Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Biden allows deployment of US military ‘contractors’ to Ukraine – media

RT | November 9, 2024

The administration of outgoing President Joe Biden has lifted a de facto ban on deploying US defense contractors in Ukraine to repair American-made armaments, Reuters and CNN reported on Friday, citing anonymous Pentagon officials.

This reversal of previous US policy comes just as vocal Ukraine conflict skeptic Donald Trump won the popular vote and secured his second term in the White House. While it is unclear whether Trump would have continued the prior policy, he has repeatedly promised not to put American lives at risk and to rapidly conclude the conflict once in office again.

The potential American presence on the ground will be “small” and located “far” from the front lines, and they are not expected to engage in combat, Reuters wrote on Friday, citing an anonymous US official. As the US and its NATO partners have provided Kiev with increasingly sophisticated American-made armaments, such as F-16 fighter jets and Patriot air defense systems, restrictions have slowed repairs and proven increasingly challenging. Much of the equipment has been damaged beyond repair by Kiev’s own specialists.

The policy change aligns the Pentagon more closely with the US State Department and USAID, which already have contractors in Ukraine, according to another official.

“These contractors will help the Ukrainian Armed Forces rapidly repair and maintain US-provided equipment as needed so it can quickly return to the front lines,” CNN wrote on Friday, citing a defense official. Specifically, F-16 jets and Patriot batteries “require specific technical expertise to maintain,” they said.

Allowing US contractors to work in Ukraine will provide a faster alternative to the current method of transporting equipment to NATO countries like Poland and Romania for repairs, CNN noted.

Meanwhile the risks of being killed by Russian strikes will fall on the companies bidding for the Pentagon contracts.

“Each US contractor, organization, or company will be responsible for the safety and security of their employees and will be required to include risk mitigation plans as part of their bids,” CNN cited a defense official as saying.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has previously stated that Moscow is aware of the “direct involvement of NATO troops in this conflict.” He pointed out that several high-tech systems the US and its allies have provided to Kiev, such as ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles, require the involvement of Western officers to operate them.

The Russian Defense Ministry regularly reports airstrikes on repair facilities in Ukraine. This week alone, the Russian military carried out at least 38 strikes on Kiev’s military-industrial complex facilities, as well as supporting energy and military infrastructure, according to the latest report on Friday.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | 1 Comment

Vaccine ‘Quietly’ Pulled Off Market in 2007 Now Linked to 19 Diseases

35 Million Babies Who Got the Shot Now at Risk as Adults

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | November 7, 2024

The thimerosal-free HibTITER pediatric vaccine marketed by Wyeth from 2003 through 2007 was associated with 19 different medical conditions, according to a study published Tuesday in the International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine.

The conditions include life-threatening side effects at rates “significantly higher” than other Hib vaccines.

The study, by Children’s Health Defense (CHD) researcher Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., and Brian Hooker, Ph.D., CHD chief scientific officer, compared adverse events among children who received HibTITER to those among children who received other Hib vaccines.

Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) is a bacterium that can cause illnesses ranging from ear infections to pneumonia to meningitis. Vaccines for Hib in young children were first licensed in 1987. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends Hib vaccines for infants at age 2 months.

Wyeth, now Pfizer, sold HibTITER from the time it was licensed in 1990 until 2007. In 2003, the company reformulated the vaccine to remove thimerosal, a type of mercury, after public outcry over the dangers of mercury in vaccines.

In 2007, Pfizer “quietly” pulled the reformulated HibTITER vaccine off the market, Hooker told The Defender — a move he said was concerning, in light of the vaccine’s “relationship to many adverse events in children.”

To assess those adverse events, Jablonowski and Hooker analyzed data from 277,484 children between 2003-2007 — when the thimerosal-free HibTiTER was available — using the publicly available Florida Medicaid database.

They corroborated their findings by analyzing data for the vaccine from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a passive public reporting system jointly administered by the CDC and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

The researchers identified medical conditions for infants vaccinated with any Hib vaccine within 30 days of the shot. The Medicaid data revealed 19 different diagnoses associated with HibTITER at frequencies significantly higher than those associated with other Hib vaccines. They also verified 14 of those diagnoses in VAERS.

The adverse events, ranging from mild to life-threatening, included respiratory, gastrointestinal, dermatologic and generalized infections; ear, nose and throat medical contitions; and other conditions.

None of the serious or even life-threatening conditions identified were listed as possible adverse events on the package insert for HibTITER.

The authors’ findings “have profound medical implications for the estimated 35 million Americans between the ages of 16 and 33 who received the vaccine,” they wrote.

VAERS ‘screaming’ problem with HibTITER for decades

The first Hib conjugate vaccine, which combines a weak antigen with a stronger one to elicit a more robust immune response to the weak antigen, was licensed in 1987 for children 18 months and older, and in 1990 for infants 2 months and older.

Following the approval of the first Hib conjugates, rates of Hib disease in young children dropped dramatically — 92%, from 37 per 100,000 in 1989 to 3 per 100,000 by 2008.

While numerous safety studies found the vaccine to be safe and the side effects to be transient, Jablonowski and Hooker wrote that those studies were “underpowered” — meaning the sample sizes were too small to detect potential safety issues.

The clinical trial used to declare the vaccine’s safety consisted of investigators calling families 72 hours after vaccination to see how the infants were doing. On that basis, they concluded the vaccine was “safe and effective,” the authors wrote.

“Since VAERS first went live in July of 1990 the data started screaming that something was wrong with HibTITER,” Jablonowski told The Defender. “In VAERS’ first six months of existence, 30% of mortalities reported in children 6 months old or younger were HibTITER recipients.”

HibTITER dominated the Hib vaccine market between 1991 and 1994 when it began to share the market with other FDA-approved vaccines.

Wyeth allowed the license for the thimerosal-containing HibTITER to expire in 2002, following the CDC’s Simpsonwood retreat. At the meeting of public health officials, vaccine manufacturers and professional medical associations reviewed data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink and privately raised concerns about thimerosal in vaccines.

The license expired just after the Institute of Medicine’s Immunization Safety Review Committee published its 2001 safety review of thimerosal-containing vaccines and their link to neurodevelopmental disorders.

In that report, the Institute of Medicine found insufficient data to confirm or deny the link, yet the CDC recommended removing thimerosal from vaccines “as soon as possible.”

However, even when Wyeth began selling a reformulated non-thimerosal version of HibTITER in 2003, adverse events continued to occur at high rates.

“In the subsequent years, HibTITER accounted for a disproportionately larger number of emergency room visits, serious reports and reports of death,” Jablonowski said. “The FDA and CDC took no known action, and instead allowed the manufacturer, Wyeth, to choose to end production.”

The researchers estimated that approximately 35 million Americans received the HibTITER vaccine during its time on the market.

In 2011, vaccine maker Nuron Biotech Inc. acquired the HibTITER rights from Wyeth/Pfizer and announced it was preparing to rerelease the vaccine in the U.S. and some Asian markets.

However, the shot was never reintroduced to the U.S. market and the company no longer exists.

‘We were stunned at what the data revealed’

The investigators compared the frequencies of new diseases identified within 30 days of vaccination among 152,269 infants who received the thimerosal-free HibTITER to 125,215 infants who received any other Hib vaccine.

They employed the Fisher’s Exact Test statistical model to compare disease frequency in each cohort and used Bonferroni correction, a powerful statistical tool, to eliminate random results. They also set a high bar for statistical significance.

They identified 19 adverse outcomes with the “most prolific, significant signals” for infectious diseases, such as pulmonary tuberculosis, where 99.03% of diagnoses were among HibTITER recipients.

Other respiratory illnesses occurring within 30 days of HibTITER vaccination included asthma, acute upper respiratory infections, influenza and acute bronchiolitis. Additional diseases included laryngopharyngitis, common cold, colitis, enteritis and gastroenteritis.

Of the 19 adverse effects they identified, the most recent package insert for HibTITER named only two: fever and rash. Infectious diseases accounted for nine of the 19 adverse effects.

Jablonowski explained that the HibTITER doesn’t directly cause infections but can create conditions that facilitate them. The presence of so many infections “implicates significant and rapid immunological defense impairment,” he said.

Jablonowski added:

“While we had heard anecdotally of many adverse reactions to the HibTITER vaccine, we were stunned at what the data revealed.

“This vaccine should have been studied much more intensively before being allowed on the market. In fact, it shouldn’t have ever been allowed to be injected into infants in the absence of rigorous studies to support its safety.”

He said analyzing the adverse outcomes was “simple — high-school level math and basic database/programming skills kind-of-simple. There are literally millions of people in this country who could have performed the data science portion of this study, and none of them apparently work for the FDA or CDC.”

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | 1 Comment

The CDC Planned Quarantine Camps Nationwide

By Jeffrey A Tucker | Brownstone Institute | November 7, 2024

No matter how bad you think Covid policies were, they were intended to be worse.

Consider the vaccine passports alone. Six cities were locked down to include only the vaccinated in public indoor places. They were New York City, Boston, Chicago, New Orleans, Washington, D.C., and Seattle. The plan was to enforce this with a vaccine passport. It broke. Once the news leaked that the shot didn’t stop infection or transmission, the planners lost public support and the scheme collapsed.

It was undoubtedly planned to be permanent and nationwide if not worldwide. Instead, the scheme had to be dialed back.

Features of the CDC’s edicts did incredible damage. It imposed the rent moratorium. It decreed the ridiculous “six feet of distance” and mask mandates. It forced Plexiglas as the interface for commercial transactions. It implied that mail-in balloting must be the norm, which probably flipped the election. It delayed the reopening as long as possible. It was sadistic.

Even with all that, worse was planned. On July 26, 2020, with the George Floyd riots having finally settled down, the CDC issued a plan for establishing nationwide quarantine camps. People were to be isolated, given only food and some cleaning supplies. They would be banned from participating in any religious services. The plan included contingencies for preventing suicide. There were no provisions made for any legal appeals or even the right to legal counsel.

The plan’s authors were unnamed but included 26 footnotes. It was completely official. The document was only removed on about March 26, 2023. During the entire intervening time, the plan survived on the CDC’s public site with little to no public notice or controversy.

It was called “Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings.”

“This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings. This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available.”

By absence of empirical data, the meaning is: nothing like this has ever been tried. The point of the document was to map out how it could be possible and alert authorities to possible pitfalls to be avoided.

The meaning of “shielding” is “to reduce the number of severe Covid-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (‘high-risk’) and the general population (‘low-risk’). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or ‘green zones’ established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector, or community level depending on the context and setting. They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.”

In other words, this is what used to be concentration camps.

Who are these people who would be rounded up? They are “older adults and people of any age who have serious underlying medical conditions.” Who determines this? Public health authorities. The purpose? The CDC explains: “physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population” allows authorities “to prioritize the use of the limited available resources.”

This sounds a lot like condemning people to death in the name of protecting them.

The model establishes three levels. First is the household level. Here high-risk people are“physically isolated from other household members.” That alone is objectionable. Elders need people to take care of them. They need love and to be surrounded by family. The CDC should never imagine that it would intervene in households to force old people into separate places.

The model jumps from households to the “neighborhood level.” Here we have the same approach: forced separation of those deemed vulnerable.

From there, the model jumps again to the “camp/sector level.” Here it is different. “A group of shelters such as schools, community buildings within a camp/sector (max 50 high-risk individuals per single green zone) where high-risk individuals are physically isolated together. One entry point is used for exchange of food, supplies, etc. A meeting area is used for residents and visitors to interact while practicing physical distancing (2 meters). No movement into or outside the green zone.”

Yes, you read that correctly. The CDC is here proposing concentration camps for the sick or anyone they deem to be in danger of medically significant consequences of infection.

Further: “to minimize external contact, each green zone should include able-bodied high-risk individuals capable of caring for residents who have disabilities or are less mobile. Otherwise, designate low-risk individuals for these tasks, preferably who have recovered from confirmed COVID-19 and are assumed to be immune.”

The plan says in passing, contradicting thousands of years of experience, “Currently, we do not know if prior infection confers immunity.” Therefore the only solution is to minimize all exposure throughout the whole population. Getting sick is criminalized.

These camps require a “dedicated staff” to “monitor each green zone. Monitoring includes both adherence to protocols and potential adverse effects or outcomes due to isolation and stigma. It may be necessary to assign someone within the green zone, if feasible, to minimize movement in/out of green zones.”

The people housed in these camps need to have good explanations of why they are denied even basic religious freedom. The report explains:

“Proactive planning ahead of time, including strong community engagement and risk communication is needed to better understand the issues and concerns of restricting individuals from participating in communal practices because they are being shielded. Failure to do so could lead to both interpersonal and communal violence.”

Further, there must be some mechanisms to prohibit suicide:

Additional stress and worry are common during any epidemic and may be more pronounced with COVID-19 due to the novelty of the disease and increased fear of infection, increased childcare responsibilities due to school closures, and loss of livelihoods. Thus, in addition to the risk of stigmatization and feeling of isolation, this shielding approach may have an important psychological impact and may lead to significant emotional distress, exacerbate existing mental illness or contribute to anxiety, depression, helplessness, grief, substance abuse, or thoughts of suicide among those who are separated or have been left behind. Shielded individuals with concurrent severe mental health conditions should not be left alone. There must be a caregiver allocated to them to prevent further protection risks such as neglect and abuse.

The biggest risk, the document explains, is as follows:

“While the shielding approach is not meant to be coercive, it may appear forced or be misunderstood in humanitarian settings.”

(It should go without saying but this “shielding” approach suggested here has nothing to do with focused protection of the Great Barrington Declaration. Focused protection specifically says: “schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.”)

In four years of research, and encountering truly shocking documents and evidence of what happened in the Covid years, this one certainly ranks up at the top of the list of totalitarian schemes for pathogenic control prior to vaccination. It is quite simply mind-blowing that such a scheme could ever be contemplated.

Who wrote it? What kind of deep institutional pathology exists that enabled this to be contemplated? The CDC has 10,600 full-time employees and contractors and a budget of $11.5 billion. In light of this report, and everything else that has gone on there for four years, both numbers should be zero.


Jeffrey Tucker is Founder, Author, and President at Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Life After Lockdown, and many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Leave a comment

Moscow rebukes Canada over ‘false accusations’ of sabotage campaign

RT | November 8, 2024

The Russian Foreign Ministry has issued a formal demarche to the Canadian embassy in Moscow over what it called “false accusations regarding alleged plans of ‘Russian sabotage’ against NATO nations.”

The diplomatic rebuke on Friday came in the context of media reports about investigations into packages which caught fire in July at DHL parcel sorting facilities in Leipzig, Germany and Birmingham, England. The devices were reportedly meant to be flown to the US and Canada in cargo planes.

Western officials have claimed that the Russian military intelligence service GRU may be behind them, the Wall Street Journal reported earlier this week citing anonymous sources. Moscow has dismissed the story, calling it an unsubstantiated piece of “fake news.”

Ottawa said it was “aware of and deeply concerned with Russia’s intensifying campaign, from cyber incidents and disinformation operations to sabotage activities,” when asked for comments.

”Canada has expressed this concern directly to Russian officials and unequivocally stated that any threat to the safety and security of Canadians is unacceptable,” government spokesperson Tim Warmington said on Tuesday.

Moscow notified the Canadian deputy ambassador on Friday that the “speculations, which are being disseminated [on] command from the US and its satellites” are part of hybrid warfare against Russia in the context of the Ukraine conflict and may indicate an upcoming “anti-Russian provocation.”

“If such a plan is realized, for instance, in the form of a false flag operation, the responsibility for it will fully fall on the nations that make such unacceptable accusations against Russia, including Canada,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

Any hostile actions against Russia will “not be left without a response, just as was the case in the past” the statement warned.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | , , , | 1 Comment

Venezuela, Russia sign new energy, defense agreements

Press TV – November 8, 2024

Venezuela and Russia have signed 17 new agreements, in what was described as further consolidation of the “pressure-free” bilateral relationship between them.

During a visit by a senior Kremlin official to Caracas on Thursday, the two sides signed the new agreements in energy cooperation and petroleum exploration as well as in the security area on “intelligence, counterintelligence and counterespionage issues.”

Visiting Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Chernyshenko, who heads the Russian part of the Intergovernmental Russian-Venezuelan High-Level Commission (CIAN), told his Venezuelan counterpart Delcy Rodriguez that his country stood ready to support Venezuela’s armed forces with “the most sophisticated weapons and military equipment.”

The Russian delegation also met with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, before inking several documents, including the outline of key cooperation areas until 2030.

During the ceremony at the Miraflores Palace, Maduro expressed his satisfaction with the work carried out by both the Venezuelan and Russian teams at CIAN. He said the new agreements would “seal and strengthen the path of union and cooperation” between Venezuela and Russia, “from now until 2030 and beyond.”

“This meeting, 20 years after the High Level Commission between both nations was founded, is one of satisfaction for the work, the spirit of friendship and brotherhood that increasingly unites Russia and Venezuela,” he said.

The Latin American leader added that Caracas and Moscow are building an “impregnable” “win-win” relationship that is “free of pressure, blackmail and sanctions”.

The 17 new agreements are added to the more than 300 bilateral cooperation instruments which were signed before in the fields of finance, energy, industry, commerce, customs, transportation and tourism, agriculture, fishing and food, science and technology, education, health, culture, sports and youth, among others areas of bilateral cooperation.

Venezuela has one of the world’s largest natural gas reserves and the world’s largest proven reserves of oil. Russia is a Eurasia energy giant. However, both countries’ energy sectors face sanctions by the United States.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has repeatedly censured American leaders over Washington’s foreign policy which aims “to preserve their domination, hegemony and diktat” by targeting other countries with “blackmail, ultimatums, threats.”

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

Houthis Blast Another US Drone Out of the Sky, Fire Hypersonic Missile at Israel

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 08.11.2024

Houthi fighters have reportedly shot down another MQ-9 Reaper drone, this one over al-Jawf province in Yemen’s north, with footage posted to social media early Friday morning showing flaming wreckage falling out of the sky and starting a large fire on the ground in the dead of night as onlookers inspect the unmanned aerial vehicle’s remains.

The US military acknowledged to the Associated Press that it had seen the footage, and said it was investigating the incident, without offering any further details.

The Houthis have now shot down as many as ten of the $32 mln apiece US reconnaissance and strike drones since November 2023, or thirteen if counting US losses going back to 2017.

The militia has a surprisingly large array of air defense systems at their disposal, including upgrades to Soviet-era Kub, Dvina, Neva/Pechora and Strela-1 SAMs, and allegedly, derivatives of Iranian-designed systems.

Separately Friday, a source told Sputnik that the Houthis had launched a “hypersonic ballistic missile from Yemen at a vital target in the Negev Desert in southern Israel.”

The source did not elaborate on the missile’s characteristics or its target, but the Negev is known to be the home to some of Israel’s most important airbases, including Nevatim, which hosts the country’s fleet of F-35I jets, and Hatzerim, home to F-15I series aircraft. The United States military is also known to host a top-secret radar facility atop Mount Har Qeren in the Negev known as Site 512.

The Houthis unveiled what they said was a two-stage, solid-fuel hypersonic missile with a range of 2,150 km known as the Palestine-2 in September, saying the weapon can reach speeds up to Mach 16, and features stealth technology. Multiple Houthi missiles and drones have pierced Israel’s powerful air defenses since the militia began its campaign against Tel Aviv last year. US, British and Israeli air and naval forces regularly deployed to try to “degrade” the militia’s capabilities have so far failed to do so, with the US alone spending over $2.5 billion on operations against the group since January.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , | 1 Comment

Algeria halts trade with France over Western Sahara stance

MEMO | November 8, 2024

Algeria has instructed its banks to suspend financial transactions related to imports and exports with France, while also lifting the longstanding ban on imports from Spain, imposed more than two and a half years ago.

The move marks Algeria’s first tangible response to France’s position on the Western Sahara dispute.

In July, Algeria withdrew its ambassador from France after Paris endorsed Morocco’s autonomy plan as the sole basis for resolving the Western Sahara conflict.

France’s former Ambassador to Algeria, Xavier Driencourt, said the Algerian decision was a “major blow to economic relations between the two countries” and warned that it could lead to serious consequences for both parties.

Algeria had previously suspended its 20-year Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighbourliness, and Cooperation with Spain due to Madrid’s stance on the Western Sahara issue. However, it reversed the decision in September. The Algerian Banking Association informed bank directors in a document that the previous suspension of financial transactions with Spain was no longer in effect.

Relations between Algeria and Spain have since improved, with Algeria recently appointing a new ambassador to Madrid after recalling the previous envoy.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israel über alles

By Ricardo Nuno Costa – New Eastern Outlook – November 8 2024

“Germany has only one place, and that’s on Israel’s side,” said German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in the Bundestag, justifying the delivery of arms to Tel Aviv.

One wonders if this partial stance is what is expected of a country that claims to be the leader of the European project, with geopolitical ambitions in an increasingly multipolar world. For the global majority, the answer is no, but in Germany, the subject is thorny and shrouded in taboos. To top it off, the Federal Republic has just passed a law to prevent it from being debated.

Berlin’s inability to call Tel Aviv to account on its international obligations only confirms Germany’s increasingly secondary role in the international arena. If the “engine of Europe” is constrained in its military role, it could at least be a diplomatic power, making use of its economic status. But its role is diminishing. Why is that?

In his latest book, “Krieg ohne Ende?” (War without end?), international political scientist Michael Lüders masterfully summarises the hypocrisy surrounding Germany’s involvement in the Zionist project from the beginning to the present day. The author suggests, in the form of a subtitle, “why we need to change our attitude towards Israel if we are to have peace in the Middle East.”

Germany is losing the credibility it has built up over decades in the eyes of the global majority. Today, the country is no longer seen with the same seriousness that we have become accustomed to in recent decades, but rather as a mere instrumental piece of the US in international relations. This is also the visible result of the “feminist foreign policy” that Annalena Baerbock has pursued as foreign minister over the last three years.

Defence of Israel is ‘Staatsräson’ of the Federal Republic

Germany has adopted the defence of Israel’s existence as ‘Staatsräson’ (raison d’État). It was during a visit by Chancellor Merkel to the Israeli Knesset in 2008 that this concept was first mentioned.

In the above-mentioned bestseller, it becomes clear that this principle is no accident, as it corresponds to the fact that Israel’s ‘raison d’État’ is the Holocaust, for which Germany is to blame. According to Mr. Lüders, the Jewish state used the Eichmann case to launch its ‘raison d’État’, while many other Nazi officials responsible for the persecution of the Jews had passed into the new Bonn nomenclature without being called to account. The most notorious case was that of Hans Globke, the eminence grise of the new regime, a key player in the USA’s fight against the USSR. He had previously drafted the Nuremberg race laws and was now Adenauer’s number two, protected by the new BND intelligence services and the CIA.

The SS officer Adolf Eichmann, kidnapped in Argentina by the Israelis, symbolically bore all the blame for Germany’s 1933-45 National Socialist’s period. After his hanging in 1962 for crimes against the Jewish people during the Holocaust, in the only judicial execution carried out in Israel to date, the FRG finally officially recognised Israel in 1965, after years of collaboration (since 1952). This marked the beginning of a complex relationship that remains opaque to this day.

An important part of this relationship has been the multi-billion dollar military industry within the Atlanticist framework. The most significant case, again unclear, was the corruption scandal over the sale of three nuclear-capable submarines and four corvettes sold during the Merkel governments to the Netanyahu government in 2016 for almost 4 billion euros, which ended up being paid for in part by German taxpayers.

In a current example, political scientist Kristin Helberg, who specialises in the Middle East, expressed her surprise on the public channel in October that Berlin was not helping Israel with defensive weapons against a hypothetical Iranian attack – which in her view would be legitimate – but by delivering ammunition to be used on civilian populations, contrary to the Geneva Convention.

Germany involved in a genocide

With its arms support for Israeli attacks on civilians in Gaza and Lebanon, Germany is not only committing an international offence that is costing it the current cases opened at the ICC and ICJ, but is also seeing its reputation stained in the biggest international forums by the global majority, on which its industrial export model depends.

On 14 October, German Foreign Ministry spokesman Sebastian Fischer said at a press conference in Berlin that the German government “sees no signs that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza” and that “Israel undoubtedly has the right to self-defence against Hamas”, and two days later Chancellor Scholz said loudly in the Bundestag that “there will be more arms deliveries – Israel can always count on that.”

Criticising Israel will be banned

In its increasingly radical philo-Zionist course, the German political class passed a new resolution “to protect, preserve and strengthen Jewish life in Germany”, to which only the parties of the governing coalition and the CDU/CSU were called, without consulting the AfD and BSW. The controversial and non-transparent resolution promises to pursue “increasingly open and violent anti-Semitism in right-wing and Islamist extremist circles, as well as a relativising approach and the rise of Israel-related and left-wing anti-imperialist anti-Semitism.”

The document mentions that “cases of anti-Semitism have increased” since the Hamas attack on Israel a year ago, but fails to mention that German law has since come to consider anti-Semitic the manifestation of various expressions in favour of the Palestinian cause such as the slogan “From the river to the sea Palestine will be free” among other slogans, chants, insignia or even posts published on the internet, which are now considered and counted as punishable anti-Semitic crimes.

“The German Bundestag reaffirms its decision to ensure that no organisation or project that spreads antisemitism, questions Israel’s right to exist, calls for a boycott of Israel or actively supports the BDS movement receives financial support,” the document goes on to say.

Recently, the rector of the Berlin Institute for Advanced Study, Barbara Stollberg-Rilinger, complained that the freedom of study of the scientific community is under massive threat. “What distinguishes antisemitism from legitimate criticism of the Israeli government?” she asked. “And above all, who defines what antisemitism is? This is not at all clear. The definition is vague and leaves enormous room for legal uncertainty,” she asserted.

The divorce between the political class and public perception

It’s clear that the text of the new law aims to exclude the AfD from public debate, using the magic buzzword of the “far right”, but it also weighs heavily on the BSW, where the Palestinian cause and the multipolarist vision are obvious. A recent study by the Forsa research institute for Stern/RTL corroborates the clear rift between real and institutional Germany. Whilst the former doesn’t want the country to be involved in the Middle East war, the political class has guaranteed its indispensable support for Israel as a ‘national interest’. Voters from all German parties are therefore unequivocally opposed to further arms deliveries to Tel Aviv. The BSW electorate (85 per cent) is in the lead, followed by the AfD (75 per cent), but also 60 per cent of SPD voters, 56 per cent of CDU/CSU voters and 52 per cent of FDP voters. Interestingly, the Greens’ electorate showed a 50-50 tie. In the national total, this corresponds to 60 per cent of the citizenry, with the difference in the east being more significant (75 per cent against).

The case of the AfD is more curious because as a party that was born out of contestation with the system on the issues not only of immigration, but also of foreign policy and others, and its electoral base is clearly critical of Berlin’s pro-Western policy, its leadership also has a disproportionate presence of the philo-Zionist element, which is no different from the rest of the political class.

According to another poll also from October, by Infratest Dimap for public television ARD and WELT daily, only 19 per cent of AfD supporters consider Israel to be a reliable partner, a noticeably lower percentage than in the CDU/CSU (34 per cent) the SPD (36 per cent) and the Greens (38 per cent).

AfD distances itself from the Zionist consensus

Probably because he knew how to interpret this discrepancy between leadership and base, AfD co-leader Tino Chrupalla called for an end to aid to Tel Aviv and Germany’s ‘one-sided’ relationship with the Jewish state. “By supplying arms to Israel, you are accepting the dehumanisation of all civilian victims on both sides. They are not contributing to détente, but rather throwing fuel on the fire”, he said. It is “time to take a critical and objective look at the Israeli government”.

These statements come at a time of a clear move towards multipolarity within the party. Moreover, the principle of neutrality is the AfD’s official line. Its 2024 European electoral programme states that “the supply of arms to war zones does not serve peace in Europe”. At the risk of becoming just another political party, the AfD seems to want to meet the feelings of the majority of Germans and its social support base on foreign policy issues, which are now much debated by the general public.

It seems clear that after decades in the room, the elephant can no longer be hidden in the German political debate.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Book Review, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes | , , , | 2 Comments

Ukraine aid program responsible for political crisis in Germany

By Lucas Leiroz | November 8, 2024

The political crisis in Germany does not seem to be coming to an end in the short term. The collapse of the government is worrying the country’s authorities, and there is also an unbalanced social scenario that puts the entire German stability at risk. In a recent speech, Olaf Scholz acknowledged that the situation in Ukraine is the main reason for this crisis, particularly due to the systematic support provided by Berlin to the Kiev regime.

The German Prime Minister stated that the main reason for the country’s political crisis is the lack of consensus among the authorities on military backing for Ukraine. He blamed former Finance Minister Christian Lindner for refusing to approve a budget plan to further boost funding for Kiev. According to Scholz, Lindner’s position created polarization among officials and broke up the coalition of the government.

Scholz recently dismissed Lindner from his post, creating strong friction between the different groups supporting the government. Lindner is also the leader of the Free Democratic Party, which is one of the three parties that make up the pro-Scholz coalition. His firing caused discontent not only among the party members, but also among the Social Democrats and the “Greens”, creating an atmosphere of distrust among Scholz’s team.

The rivalry between Scholz and Lindner started as a dispute over how to establish a policy of support for Ukraine consistent with Germany’s financial situation. The two officials had a bitter and possibly disrespectful discussion during a meeting in which Scholz tried to force Lindner to approve a new economic plan that would allow further military aid to Ukraine, thus ignoring some of Germany’s major social problems, such as economic decline and deindustrialization.

Scholz tries to disguise the nature of his economic plan by claiming that it includes efforts to promote the development of clean energy and investment in the automotive industry. However, the Ukrainian issue is the central factor in the proposal. Scholz says that it is necessary to expand aid policies for Kiev, considering that winter is coming, and Ukrainians will increasingly require international help to overcome the difficulties of the season. The chancellor also says that, with Donald Trump’s victory in the US, the main responsibility for supporting Ukraine will come to Germany and the Europeans, which is why he hopes that an economic plan establishing clear assistance for Kiev will be approved.

“The finance minister shows no willingness to implement this offer in the federal government for the benefit of our country. I do not want to subject our country to such behavior any longer,” Scholz said.

Scholz is currently in a critical political situation. His followers have become a minority in the government, as Lindner’s dismissal has also encouraged the resignation of other ministers and officials. It is possible that early elections will be called in March, and German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier has already spoken out in favor of this. Clearly, Germany is going through one of the most critical moments in its post-Cold War history, no longer being the stable, peaceful and developed country so praised by European social democrats in previous years.

Moreover, Scholz’s political opponents are pressuring the remaining officials in his government to establish a different agenda from that of the chancellor. For example, according to German media, Lindner has asked the Defense Ministry to impose new limits on military aid to Ukraine, justifying his request based on economic calculations that prove Germany’s inability to continue boosting assistance. Berlin has already halved its aid to Kiev, but Lindner and other realist politicians say that it needs to be cut further to overcome the country’s billion-dollar deficit.

In the end, it is clear how the conflict in Ukraine is responsible for the German political crisis. Olaf Scholz himself admits that the lack of consensus on the Ukrainian issue led to the collapse of his government, which seems to be reason enough for Berlin to rethink its policy towards Ukraine. Instead of firing ministers who think differently, Scholz should pay more attention to the calculations that expose the German reality, recognizing that it is not viable for the country to continue backing the Ukrainian regime in the long term.

If Scholz does not change his strategy on Ukraine, he will be defeated in new parliamentary elections. Furthermore, the political cost of his efforts will be in vain because German aid to Ukraine is not capable of changing anything in the conflict scenario. In the end, the Scholz government is likely to become yet another of the many European governments that have collapsed amid the crisis that has affected the continent since 2022.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Associations, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Will Trump Buckle Again on the JFK Records?

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | November 7, 2024

A fascinating situation has now developed between President-elect Donald Trump and the U.S. national-security establishment with respect to the long-secret JKF-assassination-related records that the CIA has succeeded in keeping secret for more than 60 years. Despite Trump’s campaign vow to release those records, it’s not at all clear how this matter is going to be resolved. I will give my prediction at the end of this article.

There are three major factors at play:

1. During his 2024 campaign, Trump vowed that this time around he is definitely going to order the National Archives to release those 60-year-old secret CIA records. Moreover, as he told Joe Rogan, he is going to do it “immediately.” See “Trump to Rogan: If Elected, I’ll Open Remaining JFK Files ‘Immediately’” by Jefferson Morley.

Let’s place this first factor in a historical context.

The JFK Records Act, which was enacted in 1992, ordered the national-security establishment and all other federal agencies to disclose their JFK-assassination-related records to the public.

However, the law gave federal officials an out. If they claimed that the release of certain records might jeopardize “national security” in various ways, they could keep them secret for another 25 years. Yes, 25 additional years of secrecy, on top of the secrecy from 1963 to the 1990s! Taking advantage of that out, the national-security establishment, especially the CIA, continued keeping thousands of its assassination-related records secret.

That 25-year-period ran out during Trump’s first term as president. At first, Trump declared valiantly that he was going to comply with the law and permit the National Archives to release and disclose the records.

But then just before the deadline arrived, Trump was visited by the CIA, who insisted on continued secrecy of its assassination-related records.

Trump immediately buckled. While allowing some records to be released, he did what the CIA wanted him to do and ordered that thousands of other records continue to be kept secret for another few years.

When the new deadline occurred under President Biden, the CIA convinced Biden to continue the secrecy of the records into perpetuity. Thus, the CIA felt it could now sleep easy, knowing that its long-secret assassination-related records would never see the light of day.

2. There is no doubt that the CIA does not want people to see its assassination-related records that it has succeeded in keeping secret for more than 60 years. That’s undoubtedly because the records contain incriminating material — that is, evidence that points further in the direction of a national-security-state regime-change operation against President Kennedy on that fateful day in Dallas in November 1963.

No, I’m not suggesting that there is some sort of “smoking gun” in those records, like a confession that states “We orchestrated the assassination of John F. Kennedy.” That would be a ridiculous notion especially because the CIA’s policy was to never put any reference to a state-sponsored assassination into writing. Moreover, the CIA would never have turned over such a “smoking-gun” record to the National Archives in the first place, even if it wouldn’t be released for another 25 years.

Instead, it is a virtual certainty that the secret records contain bits and pieces of circumstantial evidence that further fill out the mosaic of a regime-change operation. The CIA knows that assassination researchers are an extremely sharp and competent group of individuals and that they will scour those remaining records with a fine-tooth analytical comb. They know that if there is incriminating evidence, the researchers will find it.

When the CIA prevailed on Trump and Biden to maintain the secrecy of its assassination-related records, it knew that it was a virtual certainty that people would accuse it of a continued cover-up of its state-sponsored assassination of Kennedy. The CIA was obviously willing to pay that price, which indicates how important it is to the CIA that those those records never ever be released.

3. Longtime readers of my blog know that I steadfastly maintain that it is not the president, the Congress, and the Supreme Court that run the federal government. Instead, it is the national-security branch of the federal government — i.e., the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA. This is a notion that I would say most Americans simply do not want to confront because it is so discomforting.

In other words, the quaint notion is that the United States is a civilian-run government in which the military is subordinate to the civilian control. The truth is that once the federal government was converted from a limited-government republic to a national-security state in the late 1940s, the national-security establishment became in charge of the federal government, just like it is in countries like Egypt and Pakistan.

But here is the kicker: to ensure that the American people never come to the realization of what that conversion did to their federal governmental structure, the national-security branch has always permitted the other three branches to maintain the veneer or the appearance of being in charge. The national-security branch doesn’t care about appearances or veneers. It just cares about being in charge.

For a great book on this subject, one that convinced me of the validity of this thesis, I have long highly recommended National Security and Double Government by Michael J. Glennon, professor of law at Tufts University and former counsel to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

That’s how the CIA got Trump to change his mind about releasing the JFK records when he was president. The CIA is in charge. Trump, as president, answers to the CIA, not the other way around.

So, now what? You have these three factors at play: (1) Trump’s vow to immediately order a release of the records as soon as he is sworn in as president; (2) The CIA’s obvious desire that those records never see the light of day; and (3) If the CIA pulls rank and orders Trump to cease and desist and to violate his vow, it will be confirming my thesis (and Glennon’s thesis) that it is the national-security branch that is running the federal government, something that they do not want the American people to realize.

Therefore, to ensure that Trump retains the veneer of being in charge, the CIA might simply permit him to release the records, something it was not willing to do the last time that Trump was president. But that obviously means releasing assassination-related records that the CIA clearly does not want to be released.

My prediction: The CIA is going to order Trump not to release the records and Trump is going to comply with the order by engaging in another buckle, just like the last time he was president. Like the first time around, I predict that he will declare that “national security” is still at stake and order a partial release of some irrelevant records and make a big deal of it, while continuing to keep the rest of the records — i.e., the incriminating ones — secret. Of course, this option would continue to keep the CIA’s records secret and therefore advance the cover-up of the national-security establishment’s assassination of President Kennedy, but, at the same, time would confirm my thesis (and Glennon’s thesis) that the national-security branch runs the federal government and the other three branches, including the executive branch, defer to its rule.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular | , , | 1 Comment

Western liberalism has ‘degenerated’ – Putin

RT | November 7, 2024

Liberalism in the West has devolved into an aggressive and intolerant ideology in which freedom, democracy, and human rights take a back seat to power, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said.

His remarks were part of a keynote address at the 21st annual meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club in Sochi on Thursday.

“Today’s Western liberalism, in my opinion, has degenerated into extreme intolerance and aggression towards any alternative, towards any sovereign and independent thought, and now justifies neo-Nazism, terrorism, racism and even mass genocide of the civilian population,” Putin said.

Moscow has traditionally considered the “collective West” to consist of the US and its allies in North America, Europe, Australia and East Asia. Their once-liberal governments have transformed their guiding ideology into something “totalitarian in essence,” the Russian president argued.

“Democracy is increasingly being interpreted as minority rule rather than rule of the majority, and traditional democracy is even being put at odds with some abstract freedom, for the sake of which – as some believe – democratic procedures, elections, the opinion of the majority, freedom of speech and impartiality of the media can be disregarded, or even sacrificed,” said Putin.

The Russian president called this trend towards tyranny as one of the biggest threats to the emerging multipolar world order.

The plenary session at which Putin spoke was titled ‘Security for Everyone. Together – Into a New World’. This year’s Valdai meeting is taking place under the motto ‘A Lasting Peace – On What Basis? Universal Security and Equal Opportunities for Development in the 21st Century’.

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , | 1 Comment

Operation Red Rock in Cambodia

Tales of the American Empire | November 7, 2024

American President Richard Nixon was desperate to win the Vietnam war. A huge problem was that Vietnamese forces took advantage of neutral Cambodia and set up camps along the border from where they executed attacks. The Americans placed great pressure on the Cambodia government to send forces to expel the Vietnamese and promised massive aid and air support, but Cambodians didn’t want to join the bloody war. A top-secret plan called “Operation Red Rock” was devised in the White House to send 13 American commandos dressed as Vietnamese sappers along with some Vietnamese mercenaries to attack Cambodia’s main airbase. The American team parachuted in and conducted a successful yet messy raid on the night January 21,1971 that destroyed a few dozen older military aircraft, an ammo dump, and killed some guards. The US military quickly released details of a dastardly raid by Vietnamese communists that convinced the Cambodian government to enter the war on the American side. The Cambodian army sent units east to attack the battle hardened Vietnamese army, and were decimated. This led to a wider war and political turmoil that eventually destroyed Cambodia.

_________________________________________________

“Chip Tatum – Black Ops Interview with Ted Gunderson”; YouTube; May 13, 2018;    • Chip Tatum – Black Ops Interview with…  

“Family Jewels”; CIA; NSA; May 16, 1973; https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//NSAEBB/NS…

“William Colby – Suspicious Death”; Chip Tatum; April 18, 2023; https://chiptatum.com/2023/04/18/will…

Related Tales: “The Vietnam War”:    • The Vietnam War  

November 8, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment