Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Tucker Carlson’s allegation that the Biden administration is spying on him should worry everyone in the media

By Micah Curtis | RT | June 29, 2021

The Fox News host alleges the National Security Agency is spying on him and his show. If true, this violation of American freedoms should concern us all. So, how “wrong” does an opinion have to be to attract the NSA’s attention?

I would like to preface this article by saying that what Tucker Carlson claims still needs verification, but if it’s true, it sets a horrifying precedent. On his show last night, the political commentator claimed the Biden administration was spying on him, and a whistleblower had come forward with evidence proving it was going on.

During the broadcast, he alleged the whistleblower had presented him and his team with a communication about a story they were going to run that only someone within that team would have known about, and that they could only have known about via his own SMSs or emails. According to Carlson, there was no other possible source for that information.

He went on to state the following: “The Biden administration is spying on us. We have confirmed that. This morning we filed a FOIA request – a Freedom of Information Act request – asking for all the information the NSA and other agencies have gathered about this show. We did it mostly as a formality. We’ve also contacted the press office of both the NSA and the FBI. We don’t expect to hear much back. That’s the way that usually goes. Only Congress can force transparency on the intelligence agencies, and they should do that immediately. Spying on opposition journalists is incompatible with democracy. If they are doing it to us – and, again, they are definitely doing it to us, they are almost certainly doing it to others. This is scary, and we need to stop it right away.”

If what Carlson says is correct, this should make every single person who works in the United States media scared out of their minds. The idea of either political party, when in power, spying on the goings-on of news programs and media outlets is anathema to press freedom. What could conceivably be the reason behind such intelligence-gathering? The Biden administration keeps saying it wants to go after “white supremacists,” so are they going to try to lump Tucker Carlson in with that group? Will they try to do this to other conservative media personalities? Lord knows, the critical race theory they seem so fond of would certainly allow them to consider such people to be hateful bigots stained with the original sin of whiteness.

This is the problem with the United States government having the ability to spy on its own people. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) once made the point that the measures in place since the Bush era have not caught a single domestic terrorist. It makes you wonder if they’re now going to be used simply to hammer down on law-abiding citizens who just don’t have the ‘right’ opinion. When you’ve found a way to make conservative commentators such as Tucker Carlson or Ben Shapiro seem as extreme as neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, everyone can become a target.

It doesn’t matter who’s in charge. Whether you’re on the right or the left, it should absolutely horrify you that a sitting administration is spying on the press. In fact, I think members of the press need to answer a question for themselves now: would you rather have a president who has a negative view of your work and dismisses you as a jerk, or someone who spies on you for expressing the ‘wrong’ opinions? The former is an annoyance. The latter is an Orwellian nightmare.

June 29, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

Who Stole the People’s Money?

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • JUNE 29, 2021

Too many American politicians at all levels of government have come to believe that your money is their money. Federal, state and local tax rates are set annually and often arbitrarily based on the issues that elected officials and tax managers consider to be important. Input from the public is basically unwelcome except at election time but, even then, the breakdown of dollars and cents that will be coming out of one’s pocket is rarely under discussion.

It is past time to consider what the pie in the sky being proposed by the Democrats, since they are currently in power, will actually cost the American taxpayer. Bear in mind, that Democratic Party proposals that are now being floated are directed at certain constituencies that the party is seeking to weld into an unbeatable coalition that will defy all Republican attempts to recover either Congress or the Presidency. Similar activity is taking place at the state and local level. There is no consideration of the fact that government, at least theoretically, is intended to benefit all of the citizenry, not a select portion thereof that will henceforth be required to deliver the vote loyally. Politicians who manipulate the system with that in mind should be sent to jail, but alas, in the US system no one is ever punished, even if they start a war under false premises as did former President George W Bush and his apparatchiks.

Under the Democrats, the entire process whereby the spoils derived from being in power are distributed is being driven by social engineering, i.e. race and gender. One of President Joe Biden’s first moves upon taking office was to propose special payments and other incentives for black farmers, who, his administration argued, had been disadvantaged because they had been systematically denied loans for many years. It should seem outrageous that federal tax dollars were to be used to support only one racial group, but not a single Democrat appeared to be disturbed. Fortunately, a federal court ruled favorably in a case brought by a white farmer claiming that racially directed government assistance is unconstitutional as it violates the “equal protection under the law” principle. The Democrats are, however, continuing to push for their program of tying blacks firmly into their coalition, even if it means creating a system that is manifestly and even transparently unfair.

One of the most bizarre news stories of the past several weeks has to be the revelation that the Defense Department will be paying for transgender surgery for those biological males in the ranks that want to become women and vice versa. One can honestly accept that there are transgender individuals in the so-called armed services and they deserve respect for what they perhaps quite genuinely are, but this goes well beyond that. In the usual squeaky-voiced pander much favored by the Biden Administration, Veteran Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough announced during “Pride Week” that the new guidelines would create a “safe and caring” environment for all veterans, while also citing the “dark history” of discrimination against gay and transgender military personnel. “Safe and caring?” Our military? Hope they never have to fight a real war.

The White House also got into the promotion, releasing a statement that “President Biden believes that gender identity should not be a bar to military service and that America’s strength is found in its diversity. This question of how to enable all qualified Americans to serve in the military is easily answered by recognizing our core values. America is stronger, at home and around the world, when it is inclusive. The military is no exception. Allowing all qualified Americans to serve their country in uniform is better for the military and better for the country because an inclusive force is a more effective force. Simply put, it’s the right thing to do and is in our national interest.”

The statement is, like many Executive Order signing statements coming out of the Biden White House, complete nonsense. The historically most effective fighting forces have had high levels of cohesion, not diversity and it is difficult to imagine what the national interest would be in having an army that can’t fight. Transgenders were, in fact, first allowed to serve, predictably, under President Barack Obama before being blocked by President Donald Trump. They are now again a cherished part of the military community under Honest Joe Biden and both active duty transgenders and veterans will soon be able to receive gender-transition surgeries, mostly through the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care coverage. It is estimated that there are now 15,000 transgender individuals on active duty while possibly as many as 135,000 more are veterans. The numbers seem impossibly large, but gender transition surgeries will now be covered by the string of military hospitals and the veteran healthcare network.

Bear in mind that transgender transformation surgery is not urgent care or even health maintenance: it is an optional procedure intended to turn G.I. Joe into G.I. Jane or the reverse. Also bear in mind that the US taxpayer submits to the burden of the enormous and growing so-called Defense budget in the belief that it exists to protect the United States, not to change genders of American citizens who might be enlisting in the military precisely to obtain that benefit. According to a recent estimate the cost of the procedure can range from $15,000 up to more than $50,000 depending on how extensive the surgery is. Multiply that by 150,000 to get some idea of what the pander to gender obsessed fanatics in the Democratic Party and among its limousine liberals base will cost the average taxpayer, who will get nothing in return from it.

The Pentagon, of course, is fully engaged in the war on extremism and is also actively promoting the racist Critical Race Theory while rooting out extremists, which means white people, who are evil supremacists both genetically and by definition. CRT is, by the way, a remarkable Marxist-based invention that blames most bad things in America on white people. And it is being forced on the public by the usual zealots with the claim that it will make everyone the beneficiary of “equity.” On the contrary it makes Americans less well educated and dependent on government for handouts.

Even counties and school districts that have had no racial issues are being forced to hire Diversity & Equity Managers and high-priced consultants to explain the new reality. As a manifestation of CRT thinking, Fred Reed observes how increasingly in American schools “Math curricula are being dumbed down because blacks do poorly at math, English grammar instruction eliminated because blacks can’t or won’t learn it, entrance exams for the elite and demanding high schools eliminated because blacks don’t pass them, SATs dropped because blacks score poorly on them, promotion exams in police departments eliminated because blacks don’t pass them. Entrance requirements at medical school are lowered because not enough blacks pass them, AP courses in high school eliminated because too few blacks get into them… White parents are forced to see their children subjected to what they regard as obscene, semiliterate, violent, stupid, a culture dominated by what seems to them, (and would to any First World country) the opposite of cultivation.”

And, to be sure, the military is leading the way to join the new world order. Seeking to promote both racial and gender diversity in its ranks, the Navy has created a task force designed to “combat discrimination,” which inter alia requires sailors to take a pledge to “acknowledge all lived experiences and intersectional identities,” whatever that is supposed to mean. The Army is also doing its bit. In a recent appearance before Congress Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Mark Milley “defended the teaching of critical race theory at West Point and, referencing the January 6 Capitol riot, said, ‘it is important that we train and we understand … and I want to understand white rage. And I’m white.’”

Milley, who seems unaware of the “black rage” that has been burning, looting and shooting over the past year, particularly stressed the impact of the January 6th Capitol Building “insurrection,” saying “What is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America? What caused that?”

It is important to seek to understand what Milley has bought into: putting the military squarely on the side of the administration in the cultural wars currently being endured while making clear who the enemy is: white America. Some cynics observed that Milley and the military-industrial-complex behind him, who collectively speaking cannot any longer fight and win a war, are chiefly concerned with the hundreds of billions of dollars that they enjoy annually. To secure that it is necessary to play nice with whatever the White House, and the woke media, are peddling. Again, it all comes down to money that is stolen from taxpayers in this country. Time for the taxpayers themselves to put an end to the nonsense.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is a veteran of the US Army and a former Central Intelligence Agency Case Officer.

June 29, 2021 Posted by | Corruption | | Leave a comment

US officials warn against all travel to Russia, citing ‘terrorism’ concerns & inability to provide consular support

RT | June 29, 2021

The US State Department has told its citizens not to travel to Russia under any circumstances, with Washington suggesting that Americans could be kidnapped, arrested, tortured and even supposedly jailed on trumped-up charges.

A new travel advisory, issued on Monday by diplomats, gives Russia the same danger categorization as countries including Afghanistan, Uganda and Syria. As well as specifically advising against visits to southern regions like Chechnya and Crimea, US citizens are now being told to avoid the world’s largest country altogether.

The statement cites “terrorism” as one reason for US tourists to steer clear of the nation, despite the fact no serious incidents have been reported in recent years. While a number of other European nations have received similar categorizations over the Covid-19 situation, destinations like France and Germany avoid the highest level of warning, despite enduring more frequent terrorist incidents.

In addition, the US officials caution against travel due to purported “harassment by Russian government security officials” and what it calls “arbitrary enforcement of local law.” The officials claim that “spurious charges” have been leveled against Americans, and that religious workers, as well as government personnel, could be at risk.

Since President Vladimir Putin met with his US counterpart Joe Biden in Geneva earlier this month, a number of prisoner exchanges have been anticipated. Konstantin Yaroshenko, a Russian airplane pilot, is mooted to be at the top of Moscow’s list after he was arrested and taken to the US in 2011, where he was convicted over drug-smuggling allegations.

For the American side, Paul Whelan, a former US Marine and IT consultant arrested in Russia on espionage charges, is said to be a priority for any exchange. He made a personal video appeal to Biden from behind bars in the run up to the summit, and the American president announced that he had raised Whelan’s case with Putin.

Another inmate who Biden discussed with his counterpart was another former Marine, 29-year old Trevor Reed. Reed was arrested in Moscow in 2019 and handed nine years in prison for assaulting a police officer after a night of heavy drinking. Both Whelan and Reed deny the charges against them.

At the same time, Washington’s new travel advisory cites its limited ability to provide support to US citizens from its embassy in Moscow. In April, the diplomatic mission announced it would reduce its staff numbers by around 75% after it was banned from employing locals as part of a decree signed by Putin in response to “unfriendly acts,” rules imposed by Washington on Russia’s diplomats in America.

As a result, the US embassy in Russia will no longer “offer routine notarial services, Consular Reports of Birth Abroad, or renewal passport services for the foreseeable future,” its envoys said. In 2018, the US closed its consulate in St Petersburg and, in December last year, shuttered its offices in both the Ural city of Ekaterinburg and the Far East capital of Vladivostok. The decision, which Washington said came as part of a dispute over diplomatic representation and would save cash, left America with no diplomatic representation in Russia outside of Moscow.

June 29, 2021 Posted by | Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Consent? What’s that? The Massachusetts Department of Public Health is spying on you.

Source: MassPrivateI
By Richard Hugus | June 27, 2021

Without any kind of public notice, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health has gotten together with “Don’t Be Evil” Google to install spyware on smartphones of visitors to and residents of Massachusetts without the knowledge or consent of those visitors or residents. This is being done under cover of the all-purpose totalitarianism called covid 19. The spyware is a contact tracing application called  “Exposure Notifications Settings Feature – MA/ MADepartment of Public Health” available for download (if you’re stupid enough to do it voluntarily) at Google Play.

Let’s recall for a moment that contact tracing is the ability of some hidden authority to find out where you are now, where you’ve been, how long you were there, who you were with, who those people were with, and so on. No doubt it will soon be able to record what you said, if it isn’t already. And this is all because we and our neighbors are willing to carry tracking devices with microphones and cameras into places and conversations we thought were private.

A web site called privacytogo.co has an article about the stealth Mass DPH app, describing how it is installed secretly on your phone without your asking for it, or asking for your permission, and how, once installed, you can’t turn it off or otherwise get rid of it (and if you think you’re turning it off, you’re really not). One commenter named Callie M remarked:

“SPYWARE?! Automatically installed without consent. It has no icon, no way to open this and see what it even does, which is a huge red flag. Per the notifications it runs on Bluetooth which is a major battery drain, and seems to want to track my location. Major privacy violation if you ask me, and suspicious that this would be “necessary” when the surge in MA is over and the state of emergency no longer in effect because most are vaccinated. I think it’s spyware, phishing as the DPH. UNINSTALL”

The Google Play site above is useful for seeing hundreds of negative comments like this, but, like Calle M, some make the mistake of assuming that contact tracing is no longer necessary because so many people have been “vaccinated.” If the mRNA injections were actually a response to a public health crisis, contact tracing would still be a serious violation of our right to privacy. But the injections have nothing to do with our health. They are obviously harmful to our health. Their purpose —  for those of us they do not kill — is to get everyone into a surveillance and control database which will increase the scope of contact tracing many times over. With this database, the authorities will have the power to say who is and is not allowed to engage in normal social life, from shopping to banking to going to entertainment venues or bars. The mRNA injections are simply the foundation for our transhuman future as laid out by Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab and others who think they know what is best for humanity. But, like the “exposure notification” app, we were never consulted about whether we want to merge with machines. After 16 months of cynical social engineering, of fear-stoking and lies, of violations against our personal sovereignty and Constitutional rights, we can be sure that any idea of our consent is held in complete contempt by Google and the bureaucrats in the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.

According to the author of the privacy to go article:

“Not only are Google and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health covering their tracks when installing this unsolicited spyware, they’re tracking whether or not you are the type of person who would disobey contact tracing edicts in the first place! . . . Google is not simply ignoring user consent in their ongoing mass surveillance dragnet. They are actively enabling governments in creating a “biosecurity surveillance” apparatus – whether you want to participate or not.”

Massachusetts Governor and new world order ass-kisser Charlie Baker announced an end to most of his illegal emergency orders effective June 15, but the app was rolled out that same day. Calling the need for “vaccination” of all Massachusetts residents an emergency on May 28, and then sneaking in a spy initiative two weeks later, we see that the Governor wasn’t really ending anything. There has never been any public consultation, consent, or due process in any of the Governor’s orders.

The privacytogo article ends with the only logical advice to people interested in escaping government by technocracy:

“The simplest solution to disable contact tracing is arguably the hardest for most people:

Get rid of your smartphone.”

Why would we willingly carry around a device that is designed to spy on and enslave us?

June 28, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Biden administration to “encourage” private companies to use vaccine passports

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim the Net | June 28, 2021

Civil liberties could be crushed by the private sector as US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg has revealed that the Biden administration is openly nudging private companies towards introducing so-called Covid passports for their employees – seemingly as the closest thing, policy-wise, to having to outright mandate them.

Judging by Buttigieg’s department’s statement for Fox News, the administration would also like to keep itself outside of a move as controversial as making vaccination passports compulsory and government-mandated.

But when he spoke for FOX 4 on Monday, Buttigieg was clear: the federal level position is to “do everything” to encourage privately-owned businesses to enforce Covid passports among their workers.

This is consistent with Buttigieg’s statements earlier in the year, when he spoke along the same lines. At the same time, the federal government would not (likely to avoid getting itself directly mired in a world of political, legal, and constitutional trouble) mandate this kind of verification, that proves people have received the Covid jab. Instead, the policy is clearly that of encouraging and relying on the private sector to do “the dirt work.”

In April, Buttigieg said it was “not the role of the government” to make and impose that decision – but also noted that the tech to do that was “there.” And if the private sector developing it needed any kind of advice or support, the Biden administration was there for them, he said at the time.

This applies not only to employees but also to private companies’ customers – like airline passengers. According to Buttigieg’s statements, the federal government would allow these firms to do whatever they saw fit to “protect passengers and workers” – but also clearly to prop up industries that have suffered greatly from over a year and a half of the (mis)handling of the Covid pandemic.

That’s not to say all US states are playing along. Florida is outright banning both private and public entities from mandating proof of Covid vaccination status.

Also in April, Dr. Anthony Fauci spoke for Politico to say he thought it unlikely that the vaccine passports would be mandated by the government, but at the same time revealed how the mechanisms of enforcing the scheme might eventually achieve much the same result.

“I’m not saying that they should or that they would, but I’m saying you could foresee how an independent entity might say, ‘Well, we can’t be dealing with you unless we know you’re vaccinated,’ but it’s not going to be mandated from the federal government,” Fauci told Politico at the time.

June 28, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Scientific American magazine removes article detailing Israeli crimes against Palestinians

Press TV – June 28, 2021

A US publication has removed an op-ed detailing Israeli crimes against the people of Palestine and calling for solidarity with them.

Scientific American, a popular science magazine in the US, reportedly has done this act under pressure from the Zionist lobby, which is the pro-Israel lobby in the United States.

The magazine published an article earlier this month written by a group of physicians and medical students reporting details of the recent Israeli aggression against the people of Gaza and promising support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, also called the BDS movement which says Israeli and multinational firms complicit in the regime’s crimes must be boycotted.

The BDS movement seeks to raise global awareness about the Tel Aviv regime’s racist policies against Palestinians.

“Those of us who work in health care understand well that health care does not exist in a vacuum,” the physicians and students wrote.

“We increasingly understand how structural forces, systematized and institutionalized oppression, racism, violence, disinvestment, and displacement, as well as policies meant to deny people their basic human rights, lead to adverse health outcomes and mortality,” they added.

“We cannot continue to sit idly by and witness the violent erasure of an entire people by what is, as documented by international human rights organizations, an apartheid state, exacting untold physical and psychological damage to the Palestinian people,” they continued.

The BDS movement was initiated in 2005 by over 170 Palestinian organizations that were pushing for “various forms of boycott against Israel until it meets its obligations under international law.”

Thousands of volunteers worldwide have since then joined the BDS movement, which calls for people and groups across the world to cut economic, cultural and academic ties to Tel Aviv, to help promote the Palestinian cause.

Following the publication of the article, pro-Israel groups wrote letters to the magazine, accusing the magazine of “one-sided political propaganda.”

The publication was forced to remove the article and said that it was revising its internal review process to prevent “a repetition of this error by the magazine.”

Pro-Israeli groups in the United States have been aggressively targeting the people and publications who have exposed Israeli crimes in the wake of the recent Israeli aggression in Gaza.

Last week, under pressure from such groups, a US hospital fired a doctor following a Facebook post in which she condemned Israel’s crimes, and said that Zionists have a “thirst to kill our Palestinian children.”

She posted on Facebook on 21 June where she said Palestinians would “expose the #massacre and #genocide you #zionists are proud of.”

“A state based on atrocity, inhumanity, racism and cannibalism never lasts long,” Wishah continued. “Hey #israel … your end is coming sooner than you think.”

The Tel Aviv regime launched the aggression against the besieged Gaza Strip on May 10, following Palestinian retaliation against violent raids on worshipers at al-Aqsa Mosque and the regime’s plans to force a number of Palestinian families out of their homes at the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem al-Quds.

Apparently caught off guard by the unprecedented barrage of rockets from Gaza, Israel announced a unilateral ceasefire on May 21, which Palestinian resistance movements accepted with Egyptian mediation.

According to Gaza’s Health Ministry, nearly 260 Palestinians were killed in the Israeli offensive, including 66 children, while some 2,000 others were wounded.

June 28, 2021 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iraq PM strongly condemns US raids on PMU forces as ‘flagrant violation’ of country’s sovereignty

Press TV – June 28, 2021

Iraq’s Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhemi has strongly condemned as a “flagrant violation” of the Iraqi sovereignty an overnight airstrike by US warplanes against the positions of the anti-terror Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), also known as Hashd al-Sha’abi, in which several resistance fighters were killed.

“We condemn the US air attack that targeted a site last night on the Iraqi-Syrian border, which represents a blatant and unacceptable violation of Iraqi sovereignty and Iraqi national security,” said a statement from Kadhemi’s office on Monday.

The statement added that the government will “study all legal options” to prevent such action being repeated.

The statement came after the Iraqi cabinet, headed by al-Kadhemi, held an emergency security meeting following the U.S. airstrikes.

In the early hours of the day, US warplanes attacked three positions purportedly belonging to the PMU along the border.

Later, the 14th Brigade of the PMU announced that four of its fighters had been killed when the warplanes hit its headquarters. The brigade is made up of the Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada anti-terror resistance group.

The PMU in general is an Iraqi government-sponsored umbrella organization composed of about 40 factions of volunteer counter-terrorism forces, including mostly Shia Muslims besides Sunni Muslims, Christians, and Kurds. The organization had a significant role in defeating the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group in Iraq.

Iraqi military condemns U.S. airstrikes on PMU’s positions

Separately, Iraq’s military spokesman Yehya Rasool denounced the US airstrike and said it was a “breach of sovereignty.”

“We condemn the US air attack that targeted a site on the Iraqi-Syrian border last night, which represents a blatant and unacceptable violation of Iraqi sovereignty and national security in accordance with all international conventions.”

Rasool further called on all involved parties to exercise restraint and avoid any escalation of tensions.

He said Baghdad would work thoroughly to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.

Foreign Ministry: US attack on PMU violation of Iraq’s sovereignty

Additionally on Monday, Iraq’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement, condemning the deadly strike. It was an “assault and a violation of national sovereignty and a clear departure from international norms and conventions,” the statement read.

“We affirm our adherence to Iraq’s sovereignty and unity and to rely on everything that would enhance that, through sustained coordination and communication with various parties and through diplomatic initiatives and endeavors that ensure the non-repetition of such rejected and condemned hostilities.”

Syria: US attacks prove its presence meant to serve Israel’s goals

Syria, for its part, also condemned in strongest terms the US flagrant aggression in the Syrian-Iraqi border region, describing it as a blatant violation of the sanctity of the Syrian and Iraqi territories.

An official source at Foreign and Expatriates Ministry told SANA that the US aggression, which was ordered by the highest ranks in the US leadership, proves once again “the recklessness of US policies and the need for Washington to withdraw its aggressor forces” from the region.

The Syrian foreign ministry source added that such acts of aggression only escalate the tense situation in the region and prove “what we have repeatedly said in Syria that the US military presence in our region is basically meant to serve the Israeli goals and the separatist forces contrary to the interests of its own people.”

The Syrian source concluded by saying that Damascus, once again, demands the US administration respect the territorial integrity of Syria and Iraq and to immediately stop those attacks on the independence of the two countries.

Al-Nujaba Movement: US will pay for its folly

In a relevant development on Monday, a senior member of Iraq’s al-Nujaba Movement, which is part of the PMU, said in a Twitter post that Washington would pay for its folly in attacking Iraq’s popular forces.

Ali al-Asadi said the Monday US airstrike was a desperate reaction to the latest manifestation of power by the PMU through a huge military parade, which was held to mark the anniversary of the PMU’s formation.

“This [attack] is another reason, which proves that the occupier does not care about stability of this country…. We tell the occupier: you will pay for your despicable measure and will suffer the consequences of your folly,” Asadi said.

Hezbollah: US airstrikes on PMU aimed to weaken anti-terror fight

Lebanon’s Hezbollah resistance movement also reacted to the latest airstrikes by the occupying American forces on the PMU positions in western Iraq and Syria, strongly condemning the US act of aggression.

In a statement on Monday, Hezbollah said the air raid by American warplanes was blatant violation of sovereignty of both Iraq and Syria, which is aimed at weakening these countries’ power to fight terrorism on their soils.

Hezbollah then expressed support for the official condemnation of the US airstrike by Iraqi government and armed forces as well as various popular groups.

Yemen’s Ansarullah: US strikes aimed at supporting Daesh, al-Qaeda

In another development on Monday, the political office of Yemen’s Ansarullah movement issued a statement on the latest US airstrikes on Iraq’s PMU, expressing the movements condolences for the families of the PMU fighters killed in the US strikes.

“The US aggression is in line with its policy to provide aerial support for its criminal proxies, that is, the Daesh [Takfiri terrorist group] and al-Qaeda” in Syria and Iraq.

The Yemeni movement added that it strongly supported the powerful positions taken by Iraq’s officials and popular forces in opposition to the projects planned and carried out by the Great Satan, the United States, and Israel.

Yemen’s Ansarullah movement noted that the US act of aggression will only strengthen the determination of the Iraqi people and proves that the path chosen by the Iraqi nation is correct and should continue until complete expulsion of all occupying forces from the country.

US congresswoman: This failed policy will not make us any safer

Meanwhile, Ilhan Omar, a US congresswoman who represents Minnesota’s 5th congressional district, took to Twitter on Monday, condemning US act of aggression against Iraqi popular forces.

“This constant cycle of violence and retribution is a failed policy and will not make any of us safer,” she said.

Omar added that the US government cannot take any hostile action in other countries without the Congress’ approval, saying, “Congress has authority over War Powers and should be consulted before any escalation.”

Anti-American sentiments have been running high in Iraq since the US assassinated Iran’s anti-terror commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, and the deputy head of Iraq’s PMU, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, in Baghdad on January 3, 2020.

Just two days later, Iraqi lawmakers unanimously passed a bill mandating the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Iraq.

Iraqi resistance groups have pledged to take up arms against US forces if Washington fails to comply with the parliamentary order.

June 28, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

American Medicine, American Malfeasance

By Dr. Gary Null and Richard Gale | Global Research | June 26, 2021

An issue that is rarely discussed or given serious attention is the over-specialization in healthcare. Modern medicine’s approach to identify and treat illnesses and tackle the reduction of infections has in many instances ceased to be multidisciplinary. Medicine has also become increasingly compartmentalized and confined to a rigid materialistic belief system that has now established its own set of standards, criteria and values that are often contrary to gold-standard scientific protocols. The consequence is that its narrow single-mindedness has insulated modern medicine from objective criticism and preserved its internal flaws, errors and fabrications, which have contributed to the unnecessary injury and death of countless patients.

US healthcare spending reached $3.8 trillion in 2019. Due to the Covid pandemic, expenditures for 2020 will be astronomically higher. One might expect that with the world’s most expensive healthcare system, the US would equally have the best evidence-based practices to keep its citizens healthy. By now we should be proficiently expert at preventing and reversing disease, while making minimal errors resulting in injury or death. However, the exact opposite is the case. Instead of minimizing disease-causing factors, American medicine causes more illness through misguided diagnostic testing, overuse of medical and surgical procedures, and over prescribing pharmaceutical drugs. The fundamental reason for this catastrophe is that today’s healthcare establishment, and corporate science in general, over relies on profit-generating motives.

Dr. Peter Gotzsche is arguably recognized as one of the world’s foremost experts in evaluating evidence-based medicine (EBM). As the co-founder of EBM’s preeminent flagship organization – the Cochrane Collaboration — to review and analyze peer-reviewed clinical research, he is intimately knowledgeable about the widespread corruption permeating the pharmaceutical industry and medical journals. In his book Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime, he writes,

“The reason why we take so many drugs is that drug companies do not sell drugs. They sell lies about drugs… The patients do not realize that although their doctors know a lot about diseases, human physiology and psychology, they know very little about the drugs that have been concocted and dressed up by the drug industry.”

After we take a fair and objective look at American medicine during the past five decades, especially at the statistics of iatrogenic fatalities, or deaths caused by prescribed medications and medical error, our healthcare establishment is found to be anything but benign. Despite its many noteworthy discoveries and merits, a substantial amount of recommended medical practice has failed patients. “If the medical system were a bank,” writes Dr. Stephen Persell at Northwestern University’s School of Medicine, “you wouldn’t deposit your money here, because there would be an error every one-in-two to one-in-three times you made a transaction.” Dr. Persell is referring to the rates of preventable medical errors causing patients serious injury and now the third leading cause of death.

There is excellent evidence to support the argument that iatrogenic deaths have passed cancer fatalities and are now challenging heart disease for the number one spot. A 2008 study found as many as half of adverse events reported by patients were not recorded in their hospital charts. As of 2017, investigations continue to find that less than 10% of medical errors are reported. Reported adverse effects vary depending on the specialty and frequently go unnoticed or are improperly evaluated. An additional study found that almost two thirds of cardiologists had refused to report a serious error they had direct personal knowledge of to an authority.

As one example, heart disease is America’s leading cause of fatality, accounting for 665,000 deaths annually. The CDC, which consistently undermines health threats if it means positioning itself in opposition to private commercial interests, estimates that 34 percent of cardiovascular fatalities are premature and preventable. In contrast, the American Heart Association claims 80 percent are preventable. What are the heads of our federal health agencies doing to advocate on the side of prevention? Little to nothing.

There is no realistic and science-based national policy in place to lessen cardiovascular, cancer and diabetic death rates. Since the most viable and effective means to prevent these diseases are natural and within every person’s means, it is not financially lucrative to divert federal funding away from pharmaceutical treatments and surgical procedures. The CDC and FDA are largely dependent upon monetary income received from the drug and medical device industries.

Earlier we reported about the systemic corruption and fraud that has plagued the CDC and FDA for decades. It would be far cheaper to completely empty, dismantle, fumigate and rebuild the agencies anew rather than continue exerting pressure for reforms, which have only perpetuated a killing spree by protecting life-threatening drugs, vaccines and unnecessary medical procedures. Dr. Gotzsche notes, the same is true for private drug companies. Despite the numerous lawsuits drug companies have lost in federal courts, nothing has fundamentally changed in order to deter them from illegal activities to increase profits. In fact, the cost of paying out settlements and settling lawsuits is factored into the expense of doing business.

A decade ago, we teamed up with three board-certified physicians to undertake the task to review the peer-reviewed literature in order to recalculate the statistics from many branches of medicine in order to arrive at a more realistic casualty rate due to medical error. We began with a basic question. Do the current standards of American medical practice and its supporting science prove that the recommended therapies and healthcare protocols – whether drugs, surgery, diagnostic methods, medical devices, etc – are actually effective? And if so, at what cost to the patients’ health and well-being?

Our results and final conclusions were startling and culminated in the release of a widely read and referenced book, Death by Medicine. We made every effort to avoid editorial commentary to our findings. We decided to only report the statistics and facts with our calculations. The fact that our data placed iatrogenic error as the number one cause of death in America was alone sufficient. What was novel in our analysis was that we included preventable deaths, such as certain infections and severe nutrient deficiency, which could have been easily corrected by clinicians and medical personnel if viable prevention programs had been part of our healthcare system. After publication the book was sent to hundreds of journalists, federal officials and non-profit medical organizations. It was completely ignored by the orthodoxy; however, it became increasingly popular among alternative and complementary medical physicians who were already fully aware of the structural dangers to public health within conventional medical care.

Revisiting American medicine’s legacy of iatrogenic deaths is now more crucial than ever because the same behaviors that have contributed to the nation’s leading cause of death are being repeated during the Covid-19 pandemic. The government and federal health officials are in reprehensible denial of inexpensive and highly effective drugs, such as Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, to treat early and middle stage SARS-2 infections. Cases of Covid infections and deaths have been grossly exaggerated. And now we are realizing that the efficacy and safety profiles of the vaccines are orchestrated scams. As a result, the entire institutional edifice to vaccinate the global population is destined to become the greatest scandal of the 21st century.

Unfortunately, nobody can acquire accurate statistics for Covid-19 vaccine associated injuries and deaths from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Careful weekly monitoring of VAERS’ adverse event updates convince us that the entire system is criminally rigged. CDC officials overseeing the database are undoubtedly fudging numbers after ratio of adverse events, including deaths, per number of doses administered are compared to the more robust and accurate EudraVigilance database in the European Union and the less reliable Yellow Card System in the UK.

As of June 17, VAERS was reporting 329,021 injuries and 5,888 deaths due to the Covid vaccines. The database’s most recent update is reporting an additional 26,541 injuries but 1,972 less deaths. How can this sudden disappearance of almost 2,000 deaths be accounted for? The mysterious loss of fatality entries occurred during the same week as a CDC working group of outside medical professionals was reviewing an association between the mRNA vaccines and the rising number of reported cases of cardiac inflammation or myocarditis. The group concluded that there is indeed “a likely association.” The occasion of deleted deaths in VAERS is also on the heels of the Israeli Shamir Medical Center report that Pfizer’s vaccine is linked with occurrences of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, an autoimmune disorder associated with a rare form of blood clotting. However, despite weekly local news stories around the nation about youth as young as 19 years of age dying of vaccine complications shortly after receipt of an mRNA vaccine, the CDC is claiming that all 1,200 persons, between 16-24 years of age, recovered and no deaths were reported. Does this account for the likely scrubbing of entries in VAERS?

But it is much worse. We only need to look at the European Union’s statistics for adverse Covid-19 vaccine events and compare that with VAERS and the CDC’s recent conclusion to realize there is a massive cover-up in our government’s efforts to sanitize the safety record of Covid vaccines. As of this week the EudraVigilance system is reporting over 1.5 million injuries and 15,472 deaths. Within those figures, 28,583 injuries and 1,862 deaths are from cardiac complications such as myocarditis.

Second, the EU and US have administered approximately the same number of Covid vaccine doses, roughly 409 million and 379 million respectively. Therefore we should expect to find a similar dose-to-injury ratio. Again we discover the CDC gaming the nation’s reporting system to lessen the perception of lethal risks. Based upon the EU ratio we can conservatively estimate that a minimum of 14,300 Americans have been killed by the vaccines so far. If we go back a week before the CDC scrubbed entries in VAERS, it would be over 17,000 Covid vaccine deaths.  The actual number of Americans suffering adverse reactions would be 1.4 million.

In other words the EU is reporting 4 times more vaccine injuries and deaths than American health officials.  In both the US and EU, Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine accounts for the majority of these casualties. Unless the Covid-19 vaccines engineer a personal vendetta against people holding EU passports, these numbers don’t add up.

Before the arrival of the Covid vaccines, Merck’s anti-inflammatory drug Vioxx was widely regarded as the single largest pharmaceutical catastrophe in American medical history. The drug should never have been approved and licensed in the first place; and, Merck knew beforehand that the drug would be lethal and concealed that documentation from FDA regulators. Vioxx was on the market for five years before being withdrawn. At the time of the federal class action lawsuit against Merck, FDA epidemiologist Dr. David Graham estimated the drug had killed 60,000 patients due to heart attacks and strokes.  Since the majority of deaths were among elderly patients, a later report by the American Conservative predicted that upwards to half a million patients may have died from the drug over the course of a longer period. Yet during those years Merck was cashing in $2 billion annually from Vioxx sales, earning over double its eventual $4.8 billion fine after being found guilty.

To put this into a broader perspective, the Covid vaccines have only been distributed for six months and have now contributed to a realistic 17,000 deaths or upwards towards 30,000 this year alone. Since the vaccines’ immunity quickly wanes and it seems certain they provide little protection against new SARS-2 strains, health officials are already recommending regular booster shots.  Similar to a prescription medication, those who buy into the vaccine propaganda hype are in principle relying upon these vaccines for life or until such time the virus resides into just a seasonal nuisance. Consequently iatrogenic vaccine injuries and deaths may likely continue at current rates during forthcoming years.  The Covid-19 vaccines are on track to outpace the conservative number of Vioxx deaths over three-fold and even modern medicine’s most deadly drugCerivastatin, manufactured by Bayer in the late 1990s and responsible for over 100,000 deaths during the four-year period it was on the market.  In short time, Covid vaccines will be the deadliest drug to have emerged from Big Pharma.

A study published in the Journal of Patient Safety estimated that 400,000 unnecessary and preventable deaths occur annually in American hospitals alone. At that rate, it is not surprising that the large majority of deaths ruled as SARS-2 infections happened in hospitals. If our federal health officials had been competent, and less compromised by the demands and influence of drug makers, most of these fatalities likely would never have occurred.

It has been estimated that US taxpayers have paid out $39 billion for Covid-19 vaccine development, funding and towards nationalized response measures. Most of this has been horribly wasted after we consider other options on hand to curb the pandemic but were categorically ignored. “In the case of vaccines in general,” the journal Health Affairs observed,

“the government often plays an outsized role, but in the era of Covid-19 the government’s role was even more central than usual. The government essentially removed the bulk of traditional industry risks related to vaccine development: a) scientific failures, b) failures to demonstrate safety and efficacy, c) manufacturing risks, and d) market risks related to low demand.”

While this may shock and disturb a rational person, Health Affairs – a thoroughly orthodox medical publication – applauds the government’s negligent measures as “money well spent.”

For this reason it is crucial to understand the terrible decisions made during the Covid pandemic in the context of modern medicine’s past crimes and preventable failures. In the coming months Anthony Fauci’s reputation will become further tainted. We might predict he will resign as more evidence of incompetence emerges, and, in our opinion, perhaps criminal negligence in his handling of the pandemic and efforts to whitewash the US’s role in supporting gain of function research leading to the genetic engineering of the SARS-2 virus. Fortunately, unlike past scandals when misguided medical decisions were responsible for thousands of unnecessary disabilities and deaths, numerous doctors and scientists worldwide are raising their voices to condemn the lethal policies of the CDC, NIAID, British Health Ministry and the World Health Organization.

So what can we reasonably surmise at this point? At one time most Americans trusted science, medicine and our healthcare system without question or criticism. However, today we observe systemic corruption and gross conflicts of interest across the same federal health agencies that have also contributed to untold medical errors and deaths prior to SARS-2 arrival. They have weaponized pharmaceutical science and a supplicant braying media supports this perversion of medical facts. Now the drug-happy media is attacking the truth-tellers, the physicians, professors and accomplished journalists who are risking their careers and reputations to bring forth the fallacies in the pandemic narrative. This is one battle that the silent majority can find its voice and courage to step forth and support.

Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD direct Progressive Radio Network.

June 28, 2021 Posted by | Book Review, Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Empire Enters the Cocaine Trade

Tales of the American Empire | June 24, 2021

Profiteering is the goal of most foreign military interventions. The illegal narcotics trade is very profitable so it’s not surprising the American military is indirectly involved in this illicit activity. In the late 1970s, the cocaine trade attracted the attention of the private arm of the American CIA and powerful figures in American organized crime utilized American military assets to enter this profitable business.

_____________________________________________

“History of CIA Drug Trafficking”; Joel van der Reijden; DISGCP; Dec 6, 2018; https://isgp-studies.com/cia-heroin-a…

Related Tale: “Protecting the American Opium Trade”; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbMtl…

June 28, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

China and the Supply Chain: A Comment on the June 2021 White House Review

By James K. Galbraith – Institute for New Economic Thinking – June 23, 2021

In January 2013, the Obama White House released a White Paper on “National Strategy for Global Supply Chain Security: Implementation Update.” It was a short document, only 22 pages, almost wholly focused on the security of transport – of ships, air freight, the mails – against terrorism and other threats. What traveled through the supply chain, and from where, does not appear to have been a major concern.

In June 2021, the Biden White House published a “100-day review” entitled “Building Resilient Supply Chains, Revitalizing American Manufacturing and Fostering Broad-based Growth.” It is focused on a very different concept of what the “supply chain” is; the term now encompasses the entire spectrum of upstream production. The Biden review takes these up in four areas: semiconductors, high-capacity batteries, critical minerals, and pharmaceuticals.

One might ask, why these four areas and not others? There is no clear answer, and it may be that choice was mainly bureaucratic. The review was compiled from separate reports by four cabinet departments: Commerce, Energy, Defense, and Health and Human Services. Had the Department of Agriculture been asked, or the Department of Transportation, one might have gotten different choices. Petroleum comes to mind. Or natural rubber – the linchpin of World War II in the Pacific.

If there is an Ariadne’s thread to these four areas, it is the trading and competitive relationship with China. The reports do not focus solely on China and give what is largely a fair-minded and wide-ranging assessment of vulnerabilities in each sector. For the reader not previously immersed in the structures of semiconductor production or the technology of electrical storage, this document, at 250 pages, is a mine of information. But China lurks in each section, sometimes looming large, in other places only in the background.

The global semiconductor industry is here described in fascinating detail. It is a paragon of extreme specialization, relentless technological improvement, economies of scale, and global division of labor. US firms dominate in semiconductor design and integrated production; Japan produces the wafers; Taiwan and (to a much smaller degree) South Korea do high-end fabrication in “contract foundries,” while China handles a substantial share of low-end chips and of “packaging” – a term that covers the placing of chips into circuit boards including, of course, the assembly of smartphones. American-based production is only 12 percent of the world’s capacity, roughly a third of what it was in the 1990s.

To characterize broadly, the semiconductor supply chain is a network of unique nodes, in which a given firm has one upstream supplier for many major components and perhaps just one downstream customer, creating a web of bilateral monopolies operating in extreme interdependence. Thus a breakdown anywhere along the line can disrupt the entire system. This is, by the way, very much the classic problem of Soviet-style industrial structure, designed to maximize efficiency at each node (in the Soviet case, a matter of scale), but fragile as events in the early 1990s showed.

The review calls attention to several specific events that have led to recent and ongoing shortages in semiconductor supply. These include a fire in March at a facility in Japan and the freeze in February in Texas which took a trio of Austin facilities off-line for up to a month. But the most important was not itself a natural event but rather the reaction to one. As Covid-19 took hold, key figures in the industry shifted capacity to household applications. They failed to anticipate how quickly demand for vehicles would recover as the pandemic waned.

The problem is that chip production takes a lot of time; it is characterized to an extreme degree by what economists of the Austrian school call “roundaboutness.” The multiple steps (etching, doping, and so forth) are repeated “hundreds of times”; producing a single chip “can take up to 26 weeks.” So once locked into a program, the industry has the margin of maneuver, roughly, of the Ever Given in the Suez Canal. Meanwhile, the automakers who have designed a hundred or more distinct chips into their new cars must sit and wait. This accounts, no doubt, in part for the surging prices of used vehicles and the current scarcity of rental cars.

What then is the “China threat” to the semiconductor supply chain? The most important one is stated very plainly. China is the world’s largest semiconductor market, both for home use and for incorporation into products sold elsewhere. The single biggest risk from China is not some nefarious disruption of components or materials. It is rather, a possible fall in the final demand. The review is clear and unambiguous on this point:

US semiconductor companies… thus have the potential to be significantly impacted by trade restrictions between the United States and China, with major portions of their revenue at risk of long-term disruption. Based on the Chinese government’s ambitions in regard to the semiconductor industry, these revenue sources may be at risk regardless, but given that their ability to reinvest is immediately dependent on sales to China, their long-term viability is immediately affected by actions that decrease sales. (p. 57.)

The review goes on to note that since much of the industry operates on the two banks of the Taiwan Strait, “Even a minor conflict or embargo could have immediate major disruptions to the United States and long-term implications for US supply chain resilience” (p. 57). In a White House document, at this moment of heated China-bashing, this is a welcome realism.

With large-capacity batteries, the principal supply-chain issue is not so much a science-driven matter of design and engineering as it is access to key materials, most notably nickel, graphite, cobalt, and lithium. With these materials, it appears reserves are not particularly scarce, although in the case of cobalt they are concentrated in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where mining conditions are tactfully described as being “outside of international practice.” The review notes that China’s advantage in materials supply results, mainly, from having invested in finding reserves on its own territory.

But, it turns out, industrial dominance in this area does not rest on the supply side. It lies rather in the development of the industry itself, driven by demand for electrical storage, which is overwhelmingly in the automotive sector. China is the low-cost producer because it is the world’s largest user, consuming 40 percent of global large-capacity battery output. Europe accounts for another 40 percent, and the United States for just 13 percent. Consider this: there are 425,000 electrically-powered buses in the world today. Of these, 300 are in the United States; 421,000 are in China. Perhaps oddly for a report on the supply chain, but not unreasonably under the circumstances, the recommendations in this section are relentless: the United States should work to bolster demand.

In the report on critical materials, prepared by the Pentagon, thirty-eight minerals are listed for which US direct import dependence is above 75 percent. Of these, China is a top supplier in eighteen cases. And why is that? Largely, as the report states, because the growth in China’s own demand for these materials has made it profitable for China to invest in the supply chain, hence to become the high-volume, low-cost producer, to whom the world turns.

The Defense Department is naturally concerned with the possible consequences of conflict, and so with the possibility that access to materials might be lost, especially where there is only one source of supply. This is particularly true in the case of “rare earths” – a grab-bag of exotic minerals – where China had 85 percent of the global market as of 2014 – even though the entire Chinese workforce in the mining of rare earths consists of only 4,000 souls, with an additional 40,000 in smelting. Perhaps understandably, not even the Pentagon has a good answer to this problem, apart from conservation, recycling, stockpiling, and being prepared to divert from routine to essential uses in an emergency. The review laments the decline of mining expertise emerging from US university systems, where educational programs have folded as mines have disappeared. But it is hard to see why students would pursue degrees, or universities provide them, in fields for which jobs no longer exist.

With pharmaceuticals, the problem is not of scarcity but of basic economics. The supply chain moved to India because costs are low as befits the low-price, low-margin, high-volume business of generic drug manufacture. Supply chain resilience would thus be a matter of maintaining a “virtual” stockpile, consisting of manufacturing equipment and precursor chemicals, to be held in reserve in case of emergencies. It is important to note that to be useful, the reserve capacity would have to be kept idle – otherwise it adds no layer of safety in the event of a disruption. The review is realistic about the prospects for this: the scale and complexity of the sector, together with the unpredictability of future biological threats, makes it impractical to maintain large reserves in all areas. In an open global market economy, drugs will be bought from where they are cheapest to produce.

In each area, the Review is critical of Chinese practices, which are said to consist of large-scale, “top-down,” “market-distorting,” public investments, subsidies to Chinese companies, state-sponsored industrial rationalization, and in the case of electric vehicles, large subsidies to consumers to spur demand. Thus we read: “The Chinese Government has focused on capturing discrete strategic and critical material markets as a matter of state policy.” (p. 174). Examples given are that in 2002 China “prohibited foreign investors from establishing rare earth mining enterprises in China” and in 2014 consolidated the business in the hands of a “handful of national champions.” Also, back in 1985, China had established a VAT rebate for rare-earth exports, “which contributed to the erosion and the elimination of US production in the global market.

In this and other instances throughout the Review, the deplorable practices of state planning and national development strategies undertaken by China are, within a few pages, pretty much exactly what the authors recommend for the United States. (The DoD recommendations on critical materials are an exception here, addressing among other things recycling, human rights issues, and environmental concerns, even though these are perhaps somewhat tangential to supply-chain issues per se.) Thus on lithium-ion batteries, we read: “As part of the American Jobs Plan, President Joe Biden has called for transformative investments to spur this demand, including $100 billion in incentives to encourage US consumers to transition to EVs” (p. 134). Similarly on semiconductors: “Consistent with the American Jobs Plan proposals, federal incentives to build or expand semiconductor facilities are necessary to counter the significant subsidies provided by foreign allies and competitors.” (p. 76). How an “incentive” differs from the Chinese practice of “subsidies” is not clearly explained. Nor does the review admit that export rebates on VAT are standard practice everywhere.

Still, from a broad reading and fair appraisal of this genuinely excellent document, two major conclusions may be drawn. The first is that the Chinese advantage – which is by no means absolute in all areas – stems from a pragmatic program of economic development, including infrastructure and human resources, in a vast country able to take advantage of a scale of production and internal market impossible anywhere else. This leads to lower costs across a wide range of industrial and engineering capacities, bolstered by being embedded (as the Review does not point out) in a system oriented toward social stability and steady growth rather than short-term profitability and financial contracts. The Chinese edge – similar to India’s in pharmaceuticals but much more broadly based – is the product of the success of China’s development approach, especially in the post-Mao era, but with roots that go back to the 1949 revolution, to the creation of the People’s Republic and to the restoration of a unitary Chinese state with full control over the nation’s land and resources. This is a fact of life and not an artifact of ruses or dirty dealing.

The second key conclusion is that in critical sectors, in the world we inhabit and from which we cannot escape, US-China interdependence is indefeasible. Rare earths are a minor example, barring new discoveries in other places. Semiconductors are a major one: without the Chinese market, the American firms that presently dominate the high-end design processes would collapse. Bringing manufacturing back to the US, we learn, would come primarily at the expense of allies, including Japan and South Korea as well as, especially, Taiwan. It is hard to see why even the most aggressive China hawk would favor stripping Taiwan of its chip foundries – but even doing that would hardly lessen the dependence of the semiconductor ecosystem on the Chinese market.

So we come to a truly remarkable third conclusion, no less powerful for having been left unstated. It builds on the fact that the integration of the global economy cannot be undone. The division of labor – hence productivity, living standards, and the advance of technologies – is limited by the extent of the market, as Adam Smith wrote in The Wealth of Nations back in 1776. China is a now-developed country with about twenty percent of the human population; its advantages are stability and scale, almost exactly as was true in the 18th century. These advantages cannot now be taken away without destroying the world as it is.

To be sure, the Chinese still, in many important advanced areas, draw from and depend on the United States. Certainly, the US can slow the inroads of Chinese firms in some cases, and certainly the US can foster, as this report recommends, its own advantages in new sectors by maintaining and expanding its research and development base. Certainly, there are many things to be done in the United States to meet urgent environmental, public health, and critical social goals.

But the US position, as an economy with only one-fourth the population, equally now depends on the Chinese market, and on downstream Chinese firms supplying applications to the world. While precautions against natural disasters and pandemics can be taken – up to a point – the central unstated message of this 100-day Review is that the greatest risk to the supply chain, in each of the four areas, is disruption of normal trade relations with China. In short, as an objective economic matter, we learn here, the United States has an overwhelming interest in peace.

June 27, 2021 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Afghan Ghani makes farewell call on Biden

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | JUNE 25, 2021

When the anointed king receives his vassal formally at his durbar for the first time, it is a moment of truth conveying that the latter’s obeisance is noted, while the vassal hopes to claim legitimacy.

A US president is due to receive Afghan president Ashraf Ghani in the White House on Friday after a gap of some 6 years. The symbolism is profound: Ghani is in Washington, as the Taliban is tightening its noose on Kabul. On Thursday, Ghani was closeted with the CIA Director William Burns for a two and half hour meeting. 

Yet in April, when President [sic] Joe Biden announced the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, he didn’t think it necessary to speak to Ghani beforehand. The troop withdrawal is now more than half completed. 

The expectations are low as Biden receives Ghani. But then, all is not well in Biden’s camp. The Pentagon and the CIA were never really on board his withdrawal decision. They sought an open-ended presence in Afghanistan.

They have now seized the worsening security situation in Afghanistan to present an apocalyptic scenario and make out a case for some sort of continued US military and intelligence presence in Afghanistan, although Biden claims to have ended the “forever war”. 

Ghani is also to meet at the Pentagon with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and possibly other administration officials. Meanwhile, the Pentagon is exploring how American contractors (mercenaries) could perk up Ghani’s demoralised army. 

To be sure, by getting an audience at the Oval Office, Ghani hopes to boost his standing in the Afghan bazaar. But that may not salvage his precarious position in Kabul. The obstreperous Afghan warlords are gathering behind the gates of Kabul.  

Ghani has no power base and his whimsical behaviour has alienated most power brokers in Afghanistan. Only two days ago, the prominent Mujahideen leader Ismail Khan (“Amir of Herat”) accused Ghani of being the main obstacle to forming a national consensus. read more

In an interview with The Associated Press a week ago, former Afghan president Hamid Karzai said, “The international community came here 20 years ago with this clear objective of fighting extremism and bringing stability … but extremism is at the highest point today. So they have failed… Where are they leaving us now? In total disgrace and disaster.”  

Karzai added, “We will be better off without their military presence. I think we should defend our own country and look after our own lives. … Their presence (has given us) what we have now. … We don’t want to continue with this misery and indignity that we are facing. It is better for Afghanistan that they leave.” 

Evidently, the least that the US can do now is to just go away. Washington’s earlier expectation was that the Taliban would be amenable to some form of continued US presence in Afghanistan, and that Pakistan might also see advantages in it. But that turned out to be a delusional hope. 

Thus, the Biden administration has drifted away from Islamabad lately, once it dawned that Islamabad is averse to identifying with the war in Afghanistan.

Since no regional capital is willing to collaborate, Washington has zeroed in on Ankara as its newest indispensable partner. A US team landed in Ankara on Thursday to flesh out how a Turkish military contingent at Kabul Airport could provide underpinning for the security operations in Afghanistan.

Washington is pandering to President Erdogan’s Neo-Ottomanism. Turkey already has bases in Iraq, Syria, Qatar and Libya, and plans to open a new base in Azerbaijan. But Pakistan will have mixed feelings about a Turkish military presence next door. And the Taliban has criticised Ankara for messing around in Afghanistan. 

The Taliban’s morale is skyrocketing, as it senses victory. A circular to Taliban military commanders from Sirajuddin Haqqani, the deputy head of the movement’s shura, said on Thursday, “The situation was military and jihadi, but now you are entering a civilian situation… The political process that has been continuing on the side for the past 14 months has been very meaningful… Good governance is the need of the hour… This is a very sensitive phase.” 

Again on Friday, coinciding with Ghani’s visit to the White House, Taliban has issued a second statement with guidelines on treating all ethnic groups in a non-discriminatory manner, how to secure liberated districts and protect government buildings, allow trade, reopen schools and hospitals, etc.

Clearly, there is little the Americans can do now. The seasoned military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington Anthony Cordesman hit the nail on the head when he wrote this week, “The time has come to write off Afghanistan. There are no signs that a strong, unified, and effective Afghan government is emerging.” 

According to Cordesman, who has served as a consultant at the Pentagon, “Brutal as it may be to say so, it is simply too late to reverse the departure of U.S. and allied forces… The U.S. has already withdrawn and closed too much. Too many forces and bases are gone, too many capabilities are lost, and the Taliban has already made too many gains.”

“Measures like keeping small numbers of U.S. military advisors in or near Afghanistan, finding some way to keep military contractors in the country, providing limited advisory and maintenance support from the outside, boosting intelligence cadres in Kabul and near Afghanistan – and all the other ‘forlorn hope’ approaches to provide support after September 1, 2021, are token measures that at best provide a political cloak for withdrawal.” read more

June 26, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment