Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Pokemon Go(v) … Another Conspiracy Confirmed!

Corbett | December 18, 2024

Remember Pokémon Go? You know, that cute game where you And! Battle . . . Pokeballs? . . . to capture . . . .monsters in a gym? . . . or something like that. Anyway, the point is, people went bananas over this augmented reality nonsense eight years ago and of course those crazy conspiracy kooks at places like The Corbett Report had to rain on everyone’s parade by warning them about the app’s shady, intel-connected origins. Well . . . guess who just got proven correct again. (SPOILER: it’s the crazy conspiracy kooks who were just proven correct again.)

WATCH ON: ARCHIVE / BITCHUTE / ODYSEE / RUMBLE / RUMBLE / SUBSTACK or DOWNLOAD THE MP4

SHOW NOTES:

POKÉMON GO – What You Need to Know

Everyone is going crazy over Pokémon Go

Pokémon Go is a viral phenomenon

Pokémon Go – Vaporeon stampede Central Park, NYC

Pokémon Go wikipedia

Pokémon Go Came Out In the US, Let’s Catch ‘Em All

The CIA’s ‘Pokémon Go’ App is Doing What the Patriot Act Can’t

The CIA helped sell a mapping startup to Google. Now they won’t tell us why

Niantic story

Pokémon Go to The Military Industrial Complex

Building a Large Geospatial Model to Achieve Spatial Intelligence

‘Pokémon Go’ Players Are Training AI Models To See The World

The Drone Wars: You Are Not Prepared

BELLINGFEST DAY 1 (Niantic exec questioned on potential military use)

Niantic Exec Comments On Governments Buying Pokémon GO Data

Episode 145 – You Are Being Gamed

Most Disturbing Presentation Ever: Our Tech Nightmare (“Skinner Box”) DICE 2010

Ernest Hancock interviews James Corbett – 2024/11/27

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular, Video | | Leave a comment

Documents Show CISA Monitored and Influenced Domestic Speech on COVID-19 Through Private Sector Partners

Private entities were enlisted to flag content, even accurate information.

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 20, 2024

America First Legal (AFL) has revealed new information from a document it has been able to obtain through the lawsuit filed against the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

CISA is part of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which has a “foreign disinformation” unit, the Countering Foreign Influence Task Force (CFITF).

However, as early as mid-February 2020, CISA (via CFITF) had already started to monitor domestic speech about Covid – nearly a month before the pandemic was officially declared by the UN’s WHO, and before orders started to be issued to shut down schools and businesses in the US.

Even though several layers deep, CFITF was still a government entity, and in order to circumvent constitutional issues related to censorship of online speech, the document indicates that the unit turned to what AFL brands “the censorship industrial complex” – specifically, its private sector component.

These were “fact checkers,” “bias raters” and similar that keep cropping up in revelations about the Covid-era censorship: Atlantic Council DFR Lab, Media Matters, Stanford Internet Observatory, Alliance for Securing Democracy, Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) (a UK-based group, which now passes as “British-American”), Global Disinformation Index (GDI), and even an openly foreign government project, EU’s “EU vs. Disinfo.”

Among the kinds of speech CFITF would monitor and/or flag was that of President Trump, his comments about Hydroxychloroquine going back to 2020. The document reveals that CFITF (via Atlantic Council, DFR Lab) knowingly chose to give itself the right to flag even accurate information, justifying a thing as serious as censorship by presenting hypothetical scenarios:

“Once-accurate information can become misinformation as it ages, leading to erroneous conclusions and misinterpretation of the current situation,” the document reads. This was put in the context of the rapidly changing “nature” of the pandemic.

However, it took years for the same awareness – that information related to Covid was constantly changing – to start reversing some censorship decisions (e.g., the Covid origin theory).

As for CISA/CFITF early pandemic activities affecting online speech, AFL believes that they may represent “a violation of what’s known as the Supreme Court’s ‘major questions’ doctrine, which holds that government agencies must not stray from the specific legal authorities given to them by Congress.”

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | 1 Comment

UK’s Online “Safety” Act Enforced: Ofcom Pushes for Increased Platform Censorship and Encryption Backdoors

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 18, 2024

UK’s Online Safety Act has come into force and the Office of Communications (Ofcom) regulator has quickly set out to start enforcing it, with noncompliance resulting in high fines.

What those opposed to the legislation consider to be a censorship law and a sweeping one at that, is, according to Ofcom, a way to “protect” online users in the UK from illegal harms by legally requiring tech companies to “start taking action to tackle criminal activity on their platforms” as well as “make them safer by design.”

But what the law’s provisions in reality do, say critics, is bring in even more censorship, while at the same time providing for possibilities to undermine encryption via backdoors.

Then there are those who don’t think the Online Safety Act goes far enough, and are in particular upset by the gradual way it has been designed to boil this particular “frog.”

Right now, the deadline of March 15, 2025, has been given to tech companies to come up with risk assessments regarding the consequences that illegal content has on their users, and then starting two days later, they will have to begin putting measures in place to reduce those risks.

But going forward, Ofcom, which says the current requirements are “just the beginning,” plans to introduce more measures, including “crisis response protocols for emergency events (such as last summer’s riots).”

Here, the fear is that newsworthy content about various forms of protests could get censored as well.

Citing crimes like child abuse and terrorism as the reason, Ofcom also reserves the right to force tech firms to build and implement what are effectively encryption backdoors.

Ofcom says the Online Safety Act allows it to, “where we decide it is necessary and proportionate, make a provider use (or in some cases develop) a specific technology to tackle child sexual abuse or terrorism content on their sites and apps.”

Coupled with this, another provision – hash-matching – starts to gain sinister overtones, contrary to what the stated reason for it is, namely, preventing the sharing of “non-consensual intimate imagery and terrorist content.”

Ofcom is for now short on details regarding this, but the two requirements combined could easily be used for encryption backdoors.

Privacy is one victim of weakened encryption that immediately comes to mind, however, harm to online security, and the economy is often overlooked.

“Creating an encryption ‘backdoor’ for law enforcement would effectively be a blackmailer’s charter, allowing criminals and hostile foreign actors to exploit security flaws,” notes the Adam Smith Institute, and adds:

“Such measures would undermine the growth and competitiveness of the UK technology sector, potentially resulting in large companies withdrawing from the market entirely.”

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

European Parliament Approves “European Democracy Shield” Committee to Tackle Online “Disinformation”

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | December 20, 2024

The European Parliament has taken another step in its ongoing efforts to control the flow of information online, approving the creation of a new committee tasked with combating what it describes as foreign interference and disinformation.

Dubbed the European Democracy Shield, the initiative is framed as a safeguard for democratic processes but raises significant concerns about censorship and overreach. The committee’s establishment aligns with the European Commission’s policy agenda for 2024-2029 and is expected to begin operations next year.

At a plenary session in Strasbourg, the decision received strong support, with 441 members voting in favor, 178 opposing, and 34 abstaining.

While presented as a measure to protect democracy, critics have long questioned whether such sweeping powers risk stifling dissenting views under the guise of fighting disinformation.

The committee’s mandate extends to scrutinizing online platforms, AI-generated content, and so-called “hybrid” threats—broad categories that could potentially encompass legitimate political speech or alternative narratives.

Comprising 33 members, the Ad Hoc Committee on the European Democracy Shield will serve a 12-month term. Its composition, to be determined by political groups, will be announced in late January. The scope of its responsibilities includes reviewing existing laws for potential weaknesses that could be exploited and recommending reforms. However, skeptics may argue that this approach could lead to increased regulatory burdens on digital platforms, raising questions about freedom of expression and transparency in decision-making.

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

China urges US to shut Guantanamo prison, end ‘occupation’ of Cuba

Lin Jian, spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry, attends a press conference on March 18, 2024 in Beijing, China. [VCG/VCG via Getty Images]
MEMO | December 20, 2024

China today called on the US to close the Guantanamo detention facility and end its “illegal occupation” of Cuba.

The US has “long unlawfully occupied part of Guantanamo Bay, and carried out arbitrary detention and used torture to extort confessions at the detention facility there,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian said during a press briefing in Beijing.

His comments came after the US recently transferred several detainees out of Guantanamo prison.

“The US needs to immediately stop illegally occupying Cuba’s territory, stop the bullying and blockade on Cuba, close the ‘black site’ and pull out of the base at Guantanamo as soon as possible, give the Cuban people’s land back to them, and remove Cuba from the list of ‘state sponsors of terrorism’,” Lin said, according to a transcript released by ministry.

He said Washington has “repeatedly failed to keep its promise of closing this US-run concentration camp” which “will only add another stain to the poor US track record on human rights and expose the emptiness of US commitment to human rights.”

In recent days, the US released several prisoners from Guantanamo, including two Malaysians and one Kenyan.

There are some 29 inmates still held inside the prison.

“The detention facility at Guantanamo Bay is Cuba’s protracted wound. It is a living witness to more than a century of US illegal interference in Cuba. The US, while running massive arbitrary detention at Guantanamo,” said the spokesman Lin.

Read also: Guantanamo’s cruelty is medieval. It’s a horror story. And it’s true.

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Subjugation - Torture | , , , | Leave a comment

Washington trained, armed extremist groups to topple Syrian government: Report

Press TV – December 20, 2024

The United States prepared and bolstered an armed group in southern Syria weeks prior to the offensive that ousted President Bashar al-Assad, a Western media report says.

In the first indication that Washington had prior knowledge of the offensive, the group known as Revolutionary Commando Army (RCA) revealed it had been told to scale-up its forces and “be ready” for an attack that could lead to the end of the Assad government, the Telegraph reported.

The RCA fighters, trained by Britain and the US, were told “this is your moment” during a briefing by US Special Forces stationed in the Arab country before Assad was toppled on December 8, the report noted.

The RCA fighters said Washington had prior knowledge of the offensive, which was mainly led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). The RCA was told to increase its forces and prepare for a major attack that could “end” the Syrian government.

Capt Bashar al-Mashadani, an RCA commander said in the weeks preceding the offensive, the RCA’s ranks were expanded by smaller “freelance” units, all of which were briefed at the US al-Tanf air base.

“They did not tell us how it would happen,” al-Mashadani told the Telegraph from a former Syrian army air base on the outskirts of the city of Palmyra.

“We were just told: ‘Everything is about to change. This is your moment. Either Assad will fall, or you will fall.’ But they did not say when or where, they just told us to be ready.”

The RCA is an armed group established by defected Syrian Arab Army (SAA) troops and is headquartered in the al-Tanf area, near the Syria-Jordan-Iraq border area, in southern Syria.

US forces are also stationed in the al-Tanf area, where they claim to be fighting the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group in the region.

‘On the US payroll’

According to the British newspaper, the RCA remains on the US’s payroll, as Washington claims to require their assistance to prevent the resurgence of Daesh. All members of the force continued to be armed by the US and to receive their salary of $400 a month.

The group has now filled a major void vacated by the former government forces, taking over one-fifth of the country’s territory and pockets north of the capital.

Among the chief targets of the US-backed operation was Palmyra, known for its ancient ruins.

Palmyra was among the main objectives of the US-backed operation, according to the Telegraph. Fighters who captured the Russian-controlled air base in Palmyra were reportedly told to prepare to take such action in early November.

The sources also said that Americans coordinated communication between RCA and HTS during the offensive. The HTS and its leader, Abu Mohammad al-Joulani, are terror-listed by the US.

The report indicates not only that Washington knew about the offensive led by HTS, but that it had precise intelligence about its scale.

It would therefore be only one of many ironies if the US has been in an effective alliance with a group like HTS, which was al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria, the report said.

A senior delegation of US diplomats on Friday arrived in Syria to speak directly to the representatives of HTS, which is designated a terrorist group by Washington.

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

Syrian ‘end-game’ will change the Middle East

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – December 20, 2024

The fall of the Assad regime in Syria may have been a geopolitical loss for Iran (and Russia), but the fact that Islamists have overthrown the regime threatens both Iran and Arab states, creating prospects for their cooperation in the near future and minimising whatever gains the ‘winners’ of this ‘end-game’ may have made.

The ‘Winners’ and the ‘losers’

There are clear ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ in the fall of the Assad regime in Syria. But geopolitics is a very dynamic field in which gains and losses are hardly one-sided. In some ways, the fall of the Assad regime – and the inability of Iran to rescue its key ally in the region – may have been an outcome of Israel’s war on Palestine and Hezbollah, but it does not necessarily mean a permanent weakness of Iran and a permanent gain for Israel. For now, Israel is consolidating this gain by a) seizing Syrian territory, and b) bombarding the Syrian military positions to decimate its ability to launch any counter-offensive at all.

In other words, Israel’s steps show a clear direction. First, it weakened Hezbollah by engaging it in a brutal war. Second, it is now supporting the Islamist takeover of Syria. The Islamists have declared that they have no problem with Israel as their neighbour. Israel’s Netanyahu, on the other hand, has already claimed the credit for “reshaping” the Middle East.

Another clear ‘winner’ is Turkey, which had long wanted Assad to go. For years, the Turkish military had been maintaining a direct presence in Syria’s Idlib province, which also happened to be the main province under (partial) control of the so-called “rebel” Islamists. For years, Turkish forces shielded these groups from the Syrian (and Iranian and Russian) strikes and offensives. In addition, the fact that Turkey allowed these groups to conduct trade across the Turkish border provided these groups with economic support too. Now that Assad is gone, Turkey finds itself in a much better position than it was earlier to counter Kurdish groups.

But there are no ‘losers’

All of this apparently translates into crucial geopolitical gains for Israel (Washington) and Ankara, except there are no permanent ‘losers’ here. The fall of the Assad regime has brought to power a well-known Islamist group globally designated as terrorist. It is said to be only previously allied with al-Qaeda, but the way it controlled Idlib for years provides a sufficiently sound snapshot of where the group stands as an ultra-orthodox network, with serious questions remaining about whether the group was ever able to shun its ideological past.

Still, there is little denying that the ability of armed Islamists to overthrow Assad and capture power has upset not only Tehran but also Riyadh, Doha, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, and even Cairo. All of these states previously faced actual, or prospects, of popular discontent during the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. All of these states are Muslim-majority states, which makes them vulnerable to groups operating both regionally and domestically to overthrow monarchies and/or existing regimes. Can any of them face similar prospects as Syrians did? Let’s not forget that the “rebels” first emerged in Syria in the wake of the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. If the end of the Asad regime is the continuation of the same ‘movement’, there is no denying that it can reach other states too. A clear logic for these states to cooperate with each other against this Islamist threat, backed as it is by Turkey and Israel, exists.

Therefore, while Iran may have become ‘isolated’ and the fall of the Assad regime may have blocked its ability to support Hezbollah via Syria, Iran’s prospects of developing new – and deeper – relations with the Arab world have also increased manifold. Therefore, while Netanyahu might be right in claiming that he is “reshaping” the Middle East, the new shape might not be exactly to his liking. The coming together of Iran and Arab states would directly undermine Israeli ability to defeat Iran in the short and long run.

Iran and the Arab world

They are already cooperating. Iran, Saudia, Qatar, and Iraq were all quick to oppose Israeli incursions into Syrian territory. A Saudi official statement called the Golan Heights “occupied” territory. This is not an isolated development triggered by Israeli actions. It is an outcome of an ongoing policy convergence between Riyadh and Tehran vis-à-vis Israel. On Nov. 11 at a summit of Islamic nations in Riyadh, the Saudi crown prince called on the international community, i.e., the US mainly, to compel Israel to “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.” At the same gathering, he described the Israeli war on Palestine as “collective genocide.”

In Egypt, the fall of the Assad regime has brought back echoes of the fall of the Mubarak regime more than a decade ago. When the present Egyptian ruler overthrew the government of Mohammad Morsi, a Turkish ally, Erdoğan said he would never talk to Sisi. Yet, he met Sisi twice in 2024. The fact that Turkey is now backing Islamists – and it has always supported the Egypt-based Muslim Brotherhood – there is yet again every reason for Egypt to align its policies in ways that might help keep the Islamists at bay. This way includes closer ties with the rest of the Arab world, plus Tehran.

Quoting senior Western diplomats, a recent report in Middle East Eye described the situation as particularly unravelling for the UAE, which has “been unnerved by the US’s manoeuvring to open backchannels of communication to HTS via Turkey”.  The report also mentions the UAE’s efforts to “broker talks between the government of Bashar al-Assad and the US. The UAE wanted to strike a grand bargain to keep the Assad family in power”. The only reason why the UAE wanted Assad to stay in power was that the alternative to Assad would cause more damage to Emirati interests than any potential benefits. The Islamists are that alternative now that no one, except the Turks and the Israelis, wants.

Therefore, a logical response of these states (Arab and Iran) is to develop coordinated action to thwart any prospects of an Islamist revival, including the revival of the Islamist State, which has a sizable presence in Afghanistan. This is probably the only way that the Arab states can collectively outmanoeuvre Turkey and Israel. There is also little denying that any effort to deepen Gulf-Iran cooperation will be squarely seen as a welcome development in Moscow and Beijing, both of which have vital interests in the region.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hezbollah Secretary General Naim Qassem Assesses Developments in Lebanon and Syria

Speech of Secretary General of Hezbollah, Sheikh Naim Qassem, on December 14, 2024.

Axis of Tabyeen

In the name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful. All praise is due to God, Lord of the worlds and may peace and blessings be upon the noblest of creation our master Muhammad and upon his pure, immaculate household and his pious, chosen companions and upon all the prophets and righteous ones until the rising of the Day of Resurrection. May the peace, mercy, and blessings of God be upon you.

I will speak about four points. The first point: our assessment of the events and aggression against Lebanon, and our current and future situation. Secondly: what is the future of the Resistance in Lebanon? Thirdly: what is Hezbollah’s plan of action for the upcoming phase? Fourthly: what is the [Resistance’s] stance on the developments in Syria?

I begin with our assessment of the events [concerning Lebanon] and our current and future situation. Supporting Gaza was a noble and lofty act; and it is a duty upon us, in fact, it is a duty upon the entire nation [of Islam], upon all Arabs and all Muslims. And when they [the Arabs and Muslims] did not fulfill their obligations, the Zionists became tyrannical, did what they did, and [became a] Pharoah upon the land. We were expecting that the aggression on Lebanon would occur — the criminal, usurping aggression of “Israel” on Lebanon — at any moment, but we did not know what timing the Zionists would choose for this aggression. This matter was before the Al Aqsa Flood, and continued after the Al Aqsa Flood, so the aggression was in September. We did not know the timing beforehand, however, in reality, this has nothing to do with supporting Gaza. This has to do with the “Israeli” expansionist project. Because the enemy wishes to eliminate any Resistance [movement] that stands in front of its expansionist project across the entire region.

What has the enemy accomplished through its aggression on Lebanon? In all clarity, [the enemy] accomplished the killing of the leadership in Hezbollah, at the forefront of whom, his Eminence, Master of the Martyrs of the Nation [of Islam], Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah — may God, the Exalted’s pleasure be upon him — and a number of leaders and fighters. [The enemy] accomplished breaches of the communications network, and the detonation of the pagers and communication devices. These are among the accomplishments of the enemy, and the toll [it took on us] was great and painful.

However, [the enemy] did not achieve its goals in these operations that occurred towards the end of the month of September. Then, it committed its brutal crimes against [our] civilians, villages, homes, the unarmed, children, and women. The crimes aimed to break the Resistance, but they were unable to do so
despite the great sacrifices [we faced]. Therefore, the “Israeli” crimes are not an achievement. In return, we achieved the prevention of the enemy from [achieving its goal of] eliminating the Resistance and “crushing it”, as it mentioned numerous times that it wanted to end Hezbollah’s existence. The resisting fighters prevented them from advancing in the battlefield [on the Lebanese border], and their rockets reached the internal front (the occupied territories), and we pained them greatly, and we displaced many of the settlers — approximately more than 200,000 settlers. Additionally, the Resistance killed hundreds of [their] soldiers, and wounded hundreds of [their] soldiers also, and caused economic and social damages, and various types of damages within the “Israeli” interior. So, what we achieved was preventing the enemy from accomplishing its goal of crushing the Resistance, and what the enemy achieved was causing us pain by killing our leaders and [targeting our] communications [devices].

We endured, and our people endured great sacrifices to prevent the Resistance from being broken, and here I salute them all — those brave ones who protected the Resistance, and carried it, and considered it to be their sole and fundamental choice in this confrontation and through these sacrifices. They were a support to the resisting, heroic fighters, who stood firm in the battlefield. The alternative to this enduring [of these sacrifices] — to those who say to us, “For what reason did you endure [all of this]?” — the alternative is surrender, and the loss of everything. Far be it [from us] that we surrender, and far be it [from us] that we are humiliated. This is something that is not possible with the Resistance of Hezbollah.

And here, [to] those who consider that the problem which occurred in Lebanon was that the losses were great — [they ask] “O’ Hezbollah, what are you doing with these great losses?” The question [should be], “What are we doing about this great aggression?” The aggression is the problem, the confrontation [of this aggression] is not the problem. [God] the Exalted has said, in His Glorious Book: “Do not weaken or grieve: you shall have the upper hand, should you be faithful. If a wound afflicts you, a like wound has already afflicted those people; and we make such vicissitudes rotate among mankind…” [Quran, 3:139-140]. Praise be to God who [has] steadied us, and praise be to God who has made us [have the] “upper hand”, and praise be to God who enabled us to achieve this confrontation with a true victory.

The “Israeli” enemy realized that the horizon in confronting Hezbollah’s Resistance was closed, so it went towards an agreement to stop the aggression. For the record, the agreement was brought by Hochstein, and it was agreed upon between “Israel” and America. It was presented to us through being presented to the Lebanese state and Mr. [Nabih] Berri. There were remarks from President [of Parliament] Berri, and there were remarks from us. We modified what we could in this agreement. Thus, he (Hochstein) is the one who brought the agreement, and we agreed according to the details we added within the agreement.

What made the enemy move towards [making an] agreement, and stopping this aggression? Three factors of strength and steadfastness [from us] caused the enemy, and those behind it, to despair over continuing [their aggression]. The first factor is the legendary steadfastness of the Resistance fighters on the battlefield. The second factor is the blood of the martyrs and the sacrifices, led by the blood of the Master of the Martyrs of the Resistance, Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah — may God, the Exalted’s pleasure be upon him — which gave great motivation to our men and our nation [of Islam], and our people [to remain] steadfast and stand up [to this aggression]. And the third factor is the comprehensive and effective political and Combat/Resistance-based management of the “Battle of the Mighty Ones” in a manner which led to this outcome. The enemy resorted to a ceasefire due to the factors of [our] strength and steadfastness.

[Now,] what is our assessment? Our assessment is that the Resistance triumphed because the enemy was unable to achieve its central goal, which is the elimination of Hezbollah, and it was unable to return [its] settlers without [coming to] an agreement, and it was unable to enter [its plan of creating] the “New Middle East” through the gate of Lebanon. We were an impenetrable barrier, we prevented it from achieving this goal through the gate of Lebanon. The Resistance remained until the last moment [of the war] on the battlefield, and the fighters continued to resist on the frontline, their heads held high, and in their great might. [Imam] Ali — peace be upon him — has said: “When God observed our truthfulness, He sent down upon our enemy defeat and sent down upon us victory.” [Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 56]

This agreement is to stop the aggression, it is not [an agreement to] stop the Resistance. This agreement is an executive agreement derived from [U.N.] Resolution 1701 and is only related to the area south of the Litani River, whereby “Israel” withdraws to the Lebanese border, and the Lebanese army spreads [there] as the sole authority carrying arms, so that there are no [other] armed individuals or weapons in this area. The agreement has no relation to the Lebanese interior, the issues of the Lebanese interior, the relationship of the Resistance with the state [of Lebanon] and the army, the presence of weapons [amongst the Resistance], or any other issues that require [internal] dialogue and discussion.

We endured during this period hundreds of “Israeli” violations in order to help the implementation of the agreement and to avoid being an obstacle to it, and to expose the “Israeli” enemy and place all those concerned before their responsibilities. The government is responsible for following up on preventing violations, and the committee assigned to follow up on the agreement is responsible for preventing the “Israeli” violations and implementing the agreement. We as Hezbollah, monitor what is happening and act according to our assessment of what is best in interest. So much for the first point.

The second point: what is the future of the Resistance? It seems that we need to get to know the reality of the Resistance. What is the Resistance? The Resistance is faith and preparation. Faith, in God, the Exalted, and freedom, and dignity, and defending the truth, land, and homeland, “All might belongs to God, and His Apostle, and the faithful…” [Quran, 63:08]. And preparation is the preparation with weapons and resources to protect this faith in the face of the enemies, because the enemies will not stop at a limit. The enemies will always aggress; the enemies will always try to change the doctrine, the opinions, and the convictions; they will steal the blessings and resources. How will you face the enemies? How will you resist them? With words? That is not enough. With complaints? That is not enough. There is no option but to confront them by preparing the appropriate strength.

We have repeatedly said, over and over, and now I say, Palestine is the focal point for its liberation in this region. Why? Because the aggressive “Israel” occupying Palestine takes its aggression against Palestine as a point of focus for occupying the entire region. So, it is better for us to confront this cancerous tumor together in order to prevent its expansion on one hand, and to overthrow its occupation on the other. Everyone according to their capabilities, circumstances, and reality, not to watch and let “Israel” consume us one after the other.

The legitimacy of the Resistance comes from its belief in its cause, no matter the resources, whether they are great or few. When we talk about Resistance, we talk about confrontation, we talk about rights, we talk about land, we talk about a group who want to reclaim what is theirs and face the enemies who want to deprive them of their rights. This is legitimate on the level of faith, on the human level, on the global level, and on all levels.

This Resistance does not win by a knockout blow against its enemy, this Resistance wins by points. The Resistance may continue for ten years, [and] it may continue for 50 years; we do not know. The time period for which the Resistance will continue, to bring down the idol, to bring down the tyrant, and to bring down the occupier. This is Resistance, and thus it wins at times and loses at times. It takes a round and suffers a setback in another round; this is natural in the work of Resistance. What is important is its continuation, and what is important is its continuity in the field, no matter how limited its resources are. When the Resistance offers sacrifices, this does not mean that it has lost, but rather that it has paid the price for its continuity, for sacrifices are what allow the Resistance to take shape, they are what allow it to stand on its feet. When the enemy strikes the Resistance, kills people, and tries to surround it with weapons, force, and resources, what does it want? It wants to weaken the foundations of the Resistance; it wants to weaken the will of the Resistance so that it collapses. Therefore, sacrifices are the natural price for the continuity of the Resistance.

Imam Khomeini has said — may God sanctify his noble soul — “As long as we are upon the truth, then we are victorious.” This is the [true] victory. Victory is that you are not shaken. Victory is that the Resistance remains. Victory is that you do not respond to those discordant voices that live in a state of disappointment, despair, fear, and terror. The important thing is to remain on the truth. “Are we not upon the truth? Then we do not mind dying while being truthful”, as Ali al-Akbar (son of Imam al-Hussain) said in Karbala — may the peace of God, the Exalted be upon him.

Based on what has been said, the Resistance of Hezbollah continues with faith and preparation, and the sacrifices which [only] increase our responsibility in facing this expansionist enemy. This enemy, nothing can restrain it except the Resistance, and the land will not be liberated except by the Resistance. The experiences are present before us: Did Lebanon not get liberated except by the Resistance? Did “Israel” not leave the occupied border strip except through the Resistance? Were we able to stop “Israel” for 17 years, from 2006 until 2023, except through the Resistance? Was the victory in July, which prevented the “New Middle East” in 2006, not due to the Resistance? We are not saying, “Come to the Resistance to establish it.” We are saying, “Come to the Resistance that has been established, [and has] proven its effectiveness, and demonstrated that this enemy will never recede and will never leave the land except through Resistance.”

Therefore, it [the Resistance] is ongoing, and for every stage, [it has] its own methods and approaches. This means that the Resistance does not always have one form of confrontation. [In the case that] by God’s will, developments and certain conditions have occurred; we change some of the methods and approaches. The important thing is that the Resistance remains, but the methods and approaches are related to each stage separately, and this is what we will work on.

Yes, we defended Lebanon. We defended Lebanon because the recent aggression was against Lebanon, it was not just against us, even though we were directly targeted. This aggression against Lebanon, we repelled it and stopped it at the borders through the legendary Resistance of the fighters, their steadfastness, and the support of our people, our loved ones, and the solidarity of all the free people in Lebanon. I consider all the Lebanese people who sheltered, who supported, who wished for the victory of
the Resistance, and opposed “Israel”, to all be partners in the victory process because they supported the Resistance and stood by its side and with it.

If it hadn’t been for the steadfastness of the Resistance fighters on the frontlines, “Israel” would have reached Beirut and begun the following steps, of them: the settlement and colonization in southern Lebanon, weakening Lebanon’s capabilities, and controlling its politics and future. We are not speaking about an unknown enemy, and we are not speaking about ideas that are not applicable. Look at the crimes of this enemy, which have no parallel. Look at what it is doing in Gaza: 150,000 martyrs and wounded, almost complete destruction of Gaza. It [itself] declares, saying, “I do not wish to leave Gaza.” It says that it “wants North Gaza to be a demilitarized zone, devoid of civilian presence, devoid of people, devoid of homes, devoid of life.” It is [the one] thinking of settlement in Gaza. It [is the one that] says “it wants to annex the West Bank,” and it is working toward that with full cover from the greatest criminal, America, which supports it with all its resources. If the defense budget in America is 850 billion dollars, [then] all of it is in the service of “Israel”. If both parties [Democrat and Republican] are at the service of “Israel”, if around 500 planes came to the “Israeli” entity loaded with weapons and ammunition, as well as around 100 ships with the same, this means that the crimes we are seeing are made by America and by America’s decision, which always covers it.

Have you not seen what [has] happened in Syria? They destroyed all the capabilities of the Syrian army under the pretext of preemptive defense, under the pretext of fear for the future, under various titles, and America covers them directly. This is evidence of the expansionist policy, they want to wipe out the entire region, if it were possible for them — at any time possible for them, and in the other Arab countries, one by one — I will not name them now — they would do the same thing. They have their eyes on all Arab countries, the surrounding ones first, and then those further away second. This means that we are facing a dangerous expansionist enemy, which occupied part of the Golan by hundreds of kilometers. What did the world do? Why does [this] occupation happen? What is the “danger” present [for the enemy to carry out these acts]? There is no danger [to justify it], however it has expansionist intentions [and fulfills them at every opportunity].

So, we must continue with the Resistance. Yes, the Resistance, with its people and [the Lebanese] army, prevented it [the enemy] in Lebanon from achieving its expansionist goals. I am not speaking in slogans. Why [do I say] “with its people and army”? Because our army is a national army. Our army paid the price of tens of martyrs because it stands in the field. Our army is the one that will spread in the South to expel “Israel”. Our people are the ones who were cohesive, united, and cooperative until we reached this result.

The conclusion: Hezbollah is strong and recovering from its wounds. Hezbollah continues, and the Resistance continues, and Lebanon, with its elements of strength, continues. Lebanon is strong with its army, its people, and its Resistance, in preventing sedition from spreading within the structure of this trinity [Army-People-Resistance] and within Lebanon. Those who hoped for the end of Hezbollah, their hopes have been disappointed, and those who relied on “Israel” to tip the political balance [in Lebanon] in their favor over others, have failed in their reading [of the situation] and [in] their choices. And those who see Hezbollah as an effective and influential force in political life will see from us a welcome, and cooperation for the benefit of a strong and stable Lebanon, politically, economically, and socially. Lebanon rises with all of its sons and components.

What is Hezbollah’s program of action for the upcoming phase? I will mention them as five brief points. They are the work program that we will work on and [through which we will] be key partners in building the state.

First: implementing the agreement in the south of the Litani River.

Second: reconstruction, with the help of the state responsible for reconstruction, and cooperation with all countries, organizations, brotherly countries, and friends who wish to help Lebanon in [its] reconstruction.

Third: diligent work to elect a president on January 9th to set the wheels of the state in motion.

Fourth: participating through the state in an economic, social, and reform rescue program based on national belonging and equality under the law and the Taif Agreement, while confronting corruption and holding the corrupt accountable.

Fifth: positive dialogue regarding problematic issues.

Naturally, we have several problematic issues, [the matter] requires dialogue. What is Lebanon’s stance on the “Israeli” occupation of its land? We want to engage in dialogue to unify our perspective — how to confront the occupation and liberate the land, without living with the continuation of the occupation. How do we strengthen the Lebanese army to be a pillar of protection for Lebanon? What is Lebanon’s defense strategy to benefit from the Resistance and the people as a support for liberation? These and other questions need dialogue among the Lebanese.

The fourth and final point: we supported Syria because it is in a position of opposition to “Israel” and it contributed to enhancing the Resistance’s capabilities through its lands, for Lebanon and Palestine. However, now the regime has fallen at the hands of new forces. We cannot judge these new forces until they stabilize, take clear positions, and the situation of the regime in Syria becomes organized. From here, we say that some of what we desire we mention as an opinion and a stance.

Firstly, we hope that the choice of the new regime and the Syrian people will be cooperation between the two peoples and between the two governments in Lebanon and Syria on the basis of equality and the exchange of capabilities.

Secondly, we hope that all the parties in Syria, all the sects, and all the components will participate in shaping the new government and in participating in the new government so that the rule in Syria will be on the basis of the Syrian citizen and not on the seat of one group over another.

Thirdly, we also hope that this new ruling side will consider “Israel” as an enemy and not normalize relations with it.

These are the issues that will affect the nature of the relationship between us and Syria. It is the right of the Syrian people to choose their leadership, their rule, their constitution, and their future. We hope they will succeed in making choices that are not controlled by any other countries that have ambitions in Syria and want to serve the “Israeli” enemy. Yes, Hezbollah has lost at this stage the military supply route through Syria, but this loss is [nothing but] a detail in the Resistance’s work. Maybe, this new regime will come and this route may return in a natural manner, and maybe we will search for other routes. The Resistance is flexible, it does not stop at any specific limit; the important thing is the continuity of the Resistance. As for the methods and routes, they can change and shift. And it is upon the Resistance to adapt to the circumstances to strengthen its capabilities — the important thing is that it remains continuous and works on addressing its needs in different ways.

We do not believe that what is happening in Syria will affect Lebanon, but rather, on the contrary, there is now a preoccupation [for the enemy] in Syria, there are specific conditions in Syria, and [we pray that] — God willing — Syria will emerge stable and comfortable, doing what its people want.

The overall situation in the region is, in general, pressing. America and “Israel” control many paths in the region. This means that we are facing great pressure on the level of the entire region. However, we have faith that the active forces in the region will remain present and will move [towards the necessary actions]. And it is upon these active forces to reconsider their calculations and methods of action. It is not right for the active group to stay on tradition, to stay on the previous pattern. Whoever sees that their previous pattern does not produce, let them modify, let them change, and whoever sees that they have gaps, let them address the gaps. It is good to have an analysis after this great development in the region, and — God willing — the results will be positive.

Peace, all peace, to all lovers of freedom and liberation. Peace, all peace, to the noble martyrs. Peace, all peace, to our people who sacrificed, struggled, and gave. And peace to the legendary Resisters who raised our heads high. And the Resistance continues, God willing.

And may the peace, mercy, and blessings of God be upon you.

Edits: Resistance News

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany: Effort to ban AfD party faces major setback

Remix News – December 20, 2024

A motion to ban the Alternative for Germany (AfD) is unlikely to move forward, as there is less than a week left to vote on such a ban in this legislative period, and sources involved with the effort say there is no majority in place for such a move.

The motion, originally put forward by CDU MP Marco Wanderwitz, who previously said he would retire after this term, will definitely not be put forward this term, co-signer Carmen Wegge (SPD) told the Rheinische Post.

As Remix News previously reported, it appeared as if a ban procedure would almost certianly move forward just a month ago, with 105 MPs voicing cross-party support, including from MPs like Claudia Roth and Katrin Göring Eckardt from the Greens, and Ralf Stegner and Helge Lindh from the SPD, just to name a few.

The motion will only move forward if there is a majority, but so far, the CDU and the SPD have spoken out against it. There are grave worries that such a ban procedure could take years, and in any case, with elections expected to take place in February, it could lead to a substantial boost for the AfD. Currently, the SPD and CDU also see no success with the Constitutional Court, which has the final say in such a ban procedure.

So far, Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) and CDU leader Friedrich Merz do not back the ban, although both have hinted that they may support such a procedure in the future.

Notably, politicians involved in the ban procedure are once again resorting to claims of protecting democracy by banning what is currently the second-largest party in the country.

“Due to the early elections, it is not yet clear whether we can put our motion to a vote in this legislative period,” said Wegge. “The AfD represents the greatest threat to our democracy.”

She claims the party’s goal is to abolish democracy, despite the AfD actually putting forward motions for direct democracy in the country, which would allow the country to make decisions via nationwide referendums — undoubtedly a purer form of democracy than what currently serves as democracy in Germany.

Meanwhile, as Remix News previously reported, the Greens are working on an alternative ban procedure which would be more gradual but which MPs of the party, and other parties, believe would have a better chance of succeeding.

Efforts to ban the AfD are certainly not helped by the fact that it is the second most popular party in the country at the moment, routinely polling between 18 and 20 percent. A move to outright ban the party would be seen as a catastrophic blow to democracy.

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Progressive Hypocrite | | Leave a comment

West has pumped over $300 billion into Ukraine – Orban

RT | December 20, 2024

The US and the EU have provided over $300 billion in financial aid and military assistance to Kiev since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said.

Such a huge amount of money “could have done wonders” had it been spent to improve the lives of people within the EU, he said in an interview with Kossuth radio on Friday.

Orban highlighted the evolving military situation, noting that “the balance of power on the frontlines is shifting day by day” in Russia’s favor. He also pointed out the political changes expected in the US following Donald Trump’s return to the White House next month.

These developments call for leaders in EU capitals to embrace a more pragmatic approach to ensuring stability and economic resilience within the bloc, Orban believes. However, the prime minister argued that Brussels remains out of touch with global realities, pointing to a recent European Parliament decision to continue sending substantial funds to Kiev – a move he described as a clear example of misplaced priorities.

“During the negotiation with the Americans, I received the figure that Europe and America together have spent €310 billion so far. Those are huge numbers!” the Hungarian prime minister stressed.

He argued that the hundreds of billions of euros already spent to fund the conflict could have been used to bolster European infrastructure, to develop countries in Western Balkans to the level of the EU, or beef up military capabilities. This “enormous” amount of money could have been given to Europeans to make people’s lives much better, the Hungarian leader concluded.

Russia has repeatedly warned that no amount of Western aid will stop its troops from achieving the goals of the military operation or change the ultimate outcome of the conflict. By backing Kiev, they only prolong the conflict, Moscow has argued.

Earlier this month, Orban proposed a Christmas ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia, describing it as a last-ditch attempt to mediate a diplomatic resolution of the conflict. He floated the idea to Kiev and Moscow, as well as to Trump, who he personally met at his residence in Florida.

The Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov said that Moscow “fully supports Orban’s efforts aimed at finding a peaceful settlement and resolving humanitarian issues related to the exchange of prisoners.”

However, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky rejected Budapest’s offer.

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Slovakia warns of ‘serious conflict’ with Kiev

RT | December 20, 2024

Slovakia is considering retaliation against Ukraine over its refusal to continue transit of Russian gas to the EU nation, according to Prime Minister Robert Fico.

Kiev is determined not to renew a multi-year transit contract with Russia, which allowed the fuel to flow across its territory despite the armed conflict between the two nations. Slovakia is one of the recipients of the gas, which Ukraine intends to halt next year.

A “serious conflict” is possible if Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky “doesn’t release our gas,” Fico wrote on Facebook on Friday. He included excerpts from his press conference in Brussels on Thursday, after he and Zelensky discussed the issue at a meeting held behind closed doors in the Belgian capital.

Bratislava is sympathetic towards Kiev’s situation and Zelensky’s predicament, the prime minister said, but Slovakia is “not at any war” either with Russia or Ukraine, and the Slovaks are not servants doing the bidding of Zelensky. Kiev is “losing decisively,” while Zelensky “absolutely rejects any ceasefire,” he said.

Fico said the proposals regarding the gas situation, which Zelensky outlined to him at a European Council meeting, seemed “absurd.” One idea was to allow the flow to continue on condition that Russia would not receive any payment until the end of the Ukraine conflict.

“What fool will give us gas for free?” Fico asked journalists.

Slovakia is helping Ukraine by providing non-military assistance, including by transferring electricity to its capacity-starved power grid, the prime minister said. Relations between the two nations cannot be a one-way street, Fico asserted, adding: “I cannot completely rule out reciprocal measures.” His government will consider its options over the next week, he said.

Kiev previously floated the idea of letting gas that is not Russian in origin to be pumped through the Soviet-built pipelines on Ukrainian territory. Azerbaijan could be the source of such supplies, according to officials.

On Tuesday, European buyers of Russian pipeline gas, including Slovakia’s SPP, warned the European Commission that the looming termination of Ukrainian transit posed significant risks to members of the EU, and urged Brussels to act.

The escalating row has been caused by Kiev, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday, during his annual Q&A marathon. Russian gas giant Gazprom “can live” without the transit, he insisted.

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

No, Spending on the Ukraine War is Not Benefitting Americans at Home

Military Keynesianism, creating humanitarian disasters to stimulate economic activity, is fruitless and dangerous.

By Zachary Yost | The Daily Economy |

Since Russia invaded Ukraine in early 2022, those in favor of ever-increasing US involvement in the war have tossed around numerous justifications for their dangerous and escalatory policy that is detached from American national interest. We are of course served the normal pablum about defending freedom, that the Ukrainians are fighting “them over there, so we don’t have to fight them over here,” and that if not stopped the Russian army will soon be marching down the Champs-Élysées (although the Russian army, we are told, is also simultaneously full of starving demoralized conscripts forced to fight with shovels.)

Yet among the many flimsy excuses for continuing to risk nuclear escalation with Russia, few surpass the foolish argument that many billions of dollars of military aid to Ukraine are actually being spent here in the US, so it doesn’t even count as foreign aid and is therefore great for the economy.

The loudest institution promoting this line of thinking has been the American Enterprise Institute, and especially Iraq War cheerleader and Bush administration speechwriter, Marc Thiessen. The Biden administration has echoed this talking point as well.

Their logic runs as follows. We have to spend money to build and/or replace the weapons we are sending to Ukraine. That money is spent at American factories employing American workers. This helps to generate prosperity and economic growth and happy American families who can pay their bills and go on vacation.

These arguments are little more than military Keynesianism, and their reasoning falls to pieces if one thinks about it for more than 30 seconds.

As the nineteenth century French political economist Frédéric Bastiat succinctly put it, “Between a good and a bad economist this constitutes the whole difference — the one takes account of the visible effect; the other takes account both of the effects which are seen and also of those which it is necessary to foresee.”

Thiessen and others are being very bad economists (assuming they are not knowingly spreading propaganda and hoping it sticks), and repeating an age-old mistake that Bastiat identified as the broken window fallacy. In short, Bastiat reflects on a hypothetical broken window at a bakery and how at first one might say that this is good, since it will stimulate demand and lead to money being spent in the glass industry. But that is merely the visible effect. The unseen effect is that now the baker will no longer be able to invest that money into improving his business by acquiring more capital goods, or even spending it on personal consumption at a restaurant, hairdresser, or shoe shop.

A broken window does not result in an increase in wealth for society and leaves the victim poorer than before.

If this were not true, then we should pray for powerful and destructive hurricanes to wreak havoc every year since they generate so much economic activity in their wake. Similarly, its proponents would have to admit that the war is great for the Russian economy, as well. Look at all the jobs and productivity generated by the conflict!

Such thinking is nonsensical.

Yet, somehow this same line of thinking can pass muster for usually economically literate people who want to justify America’s fruitless and dangerous involvement in the Ukraine War.

We are told not to fret, since many tens of billions of dollars are being spent in America. But that is merely the seen effect. What are the unseen effects? There are many.

The US is running trillion dollar deficits and at risk of a debt trap with over a trillion dollars in interest payments. All this money being spent is either being borrowed from the capital markets, meaning the government is crowding out other borrowers, or is being financed by the Federal Reserve creating money to purchase bonds, therefore fueling further inflation.

But the effects do not stop there. Even if the US was not drowning in debt, building Javelin missiles (2023 estimated cost of $197,884 a pop), 155mm artillery rounds ($3,000 a shell), and Patriot air defense missiles ($4 million per missile) requires the use of labor, time, capital goods, and resources.

These resources obviously cannot be used to supply the other wants and needs that Americans have. Someone working at the bomb factory can’t be working at the car factory. Steel used to build an artillery shell can’t be used to make girders for buildings.

As Dwight Eisenhower noted back in 1963

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms is not spending money alone.

It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.

The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities…

We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat.

We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people…

Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

The cost of supplying weapons to Ukraine is not limited to money alone, but also the many and myriad things that we either will not have, or will have at more expense, than we did before.

The core logic put forward by military Keynsians is essentially no different from arguing that it is great for the economy to invest billions of dollars in building luxury cars and then dropping them down the Marianas Trench. (You don’t oppose money going to hard-working auto workers do you!)

At least with that plan there is little risk of stumbling into a great power war (unless Cthulhu gets annoyed at all the Cadillacs disturbing his slumber), unlike the current proxy war in Ukraine where the Biden administration has escalated the conflict even further in the wake of his defeat in November.

People are free to argue that America should be waging a proxy war in Ukraine and risking nuclear escalation. But don’t tell us that doing so will somehow make Americans more wealthy.

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries