NATO aggression against Russia becomes total war

By Drago Bosnic | August 8, 2023
On the night of August 4, the Kiev regime launched a sea drone attack against a Russian tanker. Luckily, the resulting damage was insufficient to sink the ship or cause any casualties among the 11 crew members, but it did hinder its operation. The attack happened at about 23:20 just south of the Kerch Strait, according to a statement by Russia’s Federal Agency for Sea and Inland Water Transport. The vessel was later identified as the chemical tanker SIG. The Russian maritime agency detailed that there is a hole “near the waterline on the starboard side, presumably as a result of a sea drone attack” and confirmed there were no casualties.
It’s important to note that the SIG is sanctioned by the United States for transporting jet fuel to the Russian military in Syria, making American involvement in the attack almost a certainty, particularly at a time when Washington DC’s aggression against Damascus is escalating. The targeting information was most likely provided by US ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) platforms which then relayed this to the SBU or the Neo-Nazi junta forces. The move aims to hamper vital Russian logistics in Syria, particularly operations by the VKS (Russian Aerospace Forces) which is regularly intercepting US/NATO aircraft illegally entering Syrian airspace.
To further conceal direct US involvement, the Kiev regime openly boasted about the attack, which is highly unusual given the fact that it normally maintains plausible deniability in the aftermath of such actions. According to NBC, “the tanker was transporting fuel for the Russian troops,” citing sources and adding that “it was well loaded” and that “the ‘fireworks’ could be seen from afar”. They said that a surface drone and TNT had been used to carry out the attack. A video was also released and shared by several Neo-Nazi junta officials, showing a sea drone moving towards the tanker, although it cuts just before reaching the ship, suggesting the explosion followed immediately after.
“Any explosions that happen with the ships of the Russian Federation or the Crimean Bridge is an absolutely logical and effective step in relation to the enemy,” the head of the SBU Vasyl Malyuk posted on Telegram, adding: “If the Russians want the explosions to stop, they should use the only option for this — to leave the territorial waters of Ukraine.”
Several hours before the attack on SIG, another sea drone damaged the “Olenogorsky Gornyak” landing ship, just off the port of Novorossiysk, one of Russia’s major export hubs. Coupled with attacks on tankers, such actions are obviously designed to hinder Moscow’s oil sales as the so-called “price cap” turned out to be a miserable failure, with even US vassals such as Japan ignoring it. By targeting Russian tankers and major ports, the US is hoping to stop or at least hamper oil sales. This is also connected to the issue of insurance for Russian vessels, meaning there would be no compensation in case of such attacks, possibly prompting other tankers to halt transporting Russian oil.
On the other hand, drone strikes on Russian cities aim to disrupt normal economic activity and discredit Russian authorities, probably in hopes of causing unrest of some kind. On August 6, Moscow’s Vnukovo airport was forced to temporarily halt all flights due to a failed drone attack. The Russian military’s electronic warfare (EW) assets downed the drone in the Podolsk region of the Moscow suburbs. The attack could have caused untold damage had it reached the airport, jeopardizing the lives of thousands of civilians. Since major drone attacks on buildings in Moscow (including the Kremlin itself), the Russian military strengthened its air defenses in and around Moscow, including by placing “Pantsir” SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems on rooftops.
Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin wrote on Telegram: “Today at around 11:00 AM, a drone attempted to break through to Moscow. It was destroyed on the approach by air defenses. Well done, military.”
Drone attacks on civilian infrastructure are absolutely irrelevant to Russian military operations in Ukraine, meaning they are either an act of desperation (as the Kiev regime’s much-touted counteroffensive has been an absolute debacle) or the United States is simply trying to launch a total war against Russia, as its economy has proved to be virtually impervious to the political West’s unrelenting sanctions warfare. Another proof that the economic siege of Russia has failed spectacularly is the fact that the Eurasian giant’s economy will grow 1.5% this year, according to an assessment by the IMF. This “unpleasant surprise” most likely prompted the political West to take “concrete action” in order to prevent such a scenario, as its own economic prospects are not looking so good.
