Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US threatens sanctions if Pakistan continues gas pipeline project with Iran

By Ahmed Adel | March 28, 2024

Despite Pakistan dealing with a crippling economic situation, the US has shown little concern for its strategic ally’s issues and, instead of offering support, has threatened tough sanctions if Islamabad decides to continue with the Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline project. Ironically, though, such an action will only push Pakistan closer to China, which the US views as a greater threat to its hegemony than Iran.

“We always advise everyone that doing business with Iran runs the risk of touching upon and coming in contact with our sanctions, and would advise everyone to consider that very carefully,” a US State Department spokesperson told reporters in a press briefing on March 26.

“We do not support this pipeline going forward,” the spokesperson added.

Washington continually emphasises that Pakistan is one of its closest allies and a partner in the fight against terrorism, making the sanctions threat a major development in their bilateral relations. For this reason, Pakistan Petroleum Minister Musadik Malik said on March 27 that Islamabad would seek an exemption from US sanctions over the gas pipeline project.

The Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline, known as the Peace Pipeline, will transport natural gas from Iran to Pakistan. Despite the pipeline’s several years of delays and funding challenges, Pakistan and Iran signed a five-year trade plan in August 2023 with a target of $5 billion. Tehran is evidently desperate for the project to be completed, which had an original deadline of 2015, since it signed the trade plan and overlooked Pakistan not laying the pipeline when Iran has already completed the laying of its 900-kilometre pipeline.

Islamabad claims it could not lay the pipe due to the US sanctions imposed on Iran, but Tehran rejects this excuse. Pakistan is now in a difficult position with the latest US sanction threat when recalling that Tehran issued a third notice in January to Islamabad and announced intentions to go to arbitration court to receive $18 billion for breach of contract.

The threat of US sanctions or paying a huge fine to Iran is only compounding Pakistan’s difficult economic situation, especially as the country is seeking a 24th bailout from the International Monetary Fund.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said on March 26 that his country needs another IMF loan programme to stabilise its fragile economy. An IMF mission that visited Islamabad for five days earlier this month said Pakistan had to meet IMF conditions, including revising its budget and raising interest rates, generating revenue through more taxes, and hiking electricity and gas prices.

Effectively, ordinary Pakistanis are going to suffer a lot more than they already are.

Islamabad and Washington have had longstanding relations rooted in their opposition to the Soviet Union. After the Cold War, the US became dependent on the South Asian country for supplies during its long occupation of Afghanistan. Due to the US’s double standard of using Pakistan as a security partner but also threatening to worsen the country’s economic situation, China has been able to fill the financial void.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar met with Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Guoqing on March 22 in Brussels, where the latter emphasised Beijing’s commitment to aiding Pakistan in addressing its financial challenges. However, just like the Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline, Islamabad continues to stall the implementation of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship project of the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative launched in 2013 to link the Gwadar port in southwestern Pakistan with China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region.

Worsening the situation for CPEC is the constant stream of terror attacks against Chinese workers and nationals.

In the latest attack, on March 26, a suicide bomber in the Shangla district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa rammed an explosive-laden car into a vehicle, killing five Chinese workers and engineers and their Pakistani driver heading to the Dasu Dam, the biggest hydropower project in Pakistan. Less than a week before the suicide attack, Pakistani security forces killed eight Balochistan Liberation Army separatist militants who opened fire on a convoy carrying Chinese citizens outside Gwadar port in the southwestern Balochistan province.

Given that Pakistan is facing a dire economic situation and needs to turn to the IMF and seek more funding from China, US sanctions would be a devastating blow. Sanction threats are especially contradictory for the US since it not only considers Pakistan an ally but overlooks the fact that India invests in the Iranian port of Chabahar, located only 170 kilometres from Gwadar port. Washington overlooks this contradiction since Chabahar rivals the China-funded Gwadar, signalling that the US views China as a much larger threat to its hegemony than Iran, which makes sanction threats more confusing since it will only push Pakistan to be even closer and more aligned with China.

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

March 28, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine’s survival hangs in the balance

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | MARCH 28, 2024 

A controversy arose needlessly over the advisory issued by the American embassy in Moscow on March 7 to the effect that “extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts” and warning US citizens to “avoid large gatherings.” It took the form of a diplomatic spat and momentarily at least, the American claim that they shared the ‘information’ with the Russians hinted at the ineptness of the security agencies in Moscow while the latter hit back saying there was nothing specific or actionable that the Americans conveyed.  

Clearly, Washington was in possession of some information which was at the very least credible enough in terms of its source but was not specific enough for Moscow. Interestingly, the UK embassy in Moscow also issued a similar advisory cautioning British citizens against visiting shopping centres. The US and British intelligence agencies work in tandem. 

However, in a strange pre-emptive move, as it were, the State Department also scrambled within two hours of the horrific attack on the mall in Moscow’s Crocus City Hall on March 22 with a statement declaring that Ukraine was not responsible for the attack. The US’s European allies also began parroting the same line. As can be expected, the Americans got a head start in the propaganda war and that in turn enabled them to craft a narrative — also in real time — naming the Islamic State as the culprit in the horrific crime. 

Yet, the very next day, President Vladimir Putin went on to reveal in his address to the nation that what happened was “a premeditated and organised mass murder of peaceful, defenceless people,” harking back to the Nazis “to stage a demonstrative execution, a bloody act of intimidation.”

Importantly, Putin disclosed that the perpetrators “attempted to escape and were heading towards Ukraine, where, according to preliminary information, a window was prepared for them on the Ukrainian side to cross the state border.” But he stopped short of finger-pointing as the investigation was a work in progress. 

That is to say, from Putin’s disclosure, it appears that the perpetrators’ mentors / handlers gave them instructions to exit Russian territory after their mission by using a particular route for border crossing into Ukraine where they were expected by people on the Ukrainian side of the border. What now remains in the realm of the ‘known unknown’ is really about the chain of command. This is the first thing.

Second, a storyline has been propagated by Washington that this was an ISIS attack. Indeed, it has been effectively propagated by the western media and was intended as a red herring to confuse dim-witted folks abroad. 

However, in reality, the perpetrators did not behave like ISIS killers on suicide missions who would have sought martyrdom but in this case behaved like fugitives on the run. Nor were they answering the call of ‘jihad’. They were reportedly ethnic Tajiks who admitted that they were hirelings lured by the money in it. 

The expert opinion from released videos is also that their movements inside the mall did not show battle skills attributed to well-trained fighters, and they had ‘poor muzzle discipline’, which means they had only minimal rifle training. In sum, theirs was quintessentially an act of motiveless malignity — that is, except the money part.  

That said, the US military has been ‘retooling’ erstwhile ISIS fighters lately. Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) alleged in a statement on February 13 that the US was recruiting the jihadist fighters to carry out terrorist attacks on the territory of Russia and the CIS countries.

The statement said, “Sixty such terrorists with combat experience in the Middle East were selected this year in January… they are undergoing a fast-track training course at the US base in Syria’s Al-Tanf, where they are being taught how to make and use improvised explosive devices, as well as subversive methods. Particular emphasis is paid to planning attacks on heavily guarded facilities, including foreign diplomatic missions… In the near future, there are plans to deploy militants in small groups to the territory of Russia and the CIS countries.”

The SVR also noted that “special attention was paid to the involvement of natives of the Russian North Caucasus and Central Asia.”

Significantly, on March 26, Alexander Bortnikov, Director of the Federal Security Service (FSB) said in an interview with Rossiya TV channel that from the interrogation of the detainees so far, there is a political background to the incident. He said radical Islamists alone could not prepare such an action on their own, they were assisted from the outside.

Bortnikov stated: “The primary data that we received from the detainees confirm this. Therefore, we will continue to refine the information that should show us whether the participation of the Ukrainian side is real or not. But in any case, so far there is every reason to say that this is exactly the case. Since the bandits themselves intended to go abroad, it was to the territory of Ukraine, according to our preliminary operational information, they were waiting there.”   

Bortnikov added that the terrorist attack had the support of not only the special services of Ukraine, but countries such as Britain and the United States are also behind the massacre. According to him, the prime mover of the incident has not yet been identified, and the threat of a terrorist act in Russia still persists. 

Bortnikov’s remarks hint at a classic predicament: Russia possesses evidence of Ukrainian involvement but ‘proof’ remains inadequate as yet. This is a predicament that countries often face in countering the cross-border terrorism, especially when it happens to be state-sponsored terrorism. Of course, no amount of evidence will be accepted as proof by the adversary ultimately — while in Ukraine’s case, often there is an eagerness to claim credit for bleeding Russia by staging operations on its soil, such as assassinations. 

As for the US or the UK, Russians assess that without intelligence inputs, satellite imagery, and even logistical backing by the western powers, Ukraine does not have the capability to undertake operations deep inside Russia or the sort of complex attacks targeting Russian war ships of the Black Sea Fleet. But the western powers are invariably in a denial mode when confronted with such accusations by Russia. 

There is no question that the Crocus City Hall attack will have profound geopolitical consequences and will impact the trajectory of the Ukraine war. The incident has rallied world sympathy massively for Russia. It is a huge challenge of statecraft now for Putin to act decisively, as the Russian public will expect, to completely uproot the dark forces entrenched next-door. 

Conceivably, that may involve Moscow shaking up the very foundations of the house that Washington built in Kiev after the 2024 coup. The New York Times recently disclosed that the CIA keeps a string of intelligence outposts all along the Ukraine-Russia border regions. 

Make no mistake, the US is determined to hold on to the extensive infrastructure it created in Ukraine to mount covert operations and destabilise Russia, no matter what it takes. The bottom line in the western strategy is to weaken Russia and prevent it from playing an adversarial role on the global stage.  

TS Eliot’s lines from the play Murder in the Cathedral come to mind: ‘What peace can be found / To grow between the hammer and the anvil?’ The war is slated to escalate dramatically and it is a matter of time before western combat deployment takes place in Ukraine to salvage that country’s residual potential as a frontline state for NATO in the proxy war against Russia. On their part, Russia may have no alternative but to seek a total military victory. The multi-layered Russian reaction will unfold depending on the outcome of the ongoing investigation.

March 28, 2024 Posted by | Deception, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Ukrainian oligarch possibly involved in terrorist attack as GUR becomes CIA asset

By Lucas Leiroz | March 28, 2024

Investigations into those responsible for the attack on Crocus City Hall remain ongoing. Although it is known that the killers are Islamic radicals from Central Asia, there is still no confirmation as to who the real mastermind of the crime was. However, suspicions of involvement by Ukrainian and Western intelligence agencies are growing more and more. Additionally, there is the possibility that a prominent Ukrainian oligarch is financing such terrorist acts against Moscow.

As well known, there are complex corruption schemes and illicit activities in Ukraine involving local and international agents. Nevertheless, little is known on how deeply connected these criminal networks are with Kiev-sponsored terrorism. Ukrainian oligarchs not only commit tax crimes and money laundering, but use their personal profits to promote terror against the “enemies” of the neo-Nazi regime.

Recently, Russian authorities have been investigating the case of Nikolai Zlochevsky, the owner of the Ukrainian gas company “Burisma”. Zlochevsky has already become widely known around the world for his illicit activities, mainly due to his close relationships with the Biden family – even more especially, with Hunter Biden, son of the American president. Hunter worked at Burisma while living in Ukraine, where he participated in Zlochevsky’s illicit schemes.

Later, Zlochevsky passed a lot of sensitive data about Hunter Biden’s crimes to an FBI informant, generating a public scandal that went viral in the English-language media. The information also confirms that the Bidens’ involvement is not restricted to Hunter, with the American president and other public figures from the Democratic Party participating in illegal Ukrainian business.

However, little has been said in the media so far about the real reason why Zlochevsky and his American partners were protected by Ukrainian authorities despite violating local laws: in exchange for a carte blanche in corruption, Zlochevsky became a sponsor of the Ukrainian war machine. The oligarch has been sending large sums of money to institutions in the Ukrainian military and intelligence sectors for years. His work has been vital, especially in the purchase of drones for the Ukrainian armed forces, for example. The most controversial, however, is the financial support given by Zlochevsky to the secret activities of the GUR (Kiev’s military intelligence).

Zlochevsky has been identified by Russian investigators as one of GUR’s main backers. It is believed that he has already sent a total of 22.5 million US dollars to the agency. State agencies, in theory, should not receive this type of irregular funding, which leads us to believe that this cash is used for parallel, unofficial activities – which, in the Ukrainian case, means real terrorism.

Russian investigators believe, for example, that Zlochevsky’s money was used to finance the terrorist drone operation against Moscow in May 2023. Considering his involvement in the purchase of drones and intelligence networks, it is virtually a certainty for Zlochevsky be involved in the case. Other activities in which GUR is directly involved have also drawn the attention of Russian authorities regarding the possibility of direct financing by Zlochevsky. This is the case with the recent murders and attempted murders of civilians within the territory of the Russian Federation, for example.

The GUR is behind the attacks against journalists Daria Dugina, Vladlen Tatarsky, writer Zakhar Prilepin and other well-known Russian public figures. Certainly, the funding to pay for the complex operations behind these crimes did not come from official sources, but from irregular money, like that which Zlochevsky provides to the GUR. However, it is necessary to remember that the activities of Ukrainian intelligence have never been “autonomous”. Since 2014, the entire Ukrainian state apparatus, including its secret service, has been controlled by American agents. In practice, American intelligence uses its Ukrainian assets as proxies to commit crimes that are previously planned in Washington.

As mentioned, it is not yet known who ordered the terror attack on Crocus City Hall, but there are some points in the case that seem to indicate direct participation by the GUR. This possibility is so plausible that Moscow already reacted immediately to the attack by destroying the Ukrainian intelligence headquarters in Kiev. The attack on Crocus had a high operational cost. The assassins were hired as mercenaries and received their weapons from the hirers. Furthermore, someone paid for their trip to the border in Bryansk. If GUR was involved in this operation, it is very likely that Zlochevsky’s illicit money was used.

Considering that GUR is, in practice, a CIA asset and that it receives illegal funding from Biden-linked Ukrainian oligarchs to promote terror on Russian territory, then there appears to be a very deep international network to be investigated by Moscow in order to discover the real culprits for the Crocus massacre.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert. You can follow Lucas on X (former Twitter) and Telegram.

March 28, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

OREGON URGENTLY SHUTS DOWN SMALL FARMS IN MASS “TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE”

Yanasa TV | March 18, 2024

March 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Video | , | Leave a comment

Google Is Ordered To Identify Who Watched Certain YouTube Videos

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | March 26, 2024

US federal law enforcement and courts have gone a step further in the extreme efforts they are making to surveil people’s activities online, including on Google’s vast platforms.

The latest is that the tech giant gets orders to identify all people who happen to be watching certain videos or livestreams on YouTube.

After directly censoring creators and channels, giving geolocation data of its users to the authorities in response to the controversial geofencing warrants, this is a new example of how Google can be used and abused in dragnet-style “investigations.”

Unmasking everyone who watched a particular video is similar to geofencing in that it makes everyone a suspect – and this, a number of experts and rights groups believe, is unconstitutional, i.e., in violation of the 4th Amendment, that protects from unreasonable searches.

Forbes writes that it has had access to several orders that name certain YouTube videos, citing one unsealed case originating in Kentucky and having to do with people viewing content posted by a user who law enforcement suspects of money laundering for selling bitcoin for cash.

Undercover agents had contacted the user, sending links to drone mapping and AR tutorials, to next turn to Google, asking to be told who watched the videos.

The videos had more than 30,000 views, and a court ordered that any user who did, between January 1 and 8, 2003, must be thoroughly unmasked.

The order wanted names, addresses, phone numbers, and account activity of each Google user, and IP addresses of everyone who watched the videos without an account.

“It’s fair to expect that law enforcement won’t have access to that (sensitive personal) information without probable cause,” commented Electronic Privacy Information Center’s John Davisson. “This order turns that assumption on its head.”

When the police asked for the order to be issued, they stated, “There is reason to believe that these records would be relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation.”

Although Google complied with the demand to keep silent about all this until the records were unsealed last week, according to Forbes, they “do not show whether or not Google provided data in the case.”

A separate case in New Hampshire concerned a bomb threat in a public place, and people watching a livestream of the police searching the area. The livestream was possible thanks to a camera on nearby business premises.

Next, the police wanted to know exactly who watched it, including on a YouTube channel belonging to Boston and Maine Live, which has 130,000 subscribers.

Again, no word if Google delivered.

March 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

Is America a Rogue Superpower?

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | March 27, 2024

“Unipolar” used to mean that the United States was, at least in theory, alone in leading the world. Now “unipolar” means that the United States is alone and isolated in opposition to the world.

In global affairs, a hegemon is a nation that leads because it has the consent of the other nations who believe in its goals and values. The United States has recently demonstrated, though, that it has given up any pretense of using its leadership to pursue the goals of the global community, and instead is openly using the global community to pursue its own goals.

In his new book, The Lost Peace, Richard Sakwa explains the distinction between the pursuit of hegemony and the pursuit of primacy. Primacy “entails predominance and the conscious attempt to thwart the ambition of others.” In its recent performance at the United Nations, the United States is performing, not out of hegemony as it usually described, but out of primacy.

As a hegemon, the U.S. wields the power to veto in the Security Council. But in the exercise of primacy, it has recently used that veto to supress the clearly expressed voice of the international community.

After repeated American vetoes of measures calling for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza, in a desperate and seldom used move, on December 12, the General Assembly invoked Resolution 377A in an attempt to circumvent U.S. leadership. It was the response to what was perceived as America’s irresponsible use of its veto power as a permanent member of the Security Council.

It does not matter that the vote was on the war in Gaza, nor on whether you agree with the United States. What is significant is the assumption by Washington of the role of roadblock and not leader of the international will.

Article 377A first reminds the permanent members of the Security Council that they are obliged to “to seek unanimity and exercise restraint in the use of the veto” in pursuit of the maintenance of international peace and security. It then gives the General Assembly the right to make “appropriate recommendations to Members for collective measures… to maintain or restore international peace and security” when the Security Council “because of a lack of unanimity… fails to exercise its primary responsibility.”

The world saw the United States, not as a hegemon leading the world in the pursuit of unanimity, but as failing “to exercise its primary responsibility” as a leader on the Security Council.

On March 25, the U.S. went one step further and took a step toward becoming a rogue state who has supplanted international law with its rules-based order. International law is grounded in the charter system and the United Nations and is universally applicable. The rules-based order is composed of unwritten laws whose source, consent, and legitimacy are unknown. To the global majority, those unwritten laws have the appearance of being invoked when they benefit the U.S. and its partners and not being invoked when they don’t.

On March 25, the Security Council passed a resolution demanding “an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan respected by all parties leading to a lasting sustainable ceasefire.” The resolution was able to pass because the U.S. stood aside and let the other fourteen Security Council members pass it by abstaining instead of vetoing.

But in her explanation of the American abstention after the resolution passed, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield “surprisingly” said that “we fully support some of the critical objectives in this nonbinding resolution.”

Her claim that the Security Council resolution was nonbinding was not an off script, impromptu comment. It is the strategy of a country that enforces, not international law, but the U.S. led rules-based order.

In a March 25 press briefing following the vote and Thomas-Greenfield’s claim, White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby called the resolution “nonbinding” no less than four times. “Number one,” he said, “it’s a nonbinding resolution. So, there’s no impact at all on Israel and Israel’s ability to continue to go after Hamas.”

When asked by a reporter, “on the binding thing, is it binding, nonbinding?” Kirby answered, “It’s a nonbinding resolution.” When asked “a technical question” a second time to clarify if the resolution was nonbinding, Kirby again said, “My understanding is it’s a nonbinding resolation—resolution.”

At a State Department press briefing the same day, department spokesperson Matt Miller also called the resolution “nonbinding” three times.

All UN Security Council resolutions are legally binding and have the status of international law. That is why UN Secretary General António Guterres said, “This resolution must be implemented. Failure would be unforgivable.” UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq explained that, “All the resolutions of the Security Council are international law. They are as binding as international laws.”

Others responded the same way to the U.S. claim. On behalf of the ten elected members of the Security Council who drafted the resolution, Pedro Comissario, Mozambique’s envoy to the United Nations, said, “All United Nations Security Council resolutions are binding and mandatory.” He then added, “It is the hope of the 10 that the resolution adopted today will be implemented in good faith by all parties.”

The United Kingdom also did “not share” the U.S. claim, prompting their envoy to the UN to say, “we expect all Council resolutions to be implemented. This one is not any different. The demands in the resolution are absolutely clear.” China, too, did not share the U.S. evaluation. “China’s U.N. Ambassador Zhang Jun said Security Council resolutions are binding.”

By judging Security Council resolutions to be nonbinding and denying their status as being as binding as international law, the United States has taken the next step from hegemony to primacy to a rogue state that has undermined the foundational role of the Security Council in the international order.

March 27, 2024 Posted by | Book Review, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Humbling a Goliath: US-Led ‘No-Fail’ Mission Against the Houthis is Failing

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 27.03.2024

The US established a maritime ‘coalition of the willing’ in the Red Sea in December 2023 and began bombing Yemen in January in response to the Houthis’ bid to shut down Israeli-affiliated commercial traffic through the waterway in solidarity with Palestine. The Houthis have vowed to continue their operations until the carnage in Gaza stops.

The US-led military campaign in the Red Sea which the Pentagon wanted to make into a “no-fail mission” has turned into a modern-day David vs. Goliath PR disaster, with the powerful American naval and air might arrayed against the Houthis proving unable to stop militia attacks or reopen the Red Sea to shipping, US business media has reported.
“The gray F/A-18 fighter jets hurtled one by one from the deck of the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower into the heat of the Red Sea morning, scrambling to counter the latest attack drone launched by the Houthis. The $56 million aircraft were part of a coalition operation that nullified the attack, returning hours later as they have almost daily for the last several months,” Bloomberg wrote in a report Wednesday highlighting the difficulties the West has faced trying to stop Ansar Allah.

“Yet for all the costly hardware the US and its allies have thrown at the Islamist group from northwest Yemen, they haven’t been able to stop the attacks on civilian freighters and warships. As a result, the world’s biggest shipping companies are still largely avoiding a route that once carried 15% of global commerce,” the outlet lamented.

Rear Admiral Marc Miguez, commander of USS Dwight D. Eisenhower aircraft carrier-led American armada operating in the Red Sea, said that while the US has “reduced some” of the Houthis’ missile and drone capability through strikes, there’s no way to predict when the fleet’s “job” in the region will be done, since estimates on Houthi missile numbers are “kind of a black hole for the US intelligence-wise.”

Shipping firms and companies impacted by the Red Sea crisis are even less optimistic.

“It’s quite a binary situation,” Hapag-Lloyd CEO Rolf Habben Jansen explained earlier this month. “It is either safe for our people or it is not. As long as it is not safe, we will not send our people through the Red Sea.” Jansen didn’t rule out the Houthi blockade could last throughout the rest of the year and into 2025.

A Western official predicted that the Houthis will be able to continue their blockade at its current intensity for “months” to come. Others accused the Houthis of getting help from outside via Iran, including everything from weapons components to sea mine-laying specialists. Iran has “categorically” denied providing any military or weapons assistance to the Houthis.

“[The Houthis] don’t create inertial navigation systems. They don’t create medium-range ballistic missile engines. They don’t create the stage separations on these medium-range ballistic missiles or the anti-ship cruise missiles,” US Central Command commander Gen. Michael Kurilla told a Senate hearing earlier this month, accusing Ansar Allah of getting help from outside, and ignoring the vast stocks of Soviet-era ballistic, cruise and air defense missile technologies which the Houthis have inherited and upgraded since 2014.

Unable to stop the Houthis at sea, Western officials have rejected any talk of a ground operation against the militia, warning that if the group escalates its targeting of Western warships, the coalition may respond by assassinating Houthi leaders.

An anonymous US military official told Bloomberg that the US is on the “wrong side of the cost curve” in the Red Sea campaign, whose economic costs are starting to add up.
While the Houthis can build and launch simple ballistic and cruise missiles or drones at a cost of thousands to tens of thousands of dollars, the anti-missile interceptors US warships launch to take down militia threats are costing US taxpayers up to hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece, with F/A-18 jets costing the Navy $25,000 or more per hour to operate (not counting whatever munitions they happen to expend during their mission).

The Houthis’ campaign of ship seizures, missile and drone attacks have caused commercial traffic through the southern Red Sea to drop by about 70 percent in March compared to early December, with container shipping reportedly down 90 percent, gas tanker flow halting almost completely, and Israel’s main Red Sea port forced to lay off half of its workforce.

Ansar Allah began its partial blockade of the Red Sea in November with the seizure of the Galaxy Leader, an Israeli billionaire-owned ro-ro car carrier, expanding operations to target not only Israeli, but US and British commercial vessels and warships after the pair of nations began a campaign of airstrikes against Yemen in January. Last month, the militia warned European countries setting up their own maritime security operations in the Red Sea that “any idiocy you commit will affect your ships and navigation.” Major European shipping companies including Maersk have said they would continue to avoid the Red Sea in spite of the EU’s security mission.

March 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia rejects US sea annexations

RT | March 26, 2024

Moscow does not recognize Washington’s attempt to illegally claim over a million square kilometers of maritime territory, including in the Arctic and the Bering Sea, the Russian Foreign Ministry has said.

Russian representatives informed the Council of the International Seabed Authority of this on Monday. The council is currently meeting in Kingston, Jamaica and operates under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

The US is “unilaterally trying to reduce the area of ​​the seabed under the Authority, and hence the entire international community,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

The US Department of State announced its “extended continental shelf” project in December 2023, claiming jurisdiction of approximately one million square kilometers beyond its territorial waters. The UNCLOS allows maritime claims of up to 200 nautical miles (370 km) from the shore in the world’s oceans.

“These unilateral steps by the US do not conform to the rules and procedures established by international law,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said, noting that it “blocked Washington’s latest attempt to use the 1982 Convention exclusively to advance its own interests.”

UNCLOS allows the possibility for expanding a country’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) if it can prove that the continental shelf extends past the 200-mile limit, but countries have to submit a petition through the proper channels, as Russia did in 2015.

Moscow accused Washington of “focusing on its rights and completely ignoring its obligations” when it comes to international law. Even though it was involved in crafting the UNCLOS, the US has never ratified it.

According to the Russian Foreign Ministry, the note in which Moscow refused to recognize the US continental shelf claims has already been delivered to Washington “through bilateral channels.”

Maps published by the State Department show the US claiming territory in six areas, including in the Arctic and the Bering Sea along the maritime boundary with Russia. The Arctic claim goes 350-680 nautical miles beyond the 200-mile line, while the Bering Sea claim goes approximately 340 nautical miles east.

Washington also wants to appropriate portions of the seabed north of the Mariana Islands in the Pacific Ocean, as well as off the west coast of California.

In the Atlantic, the US has claimed a wide swath of seabed beyond its 200-mile line, as well as two sections of the Gulf of Mexico along the boundary with Mexico and Cuba.

March 26, 2024 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , | Leave a comment

FDA is trying to legalize its illegal approvals of COVID vaccines without human trials

Now one animal trial will do the trick to “prove” efficacy?

BY MERYL NASS | MARCH 26, 2024

You can’t prove efficacy with an animal trial. You can’t prove safety with an animal trial. The anthrax vaccine studies PROVED that even when a vaccine seemed to work in animals, it was unclear what the right dose was and equally unclear how antibody levels related to protection, because they didn’t. Maybe because no one knew which antibody to measure?

Surrogate markers for approval of vaccines (or anything else) became a total joke when FDA began ignoring the requirement that “correlates of protection” were a essential before you could use antibodies, T cells, animals or anything besides humans to assess a vaccine. This means that you have to prove the surrogate marker or animal model actually duplicates the human response, since usually they don’t.

FDA officials ditched this absolutely necessary standard (imho illegally) and now want to a) cover their tracks, and b) foist more untested and possibly deadly injections on us going forward.

Who needs them? They are simply a Potemkin Village of a regulatory agency at this point. Thankfully ICAN is watching.

With public faith in FDA continuing to decline, the agency published draft guidance stating that a single animal study could be sufficient to demonstrate a vaccine’s effectiveness. ICAN’s attorneys submitted a comment in opposition to this draft guidance which comes shortly after FDA approved a COVID-19 booster based on trials performed solely in mice.

Back in 2007, an FDA advisory committee met to re-review the safety, effectiveness, and dosing of phenylephrine (Sudafed PE), a drug which has been on the market for nearly 50 years. At the 2007 meeting, the committee considered its efficacy data “borderline” but nonetheless voted 11-1 in favor of its efficacy, although it did vote in favor of additional studies being done.

On September 12, 2023, the same FDA committee, possibly attempting to bolster its image as a tough regulatory watchdog, voted unanimously to label phenylephrine “ineffective” as a nasal decongestant. The committee noted “significant methodological and statistical issues with the design and conduct of the original studies submitted to and evaluated by the Panel… All but one evaluated extremely small sample sizes, none adequately controlled for bias … and none performed appropriate sample size calculations,” and observed, “After a thorough review of all the available evidence, it is also possible that there may have been bias and/or data integrity issues at [at] least one study center … where five of the seven positive oral PE studies were conducted.”

If FDA follows the panel’s advice, the drug will be pulled from the market, despite the long-standing indications of its inefficacy, most of which were known in 2007. It’s too bad the committee didn’t perform this “thorough review” at any point prior to the last 50 years, before Americans wasted billions of dollars on an ineffective treatment (nearly $2 billion in 2022 alone) that apparently only exposed them to potential harm without benefit.

Ironically, on September 11, 2023, just one day before the committee met to clamp down on this “ineffective drug” with shoddy clinical trials, FDA issued draft guidance stating that, under certain circumstances, a manufacturer can show evidence of effectiveness for a biological product with a single clinical investigation conducted in animals, giving the example of “[w]hen the product is a preventive vaccine, and there is a well-established model of infection for a relevant infectious disease, and use of the vaccine in the animal model demonstrates prevention of disease.” Notably, this occurred shortly after FDA authorized the newest Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines, which are as Dr. Paul Offit notes, “new product[s],” even though Pfizer tested this brand-new shot only in mice — not humans.

Thus, on December 18, 2023, ICAN, through its attorneys, filed a formal comment in opposition to the draft guidance. In it, ICAN points out that, despite urging by ICAN in its November 2020 petition, FDA refused to amend the Phase III trials of the COVID-19 vaccines to ensure they met the required standard of “substantial evidence” of effectiveness. As a result, we now have generations of new vaccines being approved based on those original ineffective products.

Now, FDA is doubling down on its malfeasance by authorizing COVID-19 vaccines without human trials while simultaneously creating guidance to excuse its lack of oversight. As ICAN’s comment notes:

[I]t is apparent that FDA is tailoring guidance based on the vaccine manufacturers’ clinical trials instead of requiring that these trials comply with what any reasonable licensing agency should and would require. FDA has seemingly forgotten that its function is to regulate the pharmaceutical industry, not rubber stamp it. The Draft Guidance does not provide oversight, and even worse lends illegitimacy to the FDA when there is clearly insufficient evidence to support authorization or licensure. This is especially troubling for products that will be injected into healthy humans including babies, children, and pregnant women.

Rest assured that ICAN’s legal team will continue to serve as a watchdog for FDA and ensure it is held accountable for improperly wielding its regulatory authority and fulfilling its responsibilities.

To support future legal action like this, click here to donate!

You can read more about ICAN’s work serving as watchdog for our federal health agencies at the links below:

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

Complicit in genocide: Where Israel gets its weapons from

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | March 26, 2024

Over 9,000 Palestinian women have been killed since the start of Israel’s war against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Mothers have been the largest civilian population group killed by the occupation state, at an average of 37 per day since 7 October.

These statistics, from the Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza and the Red Crescent Society respectively, only convey part of the suffering experienced by 2.3 million Palestinians in the Strip. There is not a single section of Palestinian society that has not paid a heavy price in the war, although women and children have borne the brunt of it, constituting over 70 per cent of all victims of the ongoing Israeli genocide.

While these women and their children have been killed at the hands of Israeli soldiers, it is true to say that they were murdered using weapons supplied by the US and Israel’s other Western allies. Now, however, we are told that the world is finally turning against Israel.

The West’s nod of approval to Tel Aviv to carry on with its daily massacres may soon turn into a collective snub.

This claim was expressed best by the 23 March cover of the Economist magazine. It showed a tattered Israeli flag, attached to a stick, and planted in an arid, dusty land. It was accompanied by the headline “Israel Alone”.

The image, undoubtedly expressive, was meant to serve as a sign of the times. Its profundity becomes even more obvious if compared with another cover from the same publication soon after the Israeli military conquered Arab territories in the war of June 1967, known to Palestinians as the Naksa. “They did it,” trumpeted the headline back then. In the background stood an Israeli tank to illustrate the West-funded triumph.

Between the two headlines much in the world and in the Middle East has changed. To claim that Israel now stands alone, though, is not entirely accurate, at least not yet.

Although many of Israel’s traditional allies in the West are now openly disowning its behaviour in Gaza, weapons from various Western and non-Western countries continue to flow, feeding the war machine as it, in turn, continues to harvest more Palestinian lives. This compels us to ask if Israel really does stand alone when its airports and seaports are busier than ever receiving massive shipments of weapons from all corners of the globe. The answer is simple: not in the least.

Almost every time a Western country announces that it has suspended arms exports to Israel, a news headline appears shortly afterwards indicating the opposite. This has happened repeatedly.

Last year, for example, Italy declared that it was blocking all arms sales to Israel, giving false hope that some Western countries were finally experiencing some kind of moral awakening. Alas, on 14 March, Reuters quoted Italian Defence Minister Guido Crosetto as saying that shipments of weapons to Israel are continuing, based on the flimsy logic that previously-signed deals would have to be “honoured”.

Another country that is also “honouring” its previous commitments is Canada, which announced on 19 March that, following a parliamentary motion, it had suspended arms exports to Israel. The celebrations of those advocating an end to the genocide in Gaza were just getting started when, a day later, Ottawa reversed the decision by announcing that it too will honour its commitments.

This demonstrates that some Western countries continue to preach to the rest of us with their unsolicited wisdom about human rights, women’s rights and democracy, but actually have no genuine respect for any of these values.

Canada and Italy are not the largest military supporters of Israel, however; the US and Germany are. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, in the decade between 2013 and 2022, Israel received 68 per cent of its weapons from the US and 28 per cent from Germany.

The Germans remain unperturbed, even though five per cent of the total population of Gaza have been killed, wounded or are missing due to the Israeli war.

Yet, the American support for Israel is far greater, although the Biden administration is still sending messages to its constituency, the majority of whom want the war to stop, that the US president is doing his best to put pressure on Israel to end it.

Although only two approved military sales to Israel have been announced publicly since 7 October, the two shipments represent just two per cent of the total US arms sent to Israel. This was revealed by the Washington Post on 6 March at a time when US media reported a widening rift between US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“That’s an extraordinary number of sales over the course of a pretty short amount of time,” a former senior Biden administration official told the Post. Jeremy Konyndyk reached the obvious conclusion that the “Israeli campaign would not be sustainable without this level of US support.”

For decades, US military support for Israel has been the highest of any in the world. As from 2016, this unconditional support increased exponentially during the Obama Administration to amount to $3.8 billion per year.

Immediately after 7 October, however, the weapons shipments to Israel reached unprecedented levels. They included 2,000-pound bombs known as 5,000 MK-84 munitions. Israel has used these bombs to kill hundreds of innocent Palestinians.

Washington claims frequently to be looking into Israel’s use of US weapons. According to the Washington Post, though, Biden knew too well that, “Israel was regularly bombing buildings without solid intelligence that they were legitimate military targets.”

In some ways, Israel does “stand alone”, but only because its behaviour is rejected by most countries and peoples around the world. However, it is hardly alone when its war crimes are being executed with Western arms and support.

For the Israeli offensive in Gaza to end, therefore, those who continue to sustain the ongoing bloodbath must end their supply of arms and ammunition. Then Israel must be held to account for its crimes, as must all of the arms suppliers, for they are complicit in genocide.

March 26, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russian Intelligence Services Kept Eye on West’s Effort to Weaponize ISIS

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 26.03.2024

Over the past two years, Moscow has collected evidence of Western involvement in training and arming jihadi terrorists to weaponize them on the Ukrainian battlefield and Russia’s rear.

The Crocus City Hall terror attack has raised questions about the West’s repeated use of jihadist elements, starting from arming Mujahideen in Afghanistan during the Cold War era to most recent reports of Islamists fighting on the side of the Kiev regime.

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) stated on February 13, 2023, that it obtained intelligence indicating that the US military was actively recruiting militants from jihadist groups affiliated with ISIS and al-Qaeda to carry out terrorist attacks in Russia and the CIS countries. According to the SVR, particular attention is paid to attracting people from the Russian North Caucasus and Central Asia to cooperate.

The Russian intelligence service revealed that in January 2023, 60 terrorists with experience of participating in hostilities in the Middle East were recruited by the West, adding that they were undergoing training at the American base in Al-Tanf, Syria, to conduct terrorist and subversive attacks.

The SVR noted at the time that the militants would be dispatched in small groups to the territory of Russia and the CIS countries in cooperation with underground cells of international terrorist groups, including Hizb ut-Tahrir, Jamaat Ansarullah and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan.

“We see the final loss of any moral principles in the US security forces,” the SVR summarized in its official statement, lambasting Washington’s obsession with inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia by any means possible. “Such actions put Washington on a par with the largest international terrorist groups.”

Intel data confirming the plans described by the SVR started to emerge later in the year. Russian Security Service (FSB) Director Alexander Bortnikov stated at the October 2023 meeting of heads of Russian security agencies and special services that ISIS and other terrorist groups were fighting against Russia as part of the Ichkerian and Crimean Tatar mercenary units in Ukraine. ISIS is also part of sabotage and reconnaissance groups sent to Russian territory to carry out attacks and terrorist attacks, Bortnikov emphasized.

The FSB director pointed out that Western governments were “actively facilitating the movement of militants into the Ukrainian conflict zone.” As of October 2023, the FSB had registered the participation of employees of 13 Western private military companies (PMCs) and members of nine foreign paramilitary proxy forces in the Ukraine conflict on the side of the Kiev regime.

According to Bortnikov, the US and its NATO allies have turned Ukraine into nothing short of a terrorist hotbed.

The FSB chief likewise drew special attention to the US and British intelligence services’ efforts to create a “belt of instability” in Afghanistan near the southern borders of the CIS, where al-Qaeda and the ISIS groups are becoming stronger. To that end, the Western intelligence services were recruiting militants from international terrorist organizations operating in Iraq, Syria, and a number of other Asian and African countries, and transferring them to northern Afghanistan.

“We note the increased role of al-Qaeda, which, in alliance with the IS branch Vilayat Khorasan, takes an active part in the preparation, indoctrination and logistical support of controlled groups,” Bortnikov stressed last October.

Islamic Terror Groups Flocking to Ukraine

From the very beginning of the Russian special operation in Ukraine, reports started to emerge in international media outlets and blogs, shedding light on jihadists of all stripes flocking to the combat zone in Ukraine.

In early March 2022, the BBC quoted Syria-based terrorist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) explicitly expressing solidarity with the Kiev regime. High-profile HTS member al-Shamali al-Hurr took to Telegram to cheer Ukrainian victories by sharing footage and graphic images of damaged Russian military hardware and dead soldiers.

In April 2022, reports emerged claiming that the White Helmets, a Western-backed so-called “humanitarian” Syrian group, had arrived in Ukraine. Prior to this, the group, officially known as the Syrian Civil Defense, pledged to provide “tutorials” to the Ukrainian forces. The group was accused by Syrians of being connected to al-Qaeda offshoots operating in the Middle Eastern country and staging chemical attacks.

What’s more, initial training and financial support to the White Helmets was provided by the Mayday Rescue Foundation, a non-governmental organization established by ex-British Army officer James Le Mesurier. Le Mesurier’s group was instrumental in the West’s long-standing effort to topple the government of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria, according to Grayzone investigative journalists’ account of events in 2016.

The SVR announced in May 2022, citing obtained evidence, that about 60 ISIS terrorists were released from prisons controlled by the US-backed Syrian Kurds a month earlier with the aim of dispatching them to Ukraine as sabotage units. The SVR highlighted that the US Al-Tanf base in Syria’s Homs province was turned into a terrorist hub where militants were trained to be deployed to Ukraine.

“Priority is given to natives of the states of Transcaucasia and Central Asia. The training ‘course’ in Al-Tanf includes training in the use of available types of anti-tank missile systems, reconnaissance and strike drones MQ-1C, advanced communications and surveillance equipment,” the SVR stated.

On October 22, 2022, Al-Monitor reported that it had learned that members of Ajnad al-Kavkaz, a Chechen-led Islamist group, left the Syrian province of Idlib and headed to Ukraine to fight against the Russian military.

Who Masterminded the Crocus City Hall Attack?

The Crocus City Hall terror attack was carried out by the hands of radical Islamists, but it is necessary to find the masterminds and those who benefitted from the hideous crime, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated on Monday.

“The horrific crime committed on March 22 in the capital of Russia is an act of intimidation … and the question immediately arises: who benefits?” Putin said. “This atrocity can only be an element in a whole series of attempts by those who have been fighting our country since 2014 with the hands of the neo-Nazi Kiev regime.”

In the wake of the attack four alleged perpetrators – Dalerdzhon Mirzoyev, Shamsidina Fariduni, Saidakrami Rachabalizoda and Muhammadsobir Fayzov – were caught in the Russian Bryansk region on the way to the Ukrainian border. According to the FSB, the jihadists had connections in Ukraine and sought to hide in the Eastern European country after committing the crime. The fifth suspect, Dilovar Islomov, was detained on March 25.

“We also need to answer the question of why the terrorists tried to leave for Ukraine after committing the crime and who was waiting for them there,” Putin underlined during the conversation with Russian authorities on security measures taken after the terrorist attack.

The Russian president specifically referred to the Biden administration’s effort to divert public attention from Ukraine’s possible involvement immediately after the tragedy.

“We see how the US is taking to various channels to convince its satellites and other countries that according to the data from its intelligence, there is allegedly no Ukrainian trace in the Moscow terrorist attack (…) We already know by whose hands this atrocity against Russia and its people had been carried out. Now we want to know who the mastermind is,” the Russian president emphasized.

March 26, 2024 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi: notorious terrorist or American agent?

By William Van Wagenen | The Cradle | March 26, 2024

Ranked second only to Osama bin Laden, the US’s most notorious declared enemy during the so-called War on Terror was Jordanian jihadist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the founder of Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI).

But a closer examination of Zarqawi’s life and his impact on events in Iraq shows that he was likely a product and tool of US intelligence.

Neoconservative strategists within the administration of George W. Bush utilized Zarqawi as a pawn to justify the illegal US invasion of Iraq in 2003 to the American public.

Moreover, he was instrumental in fomenting internal discord within Iraqi resistance groups opposing the US occupation, ultimately instigating a sectarian civil war between Iraq’s Sunni and Shia communities.

Israel’s plan unfolds in Iraq 

This deliberate strategy of tension in Iraq advanced Tel Aviv’s goal of perpetuating the country’s vulnerabilities, dividing populations along sectarian lines, and weakening its army’s ability to challenge Israel in the region.

It has long been known that the CIA created Al-Qaeda as part of its covert war on the Soviet Red Army in Afghanistan in the 1980s and supported Al-Qaeda elements in various wars, including in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Chechnya in the 1990s.

Additionally, evidence points to CIA support for Al-Qaeda-affiliated groups during the clandestine war in Syria launched in 2011 amid the so-called Arab Spring.

Despite this history, western journalists, analysts, and historians still take at face value that Zarqawi and AQI were sworn enemies of the US.

Without understanding Zarqawi’s role as a US intelligence asset, it is impossible to understand the destructive role the US (and Israel) played in the bloodshed inflicted on Iraq, not only during the initial 2003 invasion but in launching the subsequent sectarian strife as well.

It is also essential to understand the importance of current Iraqi efforts to expel US forces and rid the country of US influence moving forward.

Who was Zarqawi?

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was born Ahmed Fadhil Nazar al-Khalaylah but later changed his name to reflect his birthplace, Zarqa, an industrial area near Amman, Jordan. In and out of prison in his youth, he would become radicalized during his time behind bars.

Zarqawi traveled to Afghanistan to fight with the CIA-backed mujahideen against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the late 1980s. Upon his return to Jordan, he helped start a local Islamic militant group called Jund al-Sham and was imprisoned in 1992.

After his release from prison following a general amnesty, Zarqawi returned to Afghanistan in 1999. The Atlantic notes that he first met Osama bin Laden at this time, who suspected that Zarqawi’s group had been infiltrated by Jordanian intelligence while in prison, which accounted for his early release.

Zarqawi then fled Afghanistan to the pro-US Kurdistan region of northern Iraq and established a training camp for his fighters in the fateful year of 2001.

The missing link

Eager to implicate Iraq in the 9/11 attacks, it wasn’t long before the Bush administration officials soon used Zarqawi’s presence to shroud Washington’s geopolitical agendas there.

In February 2003, at the UN Security Council, US Secretary of State Colin Powell claimed that Zarqawi’s presence in Iraq proved Saddam was harboring a terrorist network, necessitating a US invasion.

According to the Council on Foreign Relations, “This assertion was later disproved, but it irreversibly thrust Zarqawi’s name into the international spotlight.”

Powell made the claim even though the Kurdish region of Iraq, where Zarqawi established his base, was effectively under US control. The US air force imposed a no-fly zone on the region after the 1991 Gulf War. Israel’s foreign intelligence agency, the Mossad, was also known to have a presence there, a reality that Iran actively acknowledges and remains vigilant about.

Curiously, despite Zarqawi’s base being nestled within the confines of Iraqi Kurdistan, the Bush administration opted for inaction when presented with a golden opportunity to neutralize him.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the Pentagon drew up detailed plans in June 2002 to strike Zarqawi’s training camp but that “the raid on Mr Zarqawi didn’t take place. Months passed with no approval of the plan from the White House.”

Lawrence Di Rita, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, justified the inaction by claiming “the camp was of interest only because it was believed to be producing chemical weapons,” even though the threat of chemical and biological weapons falling into the hands of terrorists was supposedly the most important reason for toppling Saddam Hussein’s government.

In contrast, General John M. Keane, the US Army’s vice chief of staff at the time, explained that the intelligence on Zarqawi’s presence in the camp was “sound,” the risk of collateral damage was low, and that the camp was “one of the best targets we ever had.”

The Bush administration firmly refused to approve the strikes, despite US General Tommy Franks pointing to Zarqawi’s camp as among the “examples of the terrorist ‘harbors’ that President Bush had vowed to crush.”

As soon as Zarqawi’s presence in Iraq had accomplished its initial purpose of selling the war on Iraq to the US public, and after the March 2003 invasion was already underway, the White House finally approved targeting his camp with airstrikes. But by then, the Wall Street Journal adds, Zarqawi had already fled the area.

Singling out Shiites 

Then, in January 2004, the key pillar of the Bush administration’s justification for war unraveled. David Kay, the weapons inspector tasked with finding Iraq’s WMDs, publicly declared, “I don’t think they exist,” after nine months of searching.

The Guardian reported that the failure to locate any WMDs was such a devastating blow to the rationale for invading Iraq that now “even Bush was rewriting the reasons for going to war.”

On 9 February, as the WMD embarrassment mounted, Secretary of State Powell again claimed that before the invasion, Zarqawi “was active in Iraq and doing things that should have been known to the Iraqis. And we’re still looking for those connections and to prove those connections.”

Two weeks before, US intelligence had conveniently made public a 17-page letter it claimed Zarqawi had written. Its author claimed responsibility for multiple terror attacks, argued that fighting Iraq’s Shia was more important than fighting the occupying US army, and vowed to spark a civil war between the country’s Sunni and Shia communities.

In subsequent months, US officials attributed a series of brutal bombings targeting Iraq’s Shia to Zarqawi without providing evidence of his involvement.

In March 2004, suicide attacks on Shia shrines in Karbala and the Kadhimiya district of Baghdad killed 200 worshippers commemorating Ashura. In April, car bombings in the Shia-majority city of Basra in southern Iraq killed at least 50.

Regarding the Karbala and Kadhimiya attacks, Al-Qaeda issued a statement through Al-Jazeera strongly denying any involvement, but Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) head Paul Bremer insisted Zarqawi was involved.

Zarqawi’s alleged attacks on Iraq’s Shia helped drive a wedge between the Sunni and Shia resistance to the US occupation and sowed the seeds of a future sectarian war.

This proved helpful to the US army, which was trying to prevent Sunni and Shia factions from joining forces in resistance to the occupation.

‘Dividing our enemies’

In April 2004, President Bush ordered a full-scale invasion to take control of Fallujah, a city in Anbar province that had become the epicenter of the Sunni resistance.

Vowing to “pacify” the city, Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt launched the attack using helicopter gunships, unmanned surveillance drones, and F-15 warplanes.

The attack became controversial as the Marines killed many civilians, destroyed large numbers of homes and buildings, and displaced the majority of the city’s residents.

Eventually, due to widespread public pressure, President Bush was forced to call off the assault, and Fallujah became a ‘no-go’ zone for US forces.

The failure to maintain troops on the ground in Fallujah had US planners turning back to their Zarqawi card to weaken the Sunni resistance from within. In June, a senior Pentagon official claimed that “fresh information” had come to light showing Zarqawi “may be hiding in the Sunni stronghold city of Fallujah.”

The Pentagon official “cautioned, however, that the information is not specific enough to allow a military operation to be launched to try to find al-Zarqawi.”

The sudden appearance of Zarqawi and other Jihadists in Fallujah at this time was not an accident.

In a report written for the US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) entitled “Dividing our enemies,” Thomas Henriksen explained that the US military used Zarqawi to exploit differences among its enemies in Fallujah and elsewhere.

He writes that the US military maintained the goal of “fomenting enemy-on-enemy deadly encounters” so that America’s “enemies eliminate each other,” adding that “When divisions were absent, American operators instigated them.”

The Fallujah Case Study

Henriksen then cites events in Fallujah in the fall of 2004 as “a case study” that “showcased the clever machinations required to set insurgents battling insurgents.”

He explained that the takfiri–Salafi views of Zarqawi and his fellow jihadis caused tension with local insurgents who were nationalists and embraced a Sufi religious outlook. Local insurgents also opposed Zarqawi’s tactics, which included kidnapping foreign journalists, killing civilians through indiscriminate bombings, and sabotaging the country’s oil and electricity infrastructure.

Henriksen further explained that US psychological operations, which took “advantage of and deepened the intra-insurgent forces” in Fallujah, led to “nightly gun battles not involving coalition forces.”

These divisions soon extended to the other Sunni resistance strongholds of Ramadi in Anbar province and the Adhamiya district of Baghdad.

The divisions instigated by US intelligence through Zarqawi in Fallujah paved the way for another US invasion of the restive city in November 2004, days after Bush secured re-election.

BBC journalist Mark Urban reported that 2,000 bodies were recovered after the battle, including hundreds of civilians.

Conveniently, “Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was not among the dead,” having slipped through the US cordon around the city before the assault began, Urban added.

Domestic consumption 

US military intelligence later acknowledged using psychological operations to promote Zarqawi’s role in the Sunni insurgency fighting against the US occupation.

The Washington Post reported in April 2006 that “The US military is conducting a propaganda campaign to magnify the role of the leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq,” which helped “the Bush administration tie the war to the organization responsible for the 11 September 2001 attacks.”

The Post quotes US Colonel Derek Harvey as explaining, “Our own focus on Zarqawi has enlarged his caricature, if you will – made him more important than he really is.”

As the Post reports further, the internal documents detailing the psychological operation campaign “explicitly list the ‘US Home Audience’ as one of the targets of a broader propaganda campaign.”

The campaign to promote Zarqawi also proved helpful to President Bush during his re-election campaign in October 2004. When Democratic challenger John Kerry called the war in Iraq a diversion from the so-called War on Terror in Afghanistan, President Bush responded by claiming:

“The case of one terrorist shows how wrong [Kerry’s] thinking is. The terrorist leader we face in Iraq today, the one responsible for planting car bombs and beheading Americans, is a man named Zarqawi.”

Who killed Nick Berg?

Nick Berg, a US contractor in Iraq, was allegedly beheaded by Zarqawi. In May 2004, western news outlets published a video showing Berg, dressed in an orange Guantanamo-style jumpsuit, being beheaded by a group of masked men.

A masked man claiming to be Zarqawi stated in the video that Berg’s killing was in response to the US torture of detainees in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison.

Berg was in Iraq trying to win reconstruction contracts and disappeared just days after he spent a month in US detention in Mosul, where he was interrogated multiple times by the FBI.

On 8 May, a month after his disappearance, the US military claimed they found his decapitated body on the side of a road near Baghdad.

But US claims that Zarqawi killed Berg are not credible. As the Sydney Morning Herald reported at the time, there is evidence the beheading video was staged and included footage from Berg’s FBI interrogation. It was uploaded to the internet not from Iraq but from London and remained online just long enough for CNN and Fox News to download it.

Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt also lied about Berg having been in US military custody, claiming instead he had only been held by the Iraqi police in Mosul.

But the video cemented in the minds of the American public that Zarqawi and Al-Qaeda were major terror threats.

Such was the impact in the US, that following the video’s release, the terms ‘Nick Berg’ and ‘Iraq war’ temporarily replaced pornography and celebrities Paris Hilton and Britney Spears as the internet’s main searches.

Sectarianism, a key US–Israeli goal

Large-scale sectarian war erupted following the February 2006 bombing of the Shia Al-Askari Shrine in the Sunni city of Samarra in central Iraq, although the full extent was mitigated thanks to religious guidance issued by the highest and most influential Shia authority in the land, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

Al-Qaeda did not take credit for the attack, but President Bush later claimed that “the bombing of the shrine was an Al-Qaeda plot, all intending to create sectarian violence.”

Zarqawi was finally killed in a US airstrike a few months later, on 7 June 2006. An Iraqi legislator, Wael Abdul-Latif, said Zarqawi had the phone numbers of senior Iraqi officials stored in his cell phone at the time of his death, further showing Zarqawi was being used by elements within the US-backed Iraqi government.

By the time of Zarqawi’s death, the neoconservative agenda to divide and weaken Iraq through instigating chaos and sectarian conflict had reached its pinnacle. This goal was further exacerbated by the emergence of a successor group to AQI – ISIS – which played an outsized role a few years later in destabilizing neighboring Syria, igniting sectarian tensions there, and providing the justification for the renewal of a US military mandate in Iraq.

March 26, 2024 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »