Europe

by

US/NATO is in the Grip of a Daemonic Death-Wish & the Entire World is Threatened | Off-Guardian

By Edward Curtin

Not wanting to sound hyperbolic, but I am starting to conclude that the nuclear madmen running the U.S./NATO New Cold War they started decades ago are itching to start a nuclear war with Russia.

Their hypocrisy and nihilistic thirst for death and destruction are so extreme that it boggles my mind.  They accuse Russia of starting a New Cold War when they did so decades ago and have been pushing the envelope ever since.  Now they act shocked that Russia, after many years of patience, has struck back in Ukraine.

In 2017, Oliver Stone released his four-part interviews with Russian President Vladimir Putin.  The Putin Interviews were conducted between 2015, the year after the US engineered the coup d’état in Ukraine installing Nazis to power in that country bordering Russia, and 2017.

Stone was of course bashed for daring to respectfully ask questions and receive answers from the Russian leader who the American media has always cast, like all the mythic bogeymen, as the new Hitler intent on conquering the world, when it is the United States, not Russia, that has over 750 military bases throughout the world and has attacked Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria – the list is endless.

In his Putin interviews, Oliver Stone, a man of truth and honor, lets viewers catch a glimpse of the real Vladimir Putin and the matters that concern him as the leader of Russia.  In 2018, I wrote of those interviews:

…he [Putin] makes factual points that should ring loud and clear to anyone conversant with facts.

  1. that the US needs an external enemy (“I know that, I feel that.”). 
  2. the USA engineered the coup d’état in the Ukraine on Russia’s border. 
  3. the US has surrounded Russia with US/NATO troops and bases armed with anti-ballistic missiles that can, as Putin rightly says to Stone, be converted in hours to regular offensive nuclear missile aimed at Russia.

This is a factual and true statement that should make any fair-minded person stand up in horror. If Russia had such missiles encircling the United States from Cuba, Mexico, and Canada, what American would find it tolerable? What would CNN and The New York Times have to say?

Yet these same people readily find it impossible to see the legitimacy in Russia’s position, resorting to name calling and illogical rhetoric. Russia is surrounded with U.S/NATO troops and missiles and yet Russia is the aggressor.

In the years since those interviews, U.S./NATO has consistently tightened the noose around Russia, including fueling the Ukrainian attacks on the Donbass, killing thousands, all the while pleading innocent and expecting no reply. Now the reply has come.

Although I have no inside information, I get the sense that the Western Empire is planning/initiating counter-measures far more extreme than the highly publicized economic sanctions.

While it is true, as many commentators such as Ray McGovern and Pepe Escobar have pointed out, that a paradigm shift is underway and the once dominant US/NATO bully boys must now contend with the Sino-Russian alliance that has ushered in a dramatic change, nevertheless, as in the past decades, the so-called leaders of the US are a dumb bunch driven by unquenchable demons.

As McGovern says:

Yet, there remain unsettling indications coming from Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland, Antony Blinken, and Jake Sullivan that senior administration ‘dolts’ (copyright North Korean leader Kim Jong Un) in the Washington Swamp still don’t get it.

I’m afraid they don’t and never will.  That is what frightens me.  While it seems counterintuitive and totally irrational that these people would be planning to use some type of nuclear weapon in this current situation, I am not so sure.

They obviously pushed Russia to have no alternative but to attack Ukraine, and now that they have accomplished that goal, it seems to me that they will up the ante. Diplomacy is not their way; violence is.

Pepe Escobar has just written:

This is what happens when a bunch of ragged hyenas, jackals and tiny rodents poke The Bear: a new geopolitical order is born at breathtaking speed.

From a dramatic meeting of the Russian Security Council to a UN history lesson delivered by Russian President Vladimir Putin and the subsequent birth of the Baby Twins – the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk – all the way to the breakaway republics’ appeal to Putin to intervene militarily to expel the NATO-backed Ukrainian bombing-and-shelling forces from Donbass, it was a seamless process, executed at warp speed.

The (nuclear) straw that (nearly) broke the Bear’s back – and forced it to pounce – was Comedian/Ukrainian President Volodymy Zelensky, back from the Russophobia-drenched Munich Security Conference where he was hailed like a Messiah, saying that the 1994 Budapest memorandum should be revised and Ukraine should be nuclear-rearmed.

As usual, his analysis is correct, but it may fail to grasp the unspeakable nature of the madness that drives desperadoes.

If those running US foreign policy feel that a new geo-political order is being born “at breathtaking speed” as a result of Russia’s move into Ukraine, then they are capable of extreme acts. And they have all the mainstream western media behind them, barking out their non-stop propaganda.

We are inexorably moving toward a global war that will become nuclear if an international movement doesn’t quickly arise to stop it.  Most people bemoan the thought of such a war to end all wars, but refuse to analyze the factors leading to it.

It seems so unimaginable, but It happens step-by-step, and many steps have already been taken with more coming soon.  It’s so obvious that most can’t see it, or don’t want to.

The corporate mainstream media are clearly part of the continuation of the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird, and those who still rely on them for the truth are beyond reach.  We need to use all alternative means to raise the alarm and make sure the ultimate nightmare never occurs.

Perhaps hyperbole is the only way to do so, for it may be closer to the truth than we want to believe.

Source: Off-Guardian

by

Psaki Gives Away the Ukraine Game – Russia Is Needed As Fall Guy for Biden Energy Policy and Economic Damage | Conservative Treehouse

Editor’s Note: The Democratic Party is not likely to maintain control over the U.S. House of Representatives after the upcoming 2022 mid-term elections (should honest elections actually be held in the swing states), therefore these radical leftists are eager to distract not only from its incompetence at governing under Biden, but its ineptness in managing the alleged COVID-19 pandemic response, the stupidity of ignoring an invasion of illegals and criminals at the southern border with Mexico, hyperinflation, energy-policy, etc. The Russia-Ukraine conflict, and its postering for world war, gives the Democratic Party a small boost among war mongers and defense contractors, and their war mongering allies in the Republican Party as well. This show is all partisan politics and dangerous media theatrics which may very well be the end-game for civilization and a fast-track for species (human) extinction.

During an ABC interview today, White House Spokesperson Jennifer Psaki gave away the game for the Biden Administration’s intent on exploiting the Russia-Ukraine crisis.

Keep in mind, as the Biden team were getting pummeled for negative economic outcomes, massive inflation, skyrocketing energy costs and gas prices set to double, the White House worked to create an urgent defense by manufacturing the crisis.

While Joe Biden ate his pudding, the people behind the scenes told Zelenskyy and Putin that Ukraine was about to enter NATO {December 2021}.  The White House then seeded details through China knowing the intel would get back to Putin.  Russia took the bait and intervened.

The collective left (far more western leader beneficiaries on a global scale) now have a quick and strategic pivot point to go from COVID-19 as the excuse for all the economic ills, to Russia.   The Russia-Ukraine crisis transfers the cost of the Build Back Better climate change agenda from COVID-19 to Russia/Ukraine.  We can now watch COVID just disappear.

The BBB agenda, domestically known as the Green New Deal, intentionally makes energy costs skyrocket.  By creating the Ukraine crisis, gas prices specifically are no longer blamed on COVID-19 (the original fraudulent justification).  Gas prices are now rising because of Russia and the villainous Vladimir Putin.  Climate change policy outcomes are made palatable by blaming Putin.

Source: Conservative Treehouse

by

Peace Talks Possible Between Russia and Ukraine, As Magnificently Defiant Zelenskyy Stands Atop The Alamo of Kyiv Taking Selfies | Conservative Treehouse

Editor’s Note: For ten years NATO and the European Union (EU) have been expanding its influence and military might into Eastern Europe without regard for Russian sovereignty or the security of its border with Ukraine. Putin made his move into Ukraine not only to secure their borders, something the United States should be doing on the southern border of Mexico, but refuses to do so. Putin is aware that the government of Ukraine has become a hostile force since the “color revolution” of 2014 not only towards Russia, but towards two separatist regions of Ukraine which have asked for military protection from the government of Ukraine who is bent on genociding those two separatist regions. They have asked for protection and Putin is providing it. The power-drunk New World Order/Deep State’World Economic Forum/Mainstream Media/CIA forces are using the Russian-Ukraine conflict as a pretext for furthering their global totalitarian agenda – an agenda perpetrated by governments and public health officials for two years during the alleged COVID-19 pandemic (which it never was). Because the pandemic panic, mandates and lockdowns are winding down due to mass resistance to the totalitarian policies of these tyrants (now exposed for all to see) and the rise of truth (amidst the waking giant of humanity), this new pretext for war has quickly become the focus of global polarization and today’s headlines.

The propaganda pouring out of Ukraine from the U.S. State Department and the taxpayer funded Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) is, in a modern scale, historic.

In their collective effort to make #Ukraine the modern image of The Alamo (where the last stand to defend all mankind is taking place), the corporate media, state dept and NGO’s are utilizing their Hollywood directed#BringBackOurGirls and #KonySurrender techniques in the extreme.

Pay no attention to the absence of any war fighting actually taking place, meaning the lack of actual fighting shooting and stuff in a modern era where everyone has cell phone cameras, and instead focus your attention to the ‘story telling.’

After all, the White House was very clear that the winner of this contest to defend all humanity from the Russian villain Vladimir Putin, would depend on who could tell a “better story.”

Thus, you do not need to see shooting or actual war type stuff.  Instead, the contest to save the planet is boiled down to who can take a better selfie.

As Deputy National Security Advisor Daleep Singh stated last week, the U.S. government has rallied the collective west to defeat Russia using the cultural weapon of social likeability.   Vladimir Putin is getting pummeled.

It’s all a grand pantomime folks.  All of it.  Volodymyr Zelenskyy is the newest Michael Avenatti.

Ukraine has been the playground for the U.S. State Dept, NGO’s, intelligence schemes and DC political grift for well over a decade.  You know it, because it has been well documented.  Yet suddenly, the same Ukraine is the modern Alamo in the battle to save all mankind. Oh, okay, and we’re supposed to forget the first stuff.

If you’re wondering, why has it taken the Russia army four days to travel 30 miles?   You must believe it is, because Ukrainians with their free Kalashnikov rifles and Molotov cocktails have beaten back the onslaught of heavily mechanized armored tank divisions.   You must believe it, because you are being told by the most trusted names in news.

If you don’t believe it… and if you think it all just seems odd as Ukrainian politicians are taking selfies amid this monumental military encounter…   well, you must be a Russian agent, or something.

Comrades, just wait until tomorrow, when Russia will bomb the baby formula factories, then perhaps you will take it seriously.  How can you not feel sympathy for the babies, the mothers, teachers, crying on the television as they tell stories about saving their children from the scourge of the artillery fire that must be heard in the ever familiar “off in the distance.”

It’s weird how no journalist will actually go to that “distant” place they all talk about.  Alas, I digress….

Bottom line folks… the Russia -vs- Ukraine crisis is cover for the outcomes of Joe Biden’s energy policy, so that American voters do not attach $10/gal gasoline to his climate change agenda, and instead apportion the blame to Russia and Vladimir Putin.

Again, “never let a crisis go to waste,” and if you can’t find the crisis to use, make one.

Source: Conservative Treehouse

by

International Message for Freedom and Hope by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. | YouTube

Today, October 24, 2020, there are many rallies around the world. Activists in these countries are joining in a common voice: Argentina; Bolivia; Peru; Uruguay; Italy; Germany; Poland; Belgium; Netherlands; United Kingdom; Ireland; Sweden; Denmark; France; and Austria. Citizens of all countries are paying an enormous price for the epidemic.

They have not only lost their loved ones, but their freedoms, their livelihood, their joy. Children and youth are suffering due to this crisis too. Without their friends and social activities, mental health problems in our young is at an all-time high. People around the world are demanding to be spared from the devastating consequences of the epidemic.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman of Children’s Health Defense, provides an inspirational message for freedom and hope to activists around the world.

Join the movement. ChildrensHealthDefense.org

Source: YouTube

by

World Health Organization Blocked Medical Experts From Recommending Travel Bans | Trending Politics & Breitbart News

5e973108d8504large_NXEpnLnVyqgX2eQXfHKXy-3HbJWztb7TzgnTC7e0bwsBy Collin Rugg

According to a bombshell new report, the World Health Organization (WHO) blocked medical experts from recommending travel bans to help stop the spread of the Coronavirus during the early days of the pandemic.

“A report by Australia’s Sky News revealed that on January 30, WHO bureaucrats met with a group of doctors and medical experts to discuss a response to the coronavirus, which at the time was spreading from Wuhan, China, to nations like the United States, Italy, Iran, and South Korea,” Breitbart reports. “The report is based on the meeting’s official records.”Medical experts were intent on implementing travel bans however they were talked out of it by WHO bureaucrats during a meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. The bans would have most likely saved thousands of lives.

Check out what Sky News digital editor Jack Houghton had to say:

[WHO] actually decided not to go ahead with [travel ban recommendations] and not declare a global health emergency but there were a few dissenting voices. So the official meeting records say there was a divergence of views but they won’t actually go into detail about who was trying to block it. But there were doctors there who wanted to issue travel bans and the World Health Organization blocked it.

Breitbart continues:

In early and late February, while thousands of coronavirus cases were confirmed across the world, WHO bureaucrats continuously urged nations not to impose travel bans.

“WHO continues to advise against the application of travel or trade restrictions to countries experiencing COVID-19 outbreaks,” an official WHO statement from February 29 reads.

Despite WHO bureaucrats stopping the experts from recommending travel bans to nations looking to keep the coronavirus from spreading, President Trump moved forward with travel bans on China and Iran within weeks of the first confirmed case in the U.S.

About a month later, Trump issued a travel ban on Europe after the nation’s leading medical experts said the coronavirus was primarily being spread due to European travel. Specifically, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci said the travel bans were critical to fighting the coronavirus.

“I believe we would be in a worse position,” Fauci told congressional lawmakers on March 11 when asked what position the U.S. would have been in if not for Trump’s travel bans.

A study by experts at Mount Sinai states that New York City’s record-high coronavirus cases and deaths are “predominately” due to travel from Europe.

As Breitbart News reported, Australia implemented similar life-saving immigration restrictions despite the opposition of WHO bureaucrats. Australia moved relatively quickly to ban travel from China regardless of WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesu claiming such bans would “unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade.”

Source: Trending Politics & Breitbart News

by

Italians Take to the Streets to Protest New Mandatory Vaccination Law | Vaccine Impact

Vaccine-protests-ItalyBrian Shilhavy
Health Impact News Editor

Readers from Italy have been contacting Health Impact News this past week (June, 2017), asking us to cover the massive demonstrations happening throughout Italy to protest a new mandatory vaccine law. This news has been censored from the U.S. corporate media.

Francesca Alesse, who worked with the VAXXED film team to get the film shown in Italy last year, writes:

In an unprecedented way, the decree-law proposed by the Minister of Health has been signed by the sitting Italian president Sergio Mattarella. Only four vaccines were mandatory in Italy, now that number triples to 12.

No other decree-law has moved so fast in the Italian legislative system, the reasons of such hurry are incomprehensible considering that the Istituto Superiore Di Sanità (the local version of the CDC) has declared that contrary to what stated in the decree itself there is no objective urgency. There are no epidemics, the number of cases of measles or meningitis in the current year have been substantially lower than the previous year.

Thousands of parents have protested the new law this past June 3rd,  protests and marches have taken place in 21 Italian cities spread across the nation. A national protest is scheduled for this Sunday June 11th.

The translated full text of the decree-law is found here.

Florence Protest

The new law apparently has severe consequences for parents who fail to comply, including the possibility of having their children taken away from them. In addition to public outcry, there appears to be strong political opposition to the law as well.

Elisabetta Bressan, an Italian commenting on Facebook writes:

Protests are going to increase here, as our Government has announced…  a law to introduce 12 mandatory vaccines. The law…. was announced by our Health Ministry to be as follows: 12 mandatory vaccination needed to have access to pre-school system (age 0-6): no vaccination, no enrollment, no exceptions; for mandatory school (age 0-16) if kids were not vaccinated parents should pay a penalty between 500€ and 7.500€ per year, if you cannot afford it, you’ll be refer to Jouvanile Court, that could suspend your parents rights to get your children vaccinated. A national protest is envisaged in Rome on June 11.

This will start within the next school year (September 2017); it has been calculated that more then 800,000 kids will need to receive a massive vaccination in a very little time.

As you know, Italy had been chosen in 2014 as leading Country for the WHO world vaccination campaign co-financed by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, therefore what happen here can affect also other countries.

In other comments posted on Facebook, Elisabetta Bressan suggests that the new mandatory vaccine law has strong financial connections to the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which could benefit from over 1 billion euros invested in Italy over the next four years. She writes:

This is the press conference of Health Minister, Ms. Lorenzin explaining the DL https://www.facebook.com/mauriziolupi.it/videos/10155541295653694/

At the opening of the conference, all guests are presented to the press, including Dr. Ranieri Guerra, presented as Director General of Health Prevention of the Ministry of Health. (Man sitting on Ms. Lorenzin right)

His curriculum vitae is regularly published in the Government’s website:
http://www.salute.gov.it/…/CV…/CV_pubblicazioni_Guerra_n.pdf at page 6 you can see he is a member of Glaxo Smith-Kline Foundation board.

On the Foundation website http://www.fsk.it/la-fondazione/storia-della-fondazione/ you are provided with additional information:

In 1987, it was recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO) as the ‘Center for Collaboration in the Training of Health Personnel’ and in 1997 as a ‘Hospitality Management Collaboration Center’ in Italy.

The Fsk.it website belongs To Smith Kline Foundation which is maintained thanks to the non-binding annual liberal loan of the founding partner GLAXOSMITHKLINE SpA, as well as the incomes of its own projects.

The members of the Board of Directors, as indicated here, are nominated by the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of University and Research, the Ministry of the Economy, ISS, the State State Conference and GlaxoSmithKline SpA and they approve the FSK Activity Plan annually.

The members of the Board of Directors (including Mr. Ranieri Guerra) are appointed, among others, by:
– Ministry of Health, represented in the press conference by Minister Beatrice Lorenzin
– ISS,
– Higher Institute of Health, present in the person of Dr. Walter Ricciardi,
– the same GlaxoSmithKline S.p.A. Vaccines and drugs, Glaxo bets 1 billion on Italy
http://www.sanita24.ilsole24ore.com/…/vaccini-e-farmaci-gla…

Here we talk about an investment of 1 billion euros in Italy for the next 4 years, including 2016 and the years relating to the new National Vaccine Plan 2017/2019 so promoted by the Ministry of Health.

Source: Vaccine Impact

by

Soleimani is no anti-imperialist hero | Al Jazeera

Johnny Liberty, Editor’s Note:Middle Eastern politics is extremely complicated, a tapestry of hatred, vengeance, and generally unneighborly violence that has been perpetuated for centuries. These young protesters with manufactured signs seem clueless as to what they’re protesting. ‘Tis a great party though. This article may shed some light and give the reader an interesting perspective.

By Malak Chabkoun

Immediately after news broke of the assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, some left-wing circles in the West proclaimed with great confidence – yet again – that World War III was around the corner. Previously, these same warnings of global doom were evoked when US President Donald Trump ordered rather toothless strikes on empty military targets in Syria and escalated his rhetoric against North Korea’s Kim Jong Un.

And just as a world war did not break out on these previous occasions, it will not break out now either.

Much of the left in the West (the same ones who describe themselves as progressives) also viciously attacked people in the Middle East who celebrated the deaths of Soleimani and al-Muhandis. While it is wrong to praise Trump’s decision to assassinate the two commanders as a “noble deed”, framing what happened within the old, tired left-wing narrative of US imperialism erases the regional context and the suffering of millions of people in the Middle East at the hands of other powers.

Indeed, it is important to expose Trump’s recklessness and political opportunism, but it is inexcusable to ignore the crimes of Soleimani and al-Muhandis and those whom they served.  

Trump’s motives

With an upcoming impeachment trial in the Senate, more Americans disapproving than approving of his presidency, and an election coming up, Trump is trying to cement his position in US politics and play to his base. His term has been marked by no clear domestic or foreign policy agendas, frequent golfing trips that prompt ethical questions about how federal dollars are being spent, and Twitter meltdowns that often do not have anything to do with reality. In short, when Trump ordered the assassinations, his presidency would not necessarily be described as successful.

While it is clear the US president was motivated by domestic considerations, in the aftermath of the attack, he claimed that he ordered it in the name of fighting global “terrorism” and that Soleimani’s assassination meant his reign of “terror” was over.

This rhetoric might help him improve his ratings in advance of his re-election bid in November, but it is simply a lie that Soleimani’s assassination will make the world a safer place. In fact, none of Trump’s interventions in the Middle East has been of any consequence to the security of the region, contrary to what many on the right have claimed.

People in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and elsewhere where Soleimani’s Quds Force has been active will continue to suffer the consequences of Iran’s foreign interference. Al-Muhandis’ death and the limited attacks the United States has carried out on the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMFs) will not disband the militia, which is heavily entrenched in Iraq.

Similarly, the killing of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the ISIL (ISIS) group did not make the region any safer from “terrorism”. ISIL attacks have continued, and Russia and the Syrian regime have also continued to use the excuse of “anti-terror operations” to step up their military campaigns against civilians opposed to Bashar al-Assad’s rule, killing hundreds and displacing hundreds of thousands.

Trump’s 2017 and 2018 air raids on Syrian regime targets did nothing to prevent the sustained campaign of extermination Damascus has led against its own population. They also did not result in World War III or war with Russia that some left-wing pundits were predicting on social media.

In fact, throughout his term, Trump has been playing both camps – the right-wing hawks and the left-wing “anti-war” crusaders – with his constant shift of rhetoric between withdrawal and disengagement from the Middle East and aggressive action.

He “pulled out” of Syria, but sent back troops to “guard the oil”. He promised tough action on Iran after attacks in the Gulf but did not retaliate the way his allies wanted.

It is about time that both sides admit Trump makes domestic and foreign policy decisions based on his ego and what suits him, not based on standing up for “our people” or some diabolic imperialistic plot.

Regional reactions in context

The assassinations of Soleimani and al-Muhandis gave some Middle East residents a sense of relief that they have finally been rid of two militia commanders who have brought much suffering to their communities.

But when Syrians, Iraqis, Yemenis and other Arabs posted celebratory comments on the assassinations of two commanders they perceive as war criminals, Iran’s defenders immediately criticised these people, resorting to insisting they didn’t know anything about their own countries, claiming they are pro-imperialism.

In so doing, these self-identified leftists and “anti-war” activists once again downplayed the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in the region. For them, the only civilian deaths that can be acknowledged are those caused by the military intervention of the US, Israel or their allies.

However, it is hard to cover up the crimes Iran and its regional proxies have committed over the past 10 years. Iran has backed and even advised on the brutal crackdown by the Syrian regime on opposition protests and later the mass killing of civilians through areal bombardment and merciless sieges; it has also sent Afghan refugee children to fight on its behalf in Syria. It has sent military equipment and personnel to the Houthis in Yemen, who just like their enemies, the Saudis and the Emiratis, have been accused of committing war crimes in the Yemeni conflict. In Iraq, they have supported and directed militias which have committed various crimes against Iraqi civilians.

In this sense, it is hardly surprising that Syrians who have gone through the trauma of losing friends and family in the siege of Aleppo and the insult of seeing images of Soleimani marching through their city (which they may never be able to return to) are celebrating his demise. It is also hardly surprising that Iraqi protesters, who have had to drag the bodies of friends shot in the head with Iranian military-grade gas grenades during attacks by Iranian-backed militias on their demonstrations, would now be cheering the demise of al-Muhandis who had been accused of directing the crackdown.

These same left-wing people who proclaim concern about foreign intervention, refuse to acknowledge the Iranian intervention in Syria, Yemen and Iraq when the people of those countries rebelled against authoritarianism, corruption, sectarianism, and socioeconomic collapse. When protests broke out in 2018 and 2019 in Iran against the Iranian authorities, they once again framed them in the foreign-sponsored regime-change narrative.

The constant need to defend the Iranian government, even against the protests of Iranian people who have suffered under this government, is an exercise in mental gymnastics. This is the same left-wing segment that equates criticism of Iran with being an ally of Israel, which is highly problematic given Iran and Israel are committing the same crimes in the Middle East.

Only US imperialism exists?

There has been much noise about US’s breach of Iraqi sovereignty, but there has been little said of Iranian and Russian actions violating sovereignty in the region. The constant presence of Soleimani in Iraq to issue orders to Iraqi officials and forces is just one of many signs of Iran’s lack of respect for Iraq’s sovereignty. By the admission of these same leftists, Soleimani was intervening in Iraq to “fight” US intervention.

In Syria, what these self-proclaimed anti-war activists see as Iranian and Russian deployment at the invitation of a legitimate president, Syrians see as an occupation allowed by a dictator who they never elected in free and fair elections.

The debate around Soleimani and al-Muhandis’ assassinations has served to illustrate, once again, the inconsistent perception by a segment of the “progressive” left of what constitutes “imperialism”. They readily brand US and Israeli actions as imperialist; yet aggression by others – whether Russia, China, Iran or their allies – which causes equal damage and civilian deaths, is ignored, downplayed, or wrapped in “anti-terror” narratives (rather similar to the ones the US and Israel use).

Thus, US and Israeli attacks on the Iranian forces or the Assad regime have been decried as acts of imperialism while the mass killings of Syrian civilians by occupying powers Iran and Russia have been ignored, questioned or presented as “terrorist” deaths.

Criticising the US and Israel while ignoring the crimes of others, however, does no good for the people on the ground bearing the brunt of geopolitical battles between these global and regional powers. Crying “World War III is coming” every time the US engages in aggression also ignores the fact that millions of people in the Middle East and elsewhere, where US, Israeli and also Iranian, Russian and Chinese intervention have stirred conflict, are already living the realities of such a war.

Being truly anti-war would mean opposing aggression by all and condemning all those accused of war crimes – whether Qassem Soleimani or Eddie Gallagher.

Source: Al Jazeera

by

Dick Morris: The Deep State is framing Trump on Ukraine | WND & The Western Journal

By Dick Morris, The Western Journal

Editor’s Note: There is always more going on than meets the eye especially via a highly politicized and polarized media from which we gather 99.9% of our information about what’s going on. To be truly informed, do your own research and learn from both sides of the equation to better understand the bigger picture. In this article we get a better understanding of why the US State Department is so riled up about Trump involving himself directly in foreign policy and building direct relationships with the leaders of the world (and why they are testifying against him).

Encased within the Democratic efforts to oust Trump is the determination of the deep state to limit presidential power to conduct foreign policy and the desire of allies of the EU to resist efforts to enlist the new Ukrainian president in their nationalist coalition.

Conservatives and Republicans are well aware by now of the deep state that permeates the Intelligence Community, having seen it operate to try to impeach President Donald Trump over phony charges of Russian collusion.

Now, meet the Deep State at State! The State Department and the National Security Council are filled with deep state operatives working feverishly to bring Trump down over the Ukraine affair.

Their pique at Trump’s heavy-handed intervention in Ukraine is rooted in their deep-seated belief that the president must be kept out of foreign policy despite the constitutional mandate that unambiguously puts in his lap.

Recognizing the president’s formal power, the deep state folks work overtime to get the president to do their bidding on foreign affairs.

William Taylor, former charge d’affaires of the U.S. embassy in Kiev told House investigators that he “began to sense that the two decision-making channels [formulating U.S. policy toward Ukraine] — the regular and the irregular — were separate and at odds.”

Translation: How dare the president conduct foreign policy without consulting us!

Atlanticist to the core, the deep state is heavily invested in the idea of globalism and the institution of the European Union. It watched, with alarm and dismay, the defection of the UK from the EU. They see Brexit as a tragedy. But now their focus turns to the eastern border of the EU as it threatens to defect as well.

There, a determined effort led by Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban (a former client) is eroding the power of the EU. Allying with like-minded leaders in Poland and Italy, he is crafting an independent course away from Brussels.

President Trump set off alarm bells in the State Department deep state when, according to The New York Times, “Trump met, over the objections of this national security advisor, with one of [Ukraine’s] most virulent critics, Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary.”

At that meeting, The Times said, Trump “was exposed to a harsh indictment of Ukraine” that “set the stage for events that led to the impeachment inquiry.”

Orban’s sin is opposing the EU, restricting Muslim immigration and battling with fellow Hungarian George Soros. Defying the EU, he has built a wall around Hungary to protect his country of only nine million from a hostile takeover by Muslim refugees and immigrants. He refuses to admit his quota of refugees assigned Hungary by the EU.

Eager to protect the 150,000 Hungarians living in Ukraine from forced assimilation, he has battled for permitting Hungarian to be used in the regions in which they live.

Seeking to preserve national identity is a no-no in the world of the EU.

And Organ also struck at left-wing billionaire George Soros who founded the Central European University in Budapest after the fall of communism. It’s increasingly leftist, anti-nationalist orientation has drawn criticism from Orban who has moved to restrict its government funding.

Orban is building a nationalist coalition in Eastern Europe that opposes immigration and resists EU domination. His Polish ally, Jaroslaw Kaczyński (another former client) just won the election there a few months ago. Leaders in Italy and other eastern European countries have backed Orban’s crusade.

Source: WND & The Western Journal

by

Study touts planting 1 trillion trees as most effective climate change solution | The Hill

Healthy green trees in a forest of old spruce, fir and pine trees in wilderness of a national park. Sustainable industry, ecosystem and healthy environment concepts and background.

The cheapest way to halt the effects of climate change could be planting 1 trillion trees, according to a new study.

The study in the journal Science, first reported by The Associated Press, found that planting trees could be the most effective way to remove carbon from the atmosphere, but cautioned that it would have little effect without a reduction of emissions around the globe.

“This is by far — by thousands of times — the cheapest climate change solution” study co-author Thomas Crowther, an ecologist at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, said.

“It’s certainly a monumental challenge, which is exactly the scale of the problem of climate change,” he added.

Though, Crowther cautioned, “None of this works without emissions cuts.”

Scientists with the United Nations have called for a major reduction in carbon emissions over the next decade to stave off the worst effects of climate change, including rising sea levels and dangerous weather phenomena.

Lawmakers around the world have debated on how to address the issue, and in 2017 the U.S. withdrew from a major accord meant to battle climate change due to President Trump‘s opposition to the pact.

Democratic candidates for president, including former Vice President Joe Biden, have called for the U.S. to rejoin the agreement. Progressives are pushing an ambitious plan to cut U.S. carbon emissions, the Green New Deal, introduced earlier this year by Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).

If enacted, the Green New Deal calls for the transition of America’s energy grid away from fossil fuels to renewable energy.

Source: The Hill

by

European Parliament elections: 5 takeaways from the results | NBC News

The dust has settled on the world’s second largestdemocratic exercise, a continent-wide vote that has left Europe’s political landscape reshaped.

Last week, some 373 million citizens across 28 countries took part in elections for the European Parliament, which makes laws that bind the political and economic bloc. The results rolled in on Sunday night.

Far-right populists had some wins, but it wasn’t quite the dramatic, widespread surge seen in recent elections at the national and local level across the continent.

What is clear is that the mainstream parties from the center-left and center-right hemorrhaged votes, with much of their support going to a fragmented collection of environmentalists and pro-European Union liberals.

Here are five key takeaways.

1. The far-right surge never quite came

Steve Bannon, the former adviser to President Donald Trump, called for these elections to be a referendum endorsing his right-wing populist vision for Europe. But while there were some victories for this camp, the full-blown tsunami that some predicted failed to materialize.

Right-wing populists fell short of expectations in Austria, the Netherlands and Denmark, while Germany’s AfD party made only slight gains.

Even in France, where Marine le Pen’s National Rally came first, beating President Emmanuel Macron’s En Marche party, its provisional vote share was down on the last European Parliament elections in 2014.

“The big story is that the nationalist populists have not managed to turn this into a referendum on the E.U.,” said Jose Ignacio Torreblanca, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, a Brussels-based think tank. “People like Bannon have failed.”

That said, while the gains might not have been as dramatic as some forecast, the election arguably cemented far-right populism as a European force that isn’t going away soon. Such parties are often anti-migrant, anti-Muslim and anti-E.U., or at least wish to radically reshape the bloc from within.

There were clear victories for the right in Poland, Hungary and Italy. “The rules are changing in Europe,” said Matteo Salvini, the leader of Italy’s far-right League party which got around 34 percent of the vote there. “A new Europe is born.”

Britain’s Brexit Party was also victorious, securing around one-third of the vote and relegating the ruling Conservatives to fifth place at a dismal 9 percent. However, the U.K. should perhaps be seen as a special case due to the country’s protracted and messy attempts to leave the European Union.

2. The collapse of the mainstream

For the first time, the traditional center-left and center-right parties will not have a majority in the European Parliament’s 751-seat chamber.

The Social Democrats and the European People’s Party, groupings which have dominated for years, lost 39 and 36 seats respectively, according to provisional results.

“This is a profound change,” said Janis A. Emmanouilidis, director of studies at the European Policy Centre, another Brussels-based think tank. “The two biggest parties have lost a significant number of seats.”

However, voters often use the E.U. elections to give major parties a bloody nose, secure in the knowledge that it will not cause upheaval in their own national parliaments.

Even so, Sunday’s results represented a seismic rejection of the traditional ruling parties across the continent.

“We are facing a shrinking center of the European Union parliament,” Manfred Weber, chairman of the European People’s Party said. “From now on, those who want to have a strong European Union have to join forces.”

The one exception was in Spain, where the Socialists looked set to gain 20 of the country’s 54 seats. The Socialists belong to the wider Social Democrats group, however, for whom the general outlook was far more bleak.

“If you lose an election, if you lose seats, you have to be modest,” added Frans Timmermans, the lead candidate for the Social Democrats. “We have lost seats and this means that we have to be humble.”

3. More than Green shoots

Riding something of an environmentalist wave washing over Europe, the continent’s Green group made big gains.

This was most evident in Germany, where the Greens doubled their provisional vote share to 21 percent and overtook the country’s traditional center-left Social Democrats in the process.

In France and Britain, the Greens also did well, placing third and fourth respectively. More subtly, environmental issues were given increased prominence in the manifestos of other parties, too.

This shift comes on the back of months of demonstrations demanding action over climate change. In May, the United Nations released a report warning 1 million species of plants and animals were under threat of extinction.

“We will work tirelessly. For people. For Europe. For our planet!” the European Greens tweeted.

4. Pro-E.U. liberals make gains

Another group that mopped up support from the traditional parties was the pro-Europe, pro-business liberal centrists.

Parties allied with the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe — known as ALDE — looked set to increase their number of seats from 68 to 109, although this was largely thanks to Macron’s En Marche party joining them.

ALDE is led by Guy Verhofstadt, one of the E.U.’s most ardent defenders against populist forces that wish to dismantle or disrupt the union.

The boost in support suggests that voters, especially young people, came out to back their side of the argument.

“When Europe is threatened, you have seen the youth mobilizing to defend it,” said Torreblanca at the European Council on Foreign Relations.

The BBC also reported that turnout in the U.K. surged in areas that supported the country staying in the E.U. in the 2016 Brexit referendum. Britain’s Liberal Democrats came second with 20 percent of the vote. They were one of the parties to explicitly oppose Brexit, and gained huge support in Remain-backing areas, including beating Labour in that party’s erstwhile stronghold of London.

5. Good luck trying to govern now

This was the first time in Europe’s history that turnout for these elections has risen, climbing from 43 percent to an encouraging 51 percent.

“This is noteworthy,” said Emmanouilidis at the European Policy Centre, calling the leap “remarkably higher.”

Yet the results spell a European Parliament that is going to be far more fragmented than it has been in recent years.

The two centrist giants bled support and will be unable to form the kind of “grand coalition” that they had before. Instead they might need another coalition partner or two, meaning more compromise and room for disagreement on key issues.

Timmermans, of the Social Democrats, has already ruled out attempting to build a coalition with the far-right, calling instead for a “progressive” grouping to be formed.

“It will become quite messy,” said Emmanouilidis, describing attempts to find consensus in Brussels “an uphill struggle” at the best of times.

Source: NBC News