Namely, although President Joe Biden vowed to “turn the ruble into rubble” just last year, this has proven to be nothing more than a fantasy, as the Russian economy is now outperforming those of its adversaries, the same ones enforcing the sanctions. Unable to face Moscow in a fair fight, be it militarily, economically or otherwise, the political West is left with underhanded tactics such as biological warfare, evident terrorist attacks and even covert nuclear proliferation. As previously mentioned, all this can only be described by two words – total war. And while it inevitably results in damage for Moscow on a tactical level, strategically and historically, Russia has never lost such confrontations, as evidenced by the last attempt by a certain failed painter with a peculiar mustache.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
US response to Russia-China naval patrol exposes glaring hypocrisy
By Timur Fomenko | RT | August 8, 2023
Last week, the US sent a group of warships and a reconnaissance plane to waters off the coast of Alaska after Chinese and Russian vessels conducted a joint naval patrol in the area.
A former US Navy captain and analyst for right-wing think tank the Heritage Foundation described the patrol as “highly provocative.” Because the US and its allies would never, ever do something like that, right?
The US is engaged in the full-blown militarisation of the peripheries of both China and Russia in a manner that implies it has an unconditional right to do so. This behaviour has not only provoked one war, in Ukraine, but risks triggering a second one, over the Taiwan Strait, too. The reality, of course, is that neither Russia nor China poses any threat to Alaska whatsoever, because the conflict, or risk thereof, is at their own front doors, not America’s.
The US is the most militaristic and aggressive country in modern history. It has established a global military presence that spans every single continent with hundreds of military bases. In doing so, it claims it supports the freedom and self-determination of others. In reality, it provocatively encircles states that it deems rivals to its own global dominance, escalates tensions, and then when these states respond to the situation, subsequently brands them as the “aggressors,” thus affirming and even expanding its military footprint in these given regions.
With Russia, the US has pursued a relentless expansion of NATO eastwards since the Cold War, absorbing former members of the Soviet Union’s alliance system even when Russia had no will to compete with it. NATO has evolved from a unit of collective self-defence in a specific geographic region into an increasingly global ideological crusade which serves the goals of the US. The words “North Atlantic” in its name are increasingly redundant as Washington even endeavours to broaden its reach to Asia and the Pacific.
Which leads to the next point, China. The US is pushing for a full-scale military and naval encirclement around China’s eastern periphery, deliberately using the Taiwan independence issue as a wedge to ramp up tensions despite the One China Policy and giving the island region more and more arms. While doing this, it is forcing more and more countries to accept a greater American military presence. This recently included the Philippines, where the US gained access to a number of bases, as well as Papua New Guinea, where a defence cooperation agreement was recently signed. At the same time, the US constantly sails warships through the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait, citing so-called “freedom of navigation” from a law which it does not even ratify. China’s retaliatory actions are then branded “aggressive” and threatening the peace of the region.
If this constitutes normal behaviour and a sovereign right of the US, why can China and Russia not sail patrols up to Alaskan waters? Why is one behaviour described as “freedom of navigation” but the other is labelled “highly provocative”? The reality is that because both countries are concerned about the US on their doorsteps, they have little interest in ever waging war as far afield in Alaska. The same cannot be said about US actions on their doorsteps, whereby the threat of war is very, very real and is being cranked up even higher by Washington. The US deems it has rights which other countries do not, which leads to the double standards voiced in the media regarding these seemingly equal actions.
China-Russia military cooperation is a product of the US antagonising them both, rather than so-called “provocative behaviour.” In the geographic sphere of Northeast Asia, the two countries have shared strategic interests which concern checking the expansion of US military power in Japan and the Korean Peninsula. This extends to the Northern Pacific. Neither country has any specific ambitions regarding Alaska. Neither China nor Russia is attempting to foster an independence or separatist movement there, unlike what the US is doing with Taiwan, and then groom it into a military partner hostile to Washington. Therein lies the difference between the two sets of military behaviour. China and Russia may cooperate for common strategic objectives, but they are not exerting aggression in the process. On the other hand, the US’ military presence and patrols are designed to upend a region and turn countries against other, provoke strife, and of course advance its economic goals. The irony is that media discourse presents this as entirely normal and justified, but then depicts Russia-China cooperation as a potential threat to Alaska.
US Whipping Up Tension Around Abkhazia, South Ossetia – Russian Ambassador
Sputnik – 08.08.2023
WASHINGTON – The United States is whipping up tension around Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and is not working on an agreement between Tbilisi, Sukhum and Tskhinval on the non-use of force, Russian Ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov said in a statement.
“If the Biden Administration is truly committed to ensuring peace in the region, then it must drop the accusations and threats of sanctions against Russia. As well as not try to disrupt the establishing of ties between our country and Georgia. It is important to focus on practical activities within the framework of the International Geneva Discussions on Security and Stability in the South Caucasus. First of all, work towards concluding a legally binding agreement of Tbilisi with Sukhum and Tskhinval on the non-use of force. It is not time to whip up tension, which is what the United States is doing now,” Antonov said.
He said the United States was deliberately turning the situation upside down, trying to put the blame on Russia, whereas the entire responsibility for the 2008 events lies with former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili.
“It was on his criminal order that a full-scale war was unleashed against the people of South Ossetia,” Antonov said.
“It is high time Washington admitted that this inhumane decision was also the result of a misguided policy conducted by the United States. After all, it was the West who brought to power, and then zealously supported the odious regime of Saakashvili. And still is continuing to lobby for the interests of this figure, as recently confirmed by the US Ministry of Justice,” he said.
Moscow on August 26, 2008, after Georgia’s armed aggression against Tskhinval, recognized the sovereignty of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The leaders of Russia have repeatedly stated that the recognition of the independence of the two former Georgian autonomies reflects the existing realities and is not subject to revision. However, Tbilisi refuses to recognize the independence of the republics.
Professor John Mearsheimer on the Ukraine War
Why didn’t the West negotiate an Austrian-style neutrality deal with Russia?
By JOHN LEAKE | COURAGEOUS DISCOURSE | AUGUST 6, 2023
The Canadian writer and journalist, Aaron Maté, just published what strikes me as the most intelligent and illuminating conversation about the war in Ukraine I’ve heard thus far.
I have studied European history for forty years and lived in Austria for a total of 15. For the last 18 months I have tried in vain to answer the question: Why didn’t the United States at least try to negotiate with Russia for an Austrian-style neutrality deal for Ukraine?
Consider that if a neutrality deal was struck and the Russians subsequently violated it, THAT would be clear grounds for war. Instead, the United States government has simply and and steadfastly dismissed Russia’s view of the matter—a view that Russia has plainly and repeatedly stated since at least 2008.
Note that the arrogant and dismissive attitude of the U.S. government towards Russia since 2008 was in spite of the fact that Cold War eminences such as George Kennan urged the United States government to abandon its harebrained NATO expansion plan in 1997. As Kennan put it in a February 5, 1997 New York Times essay titled “A Fateful Error:”
Why, with all the hopeful possibilities engendered by the end of the Cold War, should East-West relations become centered on the question of who would be allied with whom and, by implication, against whom in some fanciful, totally unforeseeable and most improbable future military conflict?
[B]luntly stated… expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era. Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking …
Several of Kennan’s fellow Cold Warriors, including Robert McNamara and Paul Nitze, agreed wholeheartedly with him, as is evidenced by their June 26, 1997 letter to President Bill Clinton.
Back to the central question of this essay: for those unfamiliar with the 1955 State Treaty and Austrian Neutrality:
The treaty forbade unification with Germany or restoration of the Habsburgs and provided safeguards for Austria’s Croat and Slovene minorities. Austrian neutrality and a ban on foreign military bases in Austria were later incorporated into the Austrian constitution by the Law of October 26, 1955. The 40,000 Soviet troops in Austria were withdrawn by late September. The small number of Western troops that remained were withdrawn by late October.
Austrian neutrality has been honored ever since and has served the Austrian people very well. The Austrian capital, Vienna, is routinely ranked as having the highest quality of life on earth. To be sure, there is a handful of incredibly stupid and venal people in Austria who claim they wish to abandon Austrian neutrality, but they merit so little attention that I almost didn’t write this sentence.
So, why didn’t the United States government negotiate with Russia for an Austrian-style neutrality for Ukraine? Professor Mearsheimer suspects that only sheer stupidity can explain it. Aaron Maté suspects cynicism.
I suspect it’s a combination of stupidity, ignorance, cynicism, greed, bloody-mindedness, narcissism, sadism, contempt, misanthropy, and recklessness—in a word, depravity. Holders of high political office who prefer to send hundreds of thousands of young men to their deaths without at least trying diplomacy are simply terrible people in every respect.
COVID QUESTIONERS DEEMED ‘DOMESTIC TERRORISTS’
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | August 3, 2023
A trip down memory lane chronicling how Homeland Security labeled us all ‘domestic terrorists’ for trying to warn people about the harms of the COVID shots, masking kids, warnings and attacks meant to achieve COVID compliance. Will the same op be run during a climate emergency?
Helping Palestinians in need is not ‘terrorism’; they are the victims of Israeli terrorism
By Ibrahim Hewitt | MEMO | August 6, 2023
I know none of the details of the arrest of Palestinian Amin Abu Rashid and his daughter Israa in Holland recently. I do know, however, that the track record of European governments in levelling allegations of “funding terrorism” against Palestinian-European organisations over the past twenty years or so has been abysmal. In almost every case, when taken to court the authorities have lost the legal argument.
Will this happen again with Abu Rashid and Israa? Time will tell, but what is interesting is that it introduces to the world another no doubt well-funded “Israeli activist group”, Ad Kan.
It is well known, of course, that all allegations of “terrorism” and “funding Hamas” arise from “intelligence” shared by Israel and its propaganda groups in Israel and abroad. When the charity of which I was chair of trustees for almost 25 years, Interpal, was declared to be a “specially designated global terrorist entity” by the US Treasury in 2003, our name was simply one of a number of organisations and individuals on a list supplied by the Israeli foreign ministry for George W Bush to rubber stamp. The then US president announced to the world 20 years ago this month that our assets in the US were being frozen. I only found out from the BBC website. Interpal has never had any assets in the US, so Bush was simply involved in gesture politics at Israel’s instigation. When the British charity regulator asked the US treasury to provide the evidence for the “terrorist” designation of Interpal, none was forthcoming aside from half a dozen press cuttings.
Post-designation, $120,000 donated to Interpal was taken by a major US bank because all transactions in dollars have to pass through New York. The bank grabbed the $120,000 and still has it.
So when I read that, “Abu Rashid leads the Israa Foundation… which is part of a network known as the Union of [sic] Good.” and that, “The US Department of the Treasury labelled the Union of Good [as] a terrorist group in 2008,” any credibility that these Israeli “investigations” might have had disintegrated. We know how these things work, and credible evidence has little or no role to play.
A number of things have to be borne in mind with such “news”, the first of which is that just because the US Treasury puts an organisation or individual on a “terrorist list”, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the group or person in question is actually a “terrorist”. It simply means that Israel is trying yet again — it’s never really stopped — to prevent any humanitarian aid from getting through to the Palestinians living under its brutal military occupation and siege in the Gaza Strip.
After a number of years trying to have Interpal removed from the same list, our New York lawyer was told by Treasury officials “off the record” that our designation was a “political decision” and State Department intervention would be needed to remove the charity from the list. It wasn’t due to any proven criminal activity; if it was, we would surely have been closed down once the British authorities were presented with the evidence, neither of which happened. Furthermore, a senior Metropolitan Police officer said: “The absence of any police involvement is hugely significant.” I once asked a very senior British Army officer who was showing me around a major military base in the south of England if he was aware of the allegations against Interpal and, by implication, myself as its chairman. “Of course,” he replied, “Interpal; terrorist entity; we know it’s all a load of rubbish.”
When Wikileaks released a transcript of a conversation between US and UK officials about Interpal, the phrase “absent a smoking gun” was mentioned in the discussion about closing Interpal down. In other words, the Americans had no evidence. And the British security authorities, we know, were clear that Israeli “intelligence” claims would not stand up in open court.
What’s more, let us not forget that Abu Rashid and his family are Palestinians who are prevented by Israel from exercising their legitimate right of return to their homeland. Israeli “intelligence” — now there’s a thought — is, therefore, hardly likely to be objective. Israel under Benjamin Netanyahu has been trying for years to get the definition of a “Palestinian refugee” changed so that if the apartheid state allows a few thousand to return it will be seen as having fulfilled its duty. Allowing the 750,000 Palestinian refugees ethnically cleansed in 1948 or their descendants to return to their homes remains a condition of Israel’s membership of the UN that has never been fulfilled. Netanyahu has even been putting pressure on successive US presidents to close down the UN agency set up specifically to help “Palestine refugees”, UNRWA. No UNRWA, no refugees, is his warped Zionist logic.
The article in The National Interest covering Abu Rashid’s arrest is straight from the Israeli propaganda playbook — to use a term from the article — in that it is taken as read that allegations of terrorism are true, without any due legal process, without any evidence being presented in court, and without anyone being found guilty. It does mention the Holy Land Foundation in the US, whose senior officials are in prison and are likely to be for many more years, but it is silent on the fact that the “trial has been criticised by some NGOs, including Human Rights Watch” and was described as a “grave miscarriage of justice” which “capitalised on post-9/11 Islamophobic hysteria” in order to get a conviction. Indeed, “Civil rights attorney Emily Ratner wrote that the use of anonymous and hearsay evidence by the prosecutors was ‘constitutionally questionable’ at best.”
There is also the simple fact to consider that Hamas is a national resistance movement, and resistance against a military occupation is legitimate under international law. That is undeniable, and yet the level of propaganda put out by Israel and its Zionist allies in the West, including media outlets, is such that this is ignored, deliberately. Demonise the victims of Israel’s state terrorism — and the state was founded on terrorism against the British and the Palestinians, remember — and it is an easy next step to demonise those who seek to support the victims with humanitarian aid.
Zionist pressure and threats led to Interpal’s bank accounts being closed down, making it impossible for the charity to operate. Nevertheless, when it was distributing a relatively meagre average of £5 million per annum to Palestinians in desperate need and local community groups trying to fill gaps in healthcare and education provision caused by decades of Israel’s brutal military occupation, it did so with total impartiality. There was never any question of the charity asking individuals or organisations if they were Hamas supporters or Fatah supporters, or supporters of any other Palestinian faction; to do so would have broken Britain’s charity laws, which insist, rightly, that aid must be given solely on the basis of need, and nothing else.
I must confess that I have never Googled to see how much one surface to air missile, for example, might cost; or one AK47 assault rifle. To do so would provide the sort of “evidence” of evil intent that the Zionists and their lackeys in the West would jump on with glee. However, I guess that £5m a year is hardly going to fill anyone’s arsenal, especially when every Interpal penny has been accounted for on charitable expenditure in any case.
The argument of terrorist funding is, therefore, unsustainable, and always has been as far as Interpal is concerned. Whether it will be the same for Amin Abu Rashid and his daughter Israa will no doubt come out as their case proceeds through the courts, if it actually gets that far. On past experience, though, I wouldn’t trust the “evidence” presented against them one iota, especially if it comes from Israeli sources. Israel has too much invested in trying to block all humanitarian aid from getting to the Palestinians, and thus making life as miserable as possible for them in the hope that they will give up and leave their homeland.
In Zionist terminology this is called “silent transfer”. It is an evil concept with an evil objective, which is hardly surprising given the racist nature of Zionism and the state it underpins. Helping Palestinians in desperate need is not “terrorism”; they are the victims of Israel’s state terrorism.
US Aid to Afghanistan ‘Was Plundered in Washington’
By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 06.08.2023
The Taliban was hardly behind corrupt deals related to US military aid to Afghanistan, Moscow-based political analyst Alexander Knyazev told Sputnik.
US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) John Sopko has warned of “unanticipated consequences” from possible corruption pertaining to America’s hefty spending on Ukraine.
Speaking hours after Senate Democrats blocked an effort to install greater oversight over the billions of dollars of US military aid to Ukraine, Sopko recalled that Washington has sent more money to Kiev in one year than it spent in Afghanistan in 12 years.
SIGAR said that he was “not opposed to spending that” and he just wanted “to make sure it’s done correctly and there’s oversight.” Sopko especially warned about the risk of fueling graft, stressing that in Afghanistan, “corruption was the existential threat.” According to him, “it wasn’t the Taliban. It was corruption that did us in.”
As far as corruption in Afghanistan is concerned, one can already refer to this evil as a thing of the past, Russian political scientist Alexander Knyazev said.
“As for Afghanistan, I understand that we should now mention this kind of corruption in the past tense. First and foremost, there are few facts about the spread of Western weapons outside Afghanistan. Secondly, even external observers disloyal to the Taliban movement underscore a decrease in the level of corruption in Afghanistan after the Taliban came to power there,” Knyazev pointed out.
He added that over the past twenty years, “all Western aid to Afghanistan has been plundered, which importantly was not the work of Afghans.” One way or another, the analyst went on to say, “this period for Afghanistan is over.”
He also said that “the lion’s share of American aid to Afghanistan did not reach the country at all, [because] it was immediately plundered in Washington.”
“Probably, if someone ever calculates the US’ aid to Ukraine that was stealthily stolen, the sum will likely exceed what was pinched from America’s Afghan aid that came between 2001 and 2021,” Knyazev argued.
With the US spending a whopping $2.26 trillion on Afghanistan-related issues, such as the national army and security, within the above-mentioned period, this huge sum finally didn’t help America prevent the Taliban from seizing power in the South Asian country in August 2021.
This resulted in the collapse of the Washington-backed Afghan civilian government and mass evacuations, something that came amid the chaotic withdrawal of the US-led coalition troops from Afghanistan, which wrapped on August 30, 2021.
Iran responds to US military moves with more firepower
RT | August 6, 2023
Iran has beefed up the weaponry of its naval forces, arming them with such tools as additional drones and precision missiles with ranges up to 1,000 kilometers (620 miles), amid rising tensions with the US over shipping traffic through the world oil market’s most crucial bottleneck.
The Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy officially took possession of the new gear at a ceremony on Saturday, state-run media outlets reported. The systems include reconnaissance and combat drones, as well as electronic warfare equipment, truck-mounted missile launchers, and hundreds of cruise and ballistic missiles.
The announcement came after reports earlier this week that US military officials had drawn up unprecedented plans to place armed troops on commercial trips in the Strait of Hormuz. Just last month, the Pentagon announced deployments of additional fighter jets and naval assets to the Persian Gulf region in response to “alarming events,” such as Iranian seizures of commercial vessels.
Brigadier General Abolfazi Shekarchi, a spokesman for the Iranian military, denounced Washington’s proposed deployment of troops on private ships. “What do the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman and the Indian Ocean have to do with America?” he told Iran’s Tasnim news agency. “What is your business here?”
About 20% of the world’s oil supplies, or one-third of all seaborne crude shipments, go through the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow passage that connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. Tehran typically accuses the operators of detained ships of shipping violations, such as oil smuggling. Some of the vessels have only been released after other countries free detained Iranian tankers.
The new missiles give the IRGC Navy better accuracy and longer range than it previously had available, commander Alireza Tangsiri said. “The cruise missiles can attack several targets simultaneously, and the commands can be altered after takeoff,” he added.
US-Iran tensions have risen since Washington pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal in 2018. Efforts to revive the agreement, known officially as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), have failed, despite the change in US leadership when Joe Biden succeeded Donald Trump as president in January 2021.
FCC Defies Court Mandate, Delays Review of Cellphone Radiation Guidelines
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | August 2, 2023
Despite the Children Health Defense’s (CHD) “historic win” against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) nearly two years ago, the FCC has yet to comply with the court mandate to explain how its radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines adequately protect humans from harm.
The agency last week published its regulatory agenda for the next six months. The agenda made no mention of the Aug. 13, 2021, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit court decision.
Commenting on the omission, W. Scott McCollough — CHD’s chief litigator for the organization’s electromagnetic radiation (EMR) cases and the lead attorney for its 2021 victory — told The Defender, “The Federal Communications Commission has just formally admitted that it intends to continue disobeying the D.C. Circuit’s August 2021 order requiring it to reassess its RF exposure guidelines.”
“This wanton and irresponsible defiance of the court’s order is deplorable,” McCollough said. “Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people are getting sick from RF radiation exposure from devices the FCC is knowingly putting in commerce.”
This is taking place “even though all the most current science tells us the [FCC] guidelines are woefully inadequate to protect sensitive adults and defenseless children, and all the increasing non-natural radiation is contributing to species decline,” McCollough said. “We will not stand for this, and neither should the public.”
CHD sued the FCC in 2019 after the agency determined there was “no appropriate basis” for updating or amending its RF radiation exposure guidelines, which the agency initially set in 1996.
The FCC sought to justify its 2019 decision by saying, “We take to heart the findings of the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), an expert agency regarding the health impacts of consumer products, that ‘[t]he weight of scientific evidence has not linked cell phones with any health problems.’”
However, the D.C. Circuit panel majority — after reviewing 11,000 pages of evidence refuting the FCC’s position — told the FCC it must do a better job of explaining how its 1996 guidelines regarding wireless-based technologies adequately protected public health.
The panel remanded the case back to the FCC, meaning the agency was required to reopen its investigation of its RF radiation exposure guidelines.
The panel majority said the agency must also:
“(ii) address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure to RF radiation, the ubiquity of wireless devices, and other technological developments that have occurred since the Commission last updated its guidelines, and (iii) address the impacts of RF radiation on the environment.”
The FCC has since refused to take action, despite an April 2023 petition from CHD urging them to “quit stalling” and comply with the court-ordered mandate.
According to McCollough, “The FCC intends to keep stalling until it is too late to do anything because any reductions to the exposure limits would require a massive recall and overhaul of the entire wireless infrastructure they want to get deployed now.”
“They and the wireless industry are obviously planning to make the court remand meaningless through this fait accompli maneuver,” he added.
FCC report ‘a joke’
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Congress requires agencies such as the FCC to produce a public report twice a year that outlines the agency’s anticipated or ongoing regulatory undertakings.
McCollough called the FCC’s July 27 public report submitted to comply with this law “a joke.”
“This report lists 75 ongoing regulatory ‘actions,’” McCollough said. “For all but one, the ‘Next Action’’ is stated to be ‘undetermined.’ In other words, for the listed actions the FCC tells us it does not know what action, if any, it plans to take next or when it will do so.”
He added:
“This is clearly not true; the commission certainly has plans for the what and when but it prefers to keep only insiders in the know.
“The FCC would much prefer to do its dirty work in a dark back room so only its industry cohorts and masters know what the true ‘agenda’ is.”
McCollough said the remanded docket — meaning the case number for the court-ordered investigation into the science on RF radiation — is not on the list “and there is no other ‘action’ that would suit the FCC’s court-ordered duties.”
Miriam Eckenfels-Garcia — who directs CHD’s EMR program — said:
“We are very disappointed to see that the FCC continues to fail to comply with the court order and continues to ignore the ever-growing scientific evidence of human and environmental harm from RF radiation levels well below the current FCC exposure guidelines.”
According to Eckenfels-Garcia, CHD’s EMR team has identified several available legal options given the FCC’s continued refusal to obey the 2021 court mandate and will be initiating action on them soon.
“The agency’s lack of prioritizing the protection of humans and the environment makes clear how deeply captured the agency is,” Eckenfels-Garcia added.
The Defender reached out to the FCC to ask when the public might expect the agency to comply with the 2021 mandate, but the agency did not respond by our publication deadline.
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication. She has taught at various academic institutions in the United States and is fluent in Spanish.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
August 6: Humanity for Peace International Demonstration
August 6 from 1 – 4 pm EDT Humanity for Peace (HumanityforPeace.net) will be holding a demonstration on the 78th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima — along with the subsequent bombing of Nagasaki probably the most heinous crimes committed in human history.
Location: Dag Hammarskjöld Plaza, E 47th St, New York, NY 10017
Current list of speakers include:
Gerald Celente – Founder/Director of the Trends Research Institute and Publisher of the weekly Trends Journal magazine.
Mike ter Matt – Candidate for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination.
Scott Ritter – Former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer.
Garland Nixon – Veteran progressive radio and talk show host.
Diane Sare – Independent candidate for U.S. Senate in New York 2024.
Muhammad Salim Akhtar – National Director of the American Muslim Alliance and the American Muslim Task Force on Civil Rights and Elections.
Jose Vega – Sare for Senate staffer and LaRouche activist/interventionist since 2014.
Ahmadou Diallo – President and founder of the Guinean American League of Friends for Freedom.
Rev. Dr. Terri L. Strong – Chairwoman of the Action and Global Concerns Committee for the National Church Women United Organization.
Aaron Day – Former Chairman of the Free State Project; author of the book The Final Countdown: Crypto, Gold, Silver and the People’s Last Stand Against Tyranny by Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).
Jude Elie – leader of the Haitian diaspora in the United States; President of the Haitian Salesians of Don Bosco Past Pupils Worldwide.
Malcolm Burn – Grammy Award-winning record producer; host of the weekly “The Long Way Around” radio program heard on Radio Kingston, WKNY in Kingston, NY.
Demands are as follows:
1) The immediate ending of all funding and weapons to Ukraine.
2) Convene immediate unconditional peace talks.
3) The Dissolution of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
4) A new international security architecture must be created to end the division of the world into blocs, eliminating geopolitics. This new architecture must take into account the security concerns of every sovereign nation, large or small.
The demonstration will be livestreamed by the Schiller Institute at this link and by Humanity for Peace at this link.
Contact us at contact@humanityforpeace.net, follow us on X @4peacehumanity.
Below is the Mission Statement of the demonstration:
The danger of nuclear war has escalated to a point that no thoughtful person on the planet can ignore it any longer. Yet, in this atmosphere, there are still some who think there should be more weapons, more sanctions, and who think that a nuclear war can be won against Russia. It is very clear that those who have provoked the war, and continue to escalate it, do not care about the lives of the people of Ukraine or any other nation on the planet for that matter. This is NOT acceptable to those of us who care about the well-being of ALL of humanity — those who do not wish to see the human race wiped off the face of the earth.
We, therefore, call on the citizens of the world to come together and raise our voices against this madness. Humanity For Peace is building a unified coalition, above ideologies, to stop this unfolding escalation towards nuclear war. We refuse to let humanity perish at the hands of insanity.
August 6 will be the 78th anniversary of the unnecessary and genocidal nuclear bombing of Hiroshima by the United States, which was followed days later by the same crime against Nagasaki. Humanity For Peace is proud to announce that on this occasion, August 6, 2023, an international rally will be held to remind the world that nuclear war should never be fought and can never be won. Humanity is better than that, and we must reject the destiny of inevitable war as a morally repugnant and horribly cynical view.
The main rally will be held at the United Nations in New York City, NY, from 1-4pm, which will be live streamed over the internet. In solidarity with this, sister rallies will be held in other cities around the world. Please get in contact with us if you are interested in organizing another sister rally.
There are currently over 20 organizations sponsoring the event. If your organization would also like to sponsor the event, please contact us. More information, including the current speakers list, can be found at HumanityForPeace.net.
As President Kennedy said in his famous address to American University in 1963, war is not inevitable — but only if we work instead to create peace. The leadership in the United States and NATO is currently not working towards this goal, but rather are further escalating and inflaming the situation in Ukraine. For this reason, an international chorus of voices must be raised against this policy, and sound the call for peace!
Join us August 6 — we must make this sentiment the dominant voice in the world!
Humanity for Peace – Requiem Concert:
Sunday, August 6, 2023, 6:00 pm – 8:00 PM
Location: The Unitarian Church of All Souls at 1157 Lexington Avenue at East 80th Street, New York, NY
The concert will be free and open to the public.
Ex-Pakistani PM Imran Khan jailed for three years
RT | August 5, 2023
Former Pakistani prime minister Imran Khan was issued with a three-year jail sentence by an Islamabad court on Saturday after he was found guilty on corruption charges. The verdict means that Khan, who claims the prosecution was politically motivated, will not be able to contest elections later this year.
In a pre-recorded statement released on X (formerly Twitter), Khan told his supporters: “I have only one appeal, don’t sit at home silently.”
Judge Humayun Dilawar declared in court that Khan, 70, had “deliberately submitted fake details” after he was accused of illegally profiting from the sale of gifts he received while serving as Pakistan’s head of state between 2018 and 2022. After issuing the three-year custodial term, the judge also ordered Khan to be banned from politics for a period of five years.
Following the verdict, Khan, who was not in court, was arrested at his home in Lahore and taken into police custody. The claims against the former prime minister are a case of “political victimization,” according to his lawyer Intezar Hussain Panjutha.
“Khan was not given an opportunity to defend himself and say his side of the story,” he said after the verdict. “We wanted to provide witnesses in his favor but he was not allowed this opportunity. Khan was not given a fair trial.”
Khan’s barrister, Gohar Khan, added in comments to The Dawn newspaper that the court’s verdict had been a “murder of justice.”
However, opponents of the former politician appeared to celebrate the court’s judgment outside the building, with some chanting: “Imran Khan is a thief.”
More than 150 cases have been brought against Khan, the former sports star turned populist political figure, since he was ousted from office last April following a no-confidence vote. He has denied all wrongdoing.
Barring a successful appeal, Khan’s conviction means he will be prohibited from standing in Pakistan’s general elections, which are expected to take place in October or November. Khan, who had unsuccessfully called for early elections to take place, has previously stated his belief that Pakistan’s military authorities have attempted to obstruct his Tehreek-e-Insaf party from regaining political power.
It’s the second time in recent months that Khan has been arrested. Around 100 paramilitary troops were involved in his detention last May in connection with one of the numerous cases against him. Khan has alleged that Pakistan’s military is responsible for attempts to subdue his political influence. He has also claimed that the United States has conspired with Pakistan’s government to prevent him from returning to political power.
