and other countries including Japan and Australia sanctioned every possible type of economic, social and cultural activity involving Russia. Western academics no longer collaborate with Russian academics. Russian airliners can’t pass over western airspace and vice versa. Border posts have been closed or minimised. Russia can’t compete in international sporting events or even the Eurovision song contest.

Russian Ministers are subjected to indignant walkouts by western diplomats and ministers at international gatherings. Ordinary Russian people were denied a weekend ParkRun. Ukraine did its part, cancelling the Russian Orthodox church and going on a propaganda offensive with any western company that sold goods with the word ‘Russia’ in their branding.

And yet, outside of the west, Russia’s standing on the global stage doesn’t seem to be in decline. In a process accelerated by the Ukraine war, Russia, with China, has spearheaded a rapid shift by the developing world to create their own formats for dialogue and cooperation. There are over 200 countries on this planet, so the wealthy ‘west’ is in a minority. The BRICS group has grown rapidly, with a long queue of countries waiting to join, including NATO member Turkey. Vladimir Putin has an International Criminal Court arrest warrant out on him, yet he still travels freely to ‘friendly’ countries, where he receives the red-carpet treatment. He recently hosted a successful BRICS summit in Kazan while war continued to rage in Ukraine.

War started in February 2022 a few days after the Ukrainian government finally signalled the death knell of the Minsk peace agreements. But the point is that the Minsk agreement was [not] necessarily bad; it’s simply that the U.S. and UK invested significant efforts in ensuring its failure.

Sanctions never looked likely to prevent war, nor force its end, despite the death or injury to over one million people and a vast exodus of Ukraine’s population. War in Ukraine became reduced to the brutal, bloody town by town fighting in Europe after D-Day, while life in the west, and in Russia, carried on almost as normal. Fighting alone, Ukraine has never had sufficient resources to survive and never will.

There is a strong case that sanctions created the conditions for war to erupt, by undermining the very peace process – the Normandy Format – that was established to prevent it. And that the west’s continued blind faith in sanctions took us to the brink of a doomsday scenario, more horrific than the use of nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Western leaders, not wanting war themselves, focussed blindly on supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes. But the notion of ‘as long as it takes’ became tarnished with increasing numbers of western politicians started complaining that it is taking too long. Not least as the economics and demographics of war still show that Russia can continue fighting for as long as it takes, and that Vladimir Putin has the domestic political support to do that.

So, beyond the hype, if Trump is serious about ending the war in Ukraine, he must look at its origins. A ceasefire alone won’t cut it with Putin. There needs finally to be a peace proposal that includes targeted sanctions reduction. That, and a final reckoning with the NATO membership issue, the brightest red line of all.

November 18, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »