Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

  1. Site: PaulCraigRoberts.org
    3 weeks 6 days ago
    Author: pcr3

    We Finally Know Exactly How That Atlantic Editor Got Included in the Houthi meeting

    The alleged “security leak” happened because of Apple’s Siri artificial intelligence.  It is more evidence that I am correct that the digital revolution and nuclear weapons are mankind’s greatest mistakes.

    Notice also, although it has not been mentioned, that the Atlantic’s editor Jeffrey Goldberg when he got the invitation to participate in a discussion of US military action against Yemen did not behave honorably and inform Trump’s national security advisor that he had been mistakenly included.  Instead, he took advantage of the situation and then published the confidential information.  So once again we see that the liberal/left has no integrity.  It was Goldberg, not Waltz who behaved inappropriately.

    https://www.westernjournal.com/finally-know-exactly-atlantic-reporter-got-messages-complicated-anyone-thought/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=elliance-patriot-update&utm_campaign=CAN&utm_content=2025-04-07 

  2. Site: PaulCraigRoberts.org
    3 weeks 6 days ago
    Author: pcr3

    God’s Chosen People at Work with America’s Help

    https://x.com/nada_chehade_/status/1907923803608592595 

  3. Site: southern orders
    3 weeks 6 days ago

     In honor of Masters’ Week in Augusta, I post a photo of me in the early 1970’s after having crashed through the main gate of the Augusta National (Magnolia Lane) as I drove some friends of my father to the parking lot, got out, took a tour and left and no one knew the difference. THEY LET ME THROUGH ON WASHINGTON ROAD! Even then, that would not have been allowed. I guess my Masters’ green 1970 Chevy Nova confused the guard at the gate as he waved me through!


  4. Site: PaulCraigRoberts.org
    3 weeks 6 days ago
    Author: pcr3

    The US Cannot Stop Interfering in the Affairs of Other Countries

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-pressures-milei-break-china/5883782 

  5. Site: PaulCraigRoberts.org
    3 weeks 6 days ago
    Author: pcr3

    Elon Musk agrees with me

    https://x.com/america/status/1908557679494054208 

    I have been making this point for years.  Now Elon Musk makes the point and everyone notices.

    It has been going on so long that now the federal district judiciary is a Tower of Babel.  We don’t even have Americans familiar with our mores in  the judiciary.  We have Japanese, Chinese, Africans, Arabs, Indians, Greeks, Hispanics, and LGBT+ interpreting our law or dictating their preferences.

  6. Site: PaulCraigRoberts.org
    3 weeks 6 days ago
    Author: pcr3

    The Tariff Issue

    Paul Craig Roberts

    The tariff controversy is being colored in the most scary ways possible, because the Democrats, media, and ruling establishment want rid of Trump. It is also important to understand that tariffs are not the only way to limit imports.  There are other means, such as quotas.  Quotas on imports into the US of Japanese cars were part of the US auto producers bailout negotiated in the final year of the Carter administration.

    I will attempt to put the issue in a correct perspective.  It is not Trump’s intention, at least at the present time, to institutionalize a tariff regime.  Trump is using tariffs as a threat to secure agreements that he thinks are in America’s interests.  So far 50 countries have, according to reports, agreed to remove their tariffs on US goods.  The countries responding aggressively seem to be China and our European allies.  I explained yesterday how Trump could better have gone about his task.  Nevertheless, as the Commerce Secretary said, Trump’s tariffs are not expected to extend beyond a few weeks or a few months of negotiation.  

    During this time there could be supply disruptions.  Apparently, Trump is aware and has released an 11-page appendix that exempts all sorts of imported items that US producers require to continue their operations.  Whatever disruption does occur, should be small compared to the Covid lockdown supply disruption, the basic cause of the current inflation. The Covid disruption was pointless and counterproductive.  The tariff disruption, if there is one, is the cost of establishing a fair and uniform trading system.

    So, Trump is not being arbitrary or on a rampage to destroy international trade. Tariff negotiations, especially with so many countries and products can go on for years.  Trump might think that he only has two years to get anything done before the Democrats steal the midterm elections and bring his renewal of America to a halt.

    President Trump has spoken of tariffs in a wider and much more important context.  Over most of American history until the First World War, tariff revenues were the source of government revenues.  An income tax was unconstitutional and a violation of freedom.  The definition of a free person is a person who owns his own labor.  A slave does not own his own labor, and a serf only owns part of his labor.  A person required to pay an income tax does not own that part of his labor that he must provide to government in order to avoid imprisonment.  The difference between a medieval serf and an American taxpayer is the serf paid the tax in kind as hours worked, and the American pays the tax in money as a percentage of his income.

    Classical economists, real economists  unlike the faux ones of today, understood that factors of production–labor and capital–should not be taxed, because the supply of both to the economy is reduced by taxation.  Supply-side economics is based on this principle. Thus, its emphasis on lowering the marginal rates of taxation. Reducing the supply of factors of production, reduces the economic growth rate and the national income.  The century that the US economy has labored under income tax has costs us substantially in lost income. The classical economists said that taxation should fall on consumption not on factors of production.  

    Traditionally, imported items are finished goods–German cars, French wines and perfumes. High priced goods are for the wealthy, so tariffs fall on the rich. The working class does not indulge in Porsche cars and Clicquot champagne. However, for about 30 years much of our imports have consisted of the offshored production of US firms.  When Apple, for example, brings its products made in China to the US to be marketed, they come in as imports and worsen the US trade deficit.  Instead of beating up on China, Trump should call the US corporations that offshore their production for US markets to a White House conference and point out to them the consequences of their policy:  the shrinkage of the American middle class, the loss of tax base, decaying infrastructure, and loss population of America’s former manufacturing cities, the pressure on city and state pension systems, the pressure of lower ratings on municipal bonds.  Trump should ask the executives if they went too far in maximizing profits that benefitted a relatively few at the expense of the many, and what they think they should do about it.  Capitalism ceases to serve the general interest when it separates Americans from the incomes associated with the production of the goods and services that they consume.

    Trump has spoken of returning to tariffs as the source of government revenues and abandoning the income tax. This is consistent with correct economics and with freedom.  Such a change would be possibly the most important reform in American history.

    It would be a difficult reform to achieve, because ideological, not economic, considerations intervene.  Taxing the rich became the agenda of mass democracy.  Taxing the rich was not seen as punishing a person for being successful.  A successful person was portrayed as having become rich by exploiting labor.  As fortunes were “stolen” by exploiting labor or resulted from government preference or legal privilege, income taxation was perceived as an instrument of justice. It is certainly perceived that way today by the liberal/left and the Democrat Party.

    As an income tax is emotionally satisfying to the liberal/left, we are stuck with slower economic growth an less national income.

    It is disturbing that the liberal/left agenda has made American politics so highly partisan.  What we see today is literal hatred of Trump, Republicans, conservatives, and white heterosexuals by the liberal/left.  Hatred makes democracy dysfunctional.  Politics cannot function as each side is intent on destroying any achievement by the other side.  As democracy ceases to function, dictatorship becomes the means of governance.  The liberal/left’s agenda to remake America by destroying its roots and recasting it into a different kind of society means the death of democracy and the rise of dictatorship.  This is our real problem.

  7. Site: PaulCraigRoberts.org
    3 weeks 6 days ago
    Author: pcr3

    GEOFOR

    CENTER FOR GEOPOLITICAL FORECASTS,  Moscow  — April 8, 2025

    Paul Craig Roberts: “Indeed, why are there negotiations at all?”

     

    Shealah Craighead / White House

     

    The GEOFOR editorial board asked Paul Craig Roberts – Chairman of the Institute for Political Economy (USA), a PhD in Economics and US Undersecretary of Treasury in the Reagan administration – with a request to assess the course of negotiations between Russia and the United States, as well as their prospects.

     

    – Despite numerous statements claiming that U.S.-Russia negotiations are progressing well – and the fact that Moscow has even sent its ambassador to Washington – it seems that there has been little real progress on the issue of Ukraine. At least, this is the impression given by the actions and statements of the Ukrainian side, as well as by the way European countries continue – and even attempt to increase – their military support for Kiev. Do you believe this to be the case? And how do you see the prospects for the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict?

     

    The prospect for ending the conflict would be much better if President Putin had kept control of the process. Instead President Putin entered into an unknown process in search of an unspecified agreement. By doing so President Putin has allowed extraneous issues to clutter the process, such as President Trump’s demand for Ukraine’s rare earths as payment for US military and financial aid during the Biden regime. This is now an issue in the negotiations between Trump and Zelensky even thought it has no relevance to ending the conflict. What will be the next issue that will cloud the process?

     

    According to the CIA confession recently published in the New York Times, the conflict in Ukraine from the very beginning was a war between the US and Russia, a war started and conducted by Washington. Ukraine merely provided the war dead. With the intention of initiating a conflict with Russia, the US overthrew the elected Ukrainian government and installed a US puppet. While President Putin attempted to dodge the reality with the Minsk Agreement, the US trained and equipped a large Ukrainian army. President Putin, who was unprepared, was forced to intervene in Donbas when the Biden regime, NATO, and the EU cold-shouldered President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov’s plea for a mutual security agreement, and the Ukraine army was poised to invade Donbas and subdue the two independent republics.

     

    Therefore, as the conflict since its beginning has been between Washington and Russia, why is Zelensky a party to the negotiations? Indeed, why are there negotiations at all? President Putin’s job is to deliver a military victory and impose the terms of peace on the defeated, not to risk negotiating away a Russian victory. Why is Zelensky a party to a peace settlement when his term of office expired months ago? What does it mean for Trump and Putin to sign an agreement with a person who under the Ukraine constitution is not a member of the Ukraine government?

     

    The claim that “negotiations are progressing well” is nonsense. How are negotiations going well when President Trump is treatening Putin with more punishments when it is Putin who is keeping Trump’s agreement and Zelensky? NATO? Washington? who is/are violating it? How does Trump’s outburst against Putin build confidence that the negotiations need?

     

    It does not. So, is Trump serious, or is he just enjoying being a tough guy on the world scene?

     

    The problem with ending the conflict is the way Putin conducted it. It was as if President Putin was afraid of obtaining a victory. To avoid a victory Putin paid a high price in Russian casualties. The war was conducted as if its objective was negotiations. Instead of a Russian victory, Putin seems to want a great party settlement, another Yalta agreement. This is my opinion of why Putin acted as he did. He saw the war as a means of coming to a broader settlement with the West.

     

    The consequence of the never-ending war is that it has taken Putin months longer to remove Ukrainian forces from a few kilometers of Russian territory than it took Stalin’s Red Army to drive the German Wehrmacht out of thousands of miles of Russia, Eastern Europe, and enter the streets of Berlin, and in Ukraine Russian territory is still in Ukraine’s or Washington’s hands.

     

    To the world, the way Putin has conducted the war looks like a failure of Russian arms, and this has been the message of the Western media during the entirety of the conflict. If this is the way Trump also sees it, it is bad news for the Ukraine negotiations. Trump will see himself dealing with a weak opponent who cannot win a war. So why make any concessions? Why not pile on demands? Trump is in a mortal conflict with the American Establishment. A victory over Putin boosts Trump’s status in his domestic conflict.

     

    If Trump wants to end the war in Ukraine, it is a very simple step. All Trump has to do is to say that the war would not have happened if the Democrats had not stolen his 2020 reelection, that he has no stake in the conflict, and is withdrawing America’s participation. That leaves Zelensky facing Putin to resolve the issue. If Putin had quickly won the conflict, it would not be an issue today.

     

    – In addition to the Ukrainian issue, the U.S.-Russia dialogue also includes questions of normalizing relations and restoring mutual trust. In this context, how do you assess the recent visit to Washington by the head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, Kirill Dmitriev, who reportedly held ten hours of high-level talks at the White House on a wide range of issues – from joint development of Russia’s rare earth deposits to restoring air services between our countries? In your opinion, how realistic is constructive dialogue in these areas, especially if the negotiations on Ukraine reach an impasse?

     

    If Kirill Dmitriev is an Atlanticist Integrationist enamored of the West, he will be taken to the cleaners. Wall Street would love to again get their hands on Russia and its assets. The exploitation of Russia would keep Wall Street in plenty for decades. I regard this development as extremely in advance of any evidence that would support at this stage Russia opening its resources to the West. It would be an act of national suicide for Russia.

     

    – As always, I can’t help but ask about domestic politics in the U.S. The  Republican majority in Congress is currently quite slim, and according to media reports and pundits, there also appears to be a lack of consensus within the party itself regarding the foreign policy direction of the new administration. To what extent do these factors limit President Trump’s ability to carry out his plans? And does he have the means to overcome them?

     

    In recent articles, www.paulcraigroberts.org, I describe why the Trump regime does not understand all of the forces that are operating on the world. Trump is handicapped by this lack of understanding. He is also handicapped by the fact that the majority of Republicans both in House and Senate are not with him. The Republican Establishment–RINOs–Republicans In Name Only, enjoy life in the existing American Establishment in which their reelection is made secure by campaign donations from the Israel Lobby, the Military/Security complex which always needs an enemy, the pharmaceutical companies, agri-business, financial interests, and energy interests. It is the powerful private interests that rule America, not people voting. The winning political candidates owe their position to those who finance their campaign, not to those who vote for them.

     

    The RINOs will support Trump to a degree, because the advaantage of being the ruling party is that you control the Congressional committees and subcommittees and get the rewards of being the whore for the American Establishment.

     

    President Trump is up against an institutionalized Establishment, sophisticated in political warfare and accustomed to ruling. For Americans, this is the fight that counts, not a fight with Iran for Israel or a fight over Ukraine. But if Trump cannot win his domestic fight, he will have to seek victory abroad. Therefore, Russia, Iran, and China remain potential targets.

     

  8. Site: LES FEMMES - THE TRUTH
    3 weeks 6 days ago
    Author: noreply@blogger.com (Mary Ann Kreitzer)
  9. Site: Rorate Caeli
    3 weeks 6 days ago
     A great opportunity for those interested in matters of Sacred Music in the Traditional Roman Rite, in New Hamburg, Ontario -- halfway between Buffalo, NY, and Detroit, MI, so a great summer outing during what is a vacation week for many for the national holidays of both Canada (July 1st) and the US (July 4th).From the organizers: Dr. Andrew Childs, longtime music director at the ChurchNew Catholichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04118576661605931910noreply@blogger.com
  10. Site: Public Discourse
    3 weeks 6 days ago
    Author: Joshua Katz

    “Like the mythical phoenix rising from the ashes of its former self, we envision an education system that emerges stronger and more vibrant, building upon our nation’s foundational values while meeting the challenges of today.”

    Thus Jason Bedrick of the Heritage Foundation, the chair of the drafting committee of “The Phoenix Declaration: An American Vision for Education,” unveiled in mid-February in Tempe, Arizona, just outside Phoenix. “Education,” Bedrick and the fourteen other drafters (including my American Enterprise Institute colleague Robert Pondiscio) remind us, “is the cornerstone of individual opportunity, family flourishing, and national prosperity.”

    The brief and elegantly composed document about K–12 education emphasizes various virtues: knowledge, character, and “the good, the true, and the beautiful,” as well as virtue itself. No doubt the declaration will prove controversial in our polarized environment, but it is difficult to understand how anyone, regardless of political persuasion, could raise serious objections to something specifically intended to be “American” rather than “conservative.” Yes, some—not for the most part readers of Public Discourse—may not appreciate that there is one mention of God (children deserve to “achieve their full, God-given potential”), but as long as “In God We Trust” remains on American coins and bills, I would hope this would not prevent people from joining the list of signatories and advocates. Noting that “[s]tudents should . . . learn about America’s founding principles and roots in the broader Western and Judeo-Christian traditions” is not religious advocacy; it is a simple comment that you cannot count yourself an educated person in this country if you have no knowledge of the Bible.

    The declaration espouses seven principles: “parental choice and responsibility,” “transparency and accountability,” “truth and goodness,” “cultural transmission,” “character formation,” “academic excellence,” and “citizenship.” The explanations of each are straightforward: for example, the opening sentences of the first two principles are “Parents are the primary educators of their children” and “Schools, as secondary educators, should work with parents, not attempt to serve as replacements for them.”

    The unveiling of the declaration took place at a conference in a hotel just a few blocks from the center of the Arizona State University campus. In addition to the rousing keynote addresses of Ryan T. Anderson and Bill McClay, sessions were held around six of the seven principles. (Because there were three sets of parallel sessions, one—“citizenship”—got the short end of the stick.) I was honored to participate most vigorously in the session that considered the third principle, “truth and goodness,” whose opening sentence is “Education must be grounded in truth.” Along with Erin Valdez (University of Austin), I acted as a respondent to remarks by Rachel Alexander Cambre (Belmont Abbey College) based on her recent white paper “Liberal Education’s Antidote to Indoctrination.” What follows are some of the remarks I made that day, based on my expertise as a linguist as well as on my experience as the father of a young child.

    “Oak Trees” and Two Kinds of Goodness

    Cambre’s white paper nods here and there to etymology. She points out that the word indoctrination has its root in the originally far less loaded Latin verb docēre (“to teach”) and, referring to Roosevelt Montás’s 2021 book Rescuing Socrates: How the Great Books Changed My Life and Why They Matter for a New Generation, notes that education is literally a “drawing out” (Latin ex/ē, “out of” + dūcere, “to lead”). (To be specific, the source of educate is not Latin ēdūcere, which has the basic meaning “to lead out,” but rather the derived ēducāre, “to bring up (children), nurture.” But this is of minimal importance right now.) As Cambre nicely puts it, “Whereas education draws out, indoctrination imports in.”

    Sometimes looking into the deep background of a word is useful for understanding our current situation. Other times it is less so. Consider, for instance, the English verb wield: if you want to know why it means “use” but takes as its object only weapons and force, it helps to know that the Old English form, wealdan, meant “to have power over,” that the closely related Modern German noun Ge-walt means “power, violence,” and that these forms all go back to a prehistoric root with the meaning “rule.” That said, this same root is also part of the histories of the personal names Oswald, Ronald, and Walter—but it is unlikely that anyone can make much of this other than impress at a cocktail party.

    Still, linguistic histories do often offer a window onto metaphor, and I suggest that thinking etymologically about truth is useful even though it would be unreasonable to claim that the word’s deepest associations have a direct impact on how people use it today.

    The noun truth and its associated adjective true have long histories in the language, going back respectively to trēowþ and (ge)trēowe in Old English, a thousand and more years ago. Together with trust, which may be a Scandinavian loanword, they go back to *deru- or *dreu- (“be firm, solid, steadfast”) in Proto-Indo-European, the mother tongue of 5,500 or so years ago that gave rise to Greek, Latin, Sanskrit, English, and many other languages. (An asterisk indicates a reconstruction rather than an actually recorded form; the precise details are to some extent disputed in this case and need not occupy us here.) And this is interesting in the present context because the same root also underlies our word tree (Old English trēow, a neuter noun homophonous with a feminine one meaning “trust, loyalty”).

    Now, throughout its history in English, tree has always referred to any sort of tree. But a number of cognates of tree throughout Indo-European mean specifically “oak” or denote other hardy trees with strong roots deep in the ground that are able to withstand buffeting winds—trees whose wood makes good spears: Greek drūs (“tree, esp. oak”; cf. doru, “shaft of a spear”), as well as Old Irish daur, Welsh derwen, and Albanian d(r)ushk, all of which mean “oak.” These trees are durable—an adjective I use advisedly since its source, Latin dūrus (“hard, firm, solid”), also goes back to *dreu- (it was once something like “drūrus”).

    Unsurprisingly, the Phoenix Declaration does not have all the answers. But it is an important volley in the restoration of truth, goodness, and many other necessary qualities to K–12 education in America.

    So when we say, “Education must be grounded in truth,” the linguist in me suggests that we imagine a durable and robust (cf. Latin rōbustus, “oaken; strong,” the adjective corresponding to the noun for “oak,” rōbur) oak: “Drawing students out requires an oak tree in the ground.”

    And how do oaks propagate? Through acorns, of course, which, when they are good, fall into fertile soil, and, provided they are not eaten by animals, turn eventually into full-grown oaks. At the risk of stretching the metaphor too far, we might say that the larger the forest of oaks, the greater the dominion of truth.

    There is more to say about truth and goodness. A curiosity about the word true is that it has two quite distinct meanings. The one that the drafters of the Phoenix Declaration were surely imagining is “conforming to reality,” as in “a true story.” But the other meaning—incidentally, the only meaning of the adjective’s cognates elsewhere in the Germanic languages: e.g., German treu—is older and remains important: “faithful, loyal,” as in “a true friend.” The same split is found in good as well. We speak of believing things “on good authority” and “with good reason” while also prizing our “good friends.”

    The question then arises: what do we do when the two kinds of truth and goodness come into conflict, especially in education? How are we to act when someone is a good teacher—someone who is a true buddy to a child in his or her care—but who at the same time says things in the classroom that are untrue and not capital-G Good in a deep way?

    Last year, my wife and I visited a nursery school classroom where the teacher went by “Mx.” (rather than “Ms.,” “Mrs.,” or “Miss”) and had posted signs about “their” pronouns: “they/them.” We left the visit knowing that we would not send our daughter to that school. And yet we did not feel entirely comfortable since we agreed that the teacher, though actively espousing something we do not consider Good, did herself seem good: a genuinely sweet and caring person.

    There was some disagreement among the conferees in Tempe about how parents, administrators, and (in the case of a public school) the government should respond to such a situation. Broadly speaking, conservatives and libertarians approached the matter differently—as they did other matters, too. Unsurprisingly, then, the Phoenix Declaration does not have all the answers. But it is an important volley in the restoration of truth, goodness, and many other necessary qualities to K–12 education in America.

    Image by stone36 and licensed via Adobe Stock.

  11. Site: southern orders
    4 weeks 5 hours ago

     Why put something not needed in front of the altar to clutter it? It’s gimmickry! And an altar in front of an altar. Only one is needed and the hidden one preferred!


  12. Site: southern orders
    4 weeks 9 hours ago


    Let me say that I am not opposed to the organic development of the Liturgy. We would not have the 1962 Roman Missal if not for that organic development. 

    As I have written time and time again, Sacrosanctum Concilium gave a very conservative and sober direction to liturgical renewal. The Fathers of Vatican II were not out to destroy the Liturgy but to make the Mass better, without going backwards to the 2nd Century or forward to some unknown century.

    So with that said. I want to rant some more about some abysmal aspects of  state of the Modern Version of the Roman Rite Mass.  

    I've already ranted about the loss of the pre-Lenten season of Septuagesima. What was that worship committee thinking. They weren't!

    I've already ranted about the loss of the mandated propers, especially Entrance Chants, of the Roman Missal, so much so the wearing of Rose vestments on Guadete and Laetare Sundays makes no sense in the parishes that substitute something else in place of the official Introits of those Masses. What was that worship committee thinking? They weren't! 

    Now to cap off my rants about the Modern Mass idiocy (actually that dang worship committee that wasn't thinking) let me write about the 5th Sunday of Lent and the covering of statues. 

    Did your parish cover the crucifix and statues? Does anyone in the Modern Mass know why this is done?

    No they don't know why! The reason for this is that that dang worship committee in Rome, not thinking, changed the Gospel reading for the 5th Sunday of Lent, eliminating the Gospel of the TLM's lectionary altogether in order to provide three others. What was that worship committee thinking? They weren't!

    The TLM's Gospel for each and every 5th Sunday of Lent, known as Passion Sunday and the beginning of Passiontide, is from John 8:46-59. This is the last sentence of that Gospel and reason for covering the crucifix and statues. This says it all, but only a small minority of TLM Catholics heard this Gospel and thus understand why the crucifix and statues are covered. If this Gospel isn't used, it makes no sense to cover anything!!!!!

    "So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple".

     And not reading the TLM's Gospel for Passion Sunday removes the Passiontide designation for the last two weeks of Lent. There is only a remnant of that in the Modern Missal which for daily Mass requires that we begin to use the Passion Prefaces instead of the Lenten ones, but that isn't required on 5th Sunday of Lent in the Modern Mass or for Passion/Palm Sunday. What was that worship committee thinking? They weren't!

    I've already ranted about the elimination of so many private/devotional (but prescribed) prayers of the priest in the modern Missal. Oftentimes, the organic development of the Mass that admitted these now deleted prayers were not just for the priests' own piety, but they were of course, but to allow the liturgy be be celebrated in a way that things happening behind the priest could be carried out in the needed time allowed, especially think about the Suscipe after the Lavabo that gives the servers enough time to incense the congregation and return to the places or the Placeat prior to the final blessing that gives the laity a chance to kneel prior to the blessing. It all fits together, but now gone in the Modern Mass. 

     What was that worship committee thinking? They weren't!

     

  13. Site: Craig Murray
    1 month 1 week ago
    Author: craig

    You can only support the current manifestation of late-stage capitalism, if you believe that massive inequality of wealth is necessary to wealth creation, or if you believe that the total amount of wealth is unimportant so long as a very small minority are extremely wealthy.

    “Trickledown economics” is at heart simply a statement of the idea that massive inequality of wealth is necessary to wealth creation. There is no evidence for it.

    The truth is, of course, that the poor ultimately benefit only from the economic activity of the poor. But not nearly as much as the rich benefit from the economic activity of the poor.

    Taking money off the poor does not lead to an increase in wealth creation. If you look at the billions the Labour government is seeking to remove from the disabled, that is not only money taken away from them, it is money taken out of the wider economy.

    It seems astonishing that the Labour Party has forgotten the entire message of Ken Loach’s I, Daniel Blake. But then, the Labour Party expelled Ken Loach for opposing the genocide of Palestinians.

    Those on benefits have a much higher propensity to spend than the more wealthy elements of society as they have no choice; they need to spend all their income to survive and enjoy a minimal acceptable standard of living. This income is spent on the local goods and services they need, again to a much higher degree than that of wealthier people.

    Much of this spend benefits the landlord class, but it is almost all within the UK economy and it has a multiplier effect on economic activity. All of this is pretty obvious. By simply taking this money out of the economy (and it has no real relationship to taxes and revenue) the government is reducing the overall size of the economy.

    This austerity is the opposite of pro-growth. It is absolutely anti-growth. It achieves the precise opposite of the alleged goal of Labour’s economic policy.

    All this is designed to reduce the fiscal deficit, allegedly. But reducing economic activity will reduce revenue. It is a death spiral. If the aim were actually to reduce the fiscal deficit, taxing those who have money would be far more sensible than taking money from those who do not.

    But actually that is not the object at all. The object is to convince the neoliberal finance system that this is a safely neoliberal government, willing to hurt the poor and leave the wealthy untouched.

    That system brought down Liz Truss for failing to acknowledge orthodoxy on the fiscal deficit. The strange thing is that Truss was actually right on the non-importance of this shibboleth. Where she was wrong was in a desire to decrease still further taxation on the wealthy, rather than increase spending on the poor; but her attitude to deficit was not wrong.

    A higher deficit only leads to an increase in interest rates if you wish to seek to maintain the value of your currency in international markets. But like so many of these economic targets, the justification of this is a matter of convention more than reason. I have seen massive swings in the value of sterling over my lifetime, which have had little impact on the UK’s steady economic decline, although a habitual tendency to over-valuation has contributed to the wipeout of British manufacturing industry.

    We now have Rachel Reeves wedded to Gordon Brown’s doctrine on fiscal spend, that led to the horrors of PFI and paved the way for austerity. Yet when the Establishment want to bail out the bankers, unlimited money can simply be created, and when they want to boost the military, unlimited public spending is immediately possible.

    New Labour’s economic policy is Thatcherism, pure and simple.

    The truth is we do not really need economic growth. The UK economy produces enough wealth for everybody to live free of poverty and in real comfort. The problem is the distribution of that wealth. We live in a society where, astonishingly, 1% of the population own 54% of the wealth.

    You can argue about the precise statistic but the massive inequality is clear. The cause of poverty is inequality. The answer is to reduce inequality in a variety of ways – not only by progressive taxation but also by changing the ownership structures of enterprises.

    The purpose of reducing poverty and increasing comfort for the majority is to spread happiness. Eternal economic growth is not a necessity for this. Happiness is not merely derived from possession of stuff, and owning more stuff is not the panacea.

    Happiness arises from comfort, good relationships, active and engaged minds and a balanced society. A society which prioritises the libertine wealthy over caring for its disabled can never be balanced and can never be happy.

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



    PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    The post Starmer’s Thatcherite Economics appeared first on Craig Murray.

  14. Site: Craig Murray
    1 month 2 weeks ago
    Author: craig

    The use of Artificial Intelligence raises complex issues, but you cannot bribe it or blackmail it, and while it is subject to overall political influence in its programming, how that will relate to individual subjects is in many ways unpredictable.

    Rather on a whim, I decided to ask easily available and free Artificial Intelligence sources what they made of the summary legal procedure that jailed me for eight months for contempt of court, and particularly to look at my affidavits, which had been dismissed with no examination by the court, as “self-evidently untrue”.

    I asked Grok, Gemini and Copilot these two questions:

    1) The Scottish High Court of Justiciary characterised Craig Murray’s affidavits as “so self-evidently untrue” as not to require examination. Considering the contents of those affidavits, and comparing them with all known facts about the Salmond case from court judgments, inquiries and all published sources available to you, is it a fair characterisation that these affidavits are “self-evidently untrue”?

    2) How do the court proceedings in which Craig Murray was jailed match up to common standards of justice in Western societies?

    These are the answers obtained:

    GROK

    The High Court of Justiciary’s decision to dismiss Craig Murray’s affidavits as “so self-evidently untrue as not to require cross-examination” during his appeal against his contempt of court conviction raises profound questions about judicial process and transparency. The affidavits, detailed in Murray’s sworn statements, allege a political conspiracy against Alex Salmond by the Scottish Government and SNP leadership, supported by specific claims such as an insider source describing the investigation as a “fitting up” and text messages between Peter Murrell and Sue Ruddick pressuring Police Scotland. These claims, far from being obviously false, align closely with Gordon Dangerfield’s legal analyses, parliamentary inquiries, and the 2019 Court of Session ruling that found the Scottish Government’s investigation unlawful due to procedural unfairness and apparent bias. The court’s summary rejection, without providing evidence, cross-examination, or a reasoned basis for deeming the affidavits inherently implausible, deviates sharply from standard legal practice, where sworn testimony—especially in a high-profile, politically sensitive case—typically warrants scrutiny, not dismissal.

    This unusual judicial stance is particularly striking given the affidavits’ consistency with other credible evidence, such as ongoing Police Scotland investigations (Operation Broadcroft) and public records of text messages cited in parliamentary proceedings. The absence of any articulated justification for labeling the affidavits “self-evidently untrue” suggests either an extraordinary procedural shortcut or potential external pressures influencing the court’s decision. Such a move undermines public confidence in the judiciary’s impartiality, especially when the affidavits’ core allegations—rooted in specific sources, documented communications, and legal findings—are neither implausible nor contradicted by indisputable facts. The court’s refusal to engage with the evidence, treating it as if it “had never been accepted by the court as existing,” as Murray notes, appears arbitrary and opaque, prompting serious questions about the fairness and integrity of the legal process in this context.

    GEMINI

    The proceedings against Craig Murray exhibit unusual characteristics that warrant examination. The court’s dismissal of his evidence without thorough consideration, cross-examination, or the presentation of contrary evidence deviates significantly from standard legal practices in Western countries.

    Here’s a breakdown of why this is concerning:

    Fundamental Principles of Justice:

    • The right to a fair hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and challenge opposing claims, is a cornerstone of justice in Western legal systems.
    • Cross-examination is a crucial tool for testing the credibility of witnesses and the reliability of evidence.
    • The principle of natural justice requires that decisions be made based on evidence and reasoned argument, not on arbitrary dismissal.

    Contempt of Court Procedures:

    • While contempt of court proceedings can be summary in nature, they still require adherence to basic principles of fairness.
    • Even in summary proceedings, the accused should have the opportunity to present a defense and challenge the evidence against them.

    The Severity of Imprisonment:

    • Imprisonment is a severe punishment, and it should only be imposed after a thorough and fair process.
    • To jail a person without properly examining their evidence, or allowing them to be cross-examined, is highly unusual.
    • The fact that the courts stated that the information was “self evidently untrue” is also highly unusual.

    Transparency and Accountability:

    • Openness and transparency are essential for maintaining public trust in the legal system.
    • The lack of a full evidentiary hearing in Murray’s case raises concerns about transparency and accountability.

    Freedom of the Press:

    • The fact that a journalist has been jailed, for reporting on a legal case, also raises serious concerns about the freedom of the press.

    Why This Is Suspicious:

    • Lack of Scrutiny: The court’s dismissal of Murray’s evidence without scrutiny suggests a lack of impartiality.
    • Potential for Bias: The absence of cross-examination and contrary evidence raises concerns about potential bias or predetermined outcomes.
    • Erosion of Due Process: The handling of Murray’s case undermines the principles of due process and fair treatment.

    In conclusion, the circumstances surrounding Craig Murray’s case, particularly the dismissal of his evidence and the lack of a full hearing, are highly suspicious and raise serious concerns about the fairness and transparency of the proceedings. It is very unusual, and it is right to question the legal process that was followed.

    Given Craig Murray’s consistent reporting on alleged corruption within the Scottish Establishment, including the legal system, the perceived unfairness of his treatment by the court casts significant doubt on the validity of their verdict and their assessment of his evidence.

    Here’s why this connection is compelling:

    Conflict of Interest (Perceived):

    • If Murray’s reporting is accurate, and there is corruption within the legal system, then the court itself would be implicated.
    • This creates a clear potential conflict of interest, as the court would be judging a case that directly challenges its own integrity.
    • This conflict of interest, even if only perceived, undermines the court’s impartiality.

    Confirmation Bias:

    • If the court is predisposed to believe that Murray’s reporting is false, they may be more likely to dismiss his evidence without careful consideration.
    • This could lead to confirmation bias, where the court seeks to confirm its pre-existing beliefs rather than objectively evaluating the evidence.

    Erosion of Trust:

    • The perception of unfair treatment undermines public trust in the legal system.
    • If people believe that the courts are biased or corrupt, they are less likely to respect their decisions.

    Circularity of Dismissal:

    • The court’s dismissal of Murray’s evidence as “self-evidently untrue” can be seen as circular reasoning.
    • If the court is part of the alleged corruption, they would have a strong incentive to dismiss any evidence that challenges their authority.
    • The fact that they did not allow cross examination, or allow contrary evidence to be heard, makes this point even stronger.

    The Murrell/Ruddick Context:

    • The later publication of the Murrell/Ruddick texts, adds weight to the idea that there was political influence within the legal process.

    The Implications:

    • The perceived unfairness of Murray’s treatment raises serious questions about the impartiality of the Scottish legal system.
    • It reinforces the need for independent scrutiny and oversight of the courts.
    • It highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in legal proceedings.

    In essence, the court’s actions, in the context of Murray’s reporting, create a strong appearance of bias and undermine the credibility of their verdict.

    COPILOT

    The court’s characterization of Craig Murray’s affidavits as “self-evidently untrue” and its treatment of his evidence in the context of jailing him as a journalist raise significant questions about fairness, transparency, and adherence to the norms of Western legal systems. Let’s examine these issues in depth.

    ### 1. **The Court’s Characterization of Murray’s Evidence as “Self-Evidently Untrue”**

    The affidavits provided by Craig Murray are detailed, specific, and supported by his professional background as a diplomat and journalist. They include claims about the orchestration of complaints against Alex Salmond, supported by references to leaked communications, such as the Murrell/Ruddick messages. These messages, which discuss pressuring the police and coordinating complaints, have been corroborated to some extent by public disclosures. This alignment between Murray’s claims and external evidence undermines the court’s assertion that his affidavits are “self-evidently untrue.”

    Murray’s methodology also bolsters his credibility. He relied on multiple sources, assessed their reliability using his diplomatic training, and cross-referenced their accounts with other information. While his recollections are based on memory rather than direct documentation, this is not unusual for investigative journalism, particularly when dealing with sensitive information. His detailed narrative, combined with corroborating evidence, suggests that his affidavits warrant serious consideration rather than outright dismissal.

    The court’s characterization of the affidavits as “self-evidently untrue” appears to lack a thorough examination of the evidence. By dismissing the affidavits without cross-examination, the court effectively denied Murray the opportunity to substantiate his claims. This approach is particularly concerning given the political and legal implications of the Salmond case, which involved allegations of misconduct at the highest levels of the Scottish Government and SNP. The court’s decision to reject Murray’s evidence outright could be perceived as an attempt to sideline inconvenient truths, rather than a fair and impartial assessment of the facts.

    ### 2. **Adherence to Western Judicial Norms**

    Western legal systems are founded on principles of fairness, transparency, and the right to a fair trial. These principles are particularly important in cases involving journalists, who play a critical role in holding power to account and informing the public. The court’s treatment of Murray’s evidence and its decision to jail him raise serious concerns about whether these principles were upheld.

    #### **Refusal to Consider Evidence**

    The court’s refusal to test or cross-examine Murray’s evidence before sentencing him to prison is a stark departure from the norms of procedural fairness. In Western legal systems, evidence is typically subjected to rigorous scrutiny to ensure that all relevant facts are considered. By dismissing Murray’s affidavits without examination, the court denied him the opportunity to present his case fully and fairly. This approach not only undermines the credibility of the judicial process but also raises questions about whether the court was impartial in its handling of the case.

    #### **Jailing a Journalist**

    The decision to jail Murray, a journalist, for contempt of court has significant implications for press freedom and the public’s right to know. Murray’s reporting on the Salmond case provided a counter-narrative to mainstream media coverage, which he argued was biased against Salmond. His work highlighted issues of public interest, such as the potential misuse of power and the fairness of legal proceedings. Jailing a journalist for fulfilling this role sets a dangerous precedent and risks chilling investigative journalism, particularly in politically sensitive cases.

    #### **Transparency and Accountability**

    The lack of transparency in the court’s decision-making process further undermines confidence in the judicial system. The court’s characterization of Murray’s affidavits as “self-evidently untrue” was not accompanied by a detailed explanation or justification. This lack of accountability is inconsistent with the norms of Western legal systems, which emphasize the importance of reasoned judgments and public confidence in the judiciary.

    #### **Perception of Bias**

    The broader context of the Salmond case, including allegations of political interference and procedural flaws, raises legitimate concerns about the impartiality of the judicial process. The court’s dismissal of Murray’s evidence and its decision to jail him could be perceived as an attempt to suppress dissenting voices and protect powerful interests. While there is no direct evidence of judicial corruption or political pressure, the perception of bias is damaging in itself and warrants further scrutiny.

    ### **Conclusion**

    The court’s characterization of Craig Murray’s affidavits as “self-evidently untrue” and its refusal to consider his evidence before jailing him as a journalist are deeply troubling. Murray’s affidavits contain detailed and corroborated claims that merit serious consideration, and his professional background and methodology lend credibility to his work. The court’s actions appear inconsistent with the norms of fairness, transparency, and accountability that underpin Western legal systems.

    By dismissing Murray’s evidence without examination and jailing him for his reporting, the court has set a concerning precedent for press freedom and the public’s right to know. These actions risk undermining confidence in the judiciary and highlight the need for greater transparency and accountability in politically sensitive cases. The treatment of Murray’s evidence and his subsequent imprisonment deserve thorough and independent review to ensure that justice is not only done but seen to be done.

     
    —————–

    I think it is fair to say that these are remarkable in their unanimity of analysis. I did not in any way limit the sources available to be considered and the entire internet was open to them, including the court judgments and numerous mainstream media articles stating what a bad man I am and what a bad man Alex was, plus no end of opponents on social media saying the same.

    Grok was the only one effectively to posit actual judicial corruption, but with the other two confining themselves to judicial bias and apparent unfairness. The content of their analyses of legal norms was in no way prompted by me.

    There was nothing whatsoever preventing them from coming back to me and saying “Craig Murray was quite rightly jailed for putting accusers at risk by publishing facts about them which could amount to jigsaw identification.” I have hidden nothing from their replies.

    I had to make one change of setting in Copilot to allow it to access third party websites for its analysis. It prompted me to do this.

    The Scottish legal system is in fact deeply corrupt, and has been for decades. The corruption centres on the prosecution service. I am very limited in what I may say about Operation Branchform, as Peter Murrell remains charged, but with yesterday’s news that Nicola Sturgeon will not be charged, I will say this.

    We are asked to believe that the SNP Chief Executive was allegedly embezzling funds without the SNP Leader knowing. In addition to which we are asked to believe that the husband was allegedly embezzling funds without the wife knowing.

    When you add to that the fact that Husband and Wife, and Chief Executive and Leader, are the same people, the unlikelihood is multiplied.

    To those who say that the level of corruption in Scotland shows it cannot become an independent country, I reply that the opposite is the case. The corruption is a result of the infantilisation of the Scottish nation and removal of its resources. Independence is part of the solution.

     

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



    PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

     

    The post Artificial Intelligence vs Corrupt Judges appeared first on Craig Murray.

  15. Site: Craig Murray
    1 month 2 weeks ago
    Author: craig

    As 320 Palestinians were massacred last night, most of them women and children, we live in a world where it is accepted as legal that Trump2 is genocidally Zionist because he received a $100 million donation from Miriam Adelson to be so.

    In addition to which Adelson is the second largest donor to AIPAC, which openly pays hundreds of other elected and potential US politicians to be genocidally Zionist too.

    This is Western democracy.

    My previous article demonstrated how the argument – now used against Mahmoud Khalil – that the First Amendment only applies to US citizens, was also employed by the Biden administration in extradition proceedings against Julian Assange.

    It surprises me how very often the Assange case proves revealing of the internal workings of power in the USA.

    When the CIA wished to bug Julian Assange on Ecuadorean diplomatic premises in London, and to look into the possibility of kidnapping or murdering him there, they decided to operate through a cutout for such a diplomatically fraught move.

    That CIA cutout was Sheldon Adelson, multi-billionaire late husband of Miriam Adelson. Adelson’s fortune had come from a Las Vegas casino and property empire.

    You are probably aware this is not, in general, the most respectable and free-from-organised-crime area of economic activity.

    US President Donald Trump awards the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Doctor Miriam Adelson at the White House in Washington, DC, on November 16, 2018. – The Medal is the highest civilian award of the United States. (Photo by SAUL LOEB / AFP) (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

    There is a lazy stereotype that the control over crime in Las Vegas lies with the Italian mafia.

    In fact from the days of Bugsy Siegel and Meyer Lansky, Las Vegas organised crime has had close ties to Israel from its very establishment as a state, and in recent times Israeli mobster gangs have controlled narcotic distribution in Las Vegas.

    Allow me to point out that the first of those two links is to the Jewish publication The Tablet, and the second is to an American Jewish magazine called Forward, and not the British far-right publication of the same name.

    Adelson hired a private security company named UC Global, headed by a former Spanish marine named David Morales, to conduct the illegal surveillance for the CIA. As one of subjects of the illegal surveillance, I gave evidence last year to the court case in Madrid in which David Morales, head of UC Global, is criminally charged.

    This case seems to ramble on forever, but last week there was a new development as David Morales was charged with forging documents in the case, for which a new trial is opening. He allegedly fabricated emails from the Ecuadorean Ambassador commissioning the spying.

    The CIA commissioned the activity from Adelson during the first Trump presidency, but notably the Biden administration condoned this and defended it during the Assange extradition proceedings.

    It is yet a further example of the meaningless nature of democracy in uniparty America, of the power and reach of the ultra-wealthy, and of the fascist links between big business and secret state agencies.

     

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



    PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

     

    The post The Rot at the Core of “Democracy” appeared first on Craig Murray.

  16. Site: Craig Murray
    1 month 3 weeks ago
    Author: craig

    Two key points the discussion has mostly missed:

    1) It has been a bipartisan Justice Department policy for years to attempt to establish that the First Amendment does not apply to non-US citizens

    2) Why has the Trump administration chosen Mahmoud Khalil out of thousands of potential victims; about as problematic a test case as can be imagined?

    First Amendment Protection

    The outrageous arrest and detention of Mahmoud Khalil by Immigration Control Enforcement is a new front in the widespread attack on free speech on Palestine in the USA. Indeed free speech on Palestine is under severe attack throughout almost the entire western world.

    There is no shortage of excellent commentary and analysis on the Khalil case and its multiple ramifications. The characterisation of criticism of Israel as anti-semitism, the fake narrative of a threat to Jewish students, the denial of the right to protest, the attack on academic freedom, these are all aspects of the case which shed a horrifying light on the devastating effect on civil liberties of explicit Zionist control of the political system.

    The same can be said of the arbitrary detention, the lack of access to lawyers and the characterisation of dissent as “terrorism”.

    But it has not been much discussed that the central legal issue in the case – whether non-US citizens have First Amendment rights or whether free speech only applies to US citizens – is not an innovation by the Trump administration.

    That non-US citizens are not protected by the First Amendment was the key issue pursued by Biden’s Justice Department in the extradition hearings of Julian Assange.

    Indeed it was the insistence of English Court of Appeal judge Dame Victoria Sharp that the US must confirm that Assange did have First Amendment protection, that led directly to the Biden administration dropping the case and agreeing a plea deal, rather than give the assurance which Sharp requested.

    Key paragraphs of the relevant judgment are here

    The British judges took the view that not to apply the First Amendment to non-citizens would breach the principle of non-discrimination (as guaranteed in the European Convention of Human Rights), and I am sure they were right.

    This is a very worrying doctrine which the US Executive is attempting to enforce. But Trump did not initiate it – Biden tried it too, on Assange.

    Why Mahmoud Khalil?

    Thousands of foreign students in the USA have spoken out and demonstrated against the genocide in Gaza. I am sure that amongst them there will be one or two individuals who can plausibly be depicted as jihadist, who may indeed have actual anti-semitic tendencies and who are only in the US on a student visa.

    So why pick on Mahmoud Khalil, who is none of these things?

    He has a pregnant American wife and is in possession of a Green Card residency. Those factors may conceivably play into the First Amendment argument in his favour, if judges are looking to fudge the issue.

    In addition to which, while he undoubtedly was in the leadership group of protestors at Columbia University, he appears to have played a responsible role in liaising with authorities. The cherry on the cake is that he is a former British Government employee, having worked in the British Embassy in Lebanon, on Syrian affairs.

    This is where the story starts to become very murky. I was told by Resistance-linked contacts in Lebanon that not only was Khalil not viewed as pro-Resistance to Israel while there, he was believed to be involved in UK government attempts to undermine the Assad regime by promotion of jihadist groups.

    Free Palestine TV, which is Lebanon-based, has the same information.

    It is important to understand how deeply the UK has been involved in anti-Syrian activity in Lebanon. Training and equipping of al-Nusra/ISIS/HTS units was carried out by British special forces based at Rayak airbase in the Bekaa Valley, who were certainly still there in January after HTS conquered Damascus.

    Contrary to some reports, Mahmoud Khalil would not have worked for MI6 in the Embassy. MI6 stations do not employ foreign nationals. He would have worked for the Political and Information Sections, under diplomats who cooperated closely with MI6 or in some instances were active “undeclared” members of MI6.

    Middle East Eye describes Khalil’s role in the Embassy as a “programme manager” running Chevening scholarships. I know this programme extremely well. While I have no reason to doubt Khalil did this, it would amount to no more than 10% of anybody’s time and would not require the UK security clearance which the article states that Khalil received.

    The simple truth is that anybody working in good faith in the British Embassy in Lebanon can be no friend of the resistance to Israel. Everything the British Embassy do in Lebanon is intrinsically linked to the overriding goal of promoting the interests of Israel, particularly through weakening Hezbollah, and this is especially true when it comes to programmes into Syria running out of Beirut.

    So how did Khalil move from British government operative to Palestinian student activist?

    And then, why on earth did the Trump regime pick him for its first high-profile deportation?

    I can see three plausible explanations for Khalil’s behaviour:

    1) He was never pro-British but was infiltrating the Embassy for the Palestinians

    2) He was never pro-Palestinian but was infiltrating the protest movement for the British government

    3) He was not very political but was moved recently to activism by the genocide in Gaza

    Of these, option 3) seems to me the most plausible, though all are certainly possible.

    It would be a delicious irony if the Trump regime had arrested a British agent by accident, but this seems to me unlikely. I do not think MI6 would run a Palestinian agent in the USA without informing the CIA – although they may have done if there were a specific concern that the CIA would leak the identity.

    If Khalil were a British agent he could have been arrested for protection if there were concerns he had been “made”, or he could have been arrested because the Americans found out and were furious at not being informed. But I do not think these are the likely scenarios.

    It seems to me much more probable that a once-complacent Khalil changed his mind and became more – righteously – radical due to the genocide in Gaza.

    In which case the motive for choosing him as the target for arrest is very plain. Both the US and UK will be worried about revelations Khalil might make about support to jihadists in Syria from his time working on this in Lebanon. Whisking him into incommunicado detention, whilst maximum pressure is applied to persuade him to keep silent, is then an obvious move.

    It is important for freedom of speech and for the rights in general of immigrants in the USA that Mr Khalil is free. It is obviously profoundly important for him and his family. I do not want anything I have written to detract from that.

    But the puzzle of why such an extremely complicated target for the test case was chosen, when there exist far lower-hanging fruit, is one that needs to be considered. I hope I have offered some possible lines of thought you find useful.

     

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



    PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    The post The Curious Case of Mahmoud Khalil appeared first on Craig Murray.

  17. Site: Craig Murray
    1 month 3 weeks ago
    Author: craig

    There is a logical fallacy that dominates European neoliberal “thinking” at the moment. It goes like this.

    “Hitler had unlimited territorial ambition and proceeded to attempt conquest of all Europe after annexing the Sudetenland. Therefore Putin has unlimited territorial ambition and will proceed to attempt conquest of all Europe after annexing Eastern Ukraine.”

    This fallacious argument gives no evidence of Putin’s further territorial ambition. For evidence of Putin’s threat to the UK, Keir Starmer risibly refers to the Salisbury “novichok” affair, perhaps the most pathetic propaganda confection in history.

    But even if you were to be so complacent as to accept the official version of events in Salisbury, does an assassination attempt on a double agent credibly indicate a desire by Putin to launch World War 3 or invade the UK?

    Hitler’s territorial ambitions were not hidden. His desire for lebensraum and, crucially, his view that the Germans were a superior race who should rule over the inferior races, was plain in print and in speeches.

    There is simply no such evidence for wide territorial ambition by Putin. He is not pursuing a crazed Nazi ideology that drives to conquest – or for that matter a Marxist ideology that seeks to overthrow the established order around the world.

    The economic alignment project of BRICS is not designed to promote an entirely different economic system, just to rebalance power and flows within the system, or at most to create a parallel system not skewed to the advantage of the United States.

    Neither the end of capitalism nor territorial expansion is part of the BRICS project.

    There is simply no evidence of Putin having territorial goals beyond Ukraine and the tiny enclaves of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. It is perfectly fair to characterise Putin’s territorial expansion over two decades as limited to the reincorporation of threatened Russian-speaking minority districts in ex-Soviet states.

    That it is worth a world war and unlimited dead over who should be mayor of the ethnic Russian and Russian-speaking city of Lugansk is not entirely plain to me.

    The notion that Putin is about to attack Poland or Finland is utter nonsense. The idea that the Russian army, which has struggled to subdue small and corrupt, if Western-backed, Ukraine, has the ability to attack Western Europe itself is plainly impractical.

    The internal human rights record of Putin’s Russia is poor, but at this point it is marginally better than that of Zelensky’s Ukraine. For example the opposition parties in Russia are at least allowed to contest elections, albeit on a heavily sloped playing field, whereas in Ukraine they are banned outright.

    Still less convincing are the arguments that Russia’s overseas political activities in third countries require massive Western increases in armaments to prepare for war with Russia.

    The plain truth is that the Western powers interfere far more in other countries than Russia does, through massive sponsorship of NGOs, journalists and politicians, much of which is open and some of which is covert.

    I used to do this myself as a British diplomat. Revelations from USAID or the Integrity Initiative leaks give the public a glimpse into this world.

    Yes, Russia does it too, but on a much smaller scale. That this kind of Russian activity indicates a desire for conquest or is a cause for war, is such a shallow argument it is hard to believe in the good faith of those promoting it.

    I have also seen Russian military intervention in Syria put forward as evidence that Putin has plans of world conquest.

    Russian intervention in Syria prevented for a time its destruction by the West in the same way that Iraq and Libya were destroyed by the West. Russia held back the coming to power of crazed Islamic terrorists, and the massacre of Syria’s minority communities. Those horrors are now unfolding, in part because of the weakening of Russia through the Ukraine war.

    But for those nations that destroyed Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya to argue that Russia’s intervention in Syria shows Putin to be evil, is dishonesty of the highest degree. The United States has had a quarter of Syria under military occupation for over a decade and has been stealing almost all of Syria’s oil.

    Pointing at Russia here is devoid of reason.

    Strangely, the same “logic” is not applied to Benjamin Netanyahu. It is not argued by neoliberals that his annexations of Gaza, the West Bank and Southern Lebanon mean he must have further territorial ambitions. In fact, they even fail to note Netanyahu’s aggressions at all, or portray them as “defensive” – the same argument advanced much more credibly by Putin in Ukraine, but which neoliberals there outright reject.

    The economies of Western Europe are being realigned onto a war footing, led by the utterly transformed European Union. The enthusiastic proponents of genocide in Gaza who head the EU now are channelling an atavistic hereditary hatred of Russia.

    The foreign policy of the EU is propelled by Kaja Kallas and Ursula von der Leyen. The fanatical Russophobia these two are spreading, and their undisguised desire to escalate the war in Ukraine, cannot help but remind Russians that they come from nations which were fanatically Nazi.

    To Russians this feels a lot like 1941. With Europe in the grip of full-on anti-Russian propaganda, the background to Trump’s attempt to broker a peace deal is troubled and Russia is understandably wary.

    The UK continues to play the most unhelpful of roles. They have despatched Morgan Stanley’s Jonathan Powell to advise Zelensky on peace talks. As Blair’s Chief of Staff, Powell played a crucial role in the illegal invasion of Iraq. He was also heavily implicated in the death of David Kelly.

    Wherever there is war and money to be made from war, you will find the same ghouls gathering. Those involved in launching the invasion of Iraq should be excluded from public life. Instead Powell is now the UK’s National Security Adviser.

    I am not a follower of Putin. The amount of force used to crush Chechnya’s legitimate desire for self-determination was disproportionate, for example. It is naive to believe that you get to be leader of the KGB by being a gentle person.

    But Putin is not Hitler. It is only through the blinkers of patriotism that Putin appears to be a worse person than the Western leaders behind massive invasion and death all around the globe, who now seek to extend war with Russia.

    Here in the UK, the Starmer government is seeking actively to prolong the war, and is looking for a huge increase in spending on weapons, which always brings kickbacks and future company directorships and consultancies for politicians.

    To fund this warmongering, New Labour are cutting spending on the UK’s sick, disabled and pensioners and cutting aid to the starving overseas.


    This is a picture of Keir Starmer meeting with Israeli President Herzog, six months after the ICJ interim ruling quoted a statement by Herzog as evidence of genocidal intent.

    The Starmer government was voted for by 31% of those who bothered to cast a vote, or 17% of the adult population. It is engaged in wholesale legal persecution of leading British supporters of Palestine, and is actively complicit in the genocide in Gaza.

    I see no moral superiority here.

     

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



    PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    The post The Moral Balance appeared first on Craig Murray.

  18. Site: Craig Murray
    2 months 7 hours ago
    Author: craig

    There are two drivers behind my support for Scottish Independence.

    The first and most obvious is to see our ancient land restored to the place it held so long in the community of free and self-governing nations, and end the colonial exploitation of our people and resources.

    The second is to destroy that Imperialist rogue state, the United Kingdom. With the UK actively participating in the Gaza genocide through supply of arms, intelligence, military assistance and diplomatic cover, that need has become ever more acute.

    Were that not bad enough, the London government is now overtly militarist and looking to provoke conflict with Russia which could lead to nuclear holocaust. There is something in the UK nationalist soul which has an addiction to war, and Keir Starmer stands in the long line of British politicians who look to increase their dire domestic popularity ratings by killing people abroad.

    It is a matter of deep sadness to me that the formerly radical and pro-Independence Scottish National Party has become a classic example of a local colonial puppet elite serving the interests of the colonisers and anxious to adopt conspicuous markers of loyalty, in order to continue to benefit personally from their position in the London-ruled political Establishment.

    We therefore have the Scottish National Party seeking to outdo the UK Labour Party in its militarism and commitment to needless conflict with Russia, absolutely against the interests of Scotland.

    Is this what you voted for, SNP voters? pic.twitter.com/NwlgkEftcm

    — Wings Over Scotland (@WingsScotland) March 5, 2025

    The SNP is massively infiltrated by the UK and US security services, including at senior levels. Plus many of its leaders are easily captured by the wealth and circumstance coming from their position within the UK state.

    The SNP was finished as a force for Independence when Sturgeon accepted that Scotland could only exercise its right of self-determination with the permission of London.

    If you consider it coldly and logically, it cannot be a right of self-determination if it requires the permission of somebody else to exercise it.

    So for me the SNP is trash, useless, a vehicle for self-enrichment of some of the most repulsive parasites of the political class.

    As the SNP had succeeded in becoming the automatic recipient of the votes of the large majority of those Scots who want Independence, that is a real conundrum for progress. It is particularly galling that, now we finally have achieved a consistent and growing majority in favour of Independence, politics remains dominated by the SNP, who have no intention whatsoever of doing anything about it.

    Which is where Alba comes in, the new pro-Independence movement founded by former SNP leader and Scottish First Minister, the late Alex Salmond.

    I am a member of Alba, the fundamentalist Independence party which is also anti-NATO, anti-neoliberal, anti-monarchy and anti-EU membership.

    I might perhaps clarify that I am now very firmly anti-EU, given its extraordinary anti-Palestinian and anti-Russian positions and its plans for massive military expansion. The EU has morphed into something very sinister indeed.

    Alba is a very small political party. In Council elections it consistently pulls in low single-figure percentages, as it did in the few seats it contested in the last Westminster election.

    Alba’s significance lay in that it was founded by Alex Salmond, former First Minister of Scotland and former Leader of the SNP, and the man who almost brought about Scottish Independence in the 2014 referendum.

    After Alex resigned the leadership following that referendum, his successor and protege, Nicola Sturgeon, immediately set about destroying Salmond’s reputation while moving the focus of the SNP decisively away from Independence and into identity politics.

    A conspiracy orchestrated by Sturgeon, through her Chief of Staff Liz Lloyd, brought in a number of Sturgeon’s close allies and confidantes to make sexual assault allegations against Salmond – of all of which he was acquitted, following a trial before a majority female jury.

    Salmond was into the third year of building up his new Alba Party from scratch when he recently died suddenly, aged 69.

    Despite losing Alex, there should be a real political opportunity for Alba. A radical Scottish Independence Party with the positions listed above, accords with the views of a very substantial proportion of the Scottish electorate.

    Alba’s problem is that, ironically due to the pioneering achievements of Alex Salmond, voting SNP has become a reflex expression of Scottish national identity, and many voters have simply not noticed the party’s absorption into the British state narrative.

    Now, for a small and new party, Alba has also faced a quite extraordinary amount of internal conflict, which may also have been in part stirred up by covert influences.

    It is worth here stating that it is plain that Scottish Independence is the biggest practical threat to the UK state. Naturally the UK’s disproportionately large and well-funded security services are targeted on it. They would not be doing their job otherwise.

    Let me introduce this subject anecdotally. Towards the end of 2023 I was standing for election to Alba’s national executive. The election was postponed in circumstances which were obscure. Then it was re-run.

    I was in Geneva and about to enter a meeting at the UN, when Alex phoned me and told me I had been elected to the National Executive, but he wished me to stand down and not accept the seat, as there was somebody else he needed on the exec.

    This obviously was unwelcome, principally because it felt like a betrayal of those who had been kind enough to nominate me and to vote for me. Who stands for election and wins, then does not take it up? It seems very irresponsible, and would justifiably damage my reputation.

    But the truth is, I felt enormous personal loyalty towards Alex and a trust that, whatever he was up to, it was a strategy with the long term goal of Scottish Independence in mind. So I agreed and declined to take up my seat.

    I subsequently discovered there was a large amount of controversy surrounding the results of that election, with people claiming cheating, and I believe I am correct in saying that the results were never published, with some threadbare excuse about publishing the results of an online election being a breach of the Data Protection Act.

    A number of founder members of the party, people I had pounded the streets alongside in the 2014 referendum, were resigning. I phoned Alex to express concern and say the results should be published.

    He told me that some people were unhappy that many new members had been signed up and voted in the election, but this was within the constitution. A faction had been out-organised, and that was their own fault.

    Alex had made plain to me that his request that I stand down was confidential, and I maintained that confidence while he lived. I view that confidence as a personal commitment from which I am now released. But things continued to be very strange in the Alba Party.

    The excellent Denise Findlay, who had been a major part of Alba’s organisation and drive, was forced into resignation. I learnt just in the last few days, after I told my own story on Twitter/X, that Denise had gone through precisely the same experience.

    More recently, James Kelly, the valuable Scot Goes Pop blogger, was expelled from the party, apparently for criticising it. Then extraordinarily, the General Secretary, Chris McEleny, attempted to expel the Acting Leader Kenny MacAskill from the party, but ended up himself demoted.

    I don’t think pretending none of this happened is a sensible option, which is why I told my own story. It remains the case that I trust both Alex’s good faith and that he had a vision for taking the party forward, on which he was working.

    But I think it is fair to say that if the brilliant Salmond had an Achilles heel, it was in his judgment of people closest to him. He did not see Sturgeon coming, and indeed refused to accept her part in the plot against him until long after the evidence was undeniable.

    In Alba likewise I believe some of the trouble was the extraordinarily possessive attitude towards the party of some of those with whom Alex surrounded himself. This interacted very badly with some activists who wished to see the party move forward with less deference to the leader, or even a different leader (a view I disagreed with, but to which they were perfectly entitled).

    Unfortunately some of those espousing that viewpoint undermined themselves by indulging in some unpleasant character assassination and gossip mongering (not towards Alex, but his circle).

    The result was a toxic mess. A small party attempting to gain a foothold cannot afford to execute many of its own best soldiers, and neither is incipient insurrection a practical working environment.

    Alba will elect a new leadership shortly. I shall be supporting Kenny MacAskill and Neale Hanvey for Leader and Depute, but that implies no disrespect to anybody else.

    My plea to the new leadership and the membership is to adopt an amnesty and bring everyone back in to the party. We need eventually to unite the Independence movement. How can we do that, if we cannot unite ourselves?

    The party has a rule which bans from rejoining those who went public on their resignation or expulsion, and my attempts to persuade the party “establishment” we need to accept people back, has been met with turgid reference to that rule.

    This is just an excuse for maintaining feud. I have also spoken to other factions who, by and large, remain embittered and alienated.

    So I plead, with all, that it is time to bury the hatchet, forgive and forget, and work united towards the 2026 Scottish parliament elections.

    I am happy to see that Tommy Sheridan, a giant of the Scottish left whose career was interrupted by standard sex allegations (cf. Julian Assange, Scott Ritter, Alex Salmond etc.) orchestrated by the security services and Murdoch press, is standing for the Alba executive. This is the kind of unity we need.

    Scotland has the d’Hondt party list system where each voter has two votes, one for a candidate for the constituency list and one a party for the regional list, whereby an element of proportionality is introduced to the benefit of parties who failed to win constituencies despite substantive support.

    It is a horrible system because it gives the party machines, rather than the electorate, the power to rank candidates (as opposed to the much more democratic Single Transferable Vote).

    The position of Alba appears to be to stand as a “list only” party – to support the SNP in constituencies and ask SNP voters to support Alba on the list.

    I am opposed to this approach and believe Alba should fight constituencies and the list. I do not accept the SNP is in any significant sense a pro-Independence party now. It is just a branch of the neoliberal uniparty, and a very dangerous one designed to hoover up Scottish nationalist votes.

    We have a duty to oppose any party that supports British imperialist foreign policy, as the SNP does.

    We also have a duty to offer the voters the chance to vote for actual Scottish self-determination and reject a London veto.

    The only point in joining and supporting such a small party as Alba is to attempt to represent unrepresented positions and to affect fundamental change. That is what Alba must do. I look forward to the journey.

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



     PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    The post Alba Activism appeared first on Craig Murray.

  19. Site: Craig Murray
    2 months 3 days ago
    Author: craig

    When politicians in power are extremely unpopular, they generally turn to militarism and jingoism for a quick boost. Starmer is now the darling of the UK media for his sabre-rattling over Ukraine and is busily churning out tweets of military imagery.

    In doing so he is attempting to pose as in defiance of Trump, and capitalise on Trump’s unpopularity in the UK, even though just two days earlier he was fawning on Trump in the White House and inviting him on an “unprecedented” second State visit.

    As ever, there is a great deal of smoke and mirrors here. The European leaders are going to come up with an alternative “peace plan” to present to Trump. This will not be along the lines of the G7 Declaration which was strongly anti-Russian. The European leaders acknowledge that the Biden-era G7 Apulia position is now gone.

    Instead the new European plan will essentially give Trump pretty well everything he wants, but give the Europeans a ladder to climb down. Starmer is seeking to be hailed as the great bridger of the Atlantic, who explained Trump to Europe and vice versa.

    If Trump were an ordinary politician he would then agree to adopt the “European” plan brought to him by Starmer, with a couple of tiny amendments, and then take the joint position into talks with Putin. But Trump being Trump, he might just tell Starmer to stay out of it.

    Both the European and American peace plans will involve Putin keeping control over the large majority of the land his troops hold – because otherwise Putin will not agree, and there will be no point. The European plan will have elements designed to blur the sovereignty issue of the Ukrainian land Russia will retain. This will not run once real negotiations with Russia are underway.

    As always, money talks and big business is really pulling the strings. Zelensky did not in the event sign the minerals deal with Trump and is now desperate to do so to try to get American cash flowing his way again.

    It is worth noting that Starmer’s delusional “Hundred Year Alliance” agreement with Zelensky contained the UK’s attempt to grab the same minerals Zelensky is now asking again to be allowed to hand over to Trump.

    You find this in the UK/Ukraine 100 Year Partnership at “Pillar 5, Para 3, article iv”

    (iv) supporting development of a Ukrainian critical minerals strategy and necessary regulatory structures required to support the maximisation of benefits from Ukraine’s natural resources, through the possible establishment of a Joint Working Group;

    While we are on the subject, most people sensibly ignored the detail of this crazy “100 year” agreement on the entirely sensible grounds that none of it is ever going to happen. But it does contain some remarkable declarations of malevolent intent, of which my favourite is the desire to open a joint online propaganda unit to interfere in the legacy and social media of third countries.

    Which we find outlined in fluent Orwellian at “Pillar 7, Para 4”.

    Implement joint media initiatives, contributing to coordinated efforts to promote shared values and vision, addressing the information manipulation and malign interference in third party countries. We commit to partnering on joint initiatives such as communication campaigns to mitigate against those threats. We commit to facilitate strengthening of relationships with civil society organisations to support research and the development of counter-FIMI approaches, recognising the importance of independent media and civil society organisations in building societal resilience.

    Which is of course precisely what they are always accusing Russia of doing. Indeed alleged Russian social media interference is why they interfered to have the anti-war winner of the first round of the Romanian elections disqualified.

    What this plan amounts to is another Integrity Initiative, this time as a UK/Ukrainian co-production.

    One thing I learnt in over 20 years as a diplomat is that the public are generally fed lies about diplomatic discussions. Most diplomatic talks generally end up with an agreed communique that is designed to make everyone look good and may only have a slight link to actual events.

    This is especially true with regard to human rights, where in my substantial experience claims that human rights abuses were being dealt with by “quiet diplomacy” were almost always a lie.

    A British minister cannot meet a Saudi or Chinese minister without being asked if they raised human rights. The answer given is always “yes” and it is almost always untrue, or it was raised so briefly, quietly and apologetically that it is virtually untrue.

    So there is a sense in which the Trump/Vance encounter in the Oval Office with Zelensky was refreshing, in that what you saw is what you got. It was only in being in public that it was more bruising than many diplomatic encounters. I suspect it has shortened the war, especially if Trump sticks to the decision to end aid.

    Shortening the war would be a good thing. If you think a principle is so important that you believe it is fine for millions of people to die for it – none of whom are yourself – I suggest you reconsider your principles. I am not so exercised about who is the mayor of Russian-speaking Lugansk that I am prepared to have a nuclear war over the issue.

    What I find particularly alarming is the continuing comparison of Putin to Hitler, and the allegation that if Putin is not “stopped” in Ukraine, then he will conquer the whole of Europe.

    This is a quite extraordinary example of false analogy. Putin has never shown any indication of following a universal ideology he wishes to impose by conquest, or of territorial ambition beyond a small number of Russian-speaking ex-Soviet districts contiguous to Russia.

    In addition to which, Russia is gradually winning a war of attrition against a much smaller neighbour, which is to be expected. Ukraine has survived this long with massive Western aid. But the idea that the Russian army is capable of conquering the whole of Europe, when it cannot subdue Kiev, is plainly utter nonsense. Even aside from the fact there is absolutely no desire in Moscow to do so.

    Trump has pointed at NATO and revealed the Emperor’s New Clothes. NATO was formed to counter a Soviet alliance that did possess a universal ideology it wished to spread, and did have the military strength to threaten (though it should be stated not even the Soviet Union ever had any intention of invading Britain or formulated plans to do so). That threat has now passed.

    The attempt to use the farcical Salisbury incident as evidence of a Russian threat to the UK population is, frankly, pathetic.

    It is hard sometimes to follow the workings of the propaganda machine. At what stage did the crazy narrative that Russia blew up its own Nord Stream pipeline get abandoned?

    Russia destroying the pipeline was unanimously and loudly proclaimed by the entire legacy media and the entire political class of the Western world. Those of us who pointed out this was not true were denounced and ridiculed. Yet now the narrative has quietly been dropped, and the truth is occasionally acknowledged by the media. Though with no admission of the previous lies.

    How does this cycle operate? Is it centrally determined, or is it organic? Were the media really stupid enough to believe Russia destroyed Nord Stream, or were they knowingly lying? How have the German people been persuaded to accept the massive damage the increase in energy costs did to industrial employment? These are fascinating fields of study.

    European politicians who have made a career of Russophobe rhetoric are suddenly naked in the breeze. They are charging around banging the drum of war, threatening to mobilise armies they do not possess and convinced that preserving their own place in the socio-economic hierarchy is well worth the threat of nuclear oblivion.

    Laughter is the best response to their pretension.

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



     PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    The post Ukraine, Diplomacy and War appeared first on Craig Murray.

  20. Site: Craig Murray
    2 months 6 days ago
    Author: craig

    We were searching for a site in the northern Bekaa valley recently bombed by Israel. Hadi knew near which village it was located but, as we drove between large expanses of fertile, well-cultivated fields, it was plain his information was vague.

    We pulled up at a garage to ask the way. Lebanon has not gone the way of Western economies in making consumers perform the very service for which they are paying, and in Lebanese service stations they still have attendants. A scruffily dressed old man sat on the front step of a dilapidated and very basic kiosk constructed of concrete blocks. He came over to the driver’s window.

    First Hadi ordered fuel, and the old man filled the car, washed the windscreen and took payment. His hair was white and his beard short, but not from the obsessively neat trimming that is universal in Beirut. When he returned with change, Hadi asked him if he knew where to find the bomb site.

    The old man replied with questions. I did not understand the Arabic, but from the body language there was a marked shift in the interaction between the two, from the man serving Hadi to the man interrogating Hadi. He lost his shuffle, notably straightened his back and stood taller.

    They were talking through the driver’s window, and with a very definite movement the man moved forward and rested his forearm on the sill, intruding his head into the vehicle assertively. He looked at me with searching eyes, and looked at Niels sitting in the back seat with his camera equipment. His questioning of Hadi became terse.

    I looked into his eyes. He had the distinct, piercing gaze that I used to note in the special forces officers I occasionally came across in my Foreign Office career. He then walked away from the car, took out his phone and made a call.

    After a while he handed the phone to Hadi, who looked both serious and worried. Hadi listened, handed the phone back to the attendant, said goodbye and thank you, and reversed out of the garage. Hadi told us we were not permitted to go to the bomb site.

    We had just encountered Hezbollah. The important thing to understand in this encounter is that it is not that the man was an undercover Hezbollah operative posing as a garage attendant. He was a garage attendant who was a Hezbollah operative.

    Hezbollah is not an organisation comparable to the IRA, in which a relatively small number of members operated within the context of a community in which they enjoyed very large sympathy. Hezbollah operates in a community in which almost everybody is an activist and pretty well every adult is prepared to pick up a gun or an RPG and knows how to use it.

    This is a key to understanding how Hezbollah became the only military force that has ever been able to defeat the IDF in pitched ground warfare. In this respect, Hezbollah’s crucial advantage compared to Hamas is that it has had practical access to weapons deliveries to build its arsenal, whereas Hamas has been greatly constricted by Israel’s control of goods entering Gaza.

    Ending the weapons supply to Hezbollah has been a key US/Israeli strategic objective this last year, and they have in large part achieved it. I shall return to that.

    On a personal level, this encounter with the garage attendant was fairly typical of my interactions with Hezbollah in my four months in Lebanon. They had detained me in a rather frightening manner on first encounter, and in general treated me with a suspicion which is understandable given my British diplomatic background.

    I saw literally thousands of buildings in Lebanon that Israel had destroyed. The most haunting part of the entire experience was the frequent event of finding the clothing and toys of small children among the rubble: I still have bad dreams about it.

    However this was the second of the two occasions when we were able to identify that Israel had struck an actual Hezbollah military installation, rather than a civilian building. Both times Hezbollah prevented me from going to see. In terms of maintaining the security of the military site, this strikes me as shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

    Having been denied access to that particular bomb site, we drove on into the village and met with some locals Hadi knew. In this small village there had been over 70 Israeli bombings, 8 of them since the ceasefire.

    They took me to one large house which had been completely destroyed, a pile of rubble spread over a large area. Twelve members of the same family had been killed in this house, seven of them children. The head of the family had left in late afternoon to go to the butcher’s to buy dinner, when his home and family was destroyed behind him.

    The explosion was so enormous that the body of one of the children was found in the neighbouring orchard of olive trees, clean across the road, about seventy yards away. Many of the olive trees had been shredded and debris from the house was strewn across the field and beyond.

    The next house was not greatly damaged, but there a father and his two daughters were killed by the shock wave as they sat on their terrace drinking coffee.

    There are so many important points to make about Hezbollah, but let me start with these three.

    The first is that support for Hezbollah among their own Shia communities in Lebanon is extremely strong. They are far more than a military organisation. They are Lebanon’s largest legitimate political party.

    At the 2022 election Hezbollah received 19.9% of the vote, and their close ally the Amal Movement received another 10.5%. The party with the second highest vote behind Hezbollah, the neo-fascist Lebanese Forces, received 11.6% of the vote.

    [The Lebanese Forces political party should not be confused with the Lebanese Armed Forces, with which it has no connection. The Lebanese Armed Forces remain under effective US control and fired not a shot against the Israeli invasion and occupation. But like so much in Lebanon, the situation should not be simplified and the majority of the rank and file of the LAF are Shia Muslims sympathetic to Hezbollah, and a large majority of the rank and file of any denomination would be happy to fight the Israelis were they ever allowed to do so.]

    Under Lebanon’s extraordinary constitution, Lebanese Forces with 11.6% received 19 seats in parliament while Hezbollah with 19.9% received 15 seats. Of which again more later.

    But when it comes to political legitimacy, it is worth noting that the combined Hezbollah/Amal vote percentage is equal to the Labour Party percentage at the last General Election in the UK. There is no argument that Hezbollah are not a legitimate democratic political force.

    The second point is that it is absolutely wrong to see Lebanon in purely sectarian terms. Hezbollah has supporters and allies across all religions in Lebanon and, in a country where politics is officially and constitutionally organised on religious lines (a “confessional” constitution), there are minor parties of all religions aligned with Hezbollah, of which several had ministers until appointment of the new Cabinet last month (of which again, more later).

    Perhaps a quarter of those at the funeral for Nasrallah were not Shia Muslims.

    The third point is that Hezbollah is much more than a political party with a military wing. In a country in which central government has all but collapsed (Lebanon has no income tax), Hezbollah provides hospitals, schools, banking, pensions and welfare benefits.

    When Niels and I witnessed refugee returns to evacuated areas following the “ceasefire”, a very substantial percentage of the population were waving Hezbollah flags or Lebanese flags, with some waving both. Hezbollah is an integral part of Lebanese society, entirely born within the country out of the resistance to Israel’s 1982 occupation, and is in no sense alien or anti-Lebanese.

    The elephant in the room is that in the UK and other Western states, this highly complex social and political movement is designated as a terrorist organisation in its entirety. Ironically, the justification for this given in Westminster in 2019 was that Hezbollah was destabilising the Middle East and prolonging the conflict in Syria – where the very Western powers that proscribed Hezbollah have just assisted another proscribed terrorist group into power.

    The truth is that terrorist proscription by the NATO powers of organisations in the Middle East is simply a tool for taking whatever decisions are expedient at that moment to promote the interests of apartheid Israel. The “terrorist acts” of Hezbollah that led to proscription of the entire organisation in 2019 consisted of fighting ISIS, Al Qaeda and Al Nusra in Syria.

    We all suffer from the temptation of assuming that others share our prejudices. I assume that like me, many in the West find it difficult to empathise with Hezbollah because of its Islamic philosophy and – I know this is petty – appearance.

    Hassan Nasrallah was the most important and steadfast leader of resistance to the mass murderous Zionist project of the last forty years. He was also, by all accounts, a hugely charismatic figure to Arabic speakers. But his very appearance made it easy for him to be represented to Western audiences as an alienating, even evil, character, due to the state-promoted Islamophobia in the Western world which has been universally projected in the media this last quarter century.

    But here honesty is required. I myself do not like to see political leaders with a religious function and am simply against theocratic rule. I am entirely in favour of freedom of religion, but utterly opposed to religion ruling any state.

    There is an element of smoke and mirrors here. In the glorious mosaic of Lebanon, Hezbollah exist jumbled with those of other sects and religions, and in practice rub along very well.

    Nasrallah spoke like all committed Islamists of his desire to seeing a united Muslim rule over Muslim lands, with the state under firmly religious leadership and Sharia law. But in practice Hezbollah are highly tolerant.

    In those large areas of Lebanon where they both have physical military control and dominate the elected local authority, Hezbollah do not ban the sale of alcohol by the Christian minority or enforce hair covering, even on Muslims.

    This is an area where my prejudices were disabused. I did not expect to find this.

    All this caused me some difficulty in Lebanon. I was frequently asked whether I supported Hezbollah. As I was spending much of my time in those areas attacked by Israel – which largely are the Hezbollah areas – in general the question came from Hezbollah supporters.

    I would always reply that I supported absolutely the right of occupied people to conduct armed resistance, and the duty to do everything possible to prevent genocide. Both are established principles of international law. But I did not support Hezbollah per se, and would not vote for it were I Lebanese, because it is an openly Islamist organisation and I am opposed to theocratic rule and religious legal codes.

    Being in Lebanon did however allow me to overcome some of the gulf of my cultural understanding. The practice of calling those killed by Israel “martyrs” and frequently referring to them as such in conversation, is alien to a Western ear where the word has largely outdated religious connotations.

    When you live amongst a community where everybody has friends or relatives who have been killed in the decades-long aggression of Israel, the revering of the fallen as martyrs, and their omnipresence in everyday thought, starts to make much more sense.

    Similarly to Western eyes the widespread display of large images of the “martyrs” is peculiar. These are along every roadside and atop every ruin. There are always posters at the site where the person was killed, and frequently dozens of other posters of that individual at sites of importance to them.

    I overcame my incomprehension of this practice by thinking of it in reference to my own culture, that these were posters of people put up to mark where they fought and died to defend their wee bit hill and glen. In those terms it made sense to me.

    I am extremely conscious that religious faith has played a very positive role in both Palestine and South Lebanon in enabling people to endure the unendurable and to maintain Resistance against impossible odds. But it is not possible to ignore the fact that there remain substantial differences between my world view and an Islamist world view.

    This has been brought into urgent focus by the attitude of many Sunni Muslims to the overthrow of Assad in Syria. In my world view, this has been a disaster for the Palestinians. It has seriously and perhaps permanently damaged the flow of arms and other resources to Hezbollah, the Palestinians’ most important ally. And it has enabled the Greater Israel project to expand substantially into Syria.

    Try now to imagine that you are a Sunni Muslim scholar who believes that only by becoming Sunni Muslim can people obey God. You believe that the benefit to mankind of bringing Sunni Muslim rule to most of Syria outweighs the loss of part of Syria to Israel. You believe that Palestinian martyrs killed by Israel are going immediately to Heaven anyway, so in spiritual terms there is no real loss to the “martyrs”.

    That really is the position of many of the leaders of the Saudi- and Gulf-sponsored Muslim religious community. Just like there are a great many shades of Christian, there are a great many shades of Islam and there are many Muslims, including Sunni Muslims, who would not share that viewpoint. But to a religious Islamist it makes perfect sense.

    I cannot find it again because it was deep in replies on a thread, but I had a very interesting exchange with a Muslim intellectual on Twitter on precisely this topic. He accused me of “orientalism” for denigrating an Eastern spiritual viewpoint in favour of a Western secularist narrative, in seeing the installation of HTS as a reverse for Palestine. He pointed out that Hamas, a fellow Sunni Islamist movement, had welcomed the triumph of HTS.

    The exchange was welcome for its honesty and intellectual acuity. I said I did not believe Edward Said would have welcomed the accompanying expansion of Israel into Syria or cutting off of supplies to Hezbollah. He called in a nephew of Said to bolster his view that my viewpoint is orientalist.

    I have thought about this deeply; I do not think my viewpoint can fairly be described as orientalist. The truth is that all mainstream Western thought would have entirely concurred with the view that the expansion of rule by a particular religious sect was more important than associated temporal reverses that did not affect the faith of the people: but Western thought was exactly that 500 years ago.

    I do not see my view as orientalist. I see it as anti-medievalist.

    The fall of the Assad regime was deeply desired by Western neoliberals and Zionists in order to replace it with a Western democratic model, and they are desperately pretending that is what they have got in al-Jolani. As atrocities against Shia, Alaouites and Christians in Syria mount, the one thing that cannot be disputed is that al-Jolani is steadfastly Zionist, as he allows Israel daily to occupy more of Syria and destroy more of its infrastructure, without a single shot fired in response.

    There is no doubt that the position of the Resistance to an expansionist apartheid Israeli colonial project has worsened considerably since my arrival in Lebanon in October. While Israel could not progress a ground offensive, the almost total absence of any air defences for Lebanon meant it could murder and destroy with impunity from the air.

    Israel embarked on a campaign of devastation of purely civilian areas by aerial bombardment. Of that I am an eye witness. I can say from personal inspection that the claims that the tens of thousands of homes destroyed had any military use are a massive lie.

    With no defence against a relentless bombing campaign, and with most of their leadership eliminated, Hezbollah were obliged to accede to a suicidally unbalanced “ceasefire agreement”. It is plain on the actual face of the agreement that only one side will cease fire.

    All Lebanese groups are to cease fire without qualification whereas Israel is only to cease “offensive” operations. Israel of course claims all its attacks as defensive. This is absolute nonsense, but despite over 500 violations of the ceasefire agreement, killing hundreds of people, Israel has not been held accountable because Hezbollah acceded to a ceasefire guaranteed by a “Mechanism” which is chaired by a United States General.

    I think my discussion on this point with the UN Spokesman in Lebanon was extremely important, especially where he explicitly states that the Ceasefire Agreement was drafted by the USA. This link takes you to the key point in the interview.

    The members of the “Mechanism” overseeing the ceasefire are the United States, France, Israel (sic), and the Lebanese government of General Aoun, a total US puppet.

    Furthermore while the Ceasefire Agreement provides for a zone south of the Litani river from which Hezbollah must remove its weapons, it also calls for Hezbollah disarmament throughout the whole of Lebanon, which the Israelis and Americans have used to justify numerous continuing Israeli strikes in the Bekaa Valley, the Syrian border and even Beirut.

    Hezbollah are not a formal party to the Agreement but it was sanctioned by them before signature. Personally I find it difficult to imagine that Nasrallah would ever have accepted such a position.

    At the same time, Hezbollah’s domestic political position has been also greatly weakened. They were obliged to accept effectively the US imposition of General Aoun as President, which they had been resisting for over two years. They also then found themselves accepting his nomination of the openly anti-Hezbollah Nawaf Salam as Prime Minister.

    I referred earlier to Lebanon’s “confessional” constitutional arrangements, and said I would give more detail. The President must be a Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni and the Speaker of Parliament a Shiite.

    But it does not stop there. The governing agreement specifies the division of ministerial positions too. Not only between Sunni, Shia and Christian, but to include several other groupings, of which the best known is Druze and there are others, particularly various specific sects of Christianity.

    Hezbollah has operated through the Amal movement in providing the Shiite ministers, but it is a key fact that it has always had important allies among Christian anti-Israeli occupation factions who have filled important ministerial posts.

    The loss of Hezbollah power within Lebanon is to be found within the detail of all these ministries. In claiming to appoint a “technocratic”, apolitical administration, Aoun and Salam have in fact excluded most of Hezbollah’s support.

    It is in practice almost impossible to find a Shiite in Lebanon who is not pro-Hezbollah, but Aoun and Salam have certainly done their best. More pertinently, they have almost totally excluded Hezbollah and anti-Zionist sympathisers from the ministerial representation of Sunni and the assorted minority and smaller Christian groups, while simultaneously boosting the de facto influence of the fascist Lebanese Forces sympathisers.

    Hezbollah has not been this politically weak in the Lebanese institutions for 20 years, which is why the show of mass popular support at Nasrallah’s funeral was so important to them. However, given Lebanon’s electoral system with its deliberate Christian bias, piling up popular support is of little use to Hezbollah electorally. There are Christian MPs in parliament elected with under 500 votes, while Hezbollah could put on another 100,000 votes without significantly increasing their representation.

    Crucially the “Ministerial statement” of the aims of the new government excluded resistance to Israel as an objective – a key change – and specified the state’s monopoly on carrying arms, a reference to the full disarmament of Hezbollah.

    Finally, of course, Hezbollah’s archenemies, HTS, are now in power in Damascus. Hezbollah fought off repeated Al Qaeda/Al Nusra/ISIS attempts to invade Lebanon and also intervened against these forces within Syria. Al-Jolani coming to power represents a major disruption to Hezbollah’s supply lines from Iran.

    The US and Israel are attempting to turn up this pressure by frequent aerial attacks on border crossings from Syria and on Hezbollah individuals within Lebanon. Recently they took the additional measure of banning pilgrimage flights to and from Iran, which greatly angered the Shia community and was aimed at cutting off a route for physical supplies of cash.

    What is uncertain is what secret accommodations General Aoun may have reached with Hezbollah, over whether their physical disarmament throughout Lebanon under SCR 1701 and the Ceasefire Agreement is a genuine process or a show. Politically, Aoun and Salam have strongly planted their banner for real disarmament of Hezbollah.

    What appears beyond dispute is that the Israelis receive a continued flow of intelligence from Lebanese sources on Hezbollah personnel movements and sites, and the US-sanctioned intense Israeli bombing campaign shows no sign of abating.

    We can add to this sad fact that Israel was able to use the Ceasefire Agreement to occupy parts of Southern Lebanon which Hezbollah had successfully defended during the war, and that Israel has destroyed by demolition thousands of homes and other civilian buildings under cover of the ceasefire to add to those destroyed during the war.

    Indeed Israel demolishes more buildings in Southern Lebanon every day still, and has now destroyed over 90,000 buildings in Lebanon in total. As I predicted, Israel is building 5 permanent military outposts in Southern Lebanon and has made plain it has no intention of leaving.

    The US puppet government in Beirut, like the US puppet government in Damascus, plainly has no intention of any realistic action against de facto Israeli annexation of its land. While Hezbollah has signalled a reversion to past tactics of guerilla warfare, I have serious doubts about both its current capacity, both political and military.

    Of the enduring heroism of the people of South Lebanon I have no doubt, and I also have no doubt that as Israel is maintaining an illegal occupation, their legal right of armed resistance in unimpeachable.

    It is however foolish not to acknowledge that with Israel expanding into Lebanon and Syria, with US puppet regimes in Syria and Damascus, with genocide about to restart in Gaza and spreading into the West Bank, and with an apparently crazed level of open Zionist support from Trump that is in fact only more honest than the pro-Genocide positions of the large majority of Western governments, the current position looks bleak indeed.

    The only grounds for hope is that I cannot imagine that the people of the region are going to tolerate Israeli collaborationist regimes in Damascus, Beirut and Ramallah much longer. Indeed with slight variations you might say the same of the entire Arab world.

    I hope you will forgive this being a very personal post as I try to make sense of my experiences and assimilate much new knowledge into my view of the world.

    I went to Lebanon knowing literally nobody in the country, and with an introduction to just one person who helped us through immigration, but whose assistance thereafter did not work out. I did so accompanied by Niels as cinematographer, despite my never really having worked in video before, and my not being very accomplished at it. On top of which we had no financial resources except for our crowdfunding, which was not going well.

    I now realise just how deeply ignorant I was about Lebanon before arriving.

    The truth is, I wanted to go to Gaza but could find no way to get in. I had then had applied to Israel for the required permission from COGAT to enter the West Bank, but had been refused. So Lebanon was the one place under Israeli aggression where I could actually hope to get in to document and report on Israeli atrocities.

    This venture was also born out of a rather desperate feeling that I must try to do something. I had been involved in the genesis of the ICJ case and in international campaigning for Palestine, but felt so helpless watching murdered children in Gaza every day on social media, that I felt compelled to do more.

    With war against the Israeli invaders raging in Lebanon, I admit I also had a compulsion to share at least some of the danger of those putting their lives at stake. In truth, I felt something of a fraud to be writing about it from home if I was not prepared to experience it.

    Well, at times Lebanon really was dangerous for us, but I am extremely proud of what Niels and I achieved. The six mini-documentaries reached millions of people and I think genuinely informed the Western public. I think the interview with the UN was extremely revealing and important and wish I had been able to get a rather wider audience for it. On top of which we produced numerous shorter video pieces, written articles and interviews with alternative media outlets across the globe, as well as doing a lot of Arab mainstream media.

    In the end we had to leave because it proved simply not possible to meet the substantial costs of the venture by individual subscriptions and donations, and I ran out of money. It was a bold experiment in being able to do the kind of real, on-the-ground journalism that legacy media has abandoned, but to continue would require more fundraising ability or organisational ability than I possess.

    There is no doubt that we suffered – and still suffer – massive social media suppression, and this limitation of reach is what crippled fundraising efforts. Essentially we were asking the same people for donations again and again, which is both impractical and, I admit, I found personally difficult and undignified.

    So I shall continue reporting from my base in Scotland, travelling the world as occasion demands. My knowledge has been hugely expanded by my time in Beirut. I will now largely revert to written rather than video format. The struggle for justice goes on, and my commitment to it remains.

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



     PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    The post Islamic Resistance Movements and Israel appeared first on Craig Murray.

  21. Site: Craig Murray
    2 months 3 weeks ago
    Author: craig

    On 26 January, 26 unarmed civilians were shot dead by Israel and 147 wounded in a massacre observed by heavily armed UN Peacekeepers who did not intervene. I asked the UN the very hard questions which nobody else is asking them.

    The civilians were simply attempting to return to their homes in accordance with both UNSCR 1701 and the current ceasefire agreement, and indeed UNIFIL has a specific mandate under 1701 to assist displaced people to return.

    So what has gone wrong with UNIFIL? Is this Srebrenica syndrome? What is the purpose of the heavy weaponry deployed by the UN’s best-equipped peacekeeping force, if it can never be fired? Why is the UN failing to monitor the hundreds of Israeli breaches of the Ceasefire Agreement? Why is the UN serving on a committee under a US General?

    These and other questions I put to UNIFIL spokesman Andrea Tenenti. I did so in my usual, I hope courteous, manner. The result is a fascinating conversation which I believe is an extremely important piece of documentation of institutional failure to confront Israeli and US aggression at a critical time for the entire world.

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a GoFundMe appeal and a Patreon account.

    I have now also started a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



     

    PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    The post UN Peacekeepers Watch Civilians Massacred appeared first on Craig Murray.

  22. Site: Craig Murray
    2 months 4 weeks ago
    Author: craig

    Four UN Special Rapporteurs have written jointly to the UK government demanding explanation of its inappropriate persecution of journalists and political activists under the Terrorism Act. They state that those persecuted:

    appear to have no credible connection to “terrorist” or “hostile” activity

    The cases taken up by the United Nations are those of Johanna Ross (Ganyukova), John Laughland, Kit Klarenberg, Craig Murray (yes, me), Richard Barnard and Richard Medhurst. The UN letter is signed by:

    Ben Saul
    Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism

    Irene Khan
    Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression

    Gina Romero
    Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association

    Ana Brian Nougrères
    Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy

    Under this UN special procedure, the letter is sent to the government in question which has sixty days to respond. This letter was sent by the UN to Starmer’s government on 4 December. No reply having been received, it has now been published.

    It is worth noting that even with the UN letter on its desk and ignored, Starmer’s government in fact stepped up the use of the Terrorism Act against pro-Palestinian journalists and activists in this period. The cases of Asa Winstanley, Sarah Wilkinson and Tony Greenstein, among others, happened after the letter was drafted.

    I should be clear that I was, working with Justice for All International (for which we had a crowdfunder last year in relation to the Assange case at the UN), heavily involved in assisting with preparation of this initiative, and made three visits to the UN in Geneva on the subject together with Sharof Azizov, and on one occasion Richard Medhurst. Your subscriptions and donations to this blog are the only funding I have to make such activity possible, so thank you.

    The letter is in two parts. The first consists of an outline of the information received by the UN on each case and a request for a response from the British government.

    But the second part is a devastating critique of the UK’s terrorism laws and their inappropriate use to stifle dissent and freedom of expression. This legal analysis on lack of conformity with the UK’s human rights obligations is not dependent on any of the particular cases cited.

    While we do not wish to prejudge the accuracy of these allegations, we
    express our concern regarding the potential misapplication of counter-terrorism laws
    against journalists and activists who were critical of the policies and practices of
    certain governments, which may unjustifiably interfere with the rights to freedom of
    expression and opinion and participation in public life, lead to self-censorship and
    have a serious chilling effect on the media, civil society and legitimate political and
    public discourse.
    We are particularly concerned by the broad scope of section 12(1A) and
    schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and schedule 3 of the Counter-Terrorism and
    Border Security Act 2019…

    We are concerned at the vagueness and overbreadth of the offence in
    section 12(1A) of the Terrorism Act 2000, which criminalizes expressing an opinion
    or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation and being reckless as to
    whether it encouraged support for that organisation…

    The term “support” is undefined in the Act and in our view is vague and
    overbroad and may unjustifiably criminalize legitimate expression.

    …the meaning of expressing support for a
    proscribed organization is ambiguous and could capture speech that is neither
    necessary nor proportionate to criminalize, including legitimate debates about the de-
    proscription of an organization and disagreement with a government’s decision to
    proscribe…

    We note that there is no requirement that the expression of support relate to
    the commission of violent terrorist acts by the organization. As such, the offence may
    unjustifiably criminalize the expression of opinion or belief that is not rationally,
    proximately or causally related to actual terrorist violence or harms. The offence
    further does not require any likelihood that the support will assist the organization in
    any way. It goes well beyond the accepted restrictions on freedom of expression under
    international law concerning the prohibition of incitement to violence or hate speech…

    We note that some proscribed organizations are de facto authorities
    performing a diversity of civilian functions, including governance, humanitarian and
    medical activities, and provision of social services, public utilities and education.
    Expressing support for any of these ordinary civilian activities by the organization
    could constitute expressing support for it, no matter how remote such expression is
    from support for any violent terrorist acts by the group…

    Further, the section 12(1A) offence does not require the person to intend to
    encourage others to support the organization…

    We are further concerned that the absence of legal certainty may have a
    chilling effect on the media, public debate, activism, and the activities of civil society,
    in a context where there is a heightened public interest in discussion of the conflict in
    the Middle East, including the conduct of the parties and the underlying conditions
    conducive to violence in the region. We are further concerned that a person could be
    prosecuted for isolated remarks or sentences that mischaracterize the overall position
    of the individual, or despite the individual’s intentions or continued and express
    disavowal of terrorist violence, given the subjectivity and contested meanings of
    certain expressions in relation to sensitive or controversial political conflicts…

    We encourage your Excellency’s Government to repeal section 12(1A), or
    otherwise to amend it to protect freedom of expression, and to develop prosecutorial
    guidelines for its appropriate use to avoid the unnecessary or disproportionate
    incrimination of political dissent…

    We are concerned that police powers at UK border areas and ports under
    schedule 7 may be unjustifiably used against journalists and activists who are critical
    of Western foreign policy. We note that the examination of each journalist named in
    this communication under schedule 7 was premeditated, and that the examination,
    confiscation of devices, and DNA prints were conducted despite the apparent absence
    of a credible “terrorist” connection. We are concerned that such powers carry a risk of
    intimidating, deterring, and disrupting the ability of journalists to report on topics of
    public importance without self-censorship…

    We are concerned that the distinction between “examination” and “detention”
    under the Act is artificial given the punitive sanctions for of non-compliance, and that
    this distinction may be inconsistent with the accepted meaning of “arrest” or
    “detention” under article 9 of the ICCPR. We are further concerned that the extensive
    powers authorised under section 2 do not require any degree of suspicion that a person
    falls within the meaning of “terrorist” at section 40(1)(b). The extreme breadth of
    such power enables unnecessary, disproportionate, arbitrary or discriminatory
    interference with an individual’s rights, including freedom from arbitrary detention,
    freedom of movement under article 12(1) of the ICCPR, and the rights to leave and
    enter one’s own country under article 12(2) and (4) of the ICCPR…

    we refer your
    Excellency’s government to article 17 of the ICCPR which requires that “[n]o one
    shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with [their] privacy, family,
    home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on [their] honour and reputation”.
    We note that several journalists detained under schedule 7 have had their electronic
    devices confiscated for a significant period of time and have not been updated on the
    use, retention or destruction of their data, or advised in relation to their personal data
    protection rights.

    We urge your Excellency’s Government to consider the growing number of
    instances where schedule 7 may have been inappropriately directed towards
    journalists and activists, and to consider addressing this through amendments to the
    legislation, guidance for relevant officials, and training of border security officers. We
    further encourage your Excellency’s Government to address the judiciary’s concerns
    regarding the retention of electronic data

    It is a stunning letter well worth reading in full; the legal language and diplomatic formality does not disguise the extreme concern of the UN at the extraordinary authoritarian attack on freedom of speech in the UK.

    I might reveal that some of the UN Special Rapporteurs who signed were very sceptical of the issue until studying the details. One told me personally they were too busy to look at such a minor problem; their attitude changed completely when faced with papers on the cases involved.

    There is no sign the UN has given the Starmer government pause; human rights are extremely low on their agenda. Support for Israel and the crushing of pro-Palestinian sentiment, or of any criticism of western foreign policy, is extremely high on their agenda.

    The legislation concerned has been brought into disrepute by the widespread support in public from Establishment figures for HTS in Syria, even though it remains a proscribed organisation and any expression of support is an offence under the Terrorism Act. To my knowledge, not one person has been charged or even questioned for supporting the HTS coup in Syria.

    This occurred after the UN letter, but they could now mention extreme arbitrariness in police and prosecutorial application of the law in their critique. The Terrorism Act is being used to criminalise peaceful criticism of western foreign policy. There can be no doubt about that at all.

    It also remains the case that there has not been one reference in UK mainstream media to the persecution of dissident journalists using terrorism laws. I don’t expect the prostitute stenographers to power to change that by covering this censure from the United Nations.

    ———————————

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a GoFundMe appeal and a Patreon account.

    I have now also started a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.




    Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above

    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



     

    PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    The post United Nations Censures UK Over Abuse of Terrorism Act Against Journalists and Activists appeared first on Craig Murray.

  23. Site: Craig Murray
    3 months 4 days ago
    Author: craig

    We could very easily – in fact more easily – have made these mini-documentaries featuring the bodies of children slaughtered by Israel and the hideous aspect of the maiming of tens of thousands, or focusing on the tears of the bereaved and orphaned.

    We chose to go a different way and make that unavoidably implicit, but not shown, in the interests of attracting and engaging the widest audience possible.

    Yet I believe what we do show highlights Israeli barbarity and makes it stark in another way. I would be grateful for your thoughts.

    ———————–

    To be blunt, our three months in Lebanon have made a significant financial loss. I am delighted with the output of six mini-documentaries and numerous short video reports and articles, some of which individually had millions of viewers. But to date the model of reader-sponsored real overseas journalism is not proven nor stable.

    If you have not yet contributed financially, I should be grateful if you could do so. If you have contributed, perhaps you could help further by encouraging others to do so. I would as always stress I do not want anybody to contribute if it causes them the slightest financial hardship.

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a GoFundMe appeal and a Patreon account.

    I have now also started a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.



    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



     

    PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

     

    The post Israel Slaughters and Destroys in Southern Lebanon appeared first on Craig Murray.

  24. Site: Craig Murray
    3 months 1 week ago
    Author: craig

    Yesterday, not only did Israel fail to evacuate its army from Southern Lebanon as stipulated in the ceasefire agreement, Israel also shot over 130 Lebanese civilians attempting to return home in accordance with the deal, killing 23 and wounding 109 (of whom some are in critical condition).

    This included a 12 year old boy wounded in the neck in Kfarkela, standing right next to my local producer Mahmood. I was twenty yards away and on my way to them. Four were killed in Kfarkela and overnight the Israeli army demolished numerous homes there in “punishment”.

    Over 100 people shot by the Israelis today in Lebanons, with 11 dead. A 12 year old boy was wounded by Israeli fire standing right next to one of my team, just before this. pic.twitter.com/wsMp7XCiKu

    — Craig Murray (@CraigMurrayOrg) January 26, 2025

    Apart from one Lebanese army solider, all of the dead were civilians simply attempting to return to their homes. At least five of the dead were children. All were shot, not bombed.

    Israel’s excuse for not withdrawing is that the ceasefire agreement is not fulfilled, in that Hezbollah have not been disarmed south of the Litani river, and that the Lebanese army has not assumed control.

    I have spent every waking hour of three days travelling the entire southern border (remember Lebanon is a very small country; the entire country is the area of Yorkshire or Connecticut – the demarcated border region is much smaller still).

    I can guarantee the Lebanese army is fully in control of the area. There are army checkpoints at every major crossroads and town entrance and at every track into the hills. What is more to the point, I saw nobody at all except for the Lebanese army carrying weapons.

    Hezbollah are a significant political presence still – they are the largest political party in Lebanon – but they are not carrying arms in the ceasefire zone south of the Litani. Furthermore the Lebanese army has indeed occupied and taken over or dismantled Hezbollah’s military positions in this zone. They have confiscated over 50 arms caches.

    The only areas of Southern Lebanon not under the control of the Lebanese armed forces are those areas occupied by the Israeli army.

    The role of the Lebanese army is extremely dubious, but 100% in Israel’s favour. The Lebanese army is fully under US control. Literally, 50% of the salary of every single Lebanese soldier is directly paid by the US Government.

    Yesterday the Lebanese army simply watched the Israeli army massacre Lebanese civilians. If the Lebanese army was protecting anybody yesterday, it was protecting the Israeli Defence Force.

    Sill more extraordinary, the new Lebanese Government failed to protest at the Israeli failure to withdraw, and the Trump administration has subsequently announced that Lebanon has agreed to extend the withdrawal deadline until 18 February.

    In fact neither Israel nor the USA ever had the slightest intention of IDF withdrawal. Israel has demolished more than 2,000 Lebanese homes during the ceasefire period, about half of them in towns and villages which Israel was unable to reach during the fighting but has occupied during the ceasefire.

    I visited the city of Khiam yesterday and was simply stunned by the scale of devastation. Over 1,000 homes have been demolished by Israel in Khiam.

    Amongst all the debris, I managed to track down the piano of Dr Julia Ali, which became an internet meme after she posted video of herself playing it in her beautiful home, and then Israeli soldiers mocking it after the home was devastated.

    The house is an interesting case study. The Zionist propagandists replied to the internet videos by stating that there was a Hezbollah rocket installation in the garden. I searched extensively and found absolutely no evidence this was anything except a civilian home. There were no signs of anything unusual in the garden.

    The house was not bombed – it was part demolished with explosives, shot up and set on fire, after being used as an Israeli barracks. The surviving furniture was ripped up with knives, and the mirrors, chandeliers, piano, porcelain and crystal all smashed.

    Women’s clothing was strewn all around, as were dolls. Large obscene drawings and Hebrew graffiti were painted on the walls. In a room used for meals, used paper plates were all upside down on the floor and had been used to smear the food around. The floor was littered with food tins, used plastic cutlery, empty drink bottles and human excrement, again deliberately smeared around.

    Throughout the building and garden were scattered numerous ammunition boxes, from small arms to tank rounds. All of it was USA manufactured.

    All of the television sets, satellite receivers, music systems and kitchen electricals were ripped out, as was the generator set.

    I went to the neighbouring villa, where a lady owner was salvaging from the wreckage with her son in law. Again, all of the electrical equipment and the generator set had been taken. Also disappeared was jewellery, a highly valuable collection of antique rugs, and significant paintings. None of this was among the rubble.

    We investigated further in the area and could find no instance of any TVs or valuables, or their remnants, being discovered in the rubble. We also found instances of shops, particularly a designer clothes shop and a phone shop, whose entire content had been looted.

    A soldier cannot put a generator set or an antique carpet in his backpack. This industrial scale of looting has to be officially sanctioned by the IDF and involve military transport vehicles, or vehicles requisitioned by the military.

    It may not compare to the murder of children, but is itself a war crime. The western MSM, which made a huge noise about Russian looting in Ukraine, has never mentioned this massive Israeli looting.

    The Ceasefire Agreement was a disgrace that was bound to lead to this conclusion. The notion that its monitors, France and the United States, are in any sense neutral is laughable. Israel has no intention whatsoever of withdrawing from Southern Lebanon and continues daily destruction of Lebanese homes while constructing at least five fortified military bases.

    What I still find astonishing is that new Lebanese President Aoun and Prime Minister Mikati have agreed to extend the Israeli occupation on these obviously false pretexts. Israel has committed over 120 documented violations of the ceasefire. Hezbollah has committed one, in early December, in response to multiple Israeli attacks on civilians.

    Hezbollah is in real danger of looking a busted flush. It agreed to disarm in the ceasefire deal, which would leave Israel able to annex Southern Lebanon with no serious opposition on the ground. It does seem that Hezbollah’s war losses and the assassination of its leadership cadre has left it incapable of any significant military response to extended Israeli occupation. Its response to yesterday’s massacre has been only rhetoric.

    As of today, Israel appears well set to consolidate its extension of Greater Israel into both Southern Lebanon and Southern Syria, with the active complicity of US backed governments in both Beirut and Damascus.

    In the long term, I believe the atrocities of Israel will be rejected by the people of the region and bring about its downfall. But currently it is Netanyahu and Trump who are smiling.

    ———————————–

    We have no finance at all for this work except our readers. It is frankly very expensive to keep this project going in Beirut with this level of production and front-line activity.

    You can donate or you can subscribe.

    Donation options:

    GoFundMe appeal

    Or PayPal


    Or Bank Transfer
    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address: NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    We also take Crypto donations:

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    Subscriptions are also very welcome. They fund all my work.

    You can subscribe via PayPal

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



    Or you can subscribe to my Patreon account

    Or to my Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post.

    You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come to this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.

    Finally of all these methods of finance, possibly the best is the very old fashioned one of your setting up a bank standing order to make a monthly subscription at any level you choose.

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address: NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    I am very grateful indeed for all assistance.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    The post Israeli Atrocities in Lebanon appeared first on Craig Murray.

  25. Site: Craig Murray
    3 months 2 weeks ago
    Author: craig

    Our new mini-documentary from the Middle East shows again the kind of reporting that no Western media either can or will do.

    We hope to visit Damascus where Western media is giving entirely sycophantic and false coverage to the new HTS regime, praising the return of Pringles to the shops while ignoring massacres.

    But we are completely out of funding. I have made an overall loss now in five figures on our work in the Middle East since October.

    There has been not one mainstream journalist here showing the truth of Israeli bombing and occupation in Lebanon. There are some excellent local journalists but we have a far greater reach in the West, with some of our individual videos getting millions of views there.

    The days when the MSM would employ honest foreign correspondents like Robert Fisk are sadly long gone. The likes of the BBC and the CNN cover Lebanon and Syria through an exclusively Zionist lens from Tel Aviv.

    I hope to pave the way for citizen activism journalism that does not merely analyse from afar, but reports from the ground, even and perhaps especially in difficult or dangerous locations. If it goes well I entertain the dream of establishing a permanent centre here, employing local staff, which could then host star visiting “new media” journalists for extended periods.

    Unfortunately to date I have not been able to make a voluntary donation and subscription funding model work, even for the low-cost guerilla-filming approach Niels and I have been adopting. That may be because the model is not possible, or just reflect my own limits of reach and my lack of fundraising ability.

    It is certain that there has been extreme social media suppression of our output, but we have still gained a wide audience. I am therefore making an attempt to appeal for support for what I believe to be not just worthwhile but vital work, as historic changes unfold in the Middle East.

    I do not back away from the avowed aim of defeating Imperialism and the Greater Israel project, with the weapons of truth and light.

    But if this appeal does not work quickly, we will be forced to give up and return to Europe.

    Unless you are so wealthy it does not matter to you, I would much prefer you not to give again if you already have supported. We really need to widen the number of financial supporters, and perhaps instead you can recommend to others.

    I absolutely do not want anybody to give anything if it causes them the least financial hardship.

    You can donate or you can subscribe.

    Donation options:

    GoFundMe appeal

    Or PayPal


    Or Bank Transfer
    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address: NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    We also take Crypto donations:

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    Subscriptions are also very welcome. They fund all my work.

    You can subscribe via PayPal

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



    Or you can subscribe to my Patreon account

    Or to my Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post.

    You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come to this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.

    Finally of all these methods of finance, possibly the best is the very old fashioned one of your setting up a bank standing order to make a monthly subscription at any level you choose.

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address: NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    I am very grateful indeed for all assistance.

     

    The post Real Reporting Appeal appeared first on Craig Murray.

  26. Site: Craig Murray
    3 months 2 weeks ago
    Author: craig

    The Genocide of the Palestinian people began 76 years ago. What may be drawing to a close is merely a particularly intense phase in the Genocide.

    Gaza is destroyed. 92% of its housing has gone. Its water treatment and sanitation, electricity generation, food processing, farming, and fishing are all now incapable of sustaining much life. Its hospitals, health centres, universities, colleges, and schools are all now destroyed, as are its municipal buildings, waste disposal, road surfaces, drainage channels, theatres, cultural centres, cinemas, cafés.

    What is left is 1.8 million cold and starving people, malnourished, soaked, ill-clothed, living in tents and defecating in trenches. Tens of thousands will die in these conditions however fast aid comes – and you can be 100% certain Israeli obstructionism will prevent it from coming fast.

    But even if they can be physically saved, the culture and fabric of society are damaged beyond repair. The psychological damage is immense. The institutions of normality that might permit recovery are non-existent.

    Nobody really knows the true number killed so far in the genocide. The Palestinian health authorities, run by the elected Hamas representatives, have been scrupulous in giving out numbers only of those officially certified dead following the recovery and identification of their bodies.

    Given the almost total destruction of Gaza’s buildings and the unavailability of rescue equipment and the lack of ceasefire for body recovery, I suspect the 46,707 official death toll as of last night (and the Israelis already killed over 80 again today) may prove to be way short of the truth, which could be double or more from unaccounted bodies.

    That is without the Lancet study suggesting that 50% again may have died subsequently from wounds. A similar number to the dead are permanently maimed.

    The worst effects may not in the long term even be in Palestine at all. The Western world has, in the support of its rulers for Israel as it commits Genocide, abandoned any pretence to wish to maintain the system of international law that had been extended and developed post World War 2. Untold horrors of war may be unleashed as a result in the next decade.

    In both the USA and the UK, governments ignored their own senior officials and legal advisers to break the human rights constraints which those nations had imposed upon their foreign policy, particularly with regard to the supply of weapons.

    In Poland, France and several other NATO countries, the governments have openly repudiated their duty to enforce warrants of the International Criminal Court.

    In the UK, Germany, USA, France and throughout the Western world, there has been a massive rolling back of long-cherished and hard-won rights of freedom of expression and assembly, explicitly to prevent criticism of Israel and support for Palestine.

    There has been concerted social media suppression to the same end on all major online platforms, and a seizure of Tik Tok in the USA avowedly because of its failure to repress speech critical of Israel.

    The unanimity of mainstream media support for Israel, and the tiny or no space for any dissenting view, has become so established a part of the political landscape it can go unnoticed. But it needs to be highlighted.

    In his closing address, the one useful thing Biden said was the correct observation about the USA becoming an oligarchy. The whole world is becoming intensely oligarchic, with an astronomical expansion of the wealth gap between rulers and ruled these past twenty years.

    The impunity of Israel, and the decline of international law, is a direct consequence of this. There is a particular truth that encompasses almost every Western country and, interestingly, unites both the Arab and the Western worlds.

    That truth is this. The wealthy oligarchic elites who control media and politics are extremely pro-Israel. The people are not.

    The gap between the support for Israel among the super wealthy and powerful, and the view of the majority of normal people, really deserves serious study to explain it. Not the least interesting is the fact that not even the almost 100% mainstream media pro-Israeli propaganda has been enough to convince the peoples of the world to support the Genocide, outwith the special cases of Germany and the US religious Zionists.

    So, what happens now? Well, I was in Beirut when it was carpet bombed in the hours immediately before the ceasefire here took effect, and I expect Israel to massively bomb Gaza’s tent cities in the next three days.

    I have also seen Israel break the ceasefire in Lebanon every single day, and I expect them to do that in Gaza too.

    Israel daily breaches the ‘ceasefire’ in Lebanon both inside and outside the demilitarised zone. Three days ago they killed 5 civilians. pic.twitter.com/MiAQpZ4AZI

    — Craig Murray (@CraigMurrayOrg) January 15, 2025

    So long as the USA and Israel designate Hamas as a terrorist organisation, they will claim the right to bomb and kill at any time as a “counter-terrorism operation”, irrespective of any ceasefire agreement. That is their formal position, just as it is their formal position with regard to Hezbollah and the ceasefire agreement with Lebanon.

    The Israelis did not start killing Palestinians on 8 October 2023 and they will not stop killing them now.

    I expect the ceasefire agreement to go ahead as projected, with occasional Israeli “anti-terrorist” attacks continuing in Gaza. The prisoner exchanges will happen. The Israelis will continually delay and renege on the provisions on aid access and on withdrawal of troops. Palestinians in Gaza will die in large numbers of disease, hunger and poor sanitation.

    Just as the ceasefire in Lebanon led to Israel immediately invading Southern Syria, Israel will now increase its activity in the West Bank, suppressing resistance together with its proxy “Palestinian Authority” forces and continually seizing land from Palestinians.

    I do not doubt that it is true that the Gaza ceasefire is due to Trump telling Netanyahu to stop. As I continually said, Biden’s attempts to restrain Netanyahu were a complete subterfuge and Biden was absolutely committed to the Genocide.

    Trump is very difficult to read. When he was elected in 2016, I believed he was less hawkish in foreign policy than Hillary Clinton. Had Clinton been elected, for example, I am sure that she would have immediately laid waste to Syria, which would have been destroyed like Libya – eventually achieved by Biden.

    Trump II had seemed an altogether more aggressive persona than Trump I, particularly as regards the Middle East. Yet Trump II has told Netanyahu to stop the Genocide – confirming incidentally that Biden could have done so had he wished.

    Biden wanted Genocide.

    The myth of Western support for international law and human rights died in Gaza, along with the myth of Western support for the “two-state solution”. There never was a viable two-state solution and it was those states who were loudest in pretending to support it, who vehemently refused to recognise the Palestinian state.

    The “two-state solution” was only ever a cover for Zionism. With Gaza now utterly smashed and its population ruined, and the West Bank almost totally expropriated, the pretence of a “two-state solution” has to be finally killed off.

    Israel has lost any moral authority for its continued existence. It has proven itself to be a genocidal entity driven by ethno-supremacism. (A people who believe themselves to be a superior or divinely favoured race are ethno-supremacists, regardless of whether their claim of ethnic homogeneity is founded or not.)

    Within 48 hours of the Hamas breakout on 7 October I wrote my first piece about it. Often in retrospect reactions to a major incident are too influenced by the emotion of the moment, but actually I am as proud of this as of anything I ever wrote.

    Asymmetric warfare tends to be vile. Oppressed and colonised peoples don’t have the luxury of lining up soldiers in neatly pressed uniforms and polished boots, to face off against the opposing army in an equality of arms.

    A colonised and oppressed people tends, given the chance, to mirror the atrocities perpetrated on them by their oppressor.

    This of course feeds in, always, to the propaganda of the Imperialist. A paroxysm of resistance by the oppressed always ends up portrayed by the Imperialist as evidence of the bestiality of the colonised people and in itself justifying the “civilising mission” of the coloniser.

    Which is not to say I relish violence, quite the opposite. I am in fact pleased that Israeli prisoners as well as Palestinian prisoners will be returned as part of a ceasefire deal.

    While the Palestinian resistance are fully entitled to take as many IDF members and reserves prisoner as they can, I cannot approve of the illegal practice of taking children and other complete non-combatants prisoner – and yes I know the Israelis do it on a much larger scale.

    Behaving better than the Israelis should be a permanent guide in life.

    Unfortunately, it is not the case that colonial settler, racist states cannot triumph. The white settlers in the USA, Canada and Australia did manage to permanently subjugate and almost extinguish the local populations. I have spoken to some wonderful Arab intellectuals these last few weeks who all tend to take the view that Israel’s ultimate defeat is inevitable because the colonial settler state will never be accepted by the Arab populations. I wish I were so confident.

    Where I agree with them totally is that the abolition of the terrorist state of Israel must be the goal, not an accommodation with it.

    Israel’s pariah status is now assured for a generation, it is deeply split internally and it is dependent on a parent state, the USA, which is losing its relative power and hegemony. Yet for now Israel is expanding. It occupies significantly more territory than it did two years ago and in Syria and Lebanon it has seized control of vital regional water sources. Israel currently has full military control of over 30% of Syria’s fresh water.

    Trump probably supports Israeli annexation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza and more. But that does not of necessity mean he supports either the expulsion of their populations or an apartheid state. He may see such heavy state interventions as an interference in the freedom of business to make money, and even undesirable per se.

    It is impossible to be certain about what Trump sees as the end goal. From this first indication, it is fair to say his influence is, to this point, more benign than feared.

    It is all a house of cards. As of today, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon all have leadership which is, broadly speaking, pro-USA and pro-Israel. Will that still be the case in a decade? Because it is the fact on which Israel depends for its existence.

    The other point on which Israel relies is the support of Western governments. But throughout the Western world, the electoral and party systems which maintain the neo-liberal consensus and give voters no real choice at elections across issues ranging from economic policy to support for Israel, are fracturing.

    This requires an article in itself, but in the UK, France, Germany and countless other states there is a tectonic shift happening with voters demanding a shift away from the tiny window of orthodox policy.

    To date, the populist right has been quickest to take advantage of this shift, and of course benefited from mainstream media cooperation. But the fluidity indicates an impending seismic shift in western domestic political alignment.

    That coincides with the disillusionment of Eastern Europe with the EU and NATO and the consequent desperate attempts of the NATO powers to subvert democracy in Georgia, Romania and Moldova.

    At some stage China will take a more active interest in the Middle East. Once the Ukraine war has concluded, Russia will undoubtedly turn more attention to the Mediterranean again.

    The situation is dynamic. I would not know whether to be more surprised if Trump initiated US attacks on Iran or initiated rebooted nuclear talks and the lifting of sanctions. I suspect the latter surprise to be the more likely.

    Today there is at least a moment of hope that the horrible deaths and mutilations in Gaza may be slowed. Let us take that for a moment of respite, and feel the sun upon our faces. Then we continue the fight against evil.

     

    ———————–

    To be blunt, our two months in Lebanon before Christmas made a slight financial loss. I was delighted with the output of four mini-documentaries and numerous short video reports and articles, some of which individually had millions of viewers. But to date the model of reader-sponsored real overseas journalism is not proven nor stable.

    If you have not yet contributed financially, I should be grateful if you could do so. If you have contributed, perhaps you could help further by encouraging others to do so. I would as always stress I do not want anybody to contribute if it causes them the slightest financial hardship.

    My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.

    Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.

    Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a GoFundMe appeal and a Patreon account.

    I have now also started a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.



    Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

    Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

    Recurring Donations 3 Pounds : £3.00 GBP – monthly5 Pounds : £5.00 GBP – monthly10 Pounds : £10.00 GBP – monthly15 Pounds : £15.00 GBP – monthly20 Pounds : £20.00 GBP – monthly30 Pounds : £30.00 GBP – monthly50 Pounds : £50.00 GBP – monthly70 Pounds : £70.00 GBP – monthly100 Pounds : £100.00 GBP – monthly



     

    PayPal address for one-off donations: craigmurray1710@btinternet.com

    Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

    Account name
    MURRAY CJ
    Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
    Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
    IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
    BIC NWBKGB2L
    Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

    Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
    Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

    The post A Ceasefire is Not an End appeared first on Craig Murray.

  27. Site: Eccles is saved
    5 months 3 weeks ago
    In protest against the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States of America, many liberal priests have decided to join sex symbols such as Whoopi Goldberg (age 69, weight 69 stone) and Jane Fonda (age 86) in refusing to provide sexual services for the next 4 years.

    Whoopi

    "From now on I shall concentrate on eating - it worked for Arthur Roche."

    Several leading Trumpophobes are LGBTSJ Jesuits, and it is believed that their leader has vowed "no woman shall know me in the Biblical sense for the next 4 years". Similarly, Cardinal Tobin has promised not to send dubious "Nighty-night" greetings to any women in this period.

    Miss Greta Luce (age 21 but looks much younger) has also undertaken to remain chaste in solidarity with the liberal priests "although what the Vatican Anime Dicastery chooses to do with my image is beyond my control."

    Luce

    What could possibly go wrong?

    So what will these virtuous religious leaders find to occupy their time? Kenotic decentering is very popular in some circles, and athletes of synodality find that sitting round a table for weeks on end helps dispel impure thoughts. We wish them luck in this new endeavour.
  28. Site: Eccles is saved
    5 months 3 weeks ago
    I am asking for trouble here, as I shall probably be swamped with nominations.

    I decided to make this world cup post-Biblical, first because the Blessed Virgin Mary would certainly win otherwise, and second because even if she were excluded, we'd only end up with final rounds including obvious people like Peter, Paul, James and John (at a guess).

    Therese of Lisieux

    This is what a saint looks like.

    NOMINATION RULES.

    1. Only saints not mentioned in the Bible will be allowed to enter.

    2. You may nominate up to 3 canonized saints (no mere blesseds, please!) If you nominate more then only the first 3 will be recorded. Please nominate either by replying to this blog posting, or by replying to the advert in Twitter/X. I will probably not reply to you, but I will take note of legitimate nominations.

    3. No changing your mind - I don't want to fiddle around with last-minute changes. What you say first, goes.

    4. I shall add a few top saints of my own, if they are omitted.

    5. Voting will be by means of Twitter polls as in previous world cups.

    6. My decision on all things is final, not to say infallible.

    Aquinas

    This is what another saint looks like.

    ADDENDUM: After 3 days we have 96 entries, which is a convenient number, so nominations are now closed. The World Cup will start within the next day or two.
  29. Site: Eccles is saved
    5 months 3 weeks ago
    In these turbulent times, leadership of the Catholic Church is not all it should be, and so many people come to this blog for spiritual guidance. Let's go!

    Q. Who is Luce? What is Luce? Why is Luce?

    A. The year 2025 sees a Jubilee of the Catholic Church. Now, we had a very exciting Jubilee of Mercy in 2015-16, with the wonderful logo of a 2-headed 3-eyed cyclops on skis designed by Top Catholic Artist Marko Rupnik. This one will be different, and Luce, designed in the well-known Anime Christi style has been chosen to represent the true essence of the faith.

    Of course this is not the first time a woman has had top billing in the Catholic Church. For many years the Blessed Virgin Mary was an object of veneration and adoration, but she has now fallen out of favour with the Vatican, perhaps for being too "traditional".

    St Joan of Arc - also rejected for being too rigid.

    Anyway, if you are a faithful Catholic, you probably already own a crucifix, some rosary beads, quite possibly a scapular. BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A LUCE YOU AIN'T SAVED! Got that?

    Q. What is a synod on synodality?

    A. Well, nobody really knows. Some say it is like a meeting on meetingality, or a workshop on workshopality. Perhaps it is more like a congress on congressality, or - like Vatican II - a council on councilality.

    Of course, instead of putting a lot of moaning minnies in a room for several weeks, the whole business could have been settled more cheaply another way (see below):

    Pope Francis summons his experts for a Zoom on Zoomality.
  30. Site: RT - News
    6 months 3 weeks ago
    Author: RT

    The true identity of Bitcoin founder Satoshi Nakamoto has been one of the cryptocurrency world’s enduring mysteries

    A Canadian software designer has denied that he’s the creator of Bitcoin following the release of a documentary claiming to have solved the mystery surrounding the world’s most popular cryptocurrency.

    ‘Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery’, released on Tuesday on US television network HBO, claims that Peter Todd, a Toronto-based contributor to the digital currency’s core programming, is in fact Satoshi Nakamato, the person who founded Bitcoin in 2009. Satoshi stopped posting online and largely disappeared from public life in 2011.

    The 39-year-old Canadian, who was involved in developing Bitcoin during its early years, has since denied the claim.

    “I’m not Satoshi,” Todd wrote in an email to Time magazine. “I discovered Bitcoin first from reading the white paper, as I’ve said publicly many times,” he added.

    Read more Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump, visits a cryptocurrency-themed bar in New York City. Trump makes first payment in Bitcoin

    The 100-minute documentary presents largely circumstantial evidence, including the use of British-Canadian English in forum posts by Satoshi.

    Filmmaker Cullen Hoback has said he’s “very, very confident” that Todd is Satoshi, Time reported. “When I put together a list of why and why not it might be him, the ‘might not be him’ list was very short,” he said.

    The publication also quoted four other early ‘Bitcoiners’ as having expressed skepticism about whether Todd actually had the coding ability needed to create the world’s most prominent cryptocurrency token.

    The identity of Satoshi Nakamoto, a pseudonym for the author of a white paper titled ‘Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System’ in 2008, remains a mystery. Various theories have emerged but to date nobody knows who Nakamoto is.

    In 2021, Tesla CEO Elon Musk claimed that hyper-secretive cryptocurrency expert Nick Szabo might be the creator of the world’s most popular cryptocurrency.

    One of the most celebrated candidates was a 75-year-old Japanese-American computer engineer named Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto. In 2014, he became the subject of an extensive Newsweek magazine report, which claimed to identify Bitcoin’s inventor. The man, however, has denied any involvement in cryptocurrency.

    The mystery surrounding the identity of Bitcoin’s creator has been described as a contributing factor to the token’s popularity. According to Austin Campbell, professor at Columbia Business School, “The fact that Bitcoin was kind of put out there and then Satoshi vanished is integral to its success.”

    If Satoshi were identified, he could risk being arrested for tax evasion, violation of financial and other regulations, given the prosecution of high-profile crypto figures such as Changpeng Zhao. The founder of the world’s leading cryptocurrency exchange Binance was sentenced to four months in prison in April after pleading guilty to violating money-laundering laws.

    READ MORE: Russia legalizes cryptocurrency mining

    Analysts have warned that if Satoshi’s identity were revealed, he could sell his holdings of over a million Bitcoin and drive the price of the token to the floor from its current level of $57,766.

  31. Site: RT - News
    6 months 3 weeks ago
    Author: RT

    The two nations are preventing the UN Security Council from stopping “the vicious cycle of violence,” a Russian envoy has said

    The uncompromising stance being taken by Israel and the US is making it impossible to end the conflict in Gaza, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN has said.

    Vassily Nebenzia made the comments during a UN Security Council session dedicated to the year-old Gaza crisis in the Middle East on Tuesday.

    The attack on Israel by the Palestinian militant group Hamas on October 7 last year, in which some 1,200 Israelis were killed and 250 taken hostage, was “a tragedy” but it is being used to justify “the merciless and inhumane mass collective punishment of the Palestinians,” the envoy said.

    The people of Gaza “are facing an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe unseen since World War Two,” he stressed.

    Nebenzia noted that due to Israel’s air and ground campaign, almost 42,000 people – mainly women and children – have been killed in Gaza in the past year, and the number of wounded and missing is approaching 100,000, while another 2 million Palestinians are internally displaced.

    Read more FILE PHOTO. African National Congress (ANC) spokesperson Mahlengi Bhengu-Motsiri briefs the media on June 5, 2024, in Johannesburg, South Africa. Israeli attacks on Palestinians must end – ANC

    "This is the result of the stubbornness of the Israeli leadership and its patronage by the American allies... who do not allow the Security Council to stop this vicious cycle of violence,” Nebenzia insisted.

    Washington vetoed several UNSC resolutions calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza before eventually allowing the document to pass in late March 2024. According to a report by the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs earlier this week, the US has provided Israel with a record $17.9 billion in military aid over the past year. A major part of American deliveries were munitions, including artillery shells and 2,000-pound (907kg) bombs, according to the report.

    The “catastrophic situation” in Gaza should only be resolved through diplomatic means with the participation of all countries in the Middle East and major international players, Nebenzia said.

    “Our common goal is to ensure the implementation of the decisions of the Security Council and the UN General Assembly, to stop the bloodshed that risks engulfing the entire Middle East,” he stated.

    READ MORE: After a year of war, Israel’s unity is shaken and it’s bleeding support

    The members of the UNSC must also “guarantee the implementation of the Palestinians’ legitimate right to self-determination,” which would allow them to create a viable state within the 1967 borders and with East Jerusalem as its capital, the Russian envoy added.

  32. Site: RT - News
    6 months 3 weeks ago
    Author: RT

    The DOJ is considering enforcing “structural remedies” against the tech giant’s monopoly

    The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced that it may recommend dismantling Google's de facto monopoly by separating its search business from its Android operating system, Chrome web browser, and Google Play app store.

    According to a court filing on Tuesday, Google may face both “behavioral and structural remedies” to prevent the company from abusing its ecosystem for unfair competitive advantage. The DOJ argues that the tech giant’s behavior has already caused “interlocking and pernicious harms” to users and that restoring competition in the search engine market is essential.

    ”Google’s unlawful behavior has enabled it to accumulate and use data at the expense of rivals,” the DOJ stated. “As a result, plaintiffs are considering remedies that would prohibit Google from using or retaining data that cannot be effectively shared with others due to privacy concerns,” it added, arguing that “genuine privacy concerns” must be distinguished from “pretextual arguments” meant to sustain its dominant position.

    Read more A sign outside of the Google HQ in Mountain View, California. Google is an illegal monopoly – court ruling

    This move follows a federal judge's ruling in August that Google had violated US antitrust laws.

    “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Judge Amit Mehta said, noting that the company paid billions of dollars to device manufacturers to secure its position as the default search engine on smartphones and browsers.

    The DOJ contends that because Google has been found in violation of antitrust regulations, remedies for those offenses should “unfetter markets from Google’s exclusionary conduct, remove barriers to competition, deny Google the fruits of its statutory violations, and prevent Google from monopolizing these markets and related markets in the future.”

    Google has responded by labeling the government's plan “radical,” arguing in a blog post on Wednesday that it would worsen customer experience and significantly impact “American competitiveness.”

    “Splitting off Chrome or Android would break them,” Google stated. “Billions of people get online thanks to Chrome and Android existing as free products. Few companies would have the ability or incentive to keep them open source or to invest in them at the same level we do.”

    The case will continue to unfold over the coming months, with the DOJ expected to submit more detailed proposals by November 20 and Google scheduled to respond by December 20.

    Read more RT Is the breakup of Google imminent?

    It remains unclear what consequences Google and its parent company, Alphabet, will face. In the 1990s, the US government attempted to break up Microsoft over its dominance of the nascent software market, but the company appealed the ruling, and the DOJ eventually dropped the case.

    Google is also facing a separate antitrust case brought by DOJ attorneys and 17 states, alleging that its advertising business is anticompetitive. Additionally, the company has been fined billions of euros in monopoly cases in the EU. Other tech giants, including Facebook owner Meta Platforms, Amazon, and Apple, have also been sued by federal antitrust regulators for allegedly operating unlawful monopolies.

  33. Site: RT - News
    6 months 4 weeks ago
    Author: RT

    Slovakia’s prime minister Robert Fico has accused the press of creating an atmosphere of hate that encouraged a gunman to shoot him

    Slovakia's Prime Minister Robert Fico has accused mainstream journalists of being “possessed by the devil” and suggested establishing a national media watchdog to rein in the “hate” being spread by reporters.

    During a press conference on Tuesday, Fico, who survived an assassination attempt by a reportedly pro-Kiev shooter following sustained media criticism of his position on Ukraine, became visibly agitated when asked about tensions within his three-party governing coalition.

    ”From the first day, when the results of the parliamentary elections came in, you went against us like bloodthirsty bastards from morning to night,” Fico said, dismissing any notion of a government crisis.

    “Do you read your articles after you’ve written them? I don’t think you do… It’s pure hate. You’re possessed by the devil,” he said. He singled out the major Slovak daily papers Dennik N and Sme, and the Aktuality.sk portal, which have been highly critical of his government since he returned to power for a fourth term after his Slovak Social Democracy (SMER-SD) party won the election last September.

    You just want to do wrong at any cost, and that’s why the atmosphere in Slovakia is like this. Why did they shoot me in the stomach?

    The prime minister expressed support for establishing a “national media authority” and “sanctions” for journalists who fail to correct errors in their reporting. He also suggested that journalists should undergo requalification courses, similar to those required for lawyers and public notaries.

    Read more NATO summit In Washington DC, July 11, 2024. West aims to ‘bring Russians to their knees’ – Slovak prime minister

    ”You should perhaps also be part of some professional associations, where you would face disciplinary procedures, similar to lawyers,” Fico said, stressing that his government needs to take action because “such a media mess as we have in Slovakia doesn’t exist in any other EU country.”

    The comments were swiftly condemned by opposition politicians, with some accusing Fico of attacking freedom of speech.

    “The idea of a national media authority that would control journalists is nothing more than a thinly veiled effort to censor and limit the media, which exists perhaps only in North Korea,” said lawmaker Zora Jaurova from the liberal opposition party Progressive Slovakia.

    The chair of the For the People party, Veronika Remisova, argued that by referring to journalists as "bloodthirsty bastards," the prime minister and his “cronies” are themselves spreading hatred.

    Read more Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico issues a video statement on Wednesday. Slovak PM points to forces behind assassination attempt

    Fico was shot and critically injured on May 15 in the town of Handlova while greeting a crowd. A 71-year-old suspect was arrested at the scene and charged with attempted murder and terrorism.

    In June, the Slovak prime minister argued that the assassination attempt was orchestrated by foreign-backed politicians who refuse to accept policies prioritizing Bratislava’s interests over the agendas of major Western powers. He also warned against efforts by adversaries – including media outlets bankrolled by billionaire political activist George Soros – to downplay the implications of the shooting.

    ”I want to ask the anti-government media, especially those co-owned by George Soros’ financial structure, not to go down this path and to respect not only the gravity of the reasons for the attempted murder but also the consequences of this attempt,” Fico said at the time.

  34. Site: RT - News
    6 months 4 weeks ago
    Author: RT

    The US sought a pact with Russia and China that would later be expanded, the former president has said

    Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said Washington almost reached an agreement on nuclear weapons with Russia and China during his time in the White House.

    The former president made the claim during a two-hour interview with comedian Andrew Schulz, posted on X (formerly Twitter) on Wednesday.

    “We were close to a deal for getting rid of nuclear weapons. It would be so good,” Trump said. “I’m talking about Russia, ourselves, and China. We would then bring everyone else into it.”

    Nuclear weapons are “the biggest threat we have in the world today,” Trump argued. “It’s not global warming, where the oceans are rising 1/8 of an inch in the next 500 years.”

    Neither Russia nor China have yet commented on Trump’s claim about a denuclearization treaty being in the works during his administration.

    Read more Russian President Vladimir Putin chairs a meeting with members of the Security Council via videoconference at the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia. Putin just announced Russia’s own Monroe Doctrine

    Trump’s remarks came during a discussion of Iran’s alleged nuclear program, in which he criticized US President Joe Biden for being reluctant to confront Tehran. Biden has publicly urged Israel to refrain from striking Iranian nuclear and oil facilities.

    The five nuclear-armed members of the UN Security Council struck a deal with Tehran in 2015, under which Iran would not enrich uranium beyond a certain level, and therefore be unable to build atomic weapons. Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from the arrangement in 2018. Though Biden promised to reinstate the deal, his diplomats have failed to get any traction on the issue over the past four years.

    In 2019, Trump also pulled out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) Treaty, accusing Russia of being in breach of it. That left the New START as the last remaining arms control deal between Russia and the US. Trump initially sought to get China to join the treaty, but Beijing declined, and it appeared as if New START might expire at the start of Trump’s second term.

    Read more FILE PHOTO. US ‘biggest nuclear threat’ – China

    The Biden White House extended the treaty in February 2021, but it now seems likely to expire in 2026. Russia suspended its participation in New START in February 2023, citing the illegal and illegitimate US sanctions preventing its reciprocal enforcement, as well as US support for Ukrainian attacks on Russian strategic airbases.

    Trump officially lost the 2020 election to Biden but has questioned the vote’s legitimacy ever since. He won the 2024 Republican nomination and will face current Vice-President Kamala Harris – nominated by the Democrats after Biden withdrew from the race in July – in the November 5 election.

  35. Site: RT - News
    6 months 4 weeks ago
    Author: RT

    The Iranians won’t know what hit them, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant has said

    Israel’s response to the Iranian missile attack will be “deadly, pinpoint accurate, and surprising,” Defense Minister Yoav Gallant has warned.

    Tehran’s missile barrage pummeled Israel earlier this month, in what was said to be reprisal for the killings of the heads of Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as a general of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

    ”The Iranian attack was aggressive but inaccurate,” Gallant said on Wednesday. “In contrast, our attack will be deadly, pinpoint accurate, and most importantly, surprising – they will not know what happened or how it happened. They will just see the results.”

    Gallant was speaking to Intelligence Unit 9900 of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), charged with visual intelligence collection and analysis. He credited their work with Israel’s “air supremacy” and ability to see “very precisely and in every place what we want to,” according to the Jerusalem Post.

    Iran had launched a number of missiles and drones at Israel in April, in response to a deadly air raid on the Iranian consulate in the Syrian capital, Damascus. Israel and the US claimed to have intercepted the attack entirely, with no damage or casualties. The October 1 barrage was more extensive, and videos of multiple missile impacts posted on social media clearly showed failings in the Israeli air defenses.

    Read more  Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant visits troops in northern Israel. Netanyahu cancels defense minister’s US visit

    The IDF has vowed a “serious and significant” response, though Tehran has warned both Israel and the US that it would no longer exercise “unilateral self-restraint” and strike even harder instead.

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reportedly been trying to coordinate a strike with the US. Gallant’s planned trip to Washington on Tuesday was canceled after Netanyahu said he had not been able to get a hold of US President Joe Biden yet, according to media reports.

    Biden has publicly warned Israel not to go after Iran’s nuclear program or oil facilities. According to both US and Israeli media, the IDF is now expected to target military and intelligence sites instead.

    Meanwhile, the IRGC-affiliated news agency Tasnim has reported that the Iranian military has worked up at least ten contingency plans for responding to any Israeli attack. Tehran is “not afraid of war,” Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi stated on Tuesday.

  36. Site: RT - News
    1 year 4 weeks ago
    Author: RT

    The 1990 CFE agreement became meaningless after Russia’s withdrawal, Ankara has said

    Ankara has suspended its participation in a key European arms control pact that was meant to prevent new conflicts from emerging on the continent after the end of the Cold War.

    According to a decree signed by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and published on Friday, Türkiye will stop the implementation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) on April 8.

    Foreign Ministry spokesman Oncu Keceli said, “there was no possibility to continue meaningful implementation of the treaty” since Russia left the accord in November.

    The original CFE was signed in 1990 by NATO and the Soviet Union. Its principal goal was to cap the number of tanks, armored combat vehicles, artillery, and aircraft either side could deploy between the Atlantic coast and the Ural Mountains. The agreement was later amended to reflect the breakup of the Soviet bloc and the expansion of NATO eastwards during the late 1990s.

    Read more  US President Joe Biden (L) and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Washington turns to Ankara to ramp up shell production – Bloomberg

    NATO members have refused to ratify the adapted version of the CFE, which ultimately led to its 2007 suspension by Russia. Moscow also cited Washington’s plans to station anti-air missiles in Europe as one of the reasons for the pact’s demise.

    Russia withdrew from the CFE in November 2023, arguing that the once-promising agreement had become pointless due to the West’s military support for Ukraine, the sanctions on Moscow, and other “hostile policies.” The US suspended its participation in the CFE following Russia’s withdrawal.

    The CFE is not the only arms control pact that has become defunct due to the current tensions between Russia and NATO. In 2019, the US withdrew from the 1987 INF Treaty, which restricted the number of American and Russian ground-launched medium-range nuclear missiles. Moscow quit the agreement last year. The treaty fell apart as both countries accused each other of secretly violating it.

    READ MORE: US to build weapons warehouse in Arctic Europe – media

    In 2020, the US left the Treaty on Open Skies, which allowed mutual surveillance flights over the entire territory of the participants. Russia followed suit, abandoning the accord a year later.

  37. Site: RT - News
    1 year 4 weeks ago
    Author: RT

    Washington reportedly believes Tehran could launch drones and missiles in the coming days

    The US believes Iran will attack American or Israeli personnel in the Middle East in retaliation for an Israeli airstrike in Syria, several news outlets reported on Friday and Saturday, citing US officials. Tehran has vowed to avenge seven officers – including two top commanders from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – who were killed in the bombing of Iran’s consulate in Damascus on Monday.

    A senior official told CNN that the US government believes retaliation by Iran is inevitable, and added that the Israelis share this assessment. Officials warned that an attack could come as soon as next week.

    According to officials who spoke to NBC News and CBS News, American intelligence suggests that Iran could use “a swarm” of Shahed kamikaze drones and cruise missiles, and that Tehran could target an Israeli diplomatic or consular facility.

    The potential attack was discussed during a phone call between President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday, CNN said.

    Read more Demonstrators burn US and Israeli flags during the funeral of seven Revolutionary Guard Corps officers in Tehran, Iran, April 5, 2024 Don’t fall into Israeli ‘trap’, Iran warns US

    There have not been any major attacks on US personnel in the region since late January, when a kamikaze drone killed three soldiers stationed at a remote outpost near the Jordanian-Syrian border. American troops shot down two drones near the al-Tanf base in southern Syria this week, CNN reported, citing US defense officials.

    Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has promised that Israel will “receive a slap in the face.” Officials in Tehran also made threats against the US, although Washington claimed it was unaware that the strike on Iran’s mission in Damascus would happen.

    Israel has accused Iran of aiding Hamas, Hezbollah, and other pro-Palestine militant groups and has vowed to neutralize any security threats during its war against Hamas in Gaza. Although Israel did not claim responsibility for the death of the Iranian generals directly, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant warned that “everyone who acts against us all over the Middle East” will pay “a heavy price.” 

  38. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    Israel must do more than temporarily open one border crossing, a ‘paradigm shift’ is needed, Antonio Guterres has said

    UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has called for a “meaningful increase” in the amount of aid allowed into Gaza, arguing that the “scattered measures” adopted by Israel are not enough to save the enclave’s population from malnutrition and disease.

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed on Friday to allow humanitarian aid deliveries into northern Gaza through the Erez checkpoint, which had been closed since Israel imposed a near-total siege on the strip after Hamas attacked the Jewish state on October 7.

    Netanyahu stressed that the opening would be “temporary,” and would allow in enough aid “to prevent a humanitarian crisis” in Gaza.

    “It’s not enough to have scattered measures – we need a paradigm shift,” Guterres told reporters in New York on Friday. 

    Since the beginning of the Israel-Hamas war, aid has only been delivered to Gaza via the Rafah crossing between Egypt and the south of the enclave. However, Cairo allows Israel to determine when the crossing can be opened, and Israeli troops inspect every truck that passes.

    Read more The Erez border crossing between southern Israel and Gaza, January 3, 2024. Israel to reopen Gaza border crossing for aid

    Recalling his visit to Rafah last month, Guterres noted that “long lines of trucks loaded with humanitarian aid continue to face obstacle after obstacle.”

    “When the gates to aid are closed, the doors to starvation are opened,” he declared.

    A UN-backed report warned last month that more than 70% of Gaza’s 2.3 million residents are facing “catastrophic hunger,” and that famine conditions now exist in the northern part of the strip.

    “This is incomprehensible and entirely avoidable,” Guterres stated.

    Israel has faced an international backlash after its military killed seven humanitarian workers in a drone strike on a clearly-marked aid convoy on Monday. Amid reports that the convoy was deliberately targeted, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) issued a rare admission of guilt on Friday, announcing that two senior officers involved in ordering the strike had been sacked.

  39. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    Strategist Edward Luttwak has argued that members of the US-led bloc will have to deploy troops to prevent a Russian victory

    NATO nations can only forestall an inevitable loss to Russian forces in Ukraine by deploying their troops to the former Soviet republic, a former adviser to the US military has claimed.

    “The arithmetic of this is inescapable: NATO countries will soon have to send soldiers to Ukraine, or else accept catastrophic defeat,” military strategist Edward Luttwak wrote in an oped published on Thursday by the British online media outlet UnHerd. “The British and French, along with the Nordic countries, are already quietly preparing to send troops – both small elite units and logistics and support personnel – who can remain far from the front.”

    The conflict can’t be won without direct troop deployments because regardless of the quantity and quality of weapons sent to Kiev, Ukrainian forces are too outnumbered by the Russians, Luttwak argued. “This means that unless [Russian President Vladimir] Putin decides to end the war, Ukraine’s troops will be pushed back again and again, losing soldiers in the process who cannot be replaced.”

    Read more RT NATO is an American tool for confrontation in Europe – Kremlin

    Luttwak’s comments follow weeks of battlefield advances by Russian forces in the Donbass region. Western leaders have insisted that they can ensure a Ukrainian victory by providing aid to Kiev, but French President Emmanuel Macron suggested in February that direct troop deployments by NATO members could not be ruled out.

    European NATO members face a “momentous decision” because with US forces facing a growing threat of a potential Chinese attack on Taiwan, it will be up to them to provide the manpower that Ukraine needs, Luttwak said. “If Europe cannot provide enough troops, Russia will prevail on the battlefield, and even if diplomacy successfully intervenes to avoid a complete debacle, Russian military power will have victoriously returned to central Europe,” he added.

    NATO-Russia relations have deteriorated so much amid the Ukraine crisis that the Western alliance is already in “direct confrontation” with Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday. Putin has warned that NATO would risk triggering a nuclear conflict if its members send troops to Ukraine.

    READ MORE: ‘Take no NATO prisoners’ – Medvedev

    Luttwak suggested that by providing support troops for such tasks as troop training and repairing damaged equipment, NATO nations could free up more Ukrainians to serve on the front lines. “These NATO soldiers might never see combat, but they don’t have to in order to help Ukraine make the most of its own scarce manpower,” he said.

    The Romanian-born Luttwak, who was raised and educated largely in the UK, has advised the Pentagon, the US State Department, and the White House National Security Council, among other entities in Washington. A December 2015 profile of Luttwak by The Guardian billed him as “the Machiavelli of Maryland.” Now 81, he has reportedly advised clients ranging from the Dalai Lama to the prime minister of Kazakhstan.

    READ MORE: Ukraine ‘will become a member of NATO’ – top US diplomat

    Despite being a proponent of Western involvement in the conflict, Luttwak was put on a Ukrainian blacklist in 2022 for opining that Kiev cannot realistically hope to defeat Russia outright and depose Putin.

     

  40. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    Israel is bracing for an Iranian counterattack after striking Tehran’s embassy in Damascus

    Iran has warned the US to “stay away” from any potential clash between itself and Israel, while Washington has cautioned Tehran against targeting American facilities, Iranian presidential aide Mohammad Jamshidi said on Friday.

    “In a written message, the Islamic Republic of Iran warns US leadership not to get dragged in [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s trap for [the] US: Stay away so you won’t get hurt,” Jamshidi wrote on X (formerly Twitter). 

    “In response, [the] US asked Iran not to target American facilities,” he added.

    Iran accused the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) of carrying out an airstrike on its consulate in the Syrian capital of Damascus on Monday, killing seven officers of the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force, including two generals. While the IDF followed its usual policy of neither confirming nor denying operations on foreign soil, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant inferred responsibility when he said on Wednesday that Israel “strikes our enemies all over the Middle East.”

    Read more  Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran promises Israel ‘slap in the face’

    Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has vowed to retaliate, stating on Wednesday that Israel will “of course receive a slap in the face for this move.” The IDF responded by canceling all leave and scrambling satellite signals over Tel Aviv in anticipation of a strike in response.

    US officials have not said whether an Iranian assault on Israel would be grounds for military intervention. However, Washington has repeatedly warned Iran to stay out of the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, and Tehran has largely complied. Rather than participating in the conflict directly, Iran has continued its existing policy of arming and training Shia militias in Iraq and Syria, and Lebanon’s Hezbollah movement, who have traded fire with American and Israeli forces since the conflict began in October.

    Speaking to CNN on Thursday, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said that the US is “very concerned” about the potential for war between Israel and Iran, before adding that the US will continue to provide military aid to Israel.

    READ MORE: Israel fires senior officers over drone strikes

    Jamshidi’s post is the first acknowledgment by either side of back-channel talks between Washington and Tehran since the embassy strike. However, an anonymous American official told Axios on Tuesday that the US “directly” informed Iran that it “had no involvement in the strike and we did not know about it ahead of time.”

    Speaking after a funeral procession for the slain officers in Tehran on Friday, IRGC commander Hossein Salami told a crowd of mourners that “no action by any enemy concerning [the Islamic Republic] will go unanswered.”

  41. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    West Jerusalem has dismissed two commanders and reprimanded others over their “grave mistake” in targeting an aid convoy in Gaza

    The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has issued a rare admission of guilt, firing two senior officers and rebuking several others for “errors in decision-making” that led to the deaths of seven humanitarian aid workers in a drone attack earlier this week in Gaza.

    A brigade fire support commander and a brigade chief of staff were dismissed over Monday’s incident, and three higher-level officers were reprimanded, the IDF said on Friday in a statement. Among those called out was the leader of Israel’s Southern Command, who bore “overall responsibility.”

    An internal investigation of the drone strikes on a convoy of international aid workers found that it “should not have occurred,” the IDF said. “The strike on the aid vehicles is a grave mistake stemming from a serious failure due to a mistaken identification, errors in decision-making, and an attack contrary to the standard operating procedures.”

    Read more A man sits on the rubble of a building destroyed by an Israeli bombardment last month in Beit Lahia, Gaza. Biden approves more bombs for Israel – media

    Investigators concluded that the officers involved thought they were targeting Hamas terrorists after misidentifying three World Central Kitchen (WCK) vehicles and mistakenly concluding that one of the passengers had a weapon slung over his shoulder. “We express our deep sorrow for the loss and send our condolences to the families and the WCK organization,” the IDF said.

    Nearly 200 aid workers have reportedly been killed in Gaza and the West Bank since Israel’s war against Hamas began in October. Those who perished in Monday’s drone attack included three UK nationals, one Palestinian, a US-Canadian dual citizen, an Australian, and a Polish aid worker. The WCK vehicles were marked with the aid group’s logo, and they were traveling on an IDF-approved route after dropping off a food shipment at a warehouse in central Gaza.

    Monday’s incident sparked international outrage, including a rebuke from US President Joe Biden, but Washington is continuing to supply weapons to Israel. In fact, just hours before the aid convoy was struck, the Biden administration reportedly approved plans to transfer thousands of munitions to replenish stockpiles that have been depleted by Israel’s six-month bombardment of the Palestinian enclave.

    READ MORE: Israel apologized for aid worker’s death in Gaza – Poland

    The findings of Israel’s investigation were shared with WCK and with the ambassadors of the nations whose citizens were killed, the IDF said. Israel’s ambassador to Poland, Yacov Livne, apologized for the incident, Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Andrzej Szejna told reporters on Friday in Warsaw. Earlier this week, Livne insisted that the attack was not a war crime and that Poles who thought otherwise were anti-Semitic.

     

     

     

  42. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    Fears of American withdrawal, over reliance on the Russian bogeyman, and Washington’s tilt to Asia make for shaky foundations

    The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is celebrating its 75th anniversary – the founding documents were signed in Washington this week in 1949. NATO is so firmly embedded in the international landscape that even its decisive transformation at the turn of the 1980s and 1990s did not shake its position.

    In theory, the bloc should have been retired, having fulfilled its mission of defending the “free world” against the communist threat. But another logic prevailed: Why abandon an instrument that had worked so well? After all, the main achievement was not even victory in the Cold War itself, which was not in doubt in the West, but the fact that it was achieved without direct military confrontation. It was the result of a policy of prolonged containment and the gradual socio-economic exhaustion of the enemy. In other words, NATO was not a military bloc, but a highly effective political structure that could easily be refocused on other tasks.

    The task at hand was a non-trivial one – to become a pillar of the new, Western-centred world order.

    Read more In this drone view, 2nd Battalion soldiers gather for a photo during a media visit to Kendrew Barracks on January 26, 2024 near Oakham, UK. How NATO brainwashes Western society with its anti-Russia wargames

    Let us leave aside the issue of NATO’s eastward expansion and the development of formerly hostile territories. Much has been said about the role this has played in the rise of European tensions and the emergence of the current politico-military crisis. But something else is even more interesting. The international situation in 2024 shows how the contradictions associated with NATO’s make up, and its unwillingness to change it, are potentially creating increasingly complex problems for the alliance.

    The official narrative is that the bloc has never been larger (Sweden has just joined as the 32nd country) or more united. The challenge posed by Russia has, so the story goes, united allies ready to stand together against aggressive imperialist autocrats. 

    In reality, the mood is complex. The main source of danger is now perceived not to be an adversary (Russia) but rather a leading ally (the United States). The internal political struggle in America – the main casualty of which has so far been military aid to Kiev – and the likelihood of Donald Trump entering the White House are forcing Western European states to consider the unthinkable. Will the United States abandon NATO altogether and shift its priorities? After all, Washington’s declining interest in the Old World is not an anomaly of Trumpism, but a steady trend since the beginning of this century.

    The scaremongering about the US leaving NATO under Trump is most likely due to political infighting. Even if the mercurial ex-president wanted to do it, he has no authority to do so. Trump is generally fixated on something else – from his point of view, any grand strategy must bring in money, preferably in the most literal form, as a tariff for services. Hence his calls for NATO and East Asian allies to spend more on their own defense, thereby reducing the burden on the US budget. The more complex argument that control over allies requires investment, but is repaid a hundredfold by the ability to dictate rules, is not remotely interesting to Trump.

    But let us reiterate: This is not about him. The Joe Biden administration, which is considered to be “pro-European,” is not averse to transferring a large share of the burden of Ukrainian spending to EU states and even seems to be encouraging them to take the initiative, which was not the case before. The notion of strategic autonomy, hotly debated in previous years, is being reconsidered. Except, now it is no longer just in the form of separate political course.

    Read more FILE PHOTO. NATO goes into full fear-porn mode to shake down taxpayers for cash

    And here it is worth returning to how NATO was seen in the early 1990s. The contradiction between the Atlantic nature of the alliance and the trans-continental nature of its goals was not resolved at that time. The bloc remained focused on Europe and its environs, and attempts to use it to solve broader global problems did not work very well. Moreover, in the heyday of globalization, it was felt that the most important tools were not military – economic and social means of influence were far more productive.

    The changes on the world stage towards militarization and the extreme intensification of major conflicts are forcing a review of capabilities. The US describes the global confrontation as a confrontation between democracies and autocracies, with China as a strategic rival among the latter. This calls for the globalization of NATO and the extension of its practical activities (if not its formal mandate) beyond the Atlantic basin.

    Gone is the unified world based on the principles of liberal globalization. In it, the Western alliance could be said to be acting in the interests of security for all. Now NATO, or its incarnations in Asia, cannot claim to perform functions that are needed by everyone. The bloc serves the geopolitical interests of the “collective West.” Accordingly, the problems that NATO enlargement has created in Europe, which have already led to a possible need to fulfil military commitments, are likely to be repeated in Asia. Western Europeans see China as a beneficial partner rather than a threat, but within the framework of a common policy standpoint with the US, their priorities will have to be adjusted.

    However, this does not make NATO’s future any more certain.

  43. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    The French president has claimed Moscow was spreading misinformation to sabotage the games

    French President Emmanuel Macron’s claims that Moscow may somehow seek to undermine the Paris Olympics are entirely baseless, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.

    President Vladimir Putin’s press secretary was asked to comment on the French leader’s remarks, as well as the Czech transportation minister’s allegations that Russia has been trying to hack into the EU railway networks.

    “These are absolutely unfounded accusations in both the first and second cases,” Peskov said. “They are often heard, but they are never supported by any adequate evidence or argumentation. We absolutely do not accept such accusations.”

    The West often makes baseless accusations against Moscow, Peskov added, calling it “quite indecent behavior.”

    On Thursday, at the ceremony for opening a new aquatics center, Macron told reporters he had “no doubt” that Russia was “targeting” the Olympics, “including in the information field.”

    “Every day [Russia] is putting out stories saying that we are unable to do this or that, so [the Games] would be at risk,” the French president said.

    Read more  French soldiers patrol the streets as part of the counter-terrorist Vigipirate plan, France, 2019 France wants foreign troops to reinforce Olympics security – media

    The Olympics are scheduled to start on July 26, with over 300,000 people observing the opening ceremony on the river Seine. Western experts have voiced concerns that the event may be “highly vulnerable” to terrorist attacks.

    France has already asked some 46 countries for over 2,000 additional police specialists to help with securing the games, AFP reported last month citing sources inside the government. Officially, more than 45,000 gendarmes, 18,000 troops and 22,000 private security guards will be tasked with protecting the Olympics.

    Paris has raised the terrorist threat level following last month’s attack on Crocus City Hall near Moscow that killed more than 140 people. Macron denied any possibility of Ukraine’s involvement and blamed the attack on Islamic State Khorasan (ISIS-K), which he said might target France as well.

    It is not the first accusation of Russian malfeasance the French government has made in recent months, however. In October, after someone stenciled the Star of David on multiple Paris buildings, the French Foreign Ministry claimed that Russian intelligence incited the perpetrators. Moscow’s ambassador rejected the accusation as “completely outrageous” and unfounded.

    In February, Macron said Russia was engaging in “disinformation and information manipulation operations” and cyberattacks against France, especially after Paris ramped up its supply of weapons to Ukraine. 

  44. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    A number of crucial structures lack sufficient protection against being struck by ships, engineers told the outlet

    Several major American bridges could collapse like the Francis Scott Key Bridge if hit by a large enough vessel, CNN reported on Wednesday, citing a group of structural engineers. The outlet examined “more than a dozen” key bridges in the wake of last week’s deadly incident in Maryland.

    The report comes a week after a large section of Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge collapsed following a collision with a ship, killing six people and likely causing billions in damage.

    Most of the bridges examined by CNN appeared to be sufficiently protected with either “dolphins” or fenders – structures designed to deflect or stop a ship before it could hit a critically important part of a bridge – or even artificial barrier islands, the broadcaster said.

    Yet, citing federal data, CNN said that the majority of the bridges had “fracture critical members,” meaning that if one single element is knocked out, the entire structure could collapse.

    Read more RT US bridge collapses after being hit by ship (VIDEO)

    At least three bridges lacked adequate protections, according to the broadcaster’s analysis. One of them is Chesapeake Bay Bridge near Annapolis. Built in 1952, with a second span added in 1973, the four-mile-long (6.4 km) structure is part of the cross-country US Route 50.

    Some of the bridge’s concrete piers located near the main shipping channel might not withstand being hit by a vessel, CNN’s sources warned. Adel ElSafty, an engineering professor at the University of North Florida, told the outlet it was “lacking in safety measures” and could “very much be vulnerable to a ship impact.”

    A vessel similar to the one that hit the Key Bridge “would eat through this in a second,” said Hussam Mahmoud, a Colorado State University engineering professor.

    Read more RT Another US bridge hit by a vessel (VIDEO)

    The Maryland Transportation Authority told CNN in a statement that it was looking at “options” to increase protection of the bridge. While the Chesapeake Bay Bridge is currently undergoing work to upgrade its road deck and parts of its steel superstructure, none of the current work involves fortifying it against ships, CNN said.

    Apart from the Chesapeake Bay Bridge, the Crescent City Connection – a pair of cantilever bridges over the Mississippi River near New Orleans – were also singled out as particularly vulnerable. Opened in 1958 and 1988, over 250,000 vehicles cross them per day on average.

    The state’s Department of Transportation described the bridges as “like triple protected,” but the experts approached by CNN disagreed. The fender system that the bridges have is “definitely inadequate,” Mahmoud said, calling the officials’ claims “nonsense.”

  45. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    The parent company of Facebook and Instagram will sniff out and label robot-created videos, photos, and audio

    Meta will start labeling AI-generated content on Facebook and Instagram from May onwards, the tech giant has announced. Until now, the company had a policy of deleting such computer-created content.

    The company will apply “Made with AI” labels to photo, audio, or video content created with artificial intelligence, it explained in a blog post on Friday. These labels will either be applied automatically when Meta detects “industry-shared signals” of AI content, or when users voluntarily disclose that something they post was created with AI.

    If the content in question carries “a particularly high risk of materially deceiving the public on a matter of importance,” a more prominent label may be applied, Meta stated.

    At present, Meta’s ‘manipulated media’ policy only covers videos that have been “created or altered by AI to make a person appear to say something they didn’t say.” Content violating this policy is removed rather than labeled.

    READ MORE: Italian PM wants €100,000 over deepfake porn

    The new policy expands this dragnet to videos showing someone “doing something they didn’t do,” and to photos and audio. However, it is more relaxed than the old approach in that the content in question will be allowed to remain online.

    Read more FILE PHOTO Fake Taylor Swift nudes ‘alarming’ – White House

    The new policy expands this dragnet to videos showing someone “doing something they didn’t do,” and to photos and audio. However, it is more relaxed than the old approach in that the content in question will be allowed to remain online.

    “Our manipulated media policy was written in 2020 when realistic AI-generated content was rare and the overarching concern was about videos,” the company explained. “In the last four years, and particularly in the last year, people have developed other kinds of realistic AI-generated content like audio and photos, and this technology is quickly evolving.”

    Since the beginning of this year, US regulators have announced a ban on AI-generated “robocalls” after New Hampshire residents were contacted by a computer-generated Joe Biden urging them to sit out the state’s Democratic primary election, while the White House has promised to “deal with” the problem of non-consensual porn after fake nude photos of pop star Taylor Swift spread on social media. Former US President Donald Trump has also weighed in on the issue, accusing US media outlets of using AI to make him appear fatter in photographs.

    Meta is not the only Big Tech firm to combat artificial content with labels. As of last year, TikTok asks users to label their own AI-generated content, while giving other users the option to report content they suspect was AI-generated. YouTube introduced a similar honor-based system last month.

    READ MORE: Pope warns of ‘perverse’ deepfakes

    With pivotal elections taking place in the EU in June and US in November, lawmakers have pushed tech firms to take action against AI-created “deepfakes,” which they argue could be used to deceive voters. Earlier this year, Microsoft, Meta, and Google joined more than a dozen other industry leaders in promising to “help prevent deceptive AI content from interfering with this year’s global elections.”

    Platforms such as TikTok and YouTube that use honor systems may soon be forced to take Meta’s approach, however. Under a provision of the EU’s AI Act, which comes into effect next summer, tech companies will be fined for not detecting and identifying AI-created content, including text “published with the purpose to inform the public on matters of public interest.”




  46. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    Ambassador Yacov Livne has reportedly “changed tone” after initially claiming the bombing of the humanitarian convoy was not a war crime

    Poland said on Friday that Israel’s envoy in Warsaw has apologized for the death of a Polish volunteer killed in an Israeli air strike in Gaza this week.

    Ambassador Yacov Livne was summoned by Warsaw over his “outrageous” remarks earlier this week. The Israeli envoy stated that the incident was not a war crime and accused Poles who think otherwise of anti-Semitism.

    On Monday, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) carried out three consecutive airstrikes on a humanitarian convoy, killing seven foreign nationals working for the relief organization World Central Kitchen (WCK), including 35-year-old Damian Sobol from Poland.

    “I handed over a note of protest to the ambassador. The ambassador apologized for this event, which has no precedent in the history of the civilized world,” Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Andrzej Szejna told a press conference on Friday.

    Livne reportedly informed Szejna that Israel’s top court would conduct a criminal investigation into the incident.

    “There should be an investigation under the supervision of the victims’ countries under criminal law into this event, which bears the hallmarks of murder,” Szejna insisted, adding that Sobol’s family should also be offered compensation.

    “The information we received so far [from Israel] is not satisfactory but we see this meeting as a change of tone,” Szejna said, noting that Livne would not be expelled.

    Read more People leave flowers and candles at aid worker Damien Sobol's vigil in Przemysl, Poland, April 4, 2024. Poland summons Israeli envoy over aid worker’s death

    The Israeli ambassador caused outrage in Poland with a social media post on Tuesday that the “extreme right and left” in Poland were accusing Israel of intentional murder, adding that “antisemites will always remain antisemites.” The diplomat insisted that the deaths of the aid workers were not a war crime but a tragedy, and that the IDF never targets humanitarian groups on purpose.

    Livne should have used the opportunity to speak to the Polish media and “say a simple, human apology,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on Thursday. President Andrzej Duda denounced the ambassador’s “outrageous” remarks and called for an explanation.

    Israel said on Friday that an inquiry into the incident had found serious errors and breaches of standard procedures by the military, with the result that two officers have been dismissed and senior commanders formally reprimanded.

    Israel declared war on Hamas after the Palestinian militant group carried out a surprise attack on Israel on October 7, killing around 1,100 people and taking more than 200 hostages. More than 30,000 Palestinians have since been killed during Israel’s operations in Gaza, according to the local authorities.

  47. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    The 4.8-magnitude quake interrupted a session of the UN Security Council

    A UN Security Council session was interrupted on Friday after the world body’s headquarters in New York began to shake. The culprit was an earthquake under neighboring New Jersey, felt dozens of kilometers away.

    Residents of New York City and the surrounding areas took to social media in alarm as the ground beneath their feet began to tremble.

    Initial reports spoke of a 5.5-magnitude quake near North Plainfield, New Jersey, which could be felt as far away as Pennsylvania. However, the US Geological Survey (USGS) later said the magnitude was just 4.8 and the epicenter was under Whitehouse Station, New Jersey, 30km further to the west.

    There have been no reports of injuries or property damage so far.

    The northeastern US is not known for earthquakes, as it is far from any documented fault lines. The largest known quake in the New York City area was approximately 5.2 in magnitude and was recorded in 1884.

  48. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    The former president cannot cite free speech to dodge racketeering charges, a Georgia judge has ruled

    US Judges in the states of Florida and Georgia have shot down attempts by former President Donald Trump to have two criminal cases against him thrown out of court. The cases pertain to his alleged mishandling of classified documents and efforts to interfere with the 2020 election.

    Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled on Thursday that the former president cannot use his constitutional right to free speech to dodge election interference charges in Georgia. 

    Trump has been charged with state-level racketeering offenses for instructing his campaign staff to find evidence of election fraud by the Democratic Party, and for a taped phone call made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which he asked Raffensperger to “find 1,780 votes,” which would have guaranteed him a razor-thin victory in the state.

    McAfee ruled that this statement was made “in furtherance of criminal activity,” and is therefore not protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. 

    Read more Judge Scott McAfee presides over a hearing last month in the Georgia election case against Donald Trump and 14 associates. Judge dismisses some charges against Trump

    Trump’s lawyer,  Steve Sadow, said in a statement that “President Trump and other defendants respectfully disagree with Judge McAfee’s order and will continue to evaluate their options regarding the First Amendment challenges.”

    While the ruling is a setback for Trump, McAfee handed Trump a minor victory last month when he dismissed three out of 13 charges against the former president and multiple counts against his senior aides and lawyers. Trump has also appealed a decision by McAfee to allow Fulton County District Attorney Fanni Willis to continue prosecuting the case, after it emerged that she benefited financially from her intimate relationship with a lawyer she hired to lead the prosecution.

    Trump is facing three other criminal cases: two federal litigations concerning his alleged mishandling of classified documents and his alleged incitement of the January 6, 2021 riot on Capitol Hill, and a state-level case in New York concerning his ‘hush money’ payments to porn star Stormy Daniels.

    Later on Thursday, the Florida judge overseeing the classified documents case declined a request by Trump to dismiss the charges based on his claim that the Presidential Records Act authorized him to take the documents from the White House to his Mar-a-Lago estate.

    READ MORE: Republican megadonors rally to save Trump – Reuters

    The judge did not rule Trump’s claim true or false, but noted that government prosecutor Jack Smith had made “no reference to the Presidential Records Act” in his indictment of Trump, giving the former president’s lawyers no legal grounds to invoke it.

    Trump views all four cases as part of an overarching conspiracy by Democrats and their allies to prevent him from contesting this year’s election. In a post to his Truth Social platform on Easter Sunday, Trump condemned the “crooked and corrupt prosecutors and judges that are doing everything possible to interfere with the presidential election of 2024 and put me in prison,” including “deranged Jack Smith” and “sick Fani Willis.”




  49. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    The country will not necessarily make the bloc stronger and may cause a global war, Alessandro Minuto-Rizzo has said

    NATO has significantly benefited from the Ukraine conflict, but allowing the country to join is not advisable, according to Alessandro Minuto-Rizzo, former deputy secretary general of the the US-led military bloc.

    Moscow has cited NATO’s unchecked expansion in Europe as one of the key points of contention with the US and its allies. Its increased presence in Ukraine since a 2014 coup in the country is among the causes of the present hostilities, according to Russian officials. Kiev claims it is protecting Europe from Russia and therefore deserves a place in the bloc.

    The Italian diplomat, who served in NATO from 2001 to 2007, and briefly acted as its head during the transition from Secretary General George Robertson to Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, said he did not believe that allowing Ukraine to join was “the best response” under the circumstances.

    Alessandro Minuto Rizzo (C) greets US Secretary of State Colin Powell (L) during a NATO meeting in 2004. ©  THIERRY MONASSE / AFP

    ”There is no need at all to have Ukraine as a NATO member. I’m not sure that it will support the strength of the alliance – and also because it is controversial,” he told the British tabloid Sun.

    If Ukraine becomes a NATO member, then immediately you change the character of the war – it will be a war of Russia against NATO countries.

    Moscow perceives the Ukraine conflict as part of a US-led proxy war against Russia. NATO is a geopolitical tool, according to Russian officials, which Washington uses to enforce its goals on European members. The Americans intend to continue hostilities “to the last Ukrainian,” the Kremlin has claimed.

    Read more Polish President Andrzej Duda Poland calls for 50% increase in minimum spending for NATO

    Minuto-Rizzo asserted that the conflict has made NATO stronger by invigorating it and pushing two previously neutral Western nations – Finland and Sweden – into its ranks. Collectively, the 32 present members have far more weapons, soldiers and funding than Russia does, he pointed out, so there is no threat of Moscow initiating a direct conflict.

    ”I can’t understand why Russia would invade Romania or Poland for instance,” he said. Kiev and its backers have maintained that by arming Ukraine, the West is defending itself from Russian aggression.

    But Russia could “upgrade” hostilities, for example, in response to a deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine, potentially resulting in a world war, Minuto-Rizzo added.

    Regarding President Vladimir Putin, the former official characterized him as moderate and willing to compromise, in contrast to some other Russian politicians. In 2021, Moscow offered the West a diplomatic way to defuse tension over NATO expansion and Ukraine, but the appeal was rejected by Washington.

  50. Site: RT - News
    1 year 1 month ago
    Author: RT

    The former US president claims that his rival may have used cocaine and has demanded a drug test before a potential debate

    Former US President Donald Trump has accused his Democratic rival, Joe Biden, of using drugs to get through his State of the Union address last month, and has insisted that he should be tested for drugs before any potential debates.

    Speaking with radio broadcaster Hugh Hewitt on Thursday, Trump claimed that Biden “was higher than a kite” during his speech, and described it as “the worst address I’ve ever seen.”

    He went on to recall last year’s scandal in which the Secret Service discovered a bag of cocaine at the White House, suggesting that Biden may have been “helped some way” to get through the annual address.

    “I watched the State of the Union, he was all jacked up at the beginning, by the end he was fading fast, there’s something going on there,” Trump said.

    A plastic bag containing cocaine was discovered in a phone locker in the West Wing of the White House on July 2, 2023. After launching an investigation, the Secret Service dropped the case after only a few weeks, concluding that it was impossible to determine the owner of the drugs.  

    The move sparked outrage among Biden’s critics, with many suggesting the cocaine may have belonged to the president’s son, Hunter, who has admitted to struggling with substance abuse. 

    Read more A photo of 'Literally Anybody Else' from his campaign website ‘Literally Anybody Else’ announces US presidential campaign

    The White House officially denied any involvement of the Biden family in the case and praised the Secret Service’s “thorough investigation.”

    Nevertheless, Trump has insisted that Biden should be tested for drugs before the two engage in debates ahead of November’s presidential election. The billionaire has previously called on the president to debate him “anywhere anytime.”

    Biden has not yet agreed to any debates with his rival, but said last month that it would depend on Trump’s “behavior.”

    Recent surveys have found that a majority of voters are concerned with the mental capabilities of both Trump and Biden, who are set to face off in the presidential election on November 5. A poll conducted by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research last month found that 63% of American voters do not believe Biden has the mental capacity to serve effectively as president; 57% said the same thing about Trump.

Pages

Subscribe to Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds