By Paul Craig Roberts | Institute for Political Economy | November 16, 2022
Last Monday I received an email from NewsGuard, “an independent organization that rates and reviews news outlets based on nine apolitical journalistic criteria.”
The analyst asked me to comment on two statements in my columns in which I am accused of “advancing false and unsupported claims.”
One false and and unsuopported claim is “a March 2022 article titled ‘Ukraine Hosted Illegal US Biowarfare Laboratories,’ repeated Russian and Chinese propaganda about the presence of U.S.-run bioweapons labs in Ukraine, which has been repeatedly debunked by fact-checking organizations and refuted by U.S. government officials.”
The alleged “fact checker’s” claim that I made a false and unsupported claim is incorrect for two reasons. One is the fact that a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency produced official US government documents that state that the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, a component of the U.S. Department of Defense, funded anthrax laboratory activities in a Ukrainian biolab in 2018. The US government’s records also show over $11 million in funding for the Ukraine biolabs program in 2019.
Apparently, it never occurred to the dumbshit “fact checker” that relying on assurances from a proven liar such as the US government is no way to check a fact. How, “fact checker,” does the government refute its own admission? Notice also that the “fact checker” thinks that a statement by the Russian government is “unsupported,” but a statement by the US government is considered “supported.” How does this obvious bias serve to verify any fact?
The second reason the “fact checker” is incorrect indicates that the “fact checker” is incapable of understanding that to report what the Russian government claims to have discovered in Ukraine is not misinformation or propaganda. It is correct information reporting Russian claims. What we see here is a “fact checker” who thinks or has been trained to see any report, whether or not endorsed by the reporter, of an item in the “impermissible to be mentioned” category as a “false and unsupported claim.” In other words, all is false except official narratives.
My other “false and unsupported claim” is that 100,000 vote spikes are indications of fraud, a conclusion endorsed by numerous experts. The “fact checker” alleges that vote spikes “are commonplace and due to the release of large batches of results all at once from solidly Democratic or Republican districts, or from mailed ballots.” What the “fact checker” does not account for is the extreme unlikeliness of a vote dump of 100,000 or more ballots that is all for one candidate, or how votes were mailed in such a way that all Democrat votes arrived in the same delivery. Perhaps it is statistically possible for 100,000 votes to arrive in an unbroken stream all for the same person, but the probability of such an event is far too low to account for the large number of times it throws a close election to a Democrat. Are there that many voting precincts in which not a single Republican voter lives? Republican vote spikes are rare and seem to happen when the algorithm of the voting machines has created an unbelievable margin of Democrat victory and has to be narrowed.
In my opinion, “fact checkers” are unintelligent people devoid of integrity who are hired to support official narratives by stamping out truth and dissenting opinion. Who checks the “fact checkers?” There is no reason to trust a “fact checker.” Anyone can set up a “fact check” site to protect any material or ideological interest from examination. Note that “fact checkers” appeared only after the official narratives became so blatantly false that they had to be protected from examination. Never before did we have an industry of censors employed to protect official narratives. “Fact checkers” are the true enemies of truth.
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | November 10, 2022
The conversation is exploding across Europe as politicians and media raise the alarm about record excess mortality rates in 2022. Why are so many non-Covid related deaths happening now?
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | November 10, 2022
Obstetrician, Dr. James Thorp, and Postpartum Nurse, Michelle Gershman, speak out about unprecedented elevation of reproductive and pregnancy complications that have been reported that directly coincide with the Covid-19 vaccine rollout.
The Cradle | November 15, 2022
In the past few days, social media has been flooded with unsubstantiated reports alleging that the Islamic Republic of Iran sentenced 15,000 protesters to death in the wake of street protests and violent riots sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini.
The misleading allegations largely stem from a 6 November report by the UK-based and Saudi-funded Iran International news outlet regarding a letter signed by a majority of Iranian lawmakers.
In this letter, 227 out 290 lawmakers urged the judiciary to consider severe punishments for those involved in the riots.
“We, the representatives of this nation, ask all state officials, including the Judiciary, to treat those, who waged war [against the Islamic Republic] and attacked people’s life and property like [ISIS terrorists], in a way that would serve as a good lesson in the shortest possible time,” they said.
Within just a few days, western outlets like Newsweek chose to misconstrue this story, outright turning it into fake news by alleging the Iranian parliament “voted overwhelmingly in favor of the death penalty for protesters.”
Many western public figures – including celebrities like Peter Frampton, Sophie Turner, Viola Davis, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau – poured fuel on the fire, shamelessly spreading the latest piece of fake news against Iran.
In reality, no such vote has taken place in Tehran, as signing a letter does not constitute passing a law. Moreover, the Iranian parliament does not issue sentences, as the judiciary is laid out as a separate branch of government in the Iranian Constitution.
Chapter 11 of the constitution further lays out the judiciary’s role as an independent power.
Further muddying the waters, the figure of 15,000 protesters detained by Iranian authorities originates from the Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA).
US-based HRANA is the media arm of the Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRAI), a group that receives funding from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – a CIA soft power front that has for decades funded regime-change efforts across the globe.
Officially, Iran has so far sentenced one protester to death on charges of “disturbing public peace and order, assembly and conspiracy to commit a crime against national security and corruption on earth,” state news agency IRNA reported on 14 November.
The person reportedly set a government center on fire in Tehran province.
Five others were given between five to 10 years in prison under charges of “assembly and collusion to commit crimes against national security and disruption of public order and peace.”
Late last month, Iran’s Judiciary announced that 1,000 people would be tried in public in Tehran for their participation in the riots.
Iranian authorities have blamed foreign powers for inciting street violence in a heavy-handed attempt at forcing the revolutionary government out of power. Even former US officials have admitted that separatist groups in western Iran are being trained and armed in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region (IKR) for this very purpose.
Is that what the ‘wag the dog’ US relationship with Israel is all about?
BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • NOVEMBER 15, 2022
Jonathan Greenblatt, the aggressive head of the Jewish advocacy group the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) recently attacked some comments on the Israel relationship made by former President Donald Trump, who prefaced his remarks by accurately observing that “No President has done more for Israel than I have.” Greenblatt nevertheless complained in a tweet that “We don’t need the former president, who curries favor with extremists and antisemites, to lecture us about the US-Israel relationship. It is not about a quid pro quo; it rests on shared values and security interests. This ‘Jewsplaining’ is insulting and disgusting.”
Greenblatt’s perpetual whine is also “insulting and disgusting” but he possesses little in the way of introspection or restraint. He and his predecessors in the Jewish lobby have historically been largely successful in selling a load of self-serving nonsense about why the United States has become a client state that has its Middle Eastern foreign policy run out of Tel Aviv by a racist regime. US political and national security interests in the region have been subordinated to those of Israel. Washington provides political cover for anything Israel chooses to do and, the ultimate absurdity, the American taxpayer gifts a relatively wealthy Israel with $3 billion in “aid” per year plus other trade and co-production benefits.
To justify it all, phrases like “the only democracy in the Middle East” and “Israel has a right to defend itself” roll off the lips of a host of bought-and-paid-for congress critters like the chorus in a Greek tragedy every time the Israelis see fit to kill a few more Palestinians, Syrians or Iranians. Even killing American citizens like Rachel Corrie, 34 members of the crew of the USS Liberty and Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh does not draw any censure from Washington. Beyond that, Israel has recently convinced the US government to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism, which incorporates criticism of the Jewish state as ipso facto the mark of an anti-Semite. And going still further, twenty-six state governments have chosen to penalize their citizens who, in seeking benefits or a job at local level, refuse to sign or swear to a statement that they will not support any boycotts of Israel.
It is all about the dual loyalty that many Jews have as relates to Israel. Indeed, one might argue that folks like Greenblatt have something amounting to singular loyalty, and it is at least questionable whether any of that applies to the good old U S of A. Recently Greenblatt and his host of perpetual complainers have been riding hard the alleged surge in anti-Semitism, as defined by them to justify everything they and their Israeli brethren do. They know they can get away with saying and doing almost anything when it comes to Israel, to include the shamelessly hyped alleged sad plight of perpetual Jewish victims worldwide, even in the United States where they enjoy unparalleled and grossly disproportionate privilege, power, status and wealth. Jewish power driven by Jewish money dominates much political interaction while also driving the accompanying media narrative. And the Jewish/Israeli viewpoint defines what are acceptable viewpoints within academia while also shaping the product that comes out of the entertainment industry, as well as the decision making in many business and financial services sectors.
Israel is about to put together its most extreme right-wing government ever, headed for the third time by Benjamin Netanyahu and including probable cabinet level ministers who have been described as “terrorists,” “racists,” and even “fascists.” The pressure on the Palestinians will no doubt intensify with the objective of first fully establishing control on the ground before ethnically cleansing the Arabs to produce an overwhelmingly dominant Jewish state. Settlements will expand and new ones will be planted while armed settlers destroy the livelihoods of the remaining Palestinians, compelling them to flee. And there will also be pressure from Netanyahu to force the United States to take the offensive against Iran, up to and including a military first strike to destroy its fictional nuclear weapons program. President Joe Biden has already committed the United States to do something like that, promising that Iran will not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.
Articles in the Jewish media in particular but also in national publications like the New York Times and Washington Post suggest that many liberal Jews are concerned over the right-wing political shift in Israel, which might be described as being in the grip of “religious nationalism.” Diaspora Jews understand that it will become harder to defend the actions of the Jewish State and to sell the current “tie-that-binds” to both an American and international audience.
The perception that Israel, which in 2018 declared itself to be legally the nation state of the Jews with “exclusive right of self-determination,” is already an apartheid state that casually commits what many would describe as war crimes is growing and will almost certainly impact on the international acceptance of the Israelis. But in the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia and France in particular, such concerns might be considered overwrought as Jewish hard power and money have effectively bought into and even dominate some aspects of their respective political and economic systems. A clear majority of British Members of Parliament are members of various “Friends of Israel” associations and in the US both parties are heavily dependent on Jewish/Israeli donors for campaign funding and also to ensure a friendly media. Most congressmen have learned the lesson that criticizing Israel is a red line that must not be crossed if one wants to remain in office, so it is most likely that the US love affair with Israel will continue no matter what Netanyahu and company do.
One might reasonably consider two things when it comes to the lopsided Israel-US relationship. First, how accurate is the Greenblatt boast that it rests on “shared values and security interests?” And second, to what extent are ADL, not to mention groups like the American Jewish Committee (AJC) and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), actually acting as directed agents of the Israeli government and therefore subject to the terms of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) of 1938 which would open up their books to scrutiny and also require some transparency vis-à-vis their contacts with the Israeli Embassy and the country’s Foreign Ministry and intelligence and security agencies?
First of all, Greenblatt’s claim of shared values is completely a fraud unless one considers corrupt elections to protect the likes of Hunter Biden and Netanyahu, who has been accused of corruption in Israel which the election result will enable him to avoid. Israel is no democracy unless one considers that disenfranchising many of the potential voters in the area that you control is somehow “democratic.” The United States is meanwhile becoming more like Israel. It is turning into a managed democracy where the party in control uses that power to attack and delegitimize the opposition. This occurred in 2016 with Trump vs. Hillary and has been taking place since the 2020 election through Democratic Party apparatchik attempts to link the GOP to the post-electoral January claimed insurrection. Of course, Trump himself has unfortunately hurried this process along through his ill-advised attempts to focus his support among Republicans based on how enthusiastically they support his insinuations, which is at least tactically a bad move.
Security interests? I was in the CIA overseas at a post where we would receive much processed Israeli intelligence. Believe me, it nearly all related to making Muslims look bad. Any “threat” information that Israel is able to collect legitimately the United States NSA and other intelligence organizations are able to do as well or better. The United States could drop Israel as an intelligence partner tomorrow and it would not make any difference vis-a-vis US national security. Greenblatt is as usual blowing smoke to enhance the value of the bilateral relationship, such as it is. In reality it is a rip-off all to the advantage of Israel.
Finally, there is the issue of the Israel/Jewish lobby serving as an active agent for the Jewish State of Israel, which clearly it is and does do. After last week’s election, AIPAC boasted that a pac that it had set up had raised $17 million to defeat candidates critical of Israel, while also supporting those politicians who were friends, 95% of whom were elected. To pretend that the Lobby exists to provide some kind of perspective or balance in foreign policy is a case of who is kidding whom on the issue. As one of my agents in Turkey used to describe it, “It is as the hand fitting into the glove.” The Justice Department should move to investigate and, if necessary, indict all Jewish organizations that have sustained contact with the Israeli government as foreign agents, no exception. Yes, I know, it will never happen, particularly with Attorney General Merrick Garland nee Garfinkel in charge as he is too busy investigating Russia.
So here we go again. A new government alignment will soon be in place in Washington but nothing changes. Israel’s friends will be firmly in control until someone in power has the guts to go after all the Jewish organizations that are part of the so-called Israeli lobby. Make them register, find out where their money comes from and check out their close and continuing relationships with the Israeli government. And by the way, forget all about that “shared values” and “security interests” nonsense, it’s all a sham. I would like to invite Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden to travel with their families to the Israeli army occupied West Bank and live as Palestinians for a few weeks. They would get a good taste of Israeli “values.” And as for “security interests,” it’s all about Israeli perceptions, isn’t it? Genuine American interests in the Middle East region have long been ground down under the heel of Jewish power in the United States and people like Jonathan Greenblatt will continue to use their bully pulpit to make sure that critics of the process are effectively silenced.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
Press TV – November 15, 2022
Permanent Representative of Syria to the United Nations, Bassam Sabbagh, says Israel must join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and eliminate its stockpile of nuclear weapons in order for a nuclear-weapon-free zone to be established in the Middle East.
Speaking at the Third Session of the Conference on the Establishment of a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons and other Weapons of Mass Destruction in New York, Sabbagh lambasted Western countries, particularly the United States, for their generous support of the Israeli regime.
He argued that the approach has emboldened the regime to possess and develop more such munitions and to refuse to subject its nuclear facilities to international supervision, which have posed serious threats to regional peace and security.
He also complained that the tenth Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons failed to introduce practical steps that would guarantee the effective implementation of the 1995 Middle East Resolution, which serves as a fundamental pillar in supporting the non-proliferation regime on the regional level.
The senior Syrian diplomat said Damascus supported the UN General Assembly resolution as a path parallel to the implementation of the Middle East Resolution, and not an alternative to it.
“Ever since the adoption of the resolution, Syria has cooperated with regional states participating in the conference to achieve their common goals. The progress made by the conference indicates the sincere and serious efforts made by participating countries, and reveals, on the other hand, the disregard of Israel and the United States for the international will. This practice goes hand in hand with their obstructionism to create a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction,” Sabbagh noted.
“Syria considers establishment of a Middle East free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction as an important measure on the path of disarmament, empowerment of the non-proliferation regime, and a serious contribution to the protection of regional and international peace and security,” he said.
“Syria is a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and tabled a draft resolution in 2002 and 2003 aimed at establishment of a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction. The United States, however, aborted that initiative to protect Israel,” the Syrian diplomat said.
Israel, which pursues a policy of deliberate ambiguity about its nuclear weapons, is estimated to possess 200 to 400 nuclear warheads in its arsenal, making it the sole possessor of non-conventional arms in West Asia.
The illegitimate entity has, however, refused to either allow inspections of its military nuclear facilities or sign the NPT.
What has emboldened Tel Aviv to accelerate its nuclear activities, according to observers, is the support from the United States and Europe, the two parties most critical of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
Samizdat – 14.11.2022
WASHINGTON – The US midterms revealed that politicians have failed to fix a deeply flawed election process which lags behind many other countries, Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity Director Daniel McAdams told Sputnik.
The US held its midterm elections on Tuesday, November 8, but the results of the Arizona and Nevada senate races were not known until after several days of ballot counting, largely due to complex mail-in voting rules and technical malfunctions.
US media did not project Democratic incumbent Mark Kelly the winner of the Arizona race until late Friday while Nevada’s Democratic incumbent Catherine Cortez Masto was not declared the winner until Saturday. Cortez Masto’s victory allowed the Democratic Party to maintain control of the Senate. Meanwhile, although the Republicans are projected to seize control of the US House, nearly 20 races remain uncalled.
OSCE election observers assessed the US midterm elections as “competitive and professionally managed,” although the group said international monitors were restricted from some areas.
“How is it that in the US, which is supposed to be so technologically sophisticated, that counting the ballots takes days?” McAdams said. “Democrats have perfected harvesting [mass collection of] Democrat ballots while Republicans, under a worthless leadership, have done nothing in two years to correct the deeply flawed voting system in many states.”
The original excuse for mail-in ballots, Adams added, was that people should not be forced to go to vote in person because of Covid, but now the pandemic is over and voting issues continue.
McAdams said in the 1990s he spent several years as an international elections monitor in the former USSR and Eastern Bloc. Western observers would see any failure to produce results on election day as extremely suspicious and worthy of declaring fraud.
However, McAdams said in Belarus in 2006 they watched as paper ballots were openly counted in front of all election observers and observers from political parties.
“Everyone agreed on suspect ballots and the results were delivered to the regional authorities within a half hour,” McAdams said.
McAdams said that Stalin once quipped: “Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.”
That is what can now be seen in the United States, McAdams added.
“Politics in the United States is broken,” McAdams said. “We are ruled by an oligarchy.”
Although Republicans are projected to seize control of the House, they failed to meet expectations as many predicted a “red wave,” would sweep the country. Even former President Donald Trump said he found the results “disappointing,” after seeing mixed results from dozens of candidates he endorsed.
RT | November 15, 2022
Western media reports that the US government has tried to nudge Kiev towards engaging diplomatically with Moscow are mere rumors, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday. Even if true, the Ukrainian leadership appears to be ignoring the suggestions, he added.
“We’ve read reports citing anonymous sources,” Lavrov said, when asked about “signals” that Western nations are supposedly sending to Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, urging him to negotiate with Moscow.
“There are rumors that the American administration has been telling Zelensky to be more pliable,” he added. “And there was clarification that this was not aimed at getting him to act constructively, but to counter objections from the parts of the West that doubt the need to supply additional arms to him.”
Last month, the Washington Post described communications between Washington and Kiev that supposedly went along the lines described by Lavrov. A proposed change of stance by Ukraine would tackle “Ukraine fatigue” among EU nations, according to the newspaper’s sources.
The Russian foreign minister highlighted the uncompromising public stance which Zelensky reiterated in a recorded speech, played at the G20 summit in Bali, Indonesia. Lavrov, who is heading the Russian delegation to the event, said “the only conclusion” he reached after hearing the 20-minute message was that the Ukrainian president “so far takes no Western suggestions” about talks.
The Russian diplomat went on to describe Zelensky’s speech as “militant”, “Russophobic” and “aggressive”. Zelensky addressed the gathering as the “G19” in an apparent snub to Russia’s membership in the club of leading world economies, and demanded a number of concessions from Moscow before he would agree to negotiate. Lavrov described the demands as “unacceptable.”
By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 14, 2022
Spot the problem here: First, the EU has lost Russia as a partner, yet the EU insists to maintain trade with China. Two, China, though, must bend to our EU ‘rules’ on how it configures its economy. Thirdly, China too, must accept to be ‘castigated’ by the likes of Olaf Scholtz and Charles Michel for ‘not having put an end to Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine’. Fourth, we, the EU, anyway do not intend to depend on you. And fifth, clean up your human rights abuses!
Wow! Well, the initial reaction might be a spell back at the Academy on the art of diplomatic discourse, as being one idea. Nonetheless, the sheer number of non-sequiturs to this stance is startling. Firstly, the rest of the world is not greatly interested in EU leaders’ woke thought-code (the Chinese simply cancelled EU Chief Michel’s proposed speech to a gathering in Beijing). Europe has lost Russia; It will likely lose China. And probably, it will find itself excluded from the colossus, free-trade area unfolding in Eurasia – as the blocs differentiate into separate trading spheres.
Where does this leave that bruited EU ambition to be a global player? … Perhaps the EU’s thought-code culture might be the problem to its ambitions.
You (the EU) have not thought this through: You are now a dependent appendage of the U.S. economy – a prop to maintaining America’s exalted spot in the global system – at a time when its predatory economic model of money-printing at zero interest has been holed by an iceberg (known as accelerating inflation). American industry needs a captive market in a world that is fast seceding into two separate spheres. You have ‘elected’ to fill that role.
Containing China is America’s explicit goal. And that means blocking the European continent from moving closer to Asia to form the world’s biggest free trade zone. Washington had to stop that (i.e. sabotage Nord Stream) in order to preserve Europe as a captive market, and what remains of dollar ‘privilege’.
As an American dependency, Europe is perceived as having conceded not only economic, but political agency too. Simply put, the EU has lost its cheap-energy business model with the ‘I stand with Ukraine’ woke thought and speech codes, and now finds that it is impotent politically. Why would ‘others’ deal with the courtiers, when they can go directly to the ‘Command’ in Washington?
Furthermore, the culture block the EU adopts prevents it from bringing the Ukraine war to a political end. Rather, what it does is bake-in escalation.
Here is the problem: You bought into liberal America’s notion of a coercive process of induced government dysfunctionality – that is to stay, the state of mass psychosis that any weaponised dysfunctional state of society can produce. And it’s been a success (on its own narrow terms).
The bigger message is that ‘induced dysfunctionality’ marching in lockstep, and using culture block tactics to suppress any dissenting opinions, can and does produce a society that can be ruled over (made compliant through unpleasantness and applied pain) – without having to govern (i.e. make things actually work).
And induced compliance has proved its use for implementing all sorts of other ideological schemes that the public would otherwise never accept.
Weaponised dysfunctionality was trialled during the recent pandemic. The public was persuaded to accept systemic degradation of the economy. Western leaders regularly have expressed a pleasant surprise at the degree of public compliance achieved during the lockdowns. Of course, it was only made possible by ‘woke mobs’ on social platforms impugning the motives of anyone questioning ‘the Science’, the scale of emergency, or the long-lasting toxic effects on the real economy. Cultural roadblock was imposed.
The same process is evident today: The EU is in (another) ‘emergency’ because it made a strategic misjudgement over its Russia sanctions. The political class thought the effects of EU sanctions on Russia offered a ‘slam dunk’ outcome: Russia would fold in weeks, and all would return to how it was before. Energy would flow freely to the EU again; things would go back to ‘normal’.
Instead, Europe faces economic melt-down from astronomic fuel costs.
Yet, some leaders in Europe – zealots for the Green Transition – quietly embrace this sanctions ‘failure’ and the resulting economic mayhem caused by spiking energy prices – weaponising it as a strategic asset to accelerate Green Transition. European authorities actively encourage this pathological approach, believing that the pain incurred will force compliance on their societies to embrace de-industrialisation, accept carbon footprint monitoring and the Green Transition; and too, to bear prospective monumental Transition costs.
Yellen explicitly celebrated the financial pain (dysfunctionality) precisely as serving to accelerate ‘The Transition’ (like it or not) – even were that to push the citizen out of employment, and to the cusp of society.
Here then, is the problem: Some in the EU political class may hope for an intensification of the war on Russia, seeing in it all sorts of benefits – in extending centralised control over member-states and facilitating new means of printing money (mutualised debt instruments) ostensibly to fund Ukraine.
Sure – but there are fears for societal breakdown in Europe too. The problem? The EU cannot bring Ukraine to a deal.
The point is that the EU has framed the Ukraine conflict in absolute victim-vein terms, in line with woke cultural tropes: A revanchist Russian leader, dreaming of former empire, illegally, and without provocation has invaded and seized territory from its neighbour, whilst committing heinous war crimes in so doing. The perpetrator must face a humiliating defeat – otherwise, if he gets an inch, he will take a mile. And the global order will be ‘toast’.
The ‘online mob’ has been steered, through ‘influencers’, to insist that U.S. Realist Camp’s support for a negotiated settlement is tantamount to taking Russia’s side: rushing to denounce all voices – from Bill Burns’ (then U.S. ambassador and now CIA chief) celebrated 2008 telegram ‘Niet means Niet’ warning that any NATO takeover of Ukraine means war; to Prof Mearsheimer, Kissinger, or Elon Musk – as dangerous ‘Putin apologists’. Musk now faces a security probe.
The logic is stark: This shrinks the Overton window to only those advocating the total defeat of Russia and an end to Putin’s ‘regime’ – even if it risks WWIII. It is the ‘slash and burn’ stance, favoured by the U.S. and allied EU neo-cons.
So, we have Washington saying it has no interests, per se, in Ukraine – beyond supporting Kiev in recovering its territory. The Biden Administration says it is guided by the wishes of the Ukrainian people.
Do you still not see the problem to which this logic takes us? It is a Potemkin Village position. All façade and nothing ‘behind’ or around it. The conflict in Ukraine is not itself ‘a unique thing’, but a ‘thing’ of two leaves. At one level, Ukraine is a ‘state’ among surrounding states; and at another level, it is itself an actor. A ‘player in events’ – an owner indeed, of a certain history.
What the Potemkin ‘approach’ does is to artificially free-up some sort of abstract ‘clearing in the wood’ amidst the density of trees, in which the visible thing – Ukraine – is to be positioned, and set before the western spectator public, stripped naked of surrounding context; stripped of history and of the fact of itself being a conscient player in an extended drama.
The Realists have been culture blocked. Their motives impugned.
The title to this play – ‘America has no fundamental interests in Ukraine, and is but an innocent, called up upon the stage by an act of brutal villainy’ – is an obvious fraud. As is the corollary that the EU must therefore support the ‘war’ as Ukraine is victim.
Plainly said, the U.S. is pursuing a bi-partisan geopolitical strategy to quash China’s meteoric rise and preserve America’s dominant role in the world order. Can there be any doubt about that? No, none. For two decades U.S. foreign policy has centred around its ‘pivot to Asia’.
Washington’s real interests in Ukraine thus must be understood not as a war of values – as the EU has it – but rather as a cruise-missile launched at China, not Russia. In gist, the ‘high road’ to collapsing Beijing is perceived in DC to pass through a weakened Moscow. The NATO response to Ukraine is intended as ‘a letter’ to China, concerning Taiwan. And the comprehensive sanctions on Russia are a missive to the rest of the world to not trifle with America’s absolute primacy.
But if this latter context is absolutely ‘off the table’, through culture block and the only agenda item being the sham Potemkin Village construct, then what is there to talk about?
The matter then must inexorably be settled by events – not talk. Who has the potential for escalatory dominance? Russia has many – and various – options. Ukraine has only one. Pushing more troops at the contact line and suffering heavy losses. What does the West have: WWIII?
Can you see now why your peace efforts have come to naught? Actually, President Xi explained the situation courteously, yet pointedly, to Chancellor Scholtz during the latter’s day trip to Beijing: Having lectured Scholz on the evanescent quality of Trust in any political relationship (a quality that Xi said should be nurtured), he emphasised the need for Europe to avoid an ideological approach to relations.
Rough Translation: You (Scholz) have destroyed your relationship with Russia; you have pursued a bloc-orientated ideological policy, and this has been to your disadvantage. Do not think you can do the same with China.
(Or with the rest of the world, Xi might well have added).
By Felix Livshitz | RT | November 15, 2022
New research published by France’s Ecole de Guerre Economique has revealed some extraordinary findings about who and what the French intelligence services fear most when it comes to threats to the country’s economy.
The findings are based on extensive research and interviews with French intelligence experts, including representatives of spy agencies, and so reflect the positions and thinking of specialists in the under-researched field of economic warfare. Their collective view is very clear – 97 percent consider the US to be the foreign power that “most threatens” the “economic interests” of Paris.
Who is your true enemy?
The research was conducted to answer the question, “what will become of France in an increasingly exacerbated context of economic war?” This query has become increasingly urgent for the EU as Western sanctions on Moscow’s exports, in particular energy, have had a catastrophic effect on European countries, but have not had the predicted effect Russia. Nor have they hurt the US, the country pushing most aggressively for these measures.
Yet, the question is not being asked in other EU capitals. It is precisely the continent-wide failure, or unwillingness at least, to consider the “negative repercussions on the daily lives” of European citizens that inspired the Ecole de Guerre Economique report.
As the report’s lead author Christian Harbulot explains, ever since the end of World War II, France has “lived in a state of the unspoken,” as have other European countries.
At the conclusion of that conflict, “manifest fear” among French elites of the Communist Party taking power in France “strongly incited a part of the political class to place our security in the hands of the US, in particular by calling for the establishment of permanent military bases in France.”
“It goes without saying that everything has its price. The compensation for this aid from across the Atlantic was to make us enter into a state of global dependence – monetary, financial, technological – with regard to the US,” Harbulot says. And aside from 1958 – 1965 when General Charles de Gaulle attempted to increase the autonomy of Paris from Washington and NATO, French leaders have “fallen into line.”
This acceptance means aside from rare public scandals such as the sale of French assets to US companies, or Australia canceling its purchase of French-made submarines in favor of a controversial deal with the US and UK (AUKUS), there is little recognition – let alone discussion – in the mainstream as to how Washington exerts a significant degree of control over France’s economy, and therefore politics.
As a result, politicians and the public alike struggle to identify “who their enemy” truly is. “In spheres of power” across Europe, Harbulot says, “it is customary to keep this kind of problem silent,” and economic warfare remains an “underground confrontation which precedes, accompanies and then takes over from classic military conflicts.”
This in turn means any debate about “hostility or harmfulness” in Europe’s relations with Washington misses the underlying point that “the US seeks to ensure its supremacy over the world, without displaying itself as a traditional empire.”
The EU might have a trade surplus of 150 billion euros with the US, but the latter would never willingly allow this economic advantage to translate to “strategic autonomy” from it. And this gain is achieved against the constant backdrop of – and more than offset by – “strong geopolitical and military pressure” from the US at all times.
I spy with my Five Eyes
Harbulot believes the “state of the unspoken” to be even more pronounced in Germany, as Berlin “seeks to establish a new form of supremacy within Europe” based on its dependency on the US.
As France “is not in a phase of power building but rather in a search to preserve its power” – a “very different” state of affairs – this should mean the French can more easily recognize and admit to toxic dependency on Washington, and see it as a problem that must be resolved.
It is certainly hard to imagine such an illuminating and honest report being produced by a Berlin-based academic institute, despite the country being the most badly affected by anti-Russian sanctions. Some analysts have spoken of a possible deindustrialization of Germany, as its inability to power energy-intensive economic sectors has destroyed its 30-year-long trade surplus – maybe forever.
But aside from France’s “dependency” on Washington being different to that of Germany, Paris has other reasons for cultivating a “culture of economic combat,” and keeping very close track of the “foreign interests” that are harming the country’s economy and companies.
A US National Security Agency spying order sent to other members of the Five Eyes global spying network – Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the UK – released by WikiLeaks, shows that since at least 2002 Washington has issued its English-speaking allies annual “information need” requests, seeking any and all information they can dig up on the economic activities of French companies, the economic and trade policies of France’s government, and the views of Paris on the yearly G8 and G20 summits.
Whatever is unearthed is shared with key US economic decision-makers and departments, including the Federal Reserve and Treasury, as well as intelligence agencies, such as the CIA. Another classified WikiLeaks release shows that the latter – between November 2011 and July 2012 – employed spies from across the Five Eyes (OREA) to infiltrate and monitor the campaigns of parties and candidates in France’s presidential election.
Washington was particularly worried about a Socialist Party victory, and so sought information on a variety of topics, “to prepare key US policymakers for the post-election French political landscape and the potential impact on US-France relations.” Of particular interest was “the presidential candidates’ views on the French economy, what current economic policies…they see as not working, and what policies… they promote to help boost France’s economic growth prospects[.]”
The CIA was also very interested in the “views and characterization” of the US on the part of presidential candidates, and any efforts by them and the parties they represented to “reach out to leaders of other countries,” including some of the states that form the Five Eyes network itself.
Naturally, those members would be unaware that their friends in Washington, and other Five Eyes capitals, would be spying on them while they spied on France.
It was clearly not for nothing that veteran US grand strategist and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once remarked, “to be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.”
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
By Tony Cartalucci – New Eastern Outlook – 29.11.2017
The United States Air Force’s 59th Medical Wing’s molecular biology branch recently was revealed to have been collecting specifically Russian RNA and synovial (connective) tissue samples, prompting fears in Russia of a possible US directed ethnic-specific bioweapons program. … continue
Aletho News If Americans Knew No Tricks Zone
