Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

How disgraced South Korean defense minister just nearly caused nuclear war

By Drago Bosnic – December 13, 2024

To say that we live in dangerous times would be a gross understatement. The political West’s quest for global destabilization dominates its decision-making to the point of absurdity. However, the consequences of such actions are as serious as they could possibly be. The fate of the world hangs in the balance and even the most trivial event could plunge us all into the abyss. One would expect global leaders to be extra careful during such times, but it seems many of them are more careless than ever before. The recent political crisis and unrest in South Korea were largely sidelined by the ongoing events in Ukraine, Syria and elsewhere, but it seems they could’ve been just as consequential (if not more).

The martial law President Yoon Suk Yeol declared on December 3 was just as mysterious and unexpected as the virtually concurrent and shockingly swift fall of the Syrian government. What was even stranger was the accusation that his political opponents from the Democratic Party are supposedly “sympathizing with North Korea” and “supporting anti-state activities aimed at inciting rebellion”. Yoon insisted that martial law was a “necessary measure to eradicate these shameless pro-North anti-state forces”. The opposition’s control of the parliament is a major issue for the incumbent, so he tried to block their access to it. The martial law declared by Yoon was just an attempt to have a legal basis for such actions.

The National Assembly fought back, with the 190 MPs who managed to get into the building unanimously voting to lift the president’s martial law. The resulting political standoff resulted in one of South Korea’s worst crises in recent decades. The US insists it wasn’t informed in advance about the martial law, but this is extremely difficult to believe, as Seoul cannot make such decisions without explicit approval from Washington DC. Perhaps the most compelling evidence of US involvement in the crisis is the fact that the opposition wants normal relations with China and detente with North Korea. Obviously, this is a “very dangerous prospect” for the warmongering oligarchy in America.

The current government has been escalating tensions not only with both of its neighbors, but also Russia. This is 100% in line with Washington DC’s policies, which explains its support for Yoon. Expectedly, South Koreans weren’t exactly thrilled with this turn of events, resulting in massive protests. Yoon narrowly dodged an impeachment after MPs from his People Power Party boycotted the vote in the National Assembly, but still got a travel ban from the Ministry of Justice. In the following days, there was a string of arrests, including of now former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun, who even tried to commit suicide while in custody, which is hardly surprising, considering what he tried to do.

Namely, Kim Yong-hyun ordered a swarm of drones to be launched at Pyongyang in order to provoke an attack from North Korea. President Yoon was to use this as a pretext to declare martial law. It’s perfectly clear that the disgraced defense minister didn’t do this on his own volition. Worse yet, it’s extremely likely that the US ordered Yoon to launch the operation to ensure escalation with North Korea and possibly even China. The incumbent is now faced with another impeachment vote (scheduled for tomorrow). He promised to fight tooth and nail to stay in power, which is another indicator of American backing, while the former defense minister’s role is also one of the most compelling arguments for US complicity.

Namely, the South Korean military is effectively controlled by the Pentagon, meaning that the latest events are effectively a US-backed military coup. Kim Yong-hyun was the one who ordered the troops to prevent MPs from entering the National Assembly on December 3. Park Beom-kye, an MP from the Democratic Party, claims that the Defense Counterintelligence Command (DCC), led by former commander Yeo In-hyung – the disgraced defense minister’s close associate – planned the drone incursion into North Korea. Worse yet, it seems this wasn’t a one-time thing, as Pyongyang reported that it detected swarms of drones back in October. Seoul refused to confirm or deny involvement in the incident.

Needless to say, risking possible war with a nuclear-armed North Korea in order to stay in power is beyond idiotic. However, that’s precisely what Yoon and his associates did, while the US saw it as an opportunity to ensure South Korea stays firmly in its orbit. Not to mention the added “benefit” of a possible war with Pyongyang, which is the wet dream of every warmonger, war criminal, kleptocrat and plutocrat in Washington DC. The plan to escalate tensions in East Asia might’ve been uncovered, but the situation remains volatile. The opposition announced it will go ahead with the second impeachment vote, but it needs a two-thirds majority to pass it. At the moment, they control 192 of the National Assembly’s 300 seats.

Technically speaking, Yoon is safe, as the opposition would need another eight votes held by MPs from the president’s People Power Party. However, it seems the party itself sees Yoon as a political liability, as its chairman Han Dong-hun said he’d support the vote. Although Yoon’s supporters within the party didn’t take this too kindly, especially after Han told them that the president’s remarks were “a confession of rebellion” (for which he was insulted and told to “shut up”), he might convince eight MPs to vote for the impeachment. Perhaps Han himself has certain political ambitions and Yoon is simply in the way. Still, the biggest issue is how constant instability in the political West is now becoming a security hazard.

Namely, the world’s most aggressive power pole is faced with neverending crises, as various Western governments keep collapsing every few months. Not to mention their sheer unpopularity, which is effectively paralyzing the decision-making process, particularly in the troubled European Union. The new American National Security Strategy envisages a greater role for its numerous vassals and satellite states, meaning that such countries would need to sacrifice their own economic and financial interests for the sake of the warmongering oligarchy in the US. There’s zero tolerance for any sort of non-compliance, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, where aggressive US foreign policy is the main destabilizing force.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

December 13, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Sinophobia | , | Leave a comment

Can Europe be saved?

Professor Glenn Diesen interviewed by Dimitri Lascaris
Glenn Diesen | December 11, 2024

I was interviewed by Dimitri Lascaris about the future of Europe. I argue that Europe’s decline derives from its inability to adjust to a multipolar international system. Europe can become one of several centres of power by pursuing collective bargaining power based on common interests, diversifying economic partnerships to avoid excessive dependence on the US, and overcoming the Cold War legacy of zero-sum bloc politics.

The Europeans have done the exact opposite. The European security architecture has been built on the premise that expanding a military alliance ever closer to Russian borders would create peace and stability. Relations with Russia have subsequently collapsed and Europe is losing a costly proxy war against the world’s largest nuclear power. Countries in the shared neighbourhood (Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova) are destabilised and their democracy undermined to ensure pro-West/anti-Russia governments take power. These deeply divided societies have become the battleground for drawing new dividing lines in the new Cold War.

European economies are deindustrialising as they cut themselves off from the Russian market, and are also pressured by the US to decouple from the Chinese market. The US Inflation Reduction Act offers subsidies to what remains of struggling European industries if they relocate to the US. Excessive reliance on the US means that Europe cannot even criticise the US for destroying its energy infrastructure after the attack on Nord Stream. After centuries of a Europe-centric international system, the Europeans have not realised that they have been demoted from a subject to an object of security.

Governments that do not represent national interests will eventually be swept away, yet the political elites become increasingly authoritarian to keep their power. In France and Germany, their political opposition is pushed aside with undemocratic means. Hungary and Slovakia are punished by the EU for failing to fall in line. The election results in Romania were overturned after the electorate did not vote for the right candidate.

The continent desperately needs course correction, yet power structure and ideology prevent necessary changes from being implemented. More aggressive means to control the narrative also result in declining freedom of speech.

December 12, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Five Eyes Urges Broader Censorship Under “Protect the Children” Campaign

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 12, 2024

A network facilitating spy agencies’ intelligence-sharing between the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, known as Five Eyes, has its sights set on encryption, and proceeding from that, also online anonymity.

Even more online censorship would also not be a bad idea – these are some of the highlights from the first public-facing paper the organizations behind this group have published.

We obtained a copy of the paper for you here.

And Five Eyes is not above promoting its ultimate and much more far-reaching goals by using the good old “think of the children” – the paper’s title is, Young People and Violent Extremism: A Call for Collective Action.

Both it and an accompanying press release choose to consider online encryption as merely a tool used by criminals. At the same time, the paper is ignoring the fact that the entire internet ecosystem, from communications to banking and everything in between, requires strong encryption both for privacy, and security.

But, Five Eyes focuses only on communications, which they vaguely refer to as online environments, and ones that can allow sex offenders access to children, they also mention extremists, and equally vaguely, “other” malign actors.

Since encrypted platforms provide anonymity, the spies from the five countries (who refer to the state of affairs as, “a large degree of anonymity”) don’t like that either – and again link it to negative scenarios, such as “radicalization to violence.”

The paper is not specific on the exact mechanisms that would ramp up online censorship, but mentions both governments and the tech industry; the first category should “strengthen legislative support for law enforcement,” while the other is urged to “take greater responsibility for the harm done on their platforms.”

Gaming platforms Discord, Instagram, Roblox as well as TikTok are singled out as “seemingly innocuous” – but the way Five Eyes sees it, they make violent extremism content “more accessible.”

The “whole-of-society response” is the proposed solution to the problem of radicalization of minors in these countries. And the documents vow the alliance will continue working with “government agencies, the education sector, mental health and social well-being services, communities and technology companies.”

“It is important to work together early as once law enforcement and security agencies need to become involved, it is often too late,” the paper warns.

And so, a network whose members are likely, in one capacity or another, behind many of the existing attacks on online encryption and anonymity – has now come out as the campaign’s supposedly “latest recruit.”

December 12, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Exposing CIA/MI6 ‘Justice’ Operations in Syria

By Kit Klarenberg | Global Delinquents | December 12, 2024

In the immediate wake of the Syrian government’s abrupt collapse, much remains uncertain about the country’s future. While longtime leader Bashar Assad has sought refuge in Moscow, most of his government and its military, security, and intelligence apparatus remains in Damascus. Calls for reconciliation between officials and the predominantly foreign “opposition” abound, but the prospect of show trials for state apparatchiks is high. After all, elements of Anglo-American intelligence have been planning for such an eventuality since before the Syrian civil war even started.

In May 2011, the Commission for International Justice and Accountability (CIJA) was birthed by shadowy NATO state contractors, ARK and Tsamota. Its first act was to train handpicked Syrian “investigators, lawyers, and activists in basic international criminal and humanitarian law… enabling [them] to link state and non-state actors to underlying criminal acts.” Dedicated “teams of investigators according to their regions” – including Aleppo, Hama, Homs, and Idlib – were created, “and equipped with field investigative kits.”

Their objective was to gather evidence of war crimes committed by Syrian government forces, in support of a “domestic justice process in a future transitional Syria.” We must ask ourselves how such a project came to be before the Syrian army was formally deployed by Damascus, in response to the foreign-fomented crisis that commenced in mid-March that year. Particularly given bringing officials to trial in a “future transitional Syria” was wholly contingent on all-out regime change.

The timing of CIJA’s launch is a palpable indication foreign actors were laying foundations for that eventuality from the very first days of Syria’s “peaceful revolution”, before full-blown civil war had erupted. Given the affiliations of ARK and Tsamota, the pair were well-placed to know in advance of plans by Western governments to topple the Assad government via brute force. Now that has come to pass, it may be time for their long-standing plan to at last be put into action.

‘Regime Change’

Founded by MI6 journeyman Alistair Harris, ARK was one of a constellation of contractors, staffed by military and intelligence veterans, employed by British intelligence at a cost of many millions to conduct covert psychological warfare campaigns in Syria, from the initial days of the crisis. The aim was to destabilise Assad’s government, convince the domestic population, international bodies and Western citizens that genocidal CIA and MI6-backed militant groups pillaging the country were a “moderate” alternative, and deluge media the world over with pro-opposition propaganda.

Under this operation’s auspices, ARK founded and ran numerous ostensibly independent opposition media outlets targeting Syrians of all ages, while tutoring and equipping countless local “citizen journalists”, teaching them “camera handling, lighting, sound, interviewing, filming a story… video and sound editing… voice-over, scriptwriting,” and “graphics and 2D and 3D animation design.” The firm’s students were also instructed in practical propaganda theory, such as “target audience identification, media narrative analysis and monitoring, behavioral identification/understanding, campaign planning, behavioral change, and how communications can influence it.”

Such was ARK’s intimate proximity with anti-Assad elements, it boasted in leaked submissions to the Foreign Office of being entrusted by Western governments to develop a dedicated Office for Syrian Opposition Support. This entity identified the most promising groups for the proxy war’s sponsors to finance, in turn “[helping] present them to international donors, and provide access to networks that could deliver assistance.” These efforts intensified “as the conflict deepened and it became apparent that regime change would not occur in the short term.”

Tsamota’s primitive official website describes the company as “a security and justice sector consultancy which provides rule of law, forensics and natural resources advisory services,” working in “in politically, legally, socially and logistically challenging environments” for Western governments. The firm is not a compelling candidate for holding government officials anywhere accountable for war crimes. Tsamota has since inception offered guidance to major corporations on how to maximise profits in the Global South, while limiting their local and international legal liabilities.

In 2013, Tsamota director William Wiley gave a scandalous presentation to Canadian consortium MineAfrica Inc. In it, he set out a series of hypothetical scenarios in which mining companies operating in countries such as the Congo and Mali employed private security firms to crack down on striking workers, or deal with “local militias” interfering with their operations. Wiley outlined a number of means by which companies could be insulated from repercussions of heavy-handed responses to such incidents, up to and including murder.

That presentation described Tsamota as composed of “experts” drawn from “national police, military and intelligence forces.” Wiley is no exception, having served in the Canadian military for almost two decades. Subsequently, he turned to international law, among other things overseeing the trial of Saddam Hussein October 2005 – December 2006, for crimes against humanity. Mainstream accounts acknowledge Wiley was imposed on the former Iraqi leader’s defence team without consent – a major breach of basic legal norms – by the US embassy in Baghdad’s Regime Crimes Liaison Office.

After capture, Hussein was initially interrogated by the CIA. Contemporary media reports note there was significant concern within the Agency that “their questioning could become public during his eventual trial,” raising issues around “how to conduct the questioning and record the conversations.” The reasons why were unstated, although a likely explanation was Washington wished to avoid awkward disclosures in court about Hussein’s long-running relationship with the CIA, and active US complicity in many of the most heinous crimes of which he was accused.

To say the least, this was a sensitive role indeed. Even prominent Iraqi supporters of US invasion and occupation charged Baghdad’s “interim” puppet government was seeking “show trials followed by speedy executions” of Hussein et al to boost its credibility. That Wiley was entrusted with this mission speaks volumes about his reliability from the US government’s perspective. It also raises obvious questions about the nature of his relationship with the CIA, and whether that bond influenced CIJA’s creation half a decade later.

‘Moving Documents’

A series of leaked ARK files on CIJA’s activities authored in the years immediately following its creation make grand claims about its achievements. One declares the Commission “innovated in the field of transitional justice… aiding the collection of evidence to document war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other violations of International Humanitarian Law” in Syria. Another states its work represented “a landmark development in international justice: the contemporaneous gathering of evidence of violations of international humanitarian law conducted by regime forces”:

“[CIJA], through expert training, effective equipment provision and a commitment to the truth were able to ensure that when the conflict ends, the raw material of a post-conflict war crimes process is ready for trial, in turn providing a key contribution to truth telling, reconciliation and the future of Syria.”

Elsewhere, ARK boasted how CIJA had seized thousands of kilograms of “contemporaneous documentation”, hundreds of thousands of pages of “evidential material” and thousands of videos from Syria, “all of which had to be hand carried” out of the country. Cut to February 2021, and Commission chair Stephen Rapp, a US diplomatic warhorse, bragged to CBS about the sheer volume of evidence CIJA collected. He claimed the papertrail exposed a systematic strategy of Assad government-directed executions of opposition activists, along with ensuing coverups:

“Now we have 800,000 pages of original documents, signed and sealed with original signatures going all the way up to Assad that document this whole strategy…We see reports back about ‘well, we’ve got a real problem here, there are too many corpses stacking up, somebody’s gonna have to help us with that’… Everything is handled in this sort of totalitarian system where they frankly think they can get away with things… they were almost stupid… they created evidence.”

If such damning, incontrovertible proof was bagged at any stage by CIJA, it has never emerged publicly. Still, throughout the Syrian dirty war, the Commission enjoyed glowing profiles in Western media, while providing journalists and rights groups with multiple scoops supposedly exposing Syrian government atrocities. At no point did any mainstream reporter or NGO question, let alone raise concerns about, the manner in which the Commission garnered the material upon which its cases against government officials in Damascus was “hand carried” out of the country.

CIJA chief Wiley acknowledged in 2014 that his organisation smuggled evidence from Syria by working with every opposition group “up to but excluding Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State.” However, a 2019 investigation by The Grayzone amply indicates that CIJA was frequently in extremely close quarters with both groups. Moreover, they were paid handsomely for their assistance in securing documentation. This included material seized in Raqqa after its January 2014 capture by ISIS, right when the ultra-extremist group was massacring Alawites and Christians.

In a 2016 New Yorker profile of CIJA, Wiley detailed the practical hassles and financial drain inherent in “moving documents [over] international borders” and opposition-controlled “checkpoints”, while relying on “rebel groups and couriers for logistical support.” He described how bundles of government files “typically” arrived at the Commission’s offices “in a dizzying array of crappy suitcases.” Wiley lamented, “we burn enormous sums of money moving this stuff.”

Accordingly, CIJA received tens of millions of dollars for its efforts from a variety of Western governments, including those at the forefront of the Syrian dirty war. Despite the vast windfall, the Commission’s work produced zero prosecutions for many years. This changed in late 2019, when Anwar Raslan and Eyad Gharib, two former members of Damascus’ General Intelligence Directorate, were indicted in Germany for crimes against humanity.

‘Many Contradictions’

Raslan headed the Directorate’s domestic security unit, while Gharib was one of his departmental subordinates. The pair defected to the opposition in December 2012. Raslan and his family fled to Jordan, where he played “an active and visible role in the Syrian opposition.” He was part of the anti-Assad delegation at the Geneva II conference on Syria in January 2014, and in July that year, was granted asylum in Germany.

After his escape from Syria, Raslan told numerous lurid tales of abuse and atrocities perpetrated by his unit, and the Assad government more widely, during his 20 years of state service. He claimed his defection was spurred after learning an apparent opposition attack in Damascus that he was charged with investigating was, in fact, staged by security forces. Significant doubts about his accounts, and whether his defection was principled or just cynical opportunism, have been raised in many quarters.

Artist’s rendition of Raslan’s trial

In a perverse irony, Raslan’s loudmouth propensity was his undoing. His assorted claims post-defection provided grounds for arrest by German authorities, and were used against him and Gharib in their prosecutions. These legal actions heavily relied on documents seized by CIJA, including Central Crisis Management Cell records. This unit was created in March 2011 by Damascus, to manage responses to mass rioting that erupted this month. These documents have been widely described as the “linchpin” of the Commission’s case against “the Syrian regime.”

Yet, as this journalist has previously exposed, the Central Crisis Management Cell files in fact show the Assad government explicitly and repeatedly instructed security forces to protect protesters, prevent violence, and keep the situation under control. The documents also detail how from inception, many “peaceful” demonstrators were extremely violent, while opposition fighters systematically murdered security service operatives, pro-government figures, and demonstrators to foment catastrophe, in a manner eerily similar to many CIA/MI6 regime change operations old and new.

In February 2021, Gharib was found guilty of aiding and abetting crimes against humanity. He received four-and-a-half years in prison. A year later, Raslan was given life for crimes including mass torture, rape, and murder. The pair were not convicted for personally perpetrating these horrors, but serving in the General Intelligence Directorate at the time they were allegedly committed. “Expert” witness evidence provided at their trials left much to be desired.

For example, judges and prosecutors alike expressed disquiet at “many contradictions” in the testimony of “P3”, a Syrian government operative who purportedly worked in a security service “mail department”, and was central to Gharib’s conviction. P3 professed to seeing sensitive documents “related to the transfer of corpses” of opposition activists “to burial sites.” They “provided contradictory information” in statements to German police and the court, and were “visibly nervous” while testifying. Throughout, their seemingly aghast attorney sat nearby “putting his hands behind his head.”

Meanwhile, during Raslan’s prosecution, “P4” – a nameless individual who claimed to have been detained in a Syrian prison, and bribed his way out – testified he saw 500,000 corpses buried via a “bulldozer and a truck” next to his house, in an area which was previously “a desert”. Reports of the trial indicate there “was a feeling” among those present in court, including “the public”, that these numbers were greatly “exaggerated.”

The sense that Gharib and Raslan were prosecuted because they were within easy reach, and CIJA needed something to show for all its well-remunerated efforts, is ineluctable. The Commission had strong grounds to be anxious about failing to fulfill its founding objective. In March 2020, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) formally accused the organization of “submission of false documents, irregular invoicing, and profiteering” relating to an EU “Rule of Law” project it ran in Syria.

Fast forward to today, and The Guardian reports that “the abrupt implosion of the infrastructure of state terror” in Syria “has made available a huge volume of evidence.” The outlet quoted CIJA chief William Wiley at some length. He compared Assad’s fall to “a situation much like Germany in 1945 or Iraq in 2003,” with “a sudden availability of all state records” making prosecution of state officials a fait accompli:

“It’s a very unusual situation, and its suddenness creates challenges and opportunities in simply dealing with the material… If there’s any security intelligence guy that rocks up in Europe, there’s typically going to be enough material already to hand.”

December 12, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Al-Qaeda Rides Again… in Syria

By Daniel McAdams | Ron Paul Institute | December 11, 2024

As Christians around the world prepare to celebrate Christmas, a hell has been unleashed inside Syria with the seizure of the country by the re-named “al-Qaeda in Syria” now called Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). Its leader is a former deputy commander of ISIS, Abu Mohammed al-Julani.

While neocons and the mainstream media in the US and Europe celebrate the overthrow of the Assad government – a priority since the Obama Administration – as with previous US “liberations” in Libya and Iraq the outcome is proving to be anything but liberating. Christian churches are being ransacked and believers abused.

Sharia law has been announced by the new justice minister, Shadi Alwaisi.

Public executions of those who oppose the rule of al-Julani – who still has a $10 million bounty on his head from the US State Department even as he is funded by the CIA – have begun across the country. (Extremely graphic link here).

Just today, Christian Churches in Syria were warned not to hold Christmas services, not to hold Christmas parades, and not to even display the image of St. Nicholas! This is what the mainstream media told us was the new “inclusive” government in Syria.

December 12, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

State Department to Shut Down Controversial Censorship Hub but Critics May Call It a Rebrand

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 12, 2024

The US State Department looks set to shut down the Global Engagement Center (GEC), which has for a long time faced accusations of deviating from its stated role abroad, and instead engaging in, and facilitating censorship at home.

This has been revealed in a filing in the Daily Wire v. US Department of State case, in which the latter informed the court that members of Congress were told last Friday about the upcoming move.

However, even though GEC as such is “substantially likely” to cease operations on December 24, the idea seems to be a simple reshuffle – as both the funding and the staff would continue their work in other State Department offices and bureaus.

According to a spokesperson, this development is the result of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) not providing for an extension of GEC. And now the State Department is “hopeful that Congress extends this important mandate through other means before the December 24 termination date,” said the spokesperson.

That mandate, on paper, is supposed to be directing, leading, and coordinating the US government’s “countering of foreign propaganda and disinformation” – in foreign countries. And the State Department continues to maintain that this is in fact the role of GEC and that it is critically important for that work to continue.

But critics say that the office, which was created in 2016, in reality, represents a central component of partisan censorship targeting Americans – particularly conservative and “disfavored” voices.

As evidence of this kept mounting, Republican members of the House of Representatives first investigated the activities of this office, particularly the way it was handing out grants (the suspicion is that GEC “delegated” censorship to third parties in order not to openly violate the Constitution).

Now, House Republicans have decided not to approve the planned 8-year extension of GEC. One of those controversial grants, worth $100,000, went to the Global Disinformation Index – a UK-based group accused of compiling a list of conservative media that advertisers were supposed to boycott and thus deprive of revenue.

But even if GEC will no longer exist as such, the intent is clearly to reassign employees and keep funding their work. What that work will actually be going forward, should depend on the incoming administration’s new State Department.

December 12, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Bipartisan Push to Shield Free Speech Targets Abusive Lawsuits

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 9, 2024

A new bipartisan bill – the Free Speech Protection Act – has been introduced in the US Congress with the goal of improving ways to fight what are known as strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs).

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

Congressman Jamie Raskin and Kevin Kiley are behind the House proposal, while “companion” legislation in the Senate is sponsored by Ron Wyden.

SLAPPs are described as serving to chill both free speech and political action through litigation that is both frivolous in nature – and burdensome for those targeted by such lawsuits.

“Though many such suits often prove meritless, they are nonetheless effective at silencing, intimidating, and discouraging dissent,” a press release said.

The proposed legislation would prevent “Goliath triumphing over David,” as Congressman Raskin put it, by those with more money and power essentially abusing the judiciary and wearing down their opponents with huge legal costs and “prolonged invasive discovery.”

If the Free Speech Protection Act becomes law, its sponsors hope to rein in “the rich and powerful” both from draining those with fewer resources of money and in the process silencing people whose political views they consider “incorrect.”

Journalists, whistleblowers, and activists are likely to be subjected to meritless SLAPP lawsuits, the lawmakers note in their press release.

The legislative effort, which is supported by a number of civil rights groups, is meant to extend similar state laws to the federal level.

Although two-thirds of US states already restrict SLAPPs, in cases involving First Amendment free speech violations these laws do not apply – since they are tried in federal courts.

And those (ab)using the judicial system to their own end are aware of this and tend to file their SLAPPs in those courts, Institute for Free Speech President David Keating remarked, adding that this is why his group has supported the bipartisan and bicameral proposal.

The Free Speech Protection Act seeks to provide federal courts with a new mechanism to control SLAPPs, including by letting judges act quickly to identify when a SLAPP is going after constitutionally protected speech and dismiss such lawsuits.

Another provision is to prevent those filing SLAPPS from treating the discovery process as a privacy-invasive tool, and lastly, federal judges would be able to deter these lawsuits by awarding attorney fees to the victim – “to reduce the cost burden and deter future exploitation of this tactic.”

December 12, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

A Personal Announcement

Candace Show Podcast | December 11, 2024

December 11, 2024 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

Orban reveals Trump’s stance on Ukraine negotiations

RT | December 11, 2024

US President-elect Donald Trump is not yet able to conduct official negotiations to seek a resolution to the Ukraine conflict but will start doing so after assuming office on January 20, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said.

Orban made the remarks in a Facebook post on Wednesday in which he recounted his meeting with Trump and members of his inner circle earlier this week. The Hungarian prime minister expressed confidence that a “positive effect” on the conflict will be seen immediately after Trump’s inauguration.

“If two people, whether in Europe or in America, sit down to talk to each other today, they will hardly be able to avoid talking about peace and war,” Orban wrote, noting that US law strictly bars Trump from negotiating in any official capacity before he assumes office.

Orban, one of a handful of dissenters to the Western approach to the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, has reportedly been actively seeking a mediatory role in settling the hostilities.

Early on Wednesday, Orban held an hour-long phone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin that revolved around the Ukraine conflict, the situation in Syria, and bilateral ties between Moscow and Budapest.

“These are the most dangerous weeks” in the entire conflict, and Hungary is “taking every possible diplomatic step to argue in favor of a ceasefire and peace talks,” Orban said in a post on X after the talks.

Putin explained Moscow’s position to Orban, detailing “his principled assessment of the current development of the situation regarding Ukraine and the destructive line of the Kiev regime, which continues to exclude any opportunity for peaceful resolution,” according to the Kremlin press service.

The talks between Orban and Putin evoked an angry reaction from Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, who mockingly expressed hopes that the Hungarian leader “at least won’t call [former Syrian President Bashar] Assad in Moscow to listen to his hour-long lectures as well.”

“No one should boost personal image at the expense of unity; everyone should focus on shared success. Unity in Europe has always been key to achieving it. There can be no discussions about the war that Russia wages against Ukraine without Ukraine,” Zelensky stated.

Orban promptly reacted to Zelensky’s rebuke, stating that the Ukrainian leader had rejected his peace efforts, namely “a Christmas ceasefire and a large-scale prisoner exchange” he had proposed.

“It’s sad that [Zelensky] clearly rejected and ruled this out today. We did what we could!” Orban said on X.

December 11, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

US mulls ‘aggressive’ sanctions on Russian oil – Bloomberg

RT | December 11, 2024

US President Joe Biden’s administration is preparing harsher sanctions against Russian oil just weeks before Donald Trump returns to the White House, Bloomberg has reported.

The details of the new restrictions are yet to be finalized, but Washington is looking to target some Russian oil exports, the outlet said on Wednesday, citing people familiar with the matter.

While the US has already banned imports of Russian oil, Biden had long been reluctant to take a more aggressive action against the country’s crude due to fear of energy costs skyrocketing, especially during the run-up to the presidential election, the report said. However, with oil prices falling amid an expected surplus next year and uncertainty about Donald Trump’s commitment to further support for Kiev, the White House could resort to harsher measures, the outlet noted.

The call for new sanctions underscores the departing administration’s willingness to confront Russia before the end of Biden’s term, especially since despite attempts to cripple the Russian economy, Moscow’s GDP is projected to rise by 3.5% this year.

One of the methods that the US could reportedly use to sanction Russian oil exports is to target potential buyers. In this model, purchasers would face punishment by the US. However, such a move would carry significant risks, as major powers such as India and China are Russia’s top customers, the outlet warned, and such limits could also trigger a spike in global oil prices.

The sanctions will also be aimed at Russia’s oil tanker fleet, often described in the West as a ‘Shadow Fleet’, and could be unveiled in the coming weeks, the source told the outlet.

Western governments have introduced a price cap, along with an embargo on Russian seaborne oil, in an attempt to hurt the country’s economy, while at the same time keeping Russian crude flowing to global markets so as not to trigger price hikes.

The Ukraine conflict-related measures were imposed in December 2022, and were followed in February 2023 by similar restrictions on exports of Russian petroleum products. They ban Western companies from providing insurance and other services for shipments of Russian crude, unless the cargo is purchased at or below $60 per barrel.

In response, Moscow banned Russian enterprises from complying with the cap and rerouted most of its energy exports to Asia, particularly India and China.

December 11, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

Peace Plans, Schmese Plans: Key Path to Ukraine Peace Long Ignored by All

By William Dunkerley | Ron Paul Institute | December 10, 2024

Politico ran the headline, “Ukraine Peace Plans Galore.”

Ukraine, Russia, and China each have a peace plan. Trump is developing one. The Alliance of Democracies has one. It looks a lot like Ukraine’s plan at first glance.

There’s talk of a Demilitarized Zone between Ukraine and Russia. There’s also the suggestion of imposing a frozen conflict. They seem like an open invitation for continued stress between the countries, not real peace.

So, what’s the ignored key path to peace I’m talking about?

The first step along that path involves adopting a strategy of honesty. That requires sharp awareness of a troubling situation. It is that the mainstream Ukraine narrative expressed by most of our politicians is fabricated. Likewise are the stories reported by our media.

Instead of debunking all the falsehoods one by one I’ll describe the truths that the false narratives ignore. They became apparent to me by closely following what actually happened during and after the revolution. Here’s what I saw:

When in 2014 the Maidan revolutionaries took over by force, they cancelled Ukraine’s democracy.

–They illegally chased the democratically elected president out of the country, falsely claiming he was impeached. But on close examination he wasn’t. The United States has admitted that. A Ukrainian official also confirmed it to me personally. No impeachment. No resignation, either.

–The revolutionaries threw out the democratically promulgated constitution and replaced it with an old one that the legitimate Supreme Court had previously declared unconstitutional.

–They began to rule as militant, self-appointed, unelected leaders of a new, non-democratic state.

–They showed early intentions of drastically altering what had been successfully a Ukrainian-Russian multilingual state. That actually played out in later overt initiatives to linguistically and culturally cleanse things Russian from the new Ukrainian state. That brought about the oppression of Ukraine’s significant Russian minority population.

Most areas of Ukraine accepted all that as a fait accompli. Two did not: Crimea and Donbas. (Donbas consists of the areas known as Donetsk and Luhansk.)

Both Crimea and Donbas rejected the loss of democracy and also the unelected revolutionary leaders that caused it. Crimea and Donbas each declared their respective independence.

In response, the revolutionaries launched a hostile attack. They waged war on what was by then the independent area of Donbas. The intent was apparently to capture it by force.

They didn’t attack Crimea, however.

You see, a treaty that Russia had with Ukraine gave Russia control over its historical naval base at Sevastopol, Crimea. It also allowed for up to 25,000 Russian troops to be stationed there. According to the March 18, 2014 Washington Post, Russia was believed to have had about 15,000 on-base at the time of the revolution. That may have deterred an attack by the revolutionaries.

The net effect of the revolution was to create in a very real sense a different country, a different Ukraine.

Look at the chain of events I described above. Pre revolution — democracy. Post revolution — unelected rule by force. There was a complete break from the earlier government. There was no continuity. Pre revolution — control over Donbas and Crimea. Post revolution — no such control. They both had achieved independence.

In a de facto sense, pre-revolution Ukraine and post-revolution Ukraine aren’t the same country when it comes to statehood.

The post-revolution Ukrainian state was given some semblance of democracy in June 2014. That’s when it installed its first democratically elected president, Petro Poroshenko. This was about two months after the revolutionaries had already attacked Donbas. Upon taking office Poroshenko continued to attack Donbas as did Volodymyr Zelensky who followed as president.

To appreciate the concept of post-revolution Ukraine as a “different country” think of China in the 1900s. It had a revolution, too. Pre revolution it was the Republic of China. Post revolution it was the communist People’s Republic of China. Again, a complete break. Who would argue that they were the same country?

This perspective is consistent with a multinational treaty. It is the Montevideo Convention of 1933. It was signed on behalf of the United States by Cordell Hull, President Franklin Roosevelt’s secretary of state.

In international law this treaty is widely regarded as definitional regarding statehood and country status. Two essential qualifications are government and territory. Pre- and post-revolution Ukraine were discontinuous on both qualifications.

Why have the politicians and media gone for the false narrative? The full answer is beyond the scope of this article. But suffice to say, the extended war has been very lucrative and beneficial for many investors/financiers, defense industry companies, and politicians.

The impact of this on a potentially successful peace plan is a misalignment of interests. The interests of the war beneficiaries are served by prolonged war and tensions, not by sustainable peace.

That’s exactly why a sustainable peace agreement must be based on an honest perspective. The so-called peace plans that I’ve seen in the news all are accommodations of the false narrative. An honest accounting of the etiology of war in Ukraine will serve as a sounder basis.

I’m not suggesting that this be used to place blame. That would not be a wise approach. Rick Staggenborg, MD has followed this situation and explains: “To move toward peace in Ukraine we don’t have to agree on who is at fault. Unfortunately too many make that a big issue — but that’s gotten us nowhere. As a psychotherapist with training in family therapy, I know from experience that focusing on who is responsible for a problem almost never leads to a satisfactory solution; indeed it can be counterproductive.”

The key principals in negotiating a genuine peace plan must be the presidents of Ukraine, Russia, and the United States. I fail to see how they can bring about sustainable peace if the pretense of the false narrative is not broken, regardless of how entrenched it has become.

An approach based on honesty will have a better chance.

Here’s an example of an honest approach on a related matter: In mapping Ukraine, the National Geographic Society in 2014 chose not to include Crimea as part of it.

U.S. News quoted the Society’s geographer and director of editorial and research, “We map de facto, in other words we map the world as it is, not as people would like it to be.” That’s honesty on display.

In contrast, a spokesperson for Rand McNally said, “We take our direction from the State Department.” At that time the State Department was headed by politician John Kerry.

But fighting the false mainstream narrative will be difficult. There is a lot of dishonest narrative to discard.

Many countries have recognized the bogus territorial claims of the revolutionaries as factual. They’ve accepted the false narrative as being true. They side with the war beneficiaries. Those countries do so in disregard of the actual facts that are at hand.

However, in traditional diplomacy the concept of “recognition” is very powerful. Many judgments are based on that concept. Negotiators will need strength to oppose that.

“Recognition” is a political contrivance, though. It does not necessarily comport with the honest truth. Frankly, recognition sounds to me like a genteel euphemism for mob rule.

The negotiators will have a lot of controversial issues to deal with: Russia’s sudden 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the disposition of post-Ukraine territories now claimed by Russia, the main water supply for Crimea that the revolutionaries cut off, just to start with.

Then there are Russia’s security concerns over Nato advancement. History tells that President John F. Kennedy brought the world to the brink of nuclear war in 1962 over a Soviet missile threat far smaller than the Nato threat now perceived by Russia. In due fairness, Russia deserves having Nato threats considered with a comparable level of seriousness.

The peace negotiators will need the courage and integrity to resist pressure from the war beneficiaries and their allies, and reject the entrenched false narrative about Ukraine.

I hope that an honest view of the real circumstances will prevail if and when the three presidents meet to negotiate peace. That in effect is the “key path to Ukraine peace that has been long ignored by all.”

December 11, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine strikes Russia with US-made ATACMS missiles

RT | December 11, 2024

Ukrainian forces fired a barrage of six US-made ATACMS missiles at a military airfield near the southern Russian city of Taganrog, the Defense Ministry in Moscow has said, vowing retaliation for the attack.

Two of the missiles were shot down, while the other four were affected by electronic warfare measures and veered off course, the ministry said in a statement. The attack inflicted minor damage on the airfield, with two administrative buildings and a number of cars hit with shrapnel.

An unspecified number of Russian servicemen were injured in the attack by “falling fragments of the missiles,” the ministry added, vowing to retaliate for the strike.

“This attack by Western long-range weapons will not go unanswered, and appropriate measures will be taken,” it said without providing further details.

Earlier in the day, acting Rostov Region Governor Yury Slyusar said an unspecified “industrial site” was targeted by the barrage, with around 15 cars being burned out in a parking lot.

December 11, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment