Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Nasrallah assassination aimed at provoking US-Iran war: Russia’s Lavrov

Press TV – September 29, 2024

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says that Israel’s assassination of Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah may have been intended to provoke a war between the United States and Iran.

Lavrov told reporters at a news conference after addressing the UN General Assembly on Saturday that a lot of people believe Israel’s assassination of Nasrallah was aimed at provoking Iran and the US “to unleash a full-blown war in the entire region.”

Killing the Hezbollah leader was “not simply a political assassination. It’s very cynical as an act,” Lavrov said.

“I think – well not even, I think, but a lot of people say – that Israel wants to create the grounds to drag the US directly into this and so to create these grounds, it is trying to provoke Iran,” Lavrov added.

“The Iran leadership, I think, are behaving extremely responsibly. And this is necessary. This is something that we should take due note of.”

Speaking at the UN Security Council meeting on Friday, Lavrov said, “the Middle East is once again on the brink of a big war,” calling for active diplomatic efforts to prevent the “most catastrophic scenario.”

In his UN General Assembly speech, Lavrov condemned the Israeli regime for its “inhumane attack on Lebanon.”

“Another glaring example of terrorist methods as a means of achieving political aims is the inhumane attack on Lebanon that transformed civilian technology into a lethal weapon,” Lavrov said, calling for an immediate international investigation.

‘US knew about Israel’s pager attacks’

Lavrov also told reporters that the US was likely aware of the Israeli regime forces’ plans to launch a “terrorist attack” against Lebanon using communication devices.

He said the complexity of the attack and the leaking of details to Western media indicate Washington’s possible complicity in the terrorist operation.

Last week, thousands of hand-held pagers and walkie-talkies used by Hezbollah members exploded across Lebanon simultaneously, killing dozens and injuring thousands, including many civilians. The attack, widely blamed on Israeli spy agency Mossad, drew international condemnation, with UN Human Rights Commissioner Volker Turk calling it a “shocking” and “unacceptable” act that violates human rights laws.

Tel Aviv has not claimed responsibility for the pager attacks, and its allies have denied any knowledge. However, according to Lavrov, Western media reports regarding the details and preparations “indicate to varying degrees the involvement and, at the very least, awareness of Washington concerning the preparation of that terrorist attack.”

September 29, 2024 Posted by | War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

Life, Pre-empted

What would you do to save Democracy? To save America? To save the world? How will you vote in November?

By Scott Ritter | September 25, 2024

If you’re not thinking about the end of the world by now, you’re either braindead or stuck in some remote corner of the world, totally removed from access to news.

Last week we came closer to a nuclear conflict between the US and Russia than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.

Today we are even closer.

Most scenarios being bandied about in the western mainstream media that involve a nuclear conflict between Russia and the United States have Russia initiating the exchange by using nuclear weapons against Ukraine in response to deteriorating military, economic, and/or political conditions brought on by the US and NATO successfully leveraging Ukraine as a proxy to achieve the strategic defeat of Russia.

Understand, this is what both Ukraine and the Biden administration mean when they speak of Ukraine “winning the war.”

This is a continuation of the policy objective set forth by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin in April 2022, “to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine,” meaning that Russia should “not have the capability to very quickly reproduce” the forces and equipment that it loses in Ukraine.

This policy has failed; Russia has absorbed four new territories—Kherson, Zaporizhia, Donetsk and Lugansk—into the Russian Federation, and the Russian defense industry has not only replaced losses sustained in the Ukrainian conflict, but is currently arming and equipping an additional 600,000 troops that have been added to the Russian military since February 2022.

It is the United States and its NATO allies that find themselves on their back feet, with Europe facing economic hardship as a result of the extreme blowback that has transpired because of its sanctioning of Russian energy, and the United States watching helplessly as Russia, together with China, turns the once passive BRICS economic forum into a geopolitical juggernaut capable of challenging and surpassing the US-led G7 as the world’s most influential non-governmental organization.

As a result of this abysmal failure, policymakers in both the US and Europe are undertaking increasingly brazen acts of escalation designed to bring Russia to the breaking point, all premised on the assumption that all so-called “red lines” established by Russia regarding escalation are illusionary—Russia, they believe, is bluffing.

And if Russia is not bluffing?

Then, the western-generated scenario paints an apocalyptic picture which has a weak, defeated Russia using nuclear weapons against Ukraine in a last, desperate act of vengeance.

According to this scenario, which the US and NATO not only war-gamed out but made ready to implement when these entities imagined that Russia was preparing to employ nuclear weapons back in late 2022-early 2023, the US and NATO would launch a devastating response against Russian targets deep inside Russia designed to punitively degrade Russian command and control, logistics, and warfighting capacity.

This would be done using conventional weapons.

If Russia opted to retaliate against NATO targets, then the US would have to make a decision—continue to climb the escalation ladder, matching Russia punch for punch until one side became exhausted, or preemptively using nuclear weapons as a means of escalating to de-escalate—launch a limited nuclear strike using low-yield nuclear weapons in hopes that Russia would back down out of fear of what would come next—a general nuclear war.

The Pentagon has integrated such a scenario into the range of nuclear pre-emption options available to the President of the United States. Indeed, in early 2020 US Strategic Command conducted an exercise where the Secretary of Defense gave the launch instructions for a US Ohio class submarine to launch a Trident missile carrying W-76-2 low yield nuclear warheads against a Russian target in a scenario involving Russian aggression against the Baltics in which Russia used a tactical nuclear weapon to strike a NATO target.

The insanity of this scenario is that it ignores published Russian nuclear doctrine, which holds that Russia will respond with the full power of its strategic nuclear arsenal in the case of a nuclear attack against Russian soil.

Once again, US nuclear war planners believe that Russia is bluffing.

There is another twist to this discussion.

While the US might assess that Russia would not seek a general nuclear war following the use by the US of low yield nuclear warheads, the problem is that the means of employment of the W-76-2 warhead is the Trident submarine launched ballistic missile.

While the February 2020 scenario had Russia using nuclear weapons first (something which, at the time, represented a gross deviation from published Russian nuclear doctrine and the declaratory policy statements of the Russian President), the fact is the US will not necessarily wait for Russia to kick things off on the nuclear front.

The United States has long embraced a nuclear posture which not only incorporates the potential of a nuclear first strike, but, through declaratory policy statements, actively encourages America’s potential nuclear adversaries to believe such an action is, in fact, possible. David J. Trachtenberg, the deputy undersecretary of defense for policy during the Trump administration, said in a speech at the Brookings Institution in 2019 that a key aspect to the US nuclear posture was “keeping adversaries such as Russia and China guessing whether the US would ever employ its nuclear weapons.”

But the US takes the guesswork out of the equation. Theodore Postol points out, in a recent article in Responsible Statecraft, that a new fuse used on the W-76 nuclear warhead (not the low yield W-76-2, but rather the 100 kiloton version) has turned the 890 W-76 warheads loaded on the Trident missiles carried onboard the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines into weapons capable of destroying hardened Russian and Chinese missile silos with a single warhead.

This means that, firing in a reduced trajectory profile from a position close to the shores of either Russia or China, the United States possesses the ability to launch a nuclear first strike that has a good chance of knocking out the entire ground-based component of both the Chinese and Russian strategic nuclear deterrent. As a result, Russia has been compelled to embrace a “launch on detect” nuclear posture where it would employ the totality of its silo-based arsenal the moment it detected any potential first strike by the United States.

Return, for a moment, to the scenario-driven employment of the W-76-2 low yield nuclear weapon as part of the “escalate to de-escalate” strategy that underpins the entire reason for the W-76-2 weapon to exist in the first place.

When the United States launches the Trident missile carrying the low yield warhead, how are the Russians supposed to interpret this act?

The fact is, if the US ever fires a W-76-2 warhead using a Trident missile, the Russians will assess this action as the initiation of a nuclear first strike and order the launching of its own nuclear arsenal in response.

All because the United States has embraced a policy of “first strike ambiguity” designed to keep the Russians and Chinese guessing about American nuclear intentions.

And, to put icing on this nuclear cake, Russia’s response appears to have been to change its nuclear posture to embrace a similar posture of nuclear pre-emption, meaning that rather than wait for the US to actually launch a nuclear-armed missile or missiles against a Russian target, Russia will now seek to pre-empt such an attack by launching its own pre-emptive nuclear strike designed to eliminate the US land-based nuclear deterrent force.

In a sane world, both sides would recognize the inherent dangers of such a forward-leaning posture, and take corrective action.

But we no longer live in a sane world.

Moreover, given the fact that the underlying principle guiding US policies toward Russia is the misplaced notion that Russia is bluffing, any aggressive posturing we might engage in designed to promote and exploit the ambiguity derived from the first-strike potential inherent in existing US nuclear posture will, more likely than not, only fuel Russian paranoia about a potential US nuclear pre-emption, prompting Russia to pre-empt.

Russia isn’t bluffing.

And our refusal to acknowledge this has embarked us on a path where we appear more than willing to pre-empt life itself.

We need to pre-empt nuclear preemption by embracing a policy of strict no first use principles.

By choosing deterrence over warfighting.

By deemphasizing nuclear war.

By controlling nuclear weapons through verifiable arms control treaties.

And by eliminating nuclear weapons.

It truly is an existential choice—nuclear weapons or life.

Because they are incompatible with one another.

September 29, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

As the West tries to silence RT, the Global South speaks out

The US-led “diplomatic campaign” to suppress RT worldwide is not getting the warm reception Washington hoped for

By Anna Belkina | RT | September 28, 2024

The United States government has recently issued new sanctions against RT, with the State Department announcing a new “diplomatic campaign” whereby – via US, Canadian, and UK diplomats – they promise to “rally allies and partners around the world to join us in addressing the threat posed by RT.”

In other words, the plan is to bully countries outside of the Collective West into shutting off their populations’ access to RT content in order to restore the West’s almost global monopoly on information. Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa appear to be of particular concern to the State Department’s James Rubin, as it is in those regions where US foreign policy has failed to find universal purchase.

As Rubin said during a press conference, “one of the reasons… why so much of the world has not been as fully supportive of Ukraine as you would think they would be… is because of the broad scope and reach of RT.”

Clearly not trusting anyone outside of the Western elite circles to think and decide for themselves which news sources people should or should not have access to, Rubin promised that the US will be “helping other governments come to their own decisions about how to treat” RT.

The statement reeks of patronizing and neo-colonialist attitudes, especially when you consider the countries that are being targeted.

Therefore, it has been reassuring to observe over the past couple of weeks the diversity of voices that have spoken out against this latest US-led crusade.

The Hindu, one of India’s newspapers of record, was among the first, reporting that while “US officials have spoken to [India’s] Ministry of External Affairs about joining their actions” against RT, “government officials said that the debate on sanctions is not relevant to India, while a former diplomat said that banning media organizations showed ‘double standards’ by Western countries.”

This position was seconded by Indian business newspaper Financial Express : “India is unlikely to act on this request [to ban RT], given its longstanding friendly relations with Russia and its own position on media censorship… In India, RT enjoys significant viewership, with its content reaching a large number of English-speaking audiences and also expanding its reach through a Hindi-language social media platform. RT has grown in popularity in India and other parts of the world, claiming that its main mission is to counter the Western narrative and offer Russia’s perspective on global affairs.”

In the Middle East, Saudi Arabia’s Okaz paper said, “it is paradoxical, that when [free] speech becomes a threat to the US and the West, they impose restrictions on it, as it happened with the ban on RT under the pretext of lack of transparency, spreading false information, interfering in internal affairs and inciting hatred – something that Washington and the West themselves do in relation to other countries.”

Leading Lebanese daily Al Akhbar wrote: “despite all the attempts to ban it… RT continues to broadcast and causes concern among supporters of imperial wars. These efforts also demonstrate the hypocrisy of their authors and their false claims about ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘freedom of the press,’ among their other loud proclamations. They claim that RT is a ‘mouthpiece of disinformation,’ but if this is so, then why is there such fear of it? If the channel really is spreading lies, won’t the viewers be able to notice? [This only works] if Western rulers view their citizens as simple-minded and easily deceived, which in turn explains the misinformation coming from every side of the Western media.”

It is safe to say that “Western rulers” view with such disregard and distrust not only their own citizens, but most of the world’s population… But I digress.

In Latin America, Uruguay-based current affairs magazine Caras y Caretas praised RT for “maintain[ing] a truthful editorial line, beyond being a state media outlet, and [it] has increased its popularity and credibility by exposing a perspective that makes it creative, original and authentic… RT has helped open the eyes of a very large part of the world’s population and of increasingly numerous governments and countries. That is the reason for the sanctions that the US and hegemonic media conglomerates such as Meta and Facebook have imposed on RT and its directors, adjudicating against them with the charges that are not believable, and are ridiculous. The statements of top US administration officials claiming to be defenders of press freedom and accusing RT of being a front for Russian intelligence is only an expression of impotence in the face of an alternative narrative to the hegemonic imperialist story.”

Rosario Murillo, the vice president of Nicaragua, sent RT a letter of support. In it, she berated the US authorities for their actions against the network, asking when they will “learn that the aggressions that they shamelessly call Sanctions, (as if they had divine powers to dispense punishments)… have no more sense than establishing their claims to the position [of] dictators of the World.” She praised RT’s “work and the creative, thoughtful, illustrative, sensitive and moving way” that RT “manage[s] to communicate.”

A number of African outlets have also spoken out about the hypocrisy of America’s global censorship. Nigerian newspaper The Whistler summarized the latest Western media diktat and its colonialist undertones thusly: “The Americans got into some quarrel with Russia and then shut down this Russian news channel. An order signed by some American politician in Washington got the European company supplying Multichoice to stop streaming RT… The result? We in Nigeria woke up one day to find we could no longer watch RT on TV or stream them on Facebook because of some drama happening in Washington and Moscow. Imagine the audacity! It was a decision made by Americans and Europeans without asking anybody here in Africa how we felt about it. They decided what we could and could not watch on our own TVs.”

It is heartening to see that so many different countries, with incredibly varied politics, societies, and cultures, speaking out against Washington’s imposing its world order on them. They prove that RT’s voice continues to be not just necessary, but welcomed and sought after.

Last night, as part of RT’s response to the actions of the US government, the bright green RT logo lit up the facade of the US Embassy building in Moscow with the message: “We’re not going away.”

Not in the US, not in the West at large, not in other parts of the world.

See you around!

September 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

EPA LOSES HISTORIC FLUORIDE CASE

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | September 26, 2024

September 27, 2024 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment

Let’s Force Antony Blinken to Resign

No, it would be even better to arrest him for war crimes

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • September 27, 2024

Some might argue that Antony Blinken is the worst Secretary of State that the United States has ever had to suffer under even though the competition for that accolade is fierce and includes his recent predecessor Hillary Clinton. Clinton, who more than anyone launched the war against Africa’s most developed nation, is remembered fondly for her giggled, grinning response when she was informed how deposed Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi had died after having a bayonet inserted in his anus when he was captured by rebels while on the run after being removed from power by the US and its NATO allies. She said “We came, we saw and he died!” All right, so it wasn’t exactly Julius Caesar’s terse description of the outcome of his Second Civil War battle against Pharnaces II of Pontus at Zela (modern-day Zile, Turkey) in 47 BC. Caesar said “Veni, vidi, vici!” (I came, I saw, I conquered) but it was likely the best plagiarism that a Clinton could come up with.

Joe Lauria of Consortium News observes how deep the State Department rot goes as “Barack Obama also let Hillary Clinton, the ‘Queen of Warmongers,’ bring Neocon Queen Victoria Nuland into his administration. Donald Trump let neocons John Bolton and Mike Pompeo into his. And Biden has Blinken (and for a time Nuland too.) Instead of banishing these people, they are allowed to linger and drag the US into evermore perilous failures: Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza and Ukraine, leaving behind a mountain of squandered dollars and an ocean of blood.”

To be sure, the United States has developed a politico/economic system based on corruption by special interests and tribalism that fails to benefit the country and its citizens in almost every respect. Due in part to runaway military spending on unnecessary and avoidable wars, the country is running a deficit so huge that it will inevitably lead to a financial crash that will be devastating to ordinary Americans. The nation’s health care system is both broken and often prohibitively expensive, with the US delivering the worst results in medical services for any developed nation. To pretend that everything is just fine, the politicians lie and lie and lie, so much so that the joke has become current “How do you know that a politician is lying?” Answer: “When his or her lips are moving!”

My favorite recent big lies by a politician have to be President Joe Biden’s assertions crammed into an 11 minute speech on July 24th which included that he had ended his candidacy for reelection as president in order to “save democracy” in the United States. The president is 81 and his failing mental state has been widely observed but in his first White House appearance since he quit the race on July 21st, he felt compelled to say that he felt his record as president “merited a second term” but that “nothing can come in the way of saving our democracy.” Of course, one might well argue that if democracy is failing it must largely be the fault of the president and his cabinet which control the courts and justice department and run both police and intelligence services as well as having the ability to place disinformation to counter criticism in the national media. Who’s driving the car Joe?

Biden also claimed that “I’m the first president in this century to report to the American people that the United States is not at war anywhere in the world,” even though it is engaged in a military occupation of one quarter of Syria to include combat operations against government forces, bombing Yemen, and conducting counterterrorism operations in Iraq in spite of the fact that the country’s parliament and government have three times asked the US to leave. The US is as well supporting and enabling financially, logistically and with intelligence the large and bloody conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, which did not threaten the US and could have been avoided completely.

Israel is, of course, a special case even given the appalling record exhibited by US foreign policy “experts in place” screwing up the world since 9/11. Before Israel’s likely demolition/destruction of the World Trade Center towers on that day, one would never have imagined the control that the Jewish Lobby has since obtained over the US foreign policy as well as over many domestic policies. This is largely thanks to the alarmingly pro-Israel measures that have been advanced by an ignorant and reckless Donald Trump followed by the totally mindless and heedless Joe Biden. Biden has a majority of Jews occupying senior positions in his administration and it is fair to say that Jews are at the controls for Middle Eastern policy as well as what is playing out in Ukraine. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken is little more than a spokesman and advocate for Israel as he made clear when he arrived in Ben Gurion Airport a day after the Hamas October 7th 2023 attack and announced that “I come before you as a Jew…” and followed that up with his family holocaust history, though he failed to mention that his stepfather Samuel Pisar worked as private secretary for Robert Maxwell, a leading Israeli spy. That fact plus the occasional claims that he is an Israeli-American dual national, like Biden’s top Middle East negotiator Amos Hochstein, makes me wonder how Blinken ever got a security clearance in the first place. And let’s not forget about Congress, where pro-Israel fanatics have taken complete control (with the sole exception of Tom Massie) of the Republican Party.

This corruption and control of the federal government is exercised through over-the-top political donations and favorable media coverage dependent on each Congressman’s support for Israel. It also means using prominent Jewish journalists to discredit critics as antisemites and holocaust deniers. And it is all bought with cash on the line. A story is currently circulating indicating that Miriam Adelson, Israel-born heiress to the Sheldon Adelson multi-billion dollar casino fortune, has offered Trump $100 million as a political campaign contribution if he will promise to enable Israeli annexation of all of historic Palestine after he wins the November election. Just watch it happen if he wins.

Blinken is more into the straight-faced lie, particularly when he is on guard to protect Israel from any criticism up to and including a clearly visible genocide that is taking place, and that is where the latest saga involving him has gained momentum. It has picked up speed to such an extent that people who normally are afraid to challenge the Israel Lobby are beginning to take notice and are calling for Blinken’s resignation. I would personally prefer that he be flat out fired as an accessory to war crimes and genocide and imprisoned, with a black mark in perpetuum etched next to his name. But I would regret that either outcome would only free him up to take a salary increase as a front office toady with any one of a number of deep-pockets Israel Lobby components. Somehow folks who betray their loyalty oaths and ignore their allegiance to this country to “help” Israel when taking senior level government jobs always land on their feet when their betrayal becomes too obvious and they have to step down. Note for example the case of Victoria Nudelman who was recently the number two top official at the State Department and was the driving force behind war between Ukraine and Russia.

The most recent bit of over-the-top lying to cover up Israeli crimes has plenty of blood all over it, which is a development that doesn’t seem to bother Mr. Blinken as long as it is nearly all Palestinian. He is now, however, facing calls for his resignation after he had reportedly ignored assessments by two government agencies which concluded that Israel was deliberately and maliciously blocking American humanitarian aid to Gaza. Blinken’s monstrous behavior was recently exposed in an investigation by ProPublica which revealed that the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the State Department’s refugee bureau had both communicated their concerns about what was happening to Blinken and other top government officials in April. According to US law, countries that block US humanitarian aid cannot receive arms shipments, but Washington has provided Tel Aviv with billions of dollars in military aid and arms sales with only one short pause throughout the course of the entire Israeli assault on Gaza.

The 17-page USAID report that was presented to Blinken detailed “instances of Israeli interference with aid efforts, including killing aid workers, razing agricultural structures, bombing ambulances and hospitals, sitting on supply depots and routinely turning away trucks full of food and medicine.” Nevertheless, on May 10th, Blinken delivered a State Department report to Congress asserting that Israel had not blocked aid to Gaza despite the findings of the report, which went on to describe the situation in Gaza as “one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes in the world.” USAID officials also specifically recommended that all arms exports to Israel be paused until the situation is resolved. The State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, concurred and recommended that the Foreign Assistance Act be triggered to freeze the $830 million in US aid for arms for Israel that was already in the pipeline. Senior officials in the department concluded that “facts on the ground indicate US humanitarian assistance is being restricted.” One State Department official, Stacy Gilbert, resigned over Blinken’s final report to Congress, saying in a statement following her departure that “there is abundant evidence showing Israel is responsible for blocking aid” and that “to deny this is absurd and shameful.”

Israel for its part has not been shy about how it is “security controlling” aid shipments as part of its full siege of the enclave, blocking entry of food, medical equipment and supplies, and even water and electricity. Truck convoys of food have been allowed to rot at checkpoints. At least 34 children have died of malnutrition due to the blockade in 2024 alone and the war crime of deliberate starvation is one of the charges that has been levelled against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant in ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan’s application for arrest warrants in May.

Calls for Blinken to resign from his post have followed from some of the numerous critics of US policy. “Antony Blinken lied to Congress even though he knew Israel was deliberately starving Gaza – all to keep arming the genocide. We demand that @SecBlinken resign and that @JoeBiden and @KamalaHarris stop illegally arming Israel NOW!” tweeted Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) also called for Blinken to step down. “We’re calling for the resignation of @SecBlinken after @propublica reports revealed he misled Congress about Israel’s deliberate blockade of humanitarian aid to Gaza – a violation of US law. The American people deserve leaders who tell the truth. It’s time to hold the Biden administration accountable for its ongoing complicity in the Israeli genocide in Gaza. #ResignBlinken #FreeGaza #EndTheBlockade,” the group wrote on X.

So what will happen next? Probably nothing. One observer opined that Congress was very pleased to be lied to in “defense” of Israel and would have certainly denounced Blinken for speaking the truth. So the fact that Blinken is lying should really surprise no one as he knows he will get away with it. Australian journalist Caitlin Johnstone explains it this way: “Israel must be protected because it is the last bastion of freedom and democracy in the middle east, no matter how many journalists it has to assassinate, no matter how many press institutions it needs to shut down, no matter how many protests its supporters need to dismantle, no matter how much free speech it needs to eliminate, no matter how many civil rights it needs to erase, and no matter how many elections its lobbyists need to buy.” Nevertheless, international charitable organizations that aren’t affiliated with any single nation have been waking up to the reality of the Israeli genocide of the Palestinians, with some also saying repeatedly for months that Israel is blocking humanitarian aid as also independent journalists have been reporting, some of whom, like targeted aid workers, have been killed by Israel while investigating the story. And yet the United States has consistently denied knowledge of these war crimes, with the denials being most particularly verbalized by Tony Blinken. Since Congress and the White House have the power to decide which lies are okay and which lies are not, Blinken will shrug and continue to lie and will probably continue to serve as Secretary of State if Kamala Harris is elected. That has unfortunately become the American way.

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

September 27, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

Yemeni naval forces launch largest-ever attack on US warships in Red Sea

Press TV – September 27, 2024

A high-profile Yemeni military official says the country’s naval units have launched their largest-ever attack on United States Navy warships in the Red Sea, demonstrating their solid support for Palestinian and Lebanese nations amid the relentless Israeli aggression and in retaliation for the US-British attacks on the Arab country.

Brigadier General Yahya Saree, spokesman for the Yemeni Armed Forces, stated on Friday that the Yemeni military had carried out the operation against three American destroyers as they were heading towards the occupied territories to support the Israeli enemy.

He added that the large-scale maritime operation involved naval, air defense and missile forces of the Yemeni army, and was carried out with 23 ballistic and winged missiles besides kamikaze drones.

Saree underscored that the operation resulted in a direct hit against the three destroyers.

The senior Yemeni military figure said the missile attack was the largest of its kind in the course of anti-Israeli maritime operations, and also came in reprisal of joint US-British strikes on the Arab country.

Saree further noted that Yemeni armed forces are prepared to conduct more qualitative military operations in support of Palestinians and Lebanese resistance fighters, who are courageously confronting the US-backed Israeli aggression in defense of the Gaza Strip and Lebanon.

He said his country’s military will continue its anti-Israel operations until the Tel Aviv regime halts its onslaught against Gaza and eases restrictions on supplies of humanitarian aid for its Palestinian population.

Yemenis have declared their open support for Palestine’s struggle against the Israeli occupation since the regime launched a devastating war on Gaza on October 7, 2023, after the territory’s Palestinian resistance movements carried out surprise Operation Al-Aqsa Storm against the occupying entity.

The Yemeni Armed Forces have said they will not stop their attacks until unrelenting Israeli ground and aerial offensives in Gaza end.

So far, Israel has killed over 41,530 Palestinians, mostly women and children, and injured more than 96,000 others in Gaza.

September 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Americans queueing to assassinate Trump, yet Iran is blamed

By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 27, 2024

The United States does not have an impressive history of truth-telling when it comes to finding the culprits of presidential assassinations.

Indeed, the opposite. Cover-up and scapegoating are par for the course. So, bear that in mind about hyped reports this week about Iran allegedly trying to assassinate Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

In 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald, a former U.S. Marine, was officially blamed for killing John F Kennedy. It was also mooted at the time that Oswald was working as a sympathizer for Communist Cuba or the Soviet Union.

Despite decades of the U.S. mainstream media and academia sticking to the preposterous narrative of Oswald as the lone shooter in Dallas, there is cogent evidence that JFK was assassinated by the American deep state of CIA and corporate power because of the president’s opposition to Cold War confrontation with the Soviet Union.

For more than six decades, the official narrative of JFK’s assassination has not changed despite the absurdities of the official account. Three fatal bullets in quick succession from a notoriously poor shot (Oswald) and the third to the front of the president’s head, supposedly from Oswald perched in a high-rise building hundreds of feet to the rear. Give us a break.

Fast forward to the summer of 2024. Two attempts have been made on the life of Republican candidate Donald Trump. On both occasions, the attacks were carried out by American citizens. On July 13, Thomas Matthew Crooks was shot dead by Secret Service agents after he fired his assault rifle at Trump during a rally in Pennsylvania. On September 15, Ryan Routh was arrested for trying to kill Trump at his golf course in Florida. It’s not clear what the shooters’ motives were. But both incidents involve American citizens as would-be assassins.

Moreover, there are disturbing questions about the lax conduct of the state security services and bigger forces who might want Trump dead. The first assassination attempt in Pennsylvania saw gaping lapses that allowed the shooter to breach the security perimeter. In the second case, the suspect had active ties with recruiting foreign mercenaries for the NATO-backed Ukrainian regime and presumably U.S. intelligence networks.

Yet this week, the U.S. intelligence services accuse Iran of plotting to kill Trump. The story has been doing the rounds in the U.S. media for weeks, having first been reported by CNN shortly after the assassination attempt in Pennsylvania. The unsubstantiated Iranian connection smacks of a blatant distraction from possibly more homegrown culprits.

Gullibly, Trump this week appeared to buy the accusations against Iran. He threatened to blow Iran to “smithereens” if he were president.

This is while Trump has previously blamed his Democrat rivals for responsibility, pointing out how they have labelled him as a “threat to American democracy”.

There is no evidence from the U.S. spooks to substantiate their high-flown claims against Iran. The accusations come at an extremely tense time when Israel is threatening to drag the Middle East into an all-out war with Lebanon and Iran. The latest U.S. intel accusations against Iran serve to give Israel a cover for its regional aggression.

Trump’s unquestioning reaction to blame Iran is no doubt driven by his desire to act tough for electioneering gain. Threatening to blow a country to smithereens might play well with some voters.

No doubt, too, Trump is living out his own fears of Iranian revenge. He ordered the assassination in 2020 of Iran’s top military commander Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad.

Tehran has never officially declared its intention to kill Trump out of revenge for Soleimani. This week at the United Nations General Assembly, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian spoke of Iran not wanting war and of seeking diplomatic negotiations with the US to avoid further conflict in the Middle East. It would, therefore, be irrational for Tehran to jeopardize the region by engaging in a vendetta against a presidential candidate.

The fingering of Iran with allegations of plotting to assassinate Trump comes at a suspicious time.

The U.S. presidential race is heading to a tight finish, with the Democrat candidate Kamala Harris receiving endorsements from the Washington establishment, including former Republican administration officials. Harris is the deep-state favorite to ensure the continuation of foreign policy goals of confronting Russia and China. Trump is too much of a maverick and unreliable for the powers-that-be. The stakes are high to make sure he does not get back to the White House, as far as the interests of the U.S. imperial planners are concerned. His talk about cutting military aid to the Ukrainian regime and calls for a peace settlement are not what the military-intel-imperialist deep state wants.

What if a third assassination attempt on Trump succeeds? There are plenty of grounds to suspect that he could be taken out by “executive action” sanctioned by enemies within the U.S. power nexus because of the high stakes of this election. The deep state needs to pursue confrontation with Russia and China to prop up waning American global power. The stakes could not be higher.

Against all the evidence of Trump being threatened by Americans who have nothing to do with Iran, there now emerges a false flag of an Iranian threat.

One has to wonder if Iran is being set up as a patsy for eliminating an American presidential candidate.

September 27, 2024 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism | , , | Leave a comment

Biden’s Last QUAD summit: All substance and no real Action

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – September 27, 2024

When Biden hosted the leaders of the Quadrilateral Security Group (QUAD) from India, Australia, and Japan in the US in 2021, they did not directly mention China. Still, the emphasis on “shared security and prosperity” was an unmistakable reference to a joint mechanism to counter Beijing’s influence in the Indo-Pacific, particularly.

One would have expected the Biden administration to leave a legacy of a significantly functional mechanism producing collective security and prosperity at the end of its era in 2024. But, as it turns out, QUAD remains where it was in 2021: a club that hosts little more than tea parties to mean anything. The club, as the Indian Prime Minister remarked after the latest summit, is “here to stay”. The question, however, is: will it, or can it, turn into more than a club for occasional gatherings to talk about abstract geopolitics? It is quite unlikely. Donald Trump’s victory will dampen it even further. If Harris wins, she is unlikely to introduce any major changes from the Biden administration, for obvious reasons (she is currently part of the same administration!).

The Last Summit: What is new?

The last summit is, therefore, no different from the earlier ones insofar as it offers little more than a set of “commitments”, and occasional references to “unity”, “democracy” and certain joint ventures, such as Maritime Initiative for Training in the Indo-Pacific (MAITRI). Apparently a new initiative, MAITRI is backed by little to nothing actionable and concrete. It aims to equip partner countries with “tools” that they will use “to monitor and secure their waters, enforce their laws, and deter unlawful behavior”. Who will fund this initiative? What counts as “unlawful behaviour” and what exact action will be taken against those involved in any unlawful activity are some of the ‘black holes’ that need massive filling before this initiative can qualify to acquire any geostrategic significance. There are other concerns too.

While the joint statement mentions China several times, it does not mention Russia at all. Although it refers to Ukraine, the fact that it does not refer to Russia is due to the nature of Indian ties with Moscow. What does this mean for the future of QUAD? No references to any threats other than those emerging from, or associated with, China leave QUAD a club squarely and singularly focused on China. Is this an advantage or a disadvantage?

The China Factor

Being squarely anti-China means QUAD can never sell itself to the wider region as a framework of security. Had QUAD been a general framework of security, it could have attracted several other countries from the region. However, it is unable to do this because a large number of countries in the region do not wish to gang up against China due to the nature of their ties with Beijing. For instance, there is probably not a single example where a country from this region, which is not a QUAD member, ever endorsed anything QUAD said or did. In other words, QUAD operates in a disconnected regional space as an abstract idea rather than as a force to be reckoned with.

This is despite the fact that the latest QUAD summit categorically said China is “testing us”. Conversely, QUAD is “testing” China, but China’s advantage is that it does not have many real regional rivals. That includes India too.

Now, PM Modi thinks that QUAD is here to stay, but the exact purpose it will serve for him is far from clear to other QUAD members. Consider the bilateral trade volume, for instance. It has already reached US$118 billion in 2024. Despite so-called “tensions”, the overall trade grew by 1.5 per cent in terms of year-on-year growth. More significantly, QUAD downplays the role – and the possibility – of regional countries utilising bilateral channels for dispute resolution. Is QAUD the only mechanism that, for instance, PM Modi might depend upon in the wake of another border clash with China?

Bilateralism Trumps QUAD’s Multilateralism

Let’s see what both India and China have done in the past two years. Instead of relying on QUAD, New Delhi happens to have preferred meetings and regular interaction with China at the Corps Commander level. According to data shared by India’s Ministry of Home Affairs, 21 meetings have been held until February 2024. None of these meetings either involved any third party, nor did New Delhi stress a multilateral approach for ‘effective’ dispute resolution. The Indian readout stressed the friendly and amicable nature of talks.

This is not the only mechanism. Since 2012, the Working Mechanism for Consultation & Coordination (WMCC) on India-China Border Affairs has been another key bilateral avenue of dispute resolution, and it has remained relevant despite the border clashes. On August 29, the WMCC held its 31st meeting. The meeting’s aim was “to narrow down the differences and find early resolution of the outstanding issues”.

Now, the emphasis on narrowing down existing differences not only signals success, but also the willingness to remain nonviolent in their approaches to conflict resolution. Nonviolence directly implies the irrelevance of the securitised approach of the QUAD vis-à-vis China’s position in the Indo-Pacific.

There is, in simple words, a lesson for countries in the region. Many countries in Southeast Asia, for instance, have concerns about China’s dominance in the South and East China seas. Should they opt for a military approach considering that India, a much bigger military power than any country in Southeast Asia, is itself following dialogue and diplomacy to resolve disputes? The lesson, in other words, is to emphasise bilateral approach and talk directly to China.

All of these factors combine to produce the utter inability of QUAD to evolve, since its establishment in 2004, as a significant military or economic alliance. Much to Washington’s disappointment, it still does not have a regional mechanism to ‘contain’ China.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

September 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

The Nord Stream Anniversary & Europe’s Stockholm Syndrome

Defending the narrative from reality

By Glenn Diesen | September 27, 2024

Two years ago, the Nord Stream gas pipelines were destroyed in an economic and environmental terrorist attack. The attack severed a key economic connection between Europe and Russia, contributing to the de-industrialisation of Europe and intensifying Russia’s economic reorientation towards China and India. The geopolitical ramifications are immense, yet we know very little about the attack. How is this possible?

The US and its NATO allies initially insisted that Russia was certainly the perpetrator, and their stenographers in the media reported confidently that “everything is pointing to Russia”.[1] No evidence was presented, yet NATO even suggested the attack on its critical infrastructure could trigger collective defence under Article 5. Besides indirectly threatening the world’s largest nuclear power with war, NATO also used the attack on Nord Stream to justify escalating the war in Ukraine and to further militarise the Baltic Sea and other seas. Strengthening NATO’s ability to protect undersea infrastructure was also an important argument for why Finland and Sweden should join NATO.

The story of Russia blowing up its own pipeline could rely on a strong consensus as all dissent to the narrative could be dismissed as repeating the Kremlin’s talking points. Similar stories such as Russia’s continued bombing of a nuclear power plant under its own control or Russia attacking the Kremlin with drones did not make any sense either, yet in the absence of common sense the political-media elites could explain that this was straight out of the “Russian playbook”.

However, reality eventually asserted itself around the time of Seymour Hersh’s article that blamed the US for the attack, and thereafter the US began to shift the blame to Ukraine. In one of the latest developments, the Wall Street Journal reported that the US knew about the Ukrainian attack in advance and “the CIA warned Zelensky’s office to stop the operation”.[2]

It seems highly unlikely that the US was not involved in the attack on Nord Stream, yet the new and updated narrative is nonetheless interesting as it is an admission that the US knew about the attack on Nord Stream before it happened. This is an admission that the US and NATO lied to their public and the entire world when they blamed Russia for the attack, and then used that lie to escalate the war in Ukraine, militarise the Baltic Sea, and push for further NATO expansionism.

Our lack of knowledge about what happened to the Nord Stream gas pipelines is the result of defending the narrative from reality. Blissful ignorance has become the foundation for NATO unity, and facts are thus treated as our great enemy. Yet, as the demand for unity also upholds what can only be described as the Stockholm Syndrome, let’s review how the Nord Stream narrative has been defended from reality:

The US announces its objective to destroy Nord Stream

Preventing the economic integration and cooperation between Russia and Germany as two key centres of power has been a centuries-old hegemonic objective of the US and Britain. The RAND Corporation, a think tank linked to the intelligence community, wrote a report in 2019 sponsored by the Army Quadrennial Defense Review Office about how to extend and weaken Russia. Besides destabilising Russian borders and bleeding Russia in Ukraine, the report outlined the objective of cutting Russia’s energy ties to Europe: “A first step would involve stopping Nord Stream 2”.[3]

The US opposition to Nord Stream 2 included political pressure and economic sanctions against the companies of European allies who participated in the project, a hegemonic ambition sold to the public as defending Europe. In July 2020, then-US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo proclaimed: “We will do everything we can to make sure that that pipeline doesn’t threaten Europe”.[4] US Senator Tom Cotton announced in May 2021 that ‘there is still time to stop it. … Kill Nord Stream 2 now, and let it rust beneath the waves of the Baltic’.[5] On 14 January 2022, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan also threatened the pipeline: ‘We have made clear to the Russians that pipeline is at risk if they move further into Ukraine’.[6] Senator Ted Cruz similarly used very direct language calling for stopping Nord Stream: ‘This pipeline must be stopped and the only way to prevent its completion is to use all the tools available to do that’.[7]

On 7 February 2022, President Biden stood next to German Chancellor Scholz at a press briefing, warning that if Russia invades Ukraine, then “there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it”. When asked by a journalist how he would end a project under German control, Biden responded: “I promise you, we will be able to do that”.[8] US spokesperson, Ned Price, was explicit: “I want to be very clear: if Russia invades Ukraine one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward”.[9] Undersecretary of State for Policy, Victoria Nuland, used the exact same words: “If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward”.[10]

The attack on Nord Stream and the subsequent victory lap

On 26 September 2022, the German-Russian Nord Stream pipelines were destroyed. The former Foreign Minister of Poland, Radek Sikorski, tweeted “Thank you, USA” accompanied by a picture of the destroyed pipeline. The day after the attack, on 27 September 2022, leaders from Poland, Norway, and Denmark attended a ceremony in Poland to mark the opening of the new Norway-Poland Baltic Pipe that was constructed to reduce Europe’s dependence on Nord Stream.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken argued that the destruction of Nord Stream presented “a tremendous opportunity. It’s a tremendous opportunity to once and for all remove the dependence on Russian energy”. Blinken offered to “help” Europe to replace Russian gas with much more expensive American gas. Victoria Nuland joined in on celebrating the attack: “I am, and I think the Administration is, very gratified to know that Nord Stream 2 is now, as you like to say, a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea”.[11]

Washington could take a brief pause in rejoicing over the destruction of Europe’s critical energy infrastructure to reassure the world that it must have been the Russians who attacked their own pipelines. Russia had first invested billions into its evil plan of making Europe dependent on Russian energy and then transitioned into its new evil plan of blowing up these pipelines to deny gas to Europe.  Russia could alternatively have turned off the valves and saved billion dollars worth of infrastructure, but the Russian playbook works in mysterious ways. European politicians entrusted with protecting their national interests and the media entrusted with reporting on reality, insisted that only Russia would have carried out such a horrendous attack. Anyone suggesting the US could have been the perpetrator was smeared by the political-media elites as spreading “Russian propaganda”.

 Blaming Ukraine

Seymour Hersh then reported that the US had coordinated the attacks with the use of a US Navy diving team. This report was largely ignored and ridiculed by the media, with many journalists instead undermining the credibility of Hersh. The legendary investigative journalist who exposed the cover up of the My Lai massacre in Vietnam and detailed the US military’s torture of prisoners in Abu Ghraib in Iraq, was suddenly sold to the public as an old senile discredited conspiracy theorist carrying water for Putin.

Yet, the US began to shift the blame to Ukraine. The Washington Post reported in June 2023 about leaked CIA documents revealing that US intelligence and the Biden administration knew at least three months before the attack on Nord Stream that the “Ukrainian military had planned a covert attack on the undersea network, using a small team of divers who reported directly to the commander in chief of the Ukrainian armed forces”.[12] How could the media report on the US lying about Russia being behind the attack, and what kind of narrative could be constructed when the only two suspects are the US and Ukraine? When the narrative-driven media did not have a narrative, the solution was simply a media blackout. The German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius, committed to making excuses for his attackers and instead blaming Russia, suggested that it was too soon to blame Ukraine as the attack on Nord Stream could have been a “false flag” attack to blame Ukraine. Other European politicians simply concluded that it was best to stop digging as they would not like what they would find. The same EU officials who had for years spoken about the objective of “European sovereignty” now displayed complete subordination to Washington.

The US was nonetheless cautious not to delegitimise the Ukrainian government, by blaming some rogue Ukrainian elements who acquired a sailboat of diving equipment. This story was uncritically presented to the public after explaining for months that only a state actor could be behind such a complicated attack. Yet, the media was urged not to engage in speculations until European countries had completed their investigations and shared their findings with the world. Yet, Sweden announced in October 2022 that it would not establish a joint investigation team with allies such as Germany due to national security. By February 2024, Sweden announced it had closed the investigations into the attack on Nord Stream as the case did not fall under their jurisdiction.

As Russia was blocked from participating in the investigations, Russia put forward a resolution to the UN Security Council calling for establishing an international independent investigative commission into the attack on the Nord Steam pipelines. The Western countries rejected an independent international investigation and blocked the UN resolution. After all, an independent fact-finding mission could threaten the narrative that NATO unity rests upon.

By August 2024, the Nord Stream narrative evolved yet again as the Wall Street Journal reported that Zelensky had been involved in the attack which the CIA had allegedly attempted to stop.[13] The German government reassured its partners that the alleged Ukrainian attack on Nord Stream and Germany’s weapon supplies to Ukraine are two separate issues, and the Nord Stream investigation would not have any bearing on Germany’s support for Ukraine.

Reality threatens the unifying narrative

Without a Russian perpetrator as the foundation for solidarity, the Europeans have begun to turn on each other. Narrative control has subsequently become difficult. A German official claimed that Poland sabotaged investigations into the Nord Stream attack as they did not arrest a suspected Ukrainian diver named “Volodymyr Z”, and instead allowed him to escape back to Ukraine. August Hanning, the former head of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service, accused both Poland and Ukraine of being involved in the attack on Nord Stream. Hanning also questioned the sailboat narrative as: “Operations of such dimensions are inconceivable without the approval of the political leaders of the countries involved”.[14]

Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk responded to the Germans: “To all the initiators and patrons of Nord Stream 1 and 2. The only thing you should do today about it is apologise and keep quiet”.[15] The president of the Czech Republic, Petr Pavel, argued that if Ukraine was behind the attack on Nord Stream, then it was a legitimate target. The narrative is thus shifting from denial to justification of the terrorist attack. Germany’s continues to be humiliated by its key partners and allies, some that were behind the attack and others that are justifying the attack on its critical infrastructure. This is all happening while Germany’s energy-intensive industries collapse and its economy subsequently falters.

However, the Stockholm Syndrome phenomenon should not be underestimated, as the Europeans will memory-hole these uncomfortable facts and continue to ignore national interests. There will soon be a new script to be followed diligently and a swift return to the simple and comfortable world view of good versus evil, in which liberal democracies stand united under the leadership of the benign leadership of the US against the evil Russians.

[1] Z. Colman and B Lefebvre, ‘Everything is pointing to Russia’: U.S., EU officials on edge over pipeline explosions, Politico, 28 September 2022.

[2] B. Pancevski, A Drunken Evening, a Rented Yacht: The Real Story of the Nord Stream Pipeline Sabotage, The Wall Street Journal, 14 August 2024.

[3] RAND, ‘Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground’, RAND Corporation, 24 April 2019, p.62.

[4] RFE/RL, ‘Pompeo Says U.S. Will ‘Do Everything’ To Stop Nord Stream 2 Project’, RFE/RL, 30 July 2020.

[5] T. Cotton, ‘Kill Russia’s Nord Stream 2, Let it Ruse in the Baltic’, Tom Cotton official website, 19 May 2021.

[6] CNN, ‘At this hour with Kate Bolduan’, CNN, 14 January 2022.

[7] T. Cruz, ‘President Biden and the Democrats have Imperilled Ukraine and put Europe on the Brink of War’, Ted Cruz official website, 7 February 2022.

[8] S. Sarkar, ‘‘There Will No Longer Be a Nord Stream 2’: Fingers Pointed Towards Biden after Gas Pipeline Blasts’, News18, 30 September 2022.

[9] DW, ‘Nord Stream 2 won’t happen if Russia invades Ukraine: US’, Deutsche Welle, 27 January 2022.

[10] Wion, ‘If Russia invades Ukraine, Nord Stream 2 pipeline will not move forward: US’, Wion, 28 January 2022.

[11] I. Van Brugen, ‘Sergei Lavrov Accuses U.S. of Nord Stream Pipeline Attack’, Newsweek, 2 February 2023.

[12] S. Harris and S Mekhennet, U.S. had intelligence of detailed Ukrainian plan to attack Nord Stream pipeline, The Washington Post, 6 June 2023.

[13] B. Pancevski, A Drunken Evening, a Rented Yacht: The Real Story of the Nord Stream Pipeline Sabotage, The Wall Street Journal, 14 August 2024.

[14] Welt Report, German officials claim Poland sabotaged investigation into Nord Stream explosions, Politico, 7 September 2024.

[15] D. Bellamy, Polish PM Donald Tusk suggests Nord Stream patrons should ‘keep quiet’, Euronews, 18 August 2024.

September 27, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

More Truths about the War in Ukraine – Part Twenty of the Anglo-American War on Russia

Tales of the American Empire • September 26, 2024

Part Eighteen of this series explained that most Americans do not understand the current war in Ukraine because they’ve been misinformed. The great Glen Greenwald provides a summary of this propaganda effort. Retired US Army intelligence officer Tony Shaffer states that some 15,000 Americans are in Ukraine to support the war and many have been killed. There are comments by the prime ministers of Hungary and Slovakia who don’t support the Anglo-American war in Ukraine. Finally, the myth that Vladimir Putin is a dictator is addressed.

_________________________________

Here is an example of how the deaths of American servicemen in Ukraine and Israel can be hidden.: “Third airman dies at Air Force base in five weeks”; Nicholas Slayton; Task and Purpose; August 31, 2024; https://taskandpurpose.com/news/airma…

Related Tales: “The Anglo-American War on Russia”;    • The Anglo-American War on Russia  

September 26, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

20 State AGs Put Top U.S. Pediatric Group On Notice for “Abusive” and “Experimental” Trans Therapy Guidance

By Jefferey Jaxen | September 26, 2024

“It is abusive to treat a child with biologically altering drugs that have an unknown physiological trajectory and end point. It is also inhumane to endorse such experimentation without a confident safety profile, especially if more times than not, it proves to be medically unnecessary.”

This statement unpins the tone of the legal notice signed by 20 state Attorneys General to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) asking the group to answer to possible violations of state consumer protection statutes over its questionable standards on gender dysphoria care for minors.

“… the AAP continues to authoritatively declare that puberty blockers are ‘reversible,’” the letter continued. “That claim is scientifically unsupported and contradicts what is medically known. And because that claim raises questions under most state consumer protection laws, it has the undersigned alarmed,” the letter goes on to state.

Idaho AG and co-signer of the action letter Raúl Labrador stated, “It is shameful the most basic tenet of medicine – do no harm – has been abandoned by professional associations when politically pressured,” said Attorney General Labrador. “These organizations are sacrificing the health and well-being of children with medically unproven treatments that leave a wake of permanent damage.”

Why are these AGs acting now? The momentum has gained breakaway speed regarding the science of gender affirming care for minors.

Puberty blockers are not fully reversible and come with serious long-term consequences. According to the Cass Report commissioned by NHS England, using puberty blockers are used to suppress hormones during or before puberty can interfere with neurocognitive development, compromise bone density and may negatively affect metabolic health and weight.

And when puberty blocker use is followed directly by cross-sex hormone use, which is often the case, infertility and sterility is a known consequence.

The controversial world of gender care isn’t the only space that the AAP has dove into without an abundance of caution. The group made headlines in 2023 by radically altering their front line weight loss recommendations children ages 12 and up to include a new class of risky drugs and weight-loss surgery.

The AAP’s murky ‘science’ recommendations reached an early level of appalling shame in 2019 when, during a public hearing in 2019 to discuss an act before it was signed into law, pediatrician Dr. Helene Felman, representing Washington D.C.’s chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), stated:

“As a pediatrician, I like the legislation as it stands because it offers the opportunity to capture those young adults who can make informed decisions at technically any age.”

11 was ultimately decided upon until a federal court for the District of Columbia granted a preliminary injunction in a case funded by The Informed Consent Action Network.

The American Medical Association (AMA) had also thrown its full weight behind attempting to remove the parents from medical decisions involving their children.

Looking at where their energy has gone in key moments, one thing appears clear, the AAP wants children isolated from their parents and given over to the medical system for pharmaceutical interventions with known risk profiles. Why?

September 26, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Runaway Pesticide Toxicity of Food Supply Shows Generational EPA Failure

By Jefferey Jaxen | September 24, 2024

The decades-long push to clean up the American food supply has received supercharged momentum over the last month thanks, in part, to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. His media messaging to reform regulatory agencies has gained critical mass through social media outlets along with breaking into the mainstream of political talking points.

Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently acted using a rare emergency order for the first time in 40 years to stop the use of a problematic pesticide, Dacthal, from the market.

Why? According to their press release, “EPA has taken this action because unborn babies whose pregnant mothers are exposed to DCPA, sometimes without even knowing the exposure has occurred, could experience changes to fetal thyroid hormone levels, and these changes are generally linked to low birth weight, impaired brain development, decreased IQ, and impaired motor skills later in life, some of which may be irreversible.”

Does this prove the agency is listening to The People and responding to the current social momentum towards healthy food? Is the Biden–Harris administration (or whoever is truly running the country) making historic change?

Not really…

The issue of toxins, agrochemicals, and inferior ingredients harming American health through our food supply has long been a bipartisan operation – handed down from administration to administration without pause from what could only be deemed a food industrial complex… a corporate health deep state of sorts.

The EPA classified Dacthal as a “possible carcinogen” in 1995 after its studies done by the manufacturer found it could cause thyroid tumors in animals.

The entire European Union banned the pesticide in 2009 due to irrefutable health concerns. Not the EPA… it was big business as usual.

The Environmental Working Group reports:

“In 2013, the EPA required AMVAC, the sole DCPA manufacturer in the U.S., to submit an additional study showing the chemical’s effects on the fetal thyroid among other information.

AMVAC’s research, finally submitted to the EPA in 2022, showed even low doses of DCPA exposure can harm the developing fetus.

During the nearly 10 years before it finally complied with the EPA’s requirement, the company continued producing and selling Dacthal.”

In other words, the EPA dragged its feet, through multiple administrations, to slow roll the removal of this known, health-damaging pesticide.

Another point in play is the EPA’s regulatory hypocrisy claiming it removed Dacthal because it caused changes in fetal thyroid hormone levels, low birth weight, impaired brain development, decreased IQ, and impaired motor skills later in life.

Lowered IQ… Changes in thyroid function…

Meanwhile, the EPA is literally defending in court, for multiple years, the practice of widespread water fluoridation. Even though a new government report from the Department of Health and Human Services’s National Toxicology Program found it lowered IQ in children… which has been known for a long time.

Furthermore, a review of developmental fluoride neurotoxicity research shows fluoride is an endocrine disrupter causing toxicity to the thyroid gland that can affect thyroid function at intake levels as low as 0.01 to 0.03 mg/kg/day in individuals with iodine deficiency.

Yet fluoride can’t be touched. The EPA defends this practice considered one of the greatest public health achievements over the last 100 years.

How about glyphosate? The EPA acted fast on that one right?

The chemical was only removed from the U.S. market by its manufacturer due to overwhelming litigation costs of lost lawsuits threatening the corporate viability of Bayer. EPA… silent.

So here we are with an EPA that’s still broken. The results?

Continued tests of the American food supply reveals widespread pesticide contamination with a recent finding of a cocktail of 21 different pesticides in Target’s baby food. Twelve of the pesticides found are classified as highly hazardous to the environment and/or human health and eight are banned in the European Union.

A new systematic review looking at the impact of organic foods on chronic diseases found:

“A significant inverse relationship between organic food consumption and cardiometabolic risk factors, including obesity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia, was observed in the majority of prospective studies… Clinical trials consistently indicated lower pesticide exposure in participants on organic diets, suggesting potential health benefits.”

While its been clear to anyone paying attention that the U.S. regulatory agencies often act as barriers to optimal health rather than protectors. The parents, activists, non-profits and lawyers have stepped up, continuously, to fill the role of watchdog often battling the very agencies being funded to the tune of untold billions to oversee the regulation of environmental, medical, and health products and concerns of Americans.

As this narrative gets breathing room, the current messaging of clean, healthy food is also running head long into record low consumer confidence and higher food prices making basics challenging for most Americans. For it to continue the staying power it needs and desperately deserves, real change will be required from a combined political and grassroots union to overturn the very culture of regulatory agencies away from corporate capture and the conflicts of interest revolving door influence that has corrupted the core of American oversight for over half a century. No small task.

September 26, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »