Syria: A new policy is needed, but not this one
Former UK Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford on the US “responsible statecraft” under Biden:
Just World Educational | January 28, 2021
Jeffrey Feltman and Hrair Balian recently argued in a piece on Responsible Statecraft for a new U.S. policy on Syria that would ostensibly be more humane and productive since it would calibrate Syria sanctions relief to changes in President Bashar al-Assad’s behaviour. This approach may appear to be an improvement on present sanctions policy, which is clearly not working and is causing immense civilian suffering throughout the country. But it could end up making things worse.
We must be grateful to previous Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s point-man on Syria, Ambassador Jim Jeffrey, for having been brutally candid about the real goals of sanctions on Syria under the previous administration. In an early-December interview with Al-Monitor Jeffrey bragged openly about the hardships the sanctions had inflicted:
… And of course, we’ve ratcheted up the isolation and sanctions pressure on Assad, we’ve held the line on no reconstruction assistance, and the country’s desperate for it. You see what’s happened to the Syrian pound, you see what’s happened to the entire economy. So, it’s been a very effective strategy…
It’s important to grasp the moral enormity of this. Jeffrey did not stoop to deploying the standard cant about theoretical ‘humanitarian exemptions’ (which don’t work in practice) or about aiming only at Assad’s capacity to do harm. No, for him, the purpose of sanctions was and is to strangle the Syrian economy and if that should mean causing ordinary Syrians to queue for bread or gasoline for hours, or be unable to revive factories and recover jobs, or rebuild and re-equip hospitals, or import vitally needed medical goods… well that’s just collateral damage and it’s all for the greater good of pursuing U.S. interests.
What Feltman and Balian are proposing is to ease off on some of this strangulation in return for political concessions. There is a term for this: it’s called extortion. It’s the technique of New Jersey hoodlums rather than a Delaware ‘ordinary Joe’.
Let’s take a closer look at what Feltman and Balian are calling for. First, they argue,
… the United States should consider exempting from sanctions all humanitarian efforts to combat COVID-19 in Syria. Equally urgent would be facilitating the reconstruction of essential civilian infrastructure, such as hospitals, schools, and irrigation facilities. Next would follow a phased and reversible easing of U.S. and European sanctions.
They stress, however, that this “phased and reversible” easing of sanctions “would be triggered only when the United States and its European allies verify the implementation of concrete steps negotiated with the Syrian government. Monitoring mechanisms would ascertain progress.” Such “monitoring” would doubtless be intrusive and under U.S. control…
And what are these steps? Here’s how Feltman and Balian lay them out—with my own comments in italics:
- the release of political prisoners [the US-favoured ‘moderates’ no doubt, now known to be in many cases Islamist fanatics ],
- dignified reception for returning refugees [meaning no checks for returning jihadis ],
- civilian protection [what lurks behind this elastic concept? ],
- unhindered, countrywide humanitarian access [i.e. supplying jihadi-controlled Idlib ],
- the removal of remaining chemical weapons [here we go again! Iraq WMD redux, a tailor-made excuse to withhold sanctions relief ], and
- political as well as security sector reforms [i.e., pave the way for regime change ], including good-faith participation in the U.N.’s Geneva process and greater decentralization [partition ].
No government with any awareness of what happened to other countries that bowed to intrusive verification regimes (Iraq) or signed unrequited sanctions-easing agreements (Libya, Iran) could possibly make such a surrender of sovereignty, which is tantamount to capitulation. Anyone putting such a plan forward ought to know that it could not possibly be accepted even as a basis for negotiation. On the other hand it would serve neatly to deflect from the U.S. (and EU) responsibility for the suffering their sanctions inflict on the Syrian people by making it possible to say “Assad won’t negotiate to save his people.”
We can imagine Assad-haters drooling in anticipation of endless opportunities to yank his leash if he puts his head in any collar such as this. And if he doesn’t, well it’s not our fault, then, is it? We can go on as now, only now folks queasy about the hardship we are causing can rest easy in their consciences.
To appreciate the sheer chutzpah of this approach let’s imagine Assad had the temerity to demand reciprocation. How about monitoring for the withdrawal of US troops stationed in violation of international law in Eastern Syria? How about compensation for desperately needed oil illegally lifted from the areas of Eastern Syria under US control? How about cessation of intelligence cooperation with Israel (boasted about by Pompeo) to facilitate wide-scale, unprovoked Israeli bombing of Syria? How about cessation of support for the ‘autonomous authority’ which administers territory in Northern Syria on behalf of jihadi groups masquerading as moderates? Etc, etc.
Let us imagine that the Assad-haters’ dreams came true and Assad was successfully starved into making the required concessions? Who can honestly doubt that throwing open the prisons and permitting unfettered return of Islamists would lead to instability which would make post-Saddam Iraq look like a model of order? Or that replenished and revived jihadi fighters in Idlib would break out of their enclave, overrunning neighbouring Christian and Alawite areas with results too horrifying to imagine? Or that in these conditions ISIS would revive? Or that “decentralisation’”would lead to the breakup of Syria long desired by some?
It might be objected that “we have to try something” or “why not give this a shot at least?” The answer to that is that any person with the slightest understanding of the thinking in Damascus knows that the approach stands absolutely no chance of getting past first base. So it is just not going to work, at least in terms of its declared objectives. It won’t produce changes in behaviour and it won’t lead to sanctions alleviation. But just by being put on the table it will make it optically easier for the regime change advocates to carry on with the callous and cynical Jeffrey approach.
Offering a new form of a poisoned chalice is not a new policy but a way to entrench the old one.
Biden Regime Puts The Brakes On Trump’s Germany Troop Draw Down
By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | January 29, 2021
Perhaps as expected, it didn’t take long for the Biden administration to begin putting the brakes on Trump’s previously ordered troop draw downs which occurred in the last two months of his presidency, particularly in Germany, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
The defense analysis and news site Military.com is reporting that new defense secretary under the Biden administration Lloyd Austin is reviewing the withdrawal of 12,000 US troops from Germany:
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has voiced his commitment to shoring up close ties with NATO ally Germany that were strained under the Trump administration, and suggested that the plan to withdraw 12,000 U.S. troops from the country is open to discussion.
The prior Trump plan to cut nearly one-third of total American military personnel from the country was predictably fought from Congressional corners known for being hawkish on Russia, with even some American and European security officials having called the move a “gift to Putin”.
Later in December the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act attempted to override the draw down order, and according to German officials early this year there’s yet to be significant movement of troops from the country.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin this week held phone calls with NATO allied officials in Europe. The Military.com report continues:
In a phone call to his German counterpart, Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, Austin “expressed his gratitude to Germany for continuing to serve as a great host for U.S. forces, and expressed his desire for a continued dialogue on U.S. force posture in Germany,” according to a Pentagon readout of the call released Wednesday.
He also sought “to reinforce the value the United States places on the bilateral defense relationship with one of our closest NATO Allies,” the readout from Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby states.
By all appearances the some 36,000 total American troops in Germany have gone nowhere despite the plan initiated under Esper.
Recent polling of the German public also suggests half or more want to see US troops gone, after being there since World War II.
As the report concludes of Defense Secretary Austin’s phone call, it is “the latest sign of the Biden administration’s intent to reverse or water down the policies of former President Donald Trump, who repeatedly questioned NATO’s worth to the U.S. and rattled allies with demands for more defense spending.”
Our democracy is under threat… by too much democracy, say lawmakers demanding removal of ‘conspiracy theorist’ rep
By Helen Buyniski | RT | January 29, 2021
Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has triggered a meltdown among her Democrat peers, who believe her embrace of ‘conspiracy theories’ is grounds for ejecting her from Congress. But it’s not up to them.
While Democrats and the media establishment have been disparaging Greene since before she won her primary, mocking her as the “QAnon candidate” and insisting she’s dangerous for spreading “misinformation,” California Democratic rep Jimmy Gomez has gone one step further, demanding she be removed from office altogether – a rare measure that has been used fewer than two dozen times in US history.
Gomez announced on Wednesday he would introduce a resolution to expel Greene from Congress, a move that has been gaining support from her Democratic peers in the House even though it is wildly undemocratic and effectively suggests voters should have no say in choosing their government. Given that the party has been harping on “our democracy” for months in a (successful) bid to defeat former president Donald Trump, the hypocrisy on display is truly massive.
It’s not like high-ranking Democrats haven’t had a lot of encouragement for their conclusions that Greene has got to go. Everyone from establishment journalists to gun control advocates, to centrist Republicans have been demanding her removal at top volume, many since before she was sworn in. She’s not the only one on the Democrats’ chopping block, either – Senate Republicans Ted Cruz (Texas) and Josh Hawley (Missouri) have also been placed on the naughty list for voting against the certification of Joe Biden’s November election victory, as have all 147 of the Republican congressmen who voted thus.
The California Democrat has pointed to social media posts appearing to express support for conspiracy theories about both the Parkland and Sandy Hook school shootings, the QAnon psyop, and the notion that a “bullet to the head” would be the only way to pry House speaker Nancy Pelosi out of office, denouncing it all as “advocacy for extremism and sedition.” While Greene has since distanced herself from most of these opinions, she was democratically elected with that slate of views, and demanding she not only receive a reprimand from House minority leader Kevin McCarthy but also be stripped of her committee assignments and even her congressional seat is telling voters in no uncertain terms that their opinions do not matter.
And while some lawmakers have stopped at merely demanding she be stripped of her position on the Education and Labor Committee, claiming that her questions about Parkland somehow constituted “mocking” the dead children, Gomez and others have sought to muscle her out of the House altogether, their hysterical attacks resembling the high-volume propaganda assaults on Trump over the last four years.
In a way, however, the attacks on Greene are even more absurd than the Orange Man Bad brigade. She ran unopposed in the general election for her Georgia district after winning the Republican primary. Surely, if her conspiracy-mongering was so toxic and dangerous, the Democrats could have found someone to run against her?
The party’s blandishments have clearly had some effect, as House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (Louisiana) and GOP Conference Chair Liz Cheney (Wyoming) have publicly denounced their Georgia colleague and pleaded for McCarthy to do the same. He has promised to “have a conversation” with her about the comments.
But it’s hard to see a route toward removing Greene from Congress legitimately, given that a two-thirds House majority would be required and there is no precedent for using lawmakers’ statements before being elected. Then again, no calls for an actual democratic process to remove Greene have surfaced. Instead, there’s Gomez’s resolution, New York Democratic-socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s pointed comments about “white supremacists” and QAnon, and Parkland survivor turned spoiled-child anti-gun activist David Hogg literally ordering McCarthy to strip Greene of her committee posts.
The media’s unhinged obsession with Trump only made him stronger, convincing his followers he really was under attack by an unelected Deep State determined to stop him from enacting his agenda. Greene, her backers incensed by what they believe is that same system’s attempt to shred her, appears to be following in his footsteps. Rather than embark on a tiresome apology tour every time Media Matters dug up a new social media post, Greene shut down CNN’s pearl-clutchers last year after they accused her of spreading conspiracy theories. Rather than issue a point-by-point denial of all the thoughtcrimes the outlet had accused her of, she embraced the attacks as a “badge of honor.”
And to avoid those ordinary people getting even a foothold of control over their political future, the ruling class is pulling up every ladder, no longer even pretending average Americans can hoist themselves up by their bootstraps and enjoy a better life than their parents’ (or serve in government, for that matter). The same smug oligarchs who urged anyone banned from social media to “create your own platform” only to kill Parler, who urged those shut out from the financial system to “make your own market” only to ban trading certain stocks on Robinhood, are now daring downtrodden Americans to construct their own political system. As the nation saw on January 6, those who’ve been excluded from the political system are willing to call the oligarchs’ bluff.
Unfortunately, the political system so often referred to as “our democracy” bears less and less resemblance to a democracy as time goes on. From the Washington Post complaining ordinary Americans have too much choice in political primaries, to Democratic fundraiser ActBlue banning a Kansas House candidate from accepting donations due to a teenage history with ‘revenge porn,’ it’s abundantly clear that the ruling class do not in fact want ordinary people to have a say in who represents them in Washington.
Helen Buyniski is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23
‘DOCTORS, IT’S UP TO YOU’
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | January 29, 2021
American’s Frontline Doctor, Orthopedic & Spinal Surgeon Lee Merritt, MD has stumbled upon a story so shocking that it’s impact is felt going back decades. Did Doctor Merritt just expose one of modern medicine’s long held assumptions?
FBI lawyer who altered evidence to enable spying on Trump gets PROBATION instead of jail
RT | January 29, 2021
The only FBI official charged in the improper use of FISA warrants to spy on President Donald Trump via campaign aide Carter Page got a slap on the wrist. Kevin Clinesmith’s sentence was a year of probation, and community service.
Clinesmith worked at the FBI General Counsel’s Office (GCO) and was assigned to Crossfire Hurricane, the probe of Trump’s alleged ties with Russia during the 2016 election. In that capacity, he altered an email from the CIA that described Page as a source for the spy agency, to say he was “not” a source – enabling the FBI to request a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant against Page as a “Russian agent” – and, through him, spy on the Trump campaign, transition and presidency.
Boasberg was reportedly swayed by Clinesmith’s insistence that he’d acted in good faith and that his wife has a baby on the way, while shrugging-off Page’s testimony that his life had been ruined as the result of false claims he was a “Russian agent.” On Friday, federal judge James Boasberg – who also sits on the FISA court – sentenced Clinesmith to 12 months’ probation, 400 hours of community service, and a $100 fine.
The Republicans sitting on the House Judiciary Committee called the sentence “insanity” and “outrageous.”
Led by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-California), the Judiciary GOP first exposed the FISA abuse and published a memo about it in February 2018, revealing that the FBI had relied on the “Steele Dossier” – a collection of spurious claims compiled by a British spy and paid-for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign – in the initial spying request.
Others pointed out that Clinesmith’s transgression was far greater than almost anyone who ended up going to jail as a result of special counsel Robert Mueller’s ‘Russiagate’ probe. Campaign aide George Papadopoulos spent two weeks in jail for allegedly lying to the FBI – the same process crime Clinesmith pled guilty to last August – and General Michael Flynn spent four years trying to beat the same charge.
Clinesmith is also the only FBI official to face any scrutiny over the bureau’s handling of Crossfire Hurricane. Former director James Comey, his deputy Andy McCabe, lead agent Peter Strzok and attorney Lisa Page – all of whom were involved in the probe – have landed lucrative book contracts or cable news jobs, or become heroes of the Democrat “resistance” instead.
“The entire game is rigged,” said Federalist editor Sean Davis. “The rule of law is dead.”
The lenient sentence for a FBI lawyer altering evidence was seen as especially egregious, as, earlier this week, a Trump supporter going by the handle ‘Ricky Vaughn’ on Twitter was arrested and charged by the Biden administration for “conspiracy to deprive people of their voting rights” by posting memes that allegedly misled Clinton voters in 2016.
“As outrageous as this is, it’s also useful. It’s in our faces now,” wrote lawyer and filmmaker Mike Cernovich. “When they come for more Trump supporters… Remember today.”
Democrats, who spent the past four years insisting that “no one is above the law” and that Trump must be investigated for an array of suspected crimes, did not comment.
Morley v. CIA
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | January 27, 2021
After the end of World War II, the U.S. national-security establishment convinced the American people that there existed an international communist conspiracy to take over the United States and the rest of the world. This supposed conspiracy, U.S. officials steadfastly maintained, was based in Moscow, Russia. During the Cold War, the tentacles of this supposed conspiracy spread to China, North Korea, North Vietnam, Cuba, Iran, Guatemala, Chile, and other places around the world, including the United States. The Reds, they said, were everywhere and were coming to get us.
This supposed threat of communism, in fact, is what motivated U.S. officials to convert the federal government into a national-security state, a totalitarian type of governmental structure in which officials wield omnipotent powers, such as assassination. It also motivated U.S. officials to intervene in the civil wars in Korea and Vietnam, which killed more than 100,000 U.S. soldiers, many of whom had been conscripted to “serve.” The Pentagon and the CIA maintained that if the communists weren’t stopped over there, they would soon be in the halls of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court, not to mention the public schools, running the country over here.
Thus, for an American few things could be considered worse than to be labeled a communist. People who were suspected of being communists were fired from their jobs, ostracized, and sometimes criminally prosecuted. Recall the McCarthy hearings, when many people’s lives were destroyed simply through the government’s asking the question, “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?” Recall the Hollywood Blacklist and the criminal prosecution of Hollywood writer Dalton Trumbo and the Hollywood Ten. Recall the spying on and blackmail of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, who U.S. officials suspected of being a communist.
Immediately after the assassination of President Kennedy, the word went out that he had been killed by a communist, a young former U.S. Marine named Lee Harvey Oswald. The very first organization to begin publicizing Oswald’s communist bona fides was an anti-Castro exile group in New Orleans called the DRE, which immediately sent out a press release announcing that Oswald was a communist. The publicity was highly effective in dissuading people, especially people on the left, from questioning the official narrative of the assassination — that Kennedy had been killed by a communist. People were scared to death that if they questioned the official narrative, they would be labeled communists or communist sympathizers.
What people did not know at the time — and what they would not discover for several decades — was that the DRE was being secretly funded and directed by the CIA. The CIA’s supervising officer for the DRE was a man named George Joannides.
In the late 1990s, former Washington Post reporter Jefferson Morley uncovered Joannides’ role in the DRE back in 1963 and began requesting the CIA for its files on Joannides. The CIA steadfastly refused to comply with Morley’s request and made it clear that it would never disclose most of Joannides’s secret activities.
Morley filed a Freedom of Information lawsuit against the CIA, which, owing to the massive resistance of the CIA, lasted for years. The fascinating story of Morley’s battle against CIA secrecy on Joannides is now told in FFF’s newest book, Morley v. CIA: My Unfinished JFK Investigation, which is available in Kindle format on Amazon for $1.
In the course of his investigation and litigation, Morley uncovered some fascinating and intriguing facts about Joannides. In the 1970s, the House Select Committee on Assassinations reopened the investigation into the Kennedy assassination. When committee attorneys began seeking too many documents relating to Oswald’s trip to Mexico City, the CIA called Joannides out of retirement, ostensibly to serve as a facilitator between the House committee and the CIA.
As it turned out, however, Joannides’s real role was to serve as an obstructor to the efforts by the House committee attorneys to securing JFK-assassination-related information from the CIA, including information relating to Oswald’s trip to Mexico City. In the process, Joannides and the CIA failed to disclose his role with the DRE in the months leading up to the assassination, just as they had failed to disclose it to the Warren Commission back in 1964.
During the term of the Assassination Records Review Board, Joannides and the CIA once again failed to disclose his pre-assassination relationship to the DRE. Former House Select Committee counsel Robert Blakey later accused the CIA of obstruction of justice, which is a felony. Judge John Tunheim, who chaired the ARRB, declared that “the Agency should come completely clean.”
But the CIA refused to come clean on Joannides, as detailed in Morley’s fascinating account of his long judicial fight against the CIA.
Morley is the author of another book published by FFF: CIA & JFK: The Secret Assassination Files. He will be delivering two presentations at FFF’s upcoming online weekly conference series “JFK’s Foreign Policy and the Assassination.”
The conference series will begin on Wednesday, March 3, and continue weekly on Wednesdays through April 21. Registrations will open next month. Admission will be free.
A Domestic Terrorism Law? War on Dissent Will Proceed Full Speed Ahead
By Philip Giraldi | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 28, 2021
President Joe Biden has already made it clear that legislation that will be used to combat what he refers to as “domestic terrorism” will be a top priority. That means that his inaugural speech pledge to be the president for “all Americans” appears to apply except for those who don’t agree with him. Former Barack Obama CIA Chief John Brennan, who is clearly in the loop on developments, puts it this way in a tweet where he describes how the new Administration’s spooks “are moving in laser-like fashion to try to uncover as much as they can about [the] insurgency” [that includes] “religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians.”
The United States Constitution’s Bill of Rights, which includes freedom of speech and association, has been under siege for some time now. Government has always used its assumed powers conferred by a claimed state of emergency to deprive citizens of their rights. During the American Civil War Abraham Lincoln imprisoned critics of the conflict. Woodrow Wilson’s First World War administration brought in the Espionage Act, which has since been used to convict whistleblowers without having to present the level of evidence that would be required in a normal civil trial. During the Second World War, Franklin D. Roosevelt erected concentration camps that imprisoned Japanese Americans whose only crime consisted of being Japanese.
But perhaps the greatest attack on the Bill of Rights is more recent, the Patriot and Military Commissions Acts that were passed into law as a consequence of the “Global War on Terror” launched by President George W. Bush in the wake of 9/11. Together with the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which includes a court designed to speed up the warrant approval process, ordinary citizens found themselves on the receiving end of surveillance for which there was little or no justification in terms of probable cause. The FISA process was even notoriously abused in the national security apparatus attempt to derail the campaign of Donald Trump. The tools are in place for ever more government mischief and no one should doubt that the Democrats are just as capable of ignoring constitutional safeguards as the Republicans have been.
What makes the current state of war against “terrorism” so dangerous is that the national security apparatus has been politicized while the government has learned that labeling someone or some entity terrorist or even a “material supporter of terrorism” is infinitely elastic. That is precisely why Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has frequently called out opponents and attached to them the terrorist label, since it then permits other steps that might otherwise be challenged.
And there is also the fact that the playing field has changed since the First and Second World Wars. The government has technical capabilities that were never dreamed of in most of the twentieth century. Edward Snowden and other whistleblowers have demonstrated how the government routinely ignores constitutional limits on its ability to interfere in the lives of ordinary citizens. Not only that, it can monitor the lives of millions of Americans simultaneously, giving the police and intelligence agencies the power to mount “fishing expeditions” that literally invade the phones, computers and conversations of people who have not been guilty of any crime.
The authorizations that already exist will be further weaponized to go after dissidents as identified by the new regime. A bill introduced by House intelligence committee chair Adam Schiff “would take existing War on Terror legislation and simply amend it to say we can now do that within the U.S.” It would be combined with previous legislation, including former president Barack Obama’s infamous 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which allows the military to indefinitely detain American citizens suspected of terrorism without a trial. Obama and Brennan also assumed an illegal and unconstitutional right to act as judge, jury and executioner-by-drone of American citizens overseas. Given those precedents, a bill like Schiff’s would free the national security community’s hands even more.
The new body of legislation would mean increased secret legal surveillance, suppression of free speech, indefinite incarceration without charges, torture, and perhaps even assassination. If it sounds like totalitarianism it should. There ought to be particular concern that the plan of the Biden Administration to go after so-called domestic terrorists will be this generation’s version of either Pearl Harbor or 9/11. The incident that took place at the Capitol Building on January 6th (already being referred to as 1/6 in some circles) has been exaggerated beyond all recognition and is now being regularly referred to as an “insurrection,” which it was not, by both politicians and the mainstream media. The language used to vilify what are alleged to be “right wing” and “white supremacist” enemies of the state is astonishing and the technology is keeping pace to turn the United States and other countries into police states to ensure that citizens will do the bidding of government.
To cite only one example of how technology can drive the process, Biden has several times threatened to initiate and enforce something like a nationwide lockdown to defeat the coronavirus. Can he do it? Yes, the tools are already in place. Facial recognition technology is highly developed and deployable in the numerous surveillance cameras that are being installed. Wrist bands are being developed overseas that are designed to compel compliance with government dictates on pandemic measures enforcement. If you have been told to stay home and are instead walking the dog your wrist band will tell the police and they will find and arrest you.
And, as the old saying goes, the Revolution is already beginning to devour its own children. Universities and schools are insisting that teachers actively support both publicly and privately the new “equity and diversity” order while police departments are purging themselves of officers suspected of being associated with conservative groups, meaning that something like a loyalty test might soon become common. Recently the Defense Department has begun intensive monitoring of the social media of military personnel to identify dissenters, as is already done in some large companies with their employees. The new Director of National Intelligence hardliner Avril Haines has already confirmed that her agency will participate in a public threat assessment of QAnon, which she has described as America’s Greatest Threat.
Haines has also suggested that intelligence agencies will “look at connections between folks in the U.S. and externally and foreign” while Biden on his first full day in office has pledged to thoroughly investigate claims about Russian hacking of U.S. infrastructure and government sites, the poisoning of Putin critic Alexei Navalny, and the story that Russia offered the Taliban bounties to kill U.S. troops in Afghanistan. It could be Russiagate all over again, with a claimed foreign threat being used to conceal civil rights violations being committed by the federal government at home.
And, of course, the new policies will reflect the biases of the new rulers. Right wing “terror” will be targeted even though the list of actual right-wing driven outrages is embarassingly short. Groups like Black Lives Matter will be untouchable in spite of their major role in last year’s rioting, arson, looting and violence that caused $2 billion damage and killed as many as thirty because they are in all but name part of the Democratic Party. Antifa, which rioted in Portland last week, will also get a pass – the media routinely describes leftist violence as “mainly peaceful” and only sometimes concedes that some “property damage” occurred.
It is Trump supporters and conservatives in general who are being shown the exit door, to include calls for “deprogramming them”. The Washington Post’s Zionist harpy Jennifer Rubin recently declared that “We have to collectively, in essence, burn down the Republican Party. We have to level them because if there are survivors, if there are people who weather this storm, they will do it again.” She also echoed calls for making them unemployable, “I think it’s absolutely abhorrent that any institution of higher learning, any news organization, or any entertainment organization that has a news outlet would hire these people.”
As the notably clueless Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in 2006 while Lebanon was getting bombed and shelled by Israel, “We are seeing the birth pangs of a new Middle East…” so too are we Americans seeing something new and strange emerging from the ruins of Trumpdom. It will not be pretty and after it is over Americans will enjoy a lot fewer liberties, that is for sure.
DOJ & EPA to get ‘Climate Justice’ offices under Biden’s executive orders
Biden’s Executive Order echoes the agenda of activists seen here during Amazon’s ‘Climate Strike’ in Seattle, Washington, September 20, 2019. © REUTERS/Lindsey Wasson
RT | January 27, 2021
Declaring his commitment to “environmental justice” for “disadvantaged communities,” US President Joe Biden has ordered the creation of new enforcement offices in two departments and a regulatory agency.
As part of a sweeping executive order signed on Wednesday, the new or expanded “climate justice” offices will be established at the Department of Justice (DOJ), Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
“We know the communities who are being hurt, and we know we have to start enforcing the standards today in ensuring that they are part of the solution,” Gina McCarthy, Biden’s newly minted climate adviser, told reporters on Wednesday.
McCarthy, who ran the EPA between 2013 and 2017 during the Obama administration, praised the Biden-Harris administration for its “most ambitious climate vision” ever and said the new orders recognize the “intersectionality” of climate with the coronavirus pandemic, the economy and “racial equity.”
“Science is telling us that we don’t have a moment to lose,” added McCarthy.
Biden’s executive orders direct the US government to “develop programs, policies, and activities to address the disproportionate health, environmental, economic, and climate impacts on disadvantaged communities,” according to talking points released by the White House.
Among its provisions is the establishment of a “Justice40 Initiative,” which aims to deliver 40 percent of the overall benefits of federal investment to “disadvantaged communities” and establish an Environmental Justice Scorecard to track its progress.
The newly established White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council will “prioritize environmental justice and ensure a whole-of-government approach to addressing current and historical environmental injustices,” the White House said.
It wasn’t immediately clear what qualified one as “disadvantaged” or what “environmental justice” might mean in practice. The order establishing these new bureaucracies was part of a broader push for “renewable” energy that Biden promised during the presidential campaign, while insisting this was not the ‘Green New Deal’ promoted by some Democrats.
Universities Threaten To Cut Off Students’ Internet Access If They Fail To Comply With COVID Restrictions
By Steve Watson | Summit News | January 28, 2021
Universities in the US are threatening to completely cut off basic services, including internet access for students if they do not fully comply with all COVID restrictions on campus, according to a report.
Campus Reform notes that several universities are cracking down on students who are not following strict lockdown policies.
The University of Arizona has stated that students will only be able to use the internet if they have tested negative for coronavirus.
The University of Illinois has also threatened to restrict internet access, as well as the tools students need to study and submit assignments.
A January 20th email to students from the Chancellor Robert Jones warned that students who flout the mandates “face university disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal.”
“Please note that this semester, students who are out of compliance may also lose access to university Wi-Fi, Zoom, Compass and other technologies,” the email read.
Boston University also threatened to remove internet access and place blocks on ID cards, which are used for all university services, if students do not get coronavirus tests and report symptoms.
Baylor University in Waco, Texas also announced that internet access will be suspended for the entire semester if three test appointments are missed. If just two appointments are missed then students “will not be allowed to participate in University or student organization activities (All University SING, athletic events, student organization events, campus recreation sports, access to the Student Life Center for recreation, etc.).
Baylor student Charlie Letts told Campus Reform “I find the punishments put in place by Baylor to be a little extreme.”
“The wifi is something students pay for and they need in order to be successful as students,” Letts said.
He continued “I realize that Baylor is trying to enforce the testing protocol, but taking something away that hinders being a productive student maybe isn’t the best option. Especially when everyone has different views about Covid like how compliant to be with social distancing, mask wearing, etc.”
As we have previously reported, colleges are being used as testing grounds for technology to enforce draconian distancing, mask and lockdown measures:
Universities are also threatening to suspend students who dare to leave pre-determined ‘bubble’ areas around campuses, or visit non “approved businesses” without permission.
Other colleges have suggested that students who want to have sex with each other should ‘consider’ wearing face masks while doing so.
It is no longer a stretch to imagine this prison-like model of coercion being implemented in the wider world, indeed it is already being widely touted and in some instances put into place.
Fines for failing to comply with lockdown restrictions. Police given powers to enter your home or place of business to conduct COVID patrols. No internet for you if you fail to take and submit test results. No access to basic services unless you take the vaccine.
Revving Up US War on a Free and Open Society
By Stephen Lendman | January 28, 2021
It’s disappearing in plain sight with Big Media support.
The NYT supports what demands exposure and denunciation.
Sticking with the official narrative, it perpetuates the myth of a January 6 Capitol Hill insurrection — ignoring the orchestrated anti-Trump false flag, its disturbing aftermath playing out in real time.
It backs the phony DHS claim about a growing US threat posed by “violent domestic extremists” emboldened by what happened on Capitol Hill.
The only internal threat to the nation and its people is state-sponsored.
What the Times should explain, it suppresses. Instead it reported the following rubbish:
Homeland Security’s “terrorism alert did not name specific groups that might be behind any future attacks, but it made clear that their motivation would include anger over ‘the presidential transition, as well as other perceived grievances fueled by false narratives.’ ”
No “presidential transition” threat occurred, no evidence of violence against the state coming ahead.
The DHS falsely expressed concern about so-called “drivers to violence… remain(ing)” active (sic).
Yet the department admitted having no evidence that indicates a “specific, credible plot.”
Instead it dubiously warned of unexplained terrorism trends, nothing that indicates an imminent attack.
An unnamed DHS official was quoted claiming the department is concerned that Biden’s peaceful inauguration could create a false sense of security because “the intent (sic) to engage in violence has not gone away (sic).”
In the run-up to, during, and after January 20 inauguration ceremonies, there was no violence or known threat of it occurring in the nation’s capital.
The city resembles a war zone with no ongoing hostilities.
It remains militarized and occupied by thousands of National Guard troops and other security forces over nothing.
A DHS “terrorism advisory” is fear-mongering mass deception about nonexistent domestic terrorists — except for dark forces in the halls of power.
Americans are repeatedly lied to by government officials and press agent media like the Times.
The 9/11 state-sponsored mother of all false flags to that time was and remains all about waging endless war on humanity at home and abroad.
Since seasonal flu was renamed covid last year and all that followed, what remains of a free and open society is being eliminated entirely for our own good.
Police state enforced totalitarian rule is in place and being hardened.
The undemocratic Dem controlled White House and Congress are heading the nation toward full-blown tyranny — to arrive wrapped in the American flag for mass deception.
What’s coming may include mandatory mass-vaxxing with hazardous vaccines for access to public places, for work and education, for an illusory return to normalcy ahead that’s long gone without mass resistance against diabolical harshness.
The scheme includes elimination of remaining freedoms as once existed on the phony pretext of protecting public health, welfare and national security.
Instead of sounding the alarm against what no one should tolerate, the Times and other Big Media support the transformation of America to a brave new world dystopia unfit to live in — except for its ruling class at the expense of most others.
The choice is clear.
Resist or endure dark forces “stamping on a human face — forever,” with attribution to Orwell.
Life as once experienced will no longer exist if dark forces get their way.
I’m in the twilight of my life. I’m concerned about younger generations that’ll have none of the advantages I had growing up long ago.
That’s the disturbing state of things today — what I won’t be silent about, what I’m committed to resist against through my activist writing.
I urge mass activism from others to save what otherwise will be lost with no turning back.
Biden’s top cyber adviser donated a lot to Israeli lobby AIPAC, say leftist reporters – and get accused of anti-Semitism
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses AIPAC conference in Washington, DC on March 26, 2019. © REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
RT | January 28, 2021
An investigative report about ties between President Joe Biden’s pick for cyberwar adviser Anne Neuberger and AIPAC has unexpectedly landed two Democrat-friendly journalists in hot water with the Washington establishment.
Neuberger is supposed to become Biden’s deputy national security adviser for cyber and emerging technology on the National Security Council. A “rising” star at the NSA, Neuberger got promoted to cybersecurity chief in 2019, after overseeing “a preemptive strike” at Russia during the 2018 election, reveals an investigative piece by David Corn of Mother Jones and Ken Dilanian of NBC News, published Wednesday.
However, Corn and Dilanian also revealed that Neuberger used her family foundation to channel substantial donations to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
The Anne and Yehuda Neuberger Foundation has donated “hundreds of thousands of dollars” to AIPAC in recent years, according to Dilanian and Corn. The donations increased starting in 2015, when the foundation received a $93 million gift from the Chesed Foundation of America, a charity run by George Karfunkel – described as a “billionaire investor,” who also happens to be Anne Neuberger’s father.
Meanwhile, her husband Yehuda Neuberger chairs AIPAC’s Baltimore executive council, and lobbied against the Obama administration’s nuclear deal with Iran in 2015. The latter point may be the reason behind the piece, as Corn specifically argues that “AIPAC has been widely seen as a supporter of Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right and hardline policies,” incompatible with the Obama administration line that Biden has been busy trying to restore over the past week.
“While Israel is a close American ally, it operates in its own interest and aggressively spies on the US, including using cyber capabilities, current and former officials say,” Dilanian wrote.
Meanwhile, Corn lets former CIA official John Sipher phrase it instead, saying that “In her world, when people think of cyber-threats, Israel is always there, even if it’s an ally. It is surprising that someone in cyber who understands Israeli capabilities would not want to steer clear of these politics.”
Sipher characterizes Neuberger’s donations to AIPAC as “unwise at best.” Corn and Dilanian cite unnamed intelligence officials as saying that while the donations are “probably” not disqualifying, they’re “not good.”
Even so, the duo spent much of Wednesday defending themselves from accusations of anti-Semitism from groups and individuals. For example, the American Jewish Committee insisted that Neuberger is owed an apology, because “questioning the loyalty of a public servant for supporting [AIPAC] is not just offensive, it reeks of bigotry.”
Rabbi Michael Adam Latz said Corn was “intimating dual loyalty & claiming AIPAC is foreign-implying that Jews are foreign,” to which Corn replied that he never said either.
“It’s about policy,” Corn said, citing Barack Obama’s recent book saying that AIPAC is ”aligned with the Israeli right” and sided with Israel when it “took actions that were contrary to US policy.”
Some of the arguments used in the back-and-forth were by themselves revealing, such as Defense One executive editor Kevin Barron saying that the US “officially is 100% biased toward Israel” and the Pentagon maintains a policy of backing Israeli “qualitative military edge,” presumably in cyberspace as well.
“No argument on that. This is complicated,” replied Dilanian.
Corn was one of the first reporters to publicize British spy Christopher Steele’s claims about “ties” between then-candidate Donald Trump and Russia, which were put together on behalf of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 US presidential election.
Dilanian also took part in the ‘Russiagate’ reporting, and has a reputation of getting his stories vetted by the CIA – something that became part of the court record in the UK trial of WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange.
Featured Video
Racist Seinfeld Dances for Joy as Bibi Unveils His New Map
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
TV Drama Review
Japanese drama projects Japan’s wartime atrocities onto Chinese characters
Global Times | October 25, 2026
By portraying Chinese characters as perpetrators of ruthless violence while casting Japanese Self-Defense Forces (SDF) intelligence operatives as defenders, the season 2 of the Japanese drama Vivant has recently drawn criticism from Chinese netizens, who argue that its depiction turns historical reality on its head while ignoring Japan’s wartime atrocities.
The TBS drama series – a spy suspense story in which an alleged unofficial intelligence unit of the SDF operates across the globe — has attracted a passionate fanbase. Its currently airing season 2 opened with a household rating of 18.8 percent, the highest for a TV drama this year, according toa commentary article by Japanese media Toyo Keizai.
What draws attention is the portrayal of the enemies in the series, the article noted. Scenes in which the Chinese organization subjects kidnapped members of the SDF unit to brutal torture are repeated with unrelenting intensity.
It is rare for Japanese TV dramas to explicitly portray a real-life country as the enemy, the article noted.
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi also made a reference to the drama, saying that she has been recording Vivant and hopes to binge-watch it over the year-end and New Year holidays, according to Japanese media outlets.
China’s CCTV News report on Sunday revealed that the drama features scenes in which Chinese personnel cut off the fingers of and stab Japanese intelligence operatives in the abdomen. Such acts bear striking similarities to the torture inflicted on Chinese nationals by invading Japanese troops during the World War II.
The drama distorts the truth by attributing these atrocities to modern Chinese characters. Beneath the surface, it subtly glorifies Japan’s cross-border overseas operations, blurs the functional boundaries of the SDF and implicitly promotes an expansionist narrative, per CCTV News. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Up in arms… Koreans reject U.S. empire’s plan to make South Korea the next Ukraine
- Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia could advance region-led security framework in Tehran: FM spox
- Netizens condemn Japanese drama for projecting Japan’s wartime atrocities onto Chinese characters
- Racist Seinfeld Dances for Joy as Bibi Unveils His New Map
- A West Bank War for Netanyahu’s Election Campaign, Could It Backfire?
- Yemen denounces European Parliament’s ‘hypocritical’ push to blacklist Ansarullah
- Qalibaf: UAE’s UN bid aims to ‘clear the runway’ for ‘Greater Israel’, whitewash genocide
- Pakistan reopens Iran border after boosting security: Report
- Why are so many Brazilians voting for Flávio Bolsonaro?
- Democrats Put Anti-Russia Agenda Ahead of American Workers
- If Americans Knew
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- No Tricks Zone
- Sudden Stratospheric Warming, Powerful El Niño Combination May Lead To Extreme Europe Cold, Energy Crisis!
- Two New Studies Find Thwaites Glacier Melt Cannot Be Driven By Human Activity Or A Warming Ocean
- E-Cars Reduce CO2 Emissions By Only 41% Compared To Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles
- Predictions Made By Renowned Climate Professor Over Past Decades Have Been Proven To Be Poor
- New Study Suggests Large Regions Of The Pacific Ocean Have Been Cooling For The Last 80 Years
- Germany’s Green Energy Debacle: High Energy Costs Force Kahla Porzellan to Close After 182 Years!
- New Study: 50 Years Of The Most Aggressive ‘Net Zero’ Policies Can Only Affect The Global Climate By 0.03°C
- US September “Heat” Was No Record…Many Records Set Decades Ago
- Latest European Green Energy Debacle; Portugal’s Largest Flagship Solar Park Insolvent!
- Green Energy Debacle: German Expert Professor Fritz Vahrenholt Warns Of Severe Economic And Social Consequences
