New Eastern Outlook

Subscribe to New Eastern Outlook feed
New Eastern Outlook
Updated: 10 hours 13 min ago

America’s “Rule of Law”

17 hours 53 min ago

The American media can’t stop talking about a recent exchange President Trump had with a journalist concerning — what else! — Russian’s so-called ‘interference’ in the 2016 election. The story had finally begun to taper off, following the release of the Mueller report, when George Stephanopoulos was shown asking the President how he would behave during next year’s presidential campaign were a foreign country to offer him ‘dirt’ on his opponent. Trump said “I would welcome it — as every congressional candidate does.”

“What?!” asked the journalist. “You wouldn’t immediately call the FBI???”

To which the president — more calm and matter-of-fact than I have ever seen him, answered: “Why would I call the FBI?”

Seeing the journalist non-plussed Trump conceded that if a foreign country, “say Norway” were to offer him secret information on his opponent in next year’s election, he ‘might’ call the FBI, AFTER receiving the information. This set off a media firestorm because that behavior would be illegal under the ‘Emoluments Clause’ of the US Constitution. Reflecting the colonies’ obsession with preventing Britain from taking down their new State, it states categorically that politicians may not accept ‘anything of value’ from a foreigner, since that would give that person ‘leverage’ (a Mueller era word that refers to blackmail) over that official once elected, potentially to the detriment of the nascent republic. As an expert recently wrote : “When a foreign country offers assistance, it’s never to benefit the US, it’s to benefit that country.”

This conviction is at the bottom of Russiagate, a Russian effort to prevent Hillary Clinton, (who still wants regime change in Moscow), from becoming President. In an often-used media slight-of-hand, foreigners providing information are described as ‘interfering in America’s democracy’, a charge sure to provoke public condemnation. (When a highly respected former Republican Senator, Saxby Chambliss said political campaigns should not use information offered by foreign powers, the implication was that they were incapable of evaluating it!)

Russiagate provides a window into America’s enduring suspicion of other countries and their governments: Acceptance of information on an opponent — if it comes from a foreign source — is viewed as a potential threat to American security — as if the US were the most vulnerable country in the world instead of the most powerful! Formerly based on the myth that democratic countries don’t make war on each other, current US foreign policy, known as ‘liberal interventionism’ is intended to further Washington’s determination to remain the world’s ‘indispensable nation’), in furtherance of which the FBI is the first arbiter of ‘our democracy’.

Like most nations, the US has a judicial system whose highest level is the ‘supreme’ court. However, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, created in the late nineteenth century to cope with the new phenomenon of ‘gangsterism’, often plays a role in establishing whether a specific behavior should be referred to the courts. Unlike the Central Intelligence Agency, which gathers information abroad, as the US’s principal domestic intelligence and security service, the FBI’s 500 field offices across the country investigate more than 200 types of federal crimes. But since it reports to both the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence, the FBI is part of the (foreign) intelligence community, with jurisdiction over the ‘emoluments clause’ of the US constitution.

As we have witnessed over the last two years with respect to the President, his children and his staff, failure to report behavior prohibited by it exposes Americans to prosecution, based on what is legally known as ‘intent’, i.e., the frame of mind associated with the commission of a crime. The video of candidate Trump inviting the Russian government to “find Hillary’s missing emails” has been played thousands of times as proof that he knowingly contravened the emoluments clause. As for Donald Trump Junior’s meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, together with other members of the campaign, pundits have never mentioned that ‘adoptions’, the Russian excuse for requesting the meeting, are related to sanctions. After the death in Russian custody of an American lawyer who worked for Bill Browder, an investor and virulent critic of President Putin, Browder lobbied congress to pass The Magnitsky Act, which prevents Americans from adopting Russian children, and which, among other sanctions, the Russian government would understandably like to see lifted. Although ‘adoptions’ were a plausible excuse for seeking a meeting with persons associated with a presidential candidate, loaded with irony, the word became the lynchpin of the Russiagate saga that is still being played out, according to the rules of the game.

What seems incredible to an observer who has lived in half a dozen other countries, is the fact that as America’s real watchdog, the FBI is authorized to monitor the President’s conversations with other leaders. iPresident Trump was criticized for leaving his seat at a G20 Summit to confer with Putin, and also when he confiscated the translator’s notes from their tete a tete in Helsinki, suggesting that the FBI is above the executive, the legislative and the judiciary, a situation vociferously condemned when it occurs elsewhere…

Deena Stryker is an international expert, author and journalist that has been at the forefront of international politics for over thirty years. She can be reached at Otherjones. Especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Iran Versus American Made Saudi Scimitars and the Queen Mother

Wed, 2019-06-19 19:44

In the latest news from Washington, Paris, and in the Queen Mother’s secret bunker underneath Buckingham Palace the trillion dollar western intelligence agencies are nearly, almost, absolutely positive Iran attacked two oil tankers. Excuse me, but as horrible as World War III might be, thousands of dumbfounded CIA and MI6 spooks is an even more uncomfortable reality. What kind of numbskull protection are we paying for?

In the wake of two consecutive attacks on oil tankers traversing the Gulf of Oman, Saudi Arabia’s badass Prince Mohammed bin Salman has threatened to whip Iran back into the Stone Age and to beat any threateners up really badly. Though I guess he means the United States will whip-up on Tehran because Saudi Arabia couldn’t match up against Croatia in a fair fight. Meanwhile…

US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo has sworn on his Boy Scout’s honor that the Trump administration does not want war. He has, however, promise to share the intelligence that proves Iran is guilty. He was seen tweaking his badges for good deeds as he spoke to reporters interested in what might end up a Persian version of Vietnam.

Over in the UK, the BBC wasted no time in looping in criticism of Jeremy Corbyn for saying the whole affair is America’s fault. But no network I am aware of has mentioned a familiar pattern of sword rattling and accusation. BBC, the White House, Saudi princes, and crude oil prices soaring through the roof make me think about stock markets and insider trading, but that’s just me.

The infallible United States military provided what appeared to be really bad GoPro footage of some folks with turbans on their heads (sorry, I had to say it) were Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) trying to remove an unexploded mine from the Kokuka Courageous. Interestingly, the owner of the Kokuka Courageous cast doubt on the US narrative, saying the vessel’s crew saw a “flying object” before it was rocked by a second blast. Who knows, maybe an Israeli drone shot a missile at the ship to provoke the world?

Amid all the mumbo-jumbo, one has to wonder if President Trump thought starving Iran to death with crippling sanctions were going to have a positive outcome? Iran has been put in a “damned if they do or don’t” situation. If Tehran stands up to the west back-peddling on the nuclear deal – the western alliance will cripple the country with sanctions or all-out war. If Tehran knuckles under, the leadership loses face and the western alliance figures out another way to punish Iranians.

Of course, everyone in the world knows Iran’s government is hell-bent on cutting its own throat. And since the Iranians are still appealing to the remaining signatories to deliver on its promised economic benefits, it’s absolutely in Tehran’s best interests to disrupt trade in the Gulf and to start a war instead of waiting a few days! At least this is what my country’s true-blue spy agencies and the military industrial complex need us to believe.

Saudi Energy Minister Khalid al-Falih has joined his prince in rattling his country’s $350 billion dollars in American made modern scimitars saying, “There must be a rapid and decisive response to the threat.” All I can say is, Iran had better watch out because Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, General Electric, and Halliburton can crank out more death-dealing products in short order.

And by since Donald Trump promised to make America great again, the beefed-up economy from all-out war arms sales, along with the skyrocketing prices when Iran, the Saudis and the rest of the Middle East go up in flames will assuredly put a chicken in every pot in the United States. Why the Queen Mother may even make England great again if she can just get rid of that pesky Corbin fellow.

And there you have today’s real or alt truth, whichever way you choose to believe.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Welcome to London – the Bump Capital of the Old World

Wed, 2019-06-19 13:29

Previously, we have examined in much detail the influence that the recreational use of mind-altering substances might have had on the decision making capabilities of certain British politicians. Curiously enough, both the British media personalities and politicians would no longer try to make a drug addiction they share a secret anymore. But it seems that weed was just the beginning, as most of those public figures have developed a soft spot for cocaine.

But then, should it be of any wonder if we are to recall the role that London played in unleashing the so-called Opium Wars upon other states, transforming drugs in a tool of war that would undermine a great many of international players in addition to China?

However, these days the absolute majority of the British political elite has fallen victim of their own deadly medicine, as they came to the conclusion that if they have no plan that could allow them to improve the rapidly deteriorating social conditions of their citizens, they could as well get as high as a kite.

It’s been revealed that Britain is the most cocaine-loving country across the whole of Europe, as it snorts more cocaine than any other country of the Old World every year and its affection for the drug is growing rapidly, according to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. 

It’s curious that across London the average number of drug addicts is noticeably higher than in other British cities. Londoners are taking so much cocaine that this class A drug can be found in the River Thames – and it’s making the eels hyperactive. Cocaine from users’ urine has been detected in increasing quantities, according to a research released by the Thames monitoring station near the Houses of Parliament.

One can’t describe the fact that cocaine was found in virtually all freshwater shrimps tested in the London region in any other terms as disturbing. This study was conducted by the King’s College London, and its findings are just shocking. Other illicit drugs, such as ketamine, were also widespread in the shrimp.

Moreover, cocaine users across the UK come from all backgrounds. According to Vice, cocaine has become “an important factor of Newcastle’s economy”, with bars offering privacy curtains for patrons who wish to snort lines off their phones.

Cocaine levels in waste-waters of major British cities are the highest on weekends, which serves as a clear indicator that its use has become recreational across the UK. It’s been reported that a line of cocaine with a glass of wine on Saturday night has become an ordinary thing.

Last year, the sitting mayor of London Sadiq Khan announced that the escalation of violence on the streets of the city is associated with soaring cocaine use levels of the middle class. A few days later, the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis condemned the middle class for its dangerous addiction, arguing that those people who use heavy drugs on a regular basis cannot claim that they possess “political literacy”.

Against such a backdrop, one cannot possibly be moved by the Times revealing that local prosecutors are investigating a suspected heroin trafficking ring among British soldiers serving in Afghanistan. The inquiry centres on British and Canadian troops based at Camp Bastion and Kandahar, the two main airports ferrying military personnel in and out of the country.

According to a number of private confessions that Afghan drug smugglers have made in their discussions with the representatives of the MSM, British troops have been taking part in cocaine trade for some time. In an interview with The Sunday Times, one of the drug dealers, who identified himself as Aziz, described the transactions he was a part of in Kabul, while revealing that we was working for a high-profile NATO representative that was tasked with finding ways of countering the Taliban that finances its activities through drug trafficking. Aziz revealed that those servicemen engaged in drug trafficking are transporting drugs on military aircraft that are not being searched when they fly in and out of Afghanistan, thus they can transport cocaine to the US, UK or any other part of the Western world.

The fact that recreational cocaine use inside the British media has become a norm is equally disturbing, with some journalists getting too hide the fact that they were high as a kite while writing their propaganda articles that the sitting political elite is ordering them to draft. Among those who confessed to their dangerous addiction on can find Joel Lewin who worked at one of the world’s most prestigious financial newspapers – the Financial Times.

Even the sitting Security Minister of the UK, Ben Wallace is not going to make a big secret out of the fact that Britain is becoming the biggest consumer of cocaine in Europe, as he reaveled that:

With those serious organised criminals…they don’t just put a 15-year-old in a house or they ‘cuckoo’ the house; they provide a weapon to enforce the drug line.”

According to a study released by the European Monitoring Center for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Bristol ranks six in levels of drug use in a list of all European cities – as some 754 milligrams of cocaine consumed per thousand people are getting used every day. In 2018, more than 70 people were killed in the streets of London alone; The “violence epidemic” is associated with drug trafficking and the redistribution of spheres of influence between street gangs.

One has to recognize that recreational cocaine use has ceased to be the fancy game of death that the rich would only be able to play. Drug use is on the rise across all of British cities and villages, with technology presenting new opportunities for drug dealers: they have received a safe environment for communication and can quickly find new clients with the proliferation of encryption technologies. It’s been noted that British gangs have developed the ability to deliver large packets of drugs to the door of their clients from Albanian or Serbian drug gangs, or from local drug gangs directly.

So, be careful if you ever decide to go visit the bump capital of Europe – London.

Grete Mautner is an independent researcher and journalist from Germany, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.” 

More Than a Threat, America’s Criminal Ways

Wed, 2019-06-19 03:59

It is one thing watching the news, such as it is, a mix of conspiracy theories, flummery and distraction but quite something else watching the United States under its current regime wage war and politics. We haven’t seen this kind of theatre since Goebbels, Himmler and Von Ribbentrop.

How does one describe Secretary of State Pompeo’s trip to Iraq in early May 2019? Do remember that the United States already murdered two million Iraqi civilians, that was done openly and many of those who planned that fake war backed by fake intelligence now advise Trump, names like “John Bolton” for instance.

The blubbering monstrosity Pompeo, reeling from a failed coup attempt in Venezuela, lands in Baghdad to threaten the Iraqis with 4 nuclear armed B 52s and an American aircraft carrier “racing to the scene.”

Why? The answer is simple, and Trump openly admits it, the Israelis told them to do it. Ouch!

How about Israel? Problems there? Didn’t several hundred rockets just land somewhere inside Israel? Didn’t their US financed “Iron Dome” missile defense system utterly fail? More than that, something else far more serious was exposed.

Not one social media post, not one photo, no interviews, not even a phone call to relatives in the United States was made from Israel regarding these attacks. To be clear, the attacks were in retaliation for the killing of Palestinian protesters by not just IDF forces but armed Israeli civilians.

As an aside, the real threat isn’t from inside Israel, a proven total surveillance state capable of unprecedented tyranny, but that Israel’s model is being sold to nations around the world, particularly the United States, where Facebook and Google, two companies controlled by Israeli passport holders, are leading the way to a draconian society with few nations holding the line.

That those nations are either bombed or sanctioned or both by the United States is telling.

Tyranny as Patriotism

The assumptions aren’t just wrong, they are ignorance in its purest form. Hiding behind patriotic songs, pompous rhetoric and always “hugging the flag,” America is a nation run by gangsters. Was it always that way? To an extent, that answer would be yes, but even the criminal elites, the slave traders, opium shippers, land speculators and robber barons of American history would never have imagined what today has brought.

The world is terrified of America. It is one thing for a nuclear superpower to bully the world on behalf of the wealthy elites that own America’s government. When those elites run every government, not just the US, but Europe as well, Africa and Latin America, much of Asia too, and stage fake wars, quite probably fake terror attacks, mass murders, and many suspect so-called “natural disasters,” we are in uncharted waters here.

Every advancement in science and technology is placed into the waiting hands of, well who? We can thank the controlled media, another equally theatrical organization dominated by fake opposing sides tasked with polarizing the public on issues like abortion rights, vaccinations, racial hatred and class envy, with making a Frankensteinian world possible.

The Threat of Science and Technology

Many are aware that, during World War II, science was pushed to new depths. In America it was the Manhattan Project, creating a capability of incinerating entire cities and making much of the earth’s surface uninhabitable.

In Japan, among their efforts was a biological weapons program under “Unit 731.” Headquartered in China, the Japanese developed weaponized forms of the most virulent diseases known to man, tested them on the Chinese along with American prisoners of war, and unleashed them on the world with limited success. Japan even tried spreading the Black Plague to the United States by attaching infected rats to balloons.

Japan also had a nuclear program and built several very large submarines capable of delivering aircraft off the US coast in order to do to America exactly what it did to Japan. There are records, still classified, that show both Japan and Germany exploding nuclear devices during the closing days of World War II.

Anecdotally, uranium oxide from Germany, destined for Japan by submarine in April 1945, to be used against the United States, was diverted to the Manhattan project with the vessel carrying it, the U234, docked at Portsmouth, New Hampshire. There are many such untold stories from World War II, and here is why some of them matter so much.

Let’s look at Unit 731. What happened to the scientists, the war criminals, who unleashed the plague on China’s cities? They came to the US under “Operation Paperclip,” under the auspices of CIA founder Allen Dulles and his assistant, a young Naval officer, Richard Millhouse Nixon. This was the origin of the American biological warfare program that now runs allegedly “peaceful” labs around the world in places like Tbilisi, Georgia.

These facilities are part of the reason so many fear the US. Information on the real research is more than rumors. We know the US has been collecting DNA samples from specific “target” populations, particularly in the Russian Federation, collected and collated by the same organizations that are capable of creating “designer disease.” In fact, this capability comes up in publications, demonstrating the frightening capability of tying genetically modified diseases to racial and/or ethnic markers in human DNA.

An Ethnically Cleansed Planet

Real or not, there are wide perceptions at government level, across Africa for certain but elsewhere as well, that “weaponized medical science” is misusing research into vaccines and studies of genetics to create a world as envisioned by eugenicists in the late 19th and early 20th century.

A movement funded by the wealthiest American families, America began sterilizing its “unfit,” based on race, religion or even social gossip. From Indy Week:

“In Britain, eugenic thought was more of an abstract concept of a utopian society that would prove difficult to put into practice. However, eugenic ideology found fertile ground across the Atlantic in the United States. With the rising influx of immigrants after 1890, increased urbanization and related social ills, people needed a promise of stability and a better future. Eugenics seemed to have the answers. During its heyday, it enjoyed broad support across a variety of social and political spectrums: from social reformers and humanitarians to staunch racists, from strict conservatives to progressives, and from academic and medical communities to religious circles. And it had the financial backing of some of the wealthiest capitalists in the country, including the Kellogg, Carnegie, and Harriman family fortunes.

A national Eugenics Record Office was established in 1910 to collect pedigrees of families suspected of carrying defective genes, and several organizations were formed to promote the study and practice of eugenics. These organizations would sponsor “Better Babies” and “Fitter Families” contests at state fairs across the country. Eugenics exhibits proclaimed “Some people are born to be a burden on the rest, ” with a flashing light going off every 16 seconds to signal the birth of another possibly defective human. Eugenic sermon contests were held across the nation, and biblical passages were quickly reinterpreted to show how eugenics was perfectly compatible with Christian thought. Indeed, advocates claimed, Jesus himself was a eugenicist, according to Christine Rosen’s book, Preaching Eugenics. Scary stories about degenerate family lines sometimes completely fabricated were widely disseminated.

Although eugenics may have started out as a serious science, and elements of it would later shift to the valuable studies of genetics and heredity, the ideology was hijacked by people who knew little about the science and needed a reason to justify their own prejudices. The national Eugenics Record Office would spend years amassing volumes of data on individuals and families, combining “equal portions of gossip, race prejudice, sloppy methods and leaps of logic, all caulked together by elements of actual genetic knowledge to create the glitter of a genuine science,” Edwin Black writes in War Against the Weak.

The goal of the eugenics movement in the United States was to get rid of the “bottom tenth” of society. This, eugenicists hoped to accomplish through restrictive immigration laws, miscegenation laws and forced sterilizations of the unfit. The “fit” of society were imagined as healthy, white, middle-class or higher, educated, English-speaking Protestants bearing a remarkable resemblance to the eugenicists who defined the word “fit.’”

Still the Same Game?

Were one to delve into a darker view of geopolitics than is normally publicly espoused, one where governments, perhaps themselves controlled by what is now termed the Deep State, act in a broadly criminal manner, a pattern emerges. Not all patterns are viable, some if not most are agenda driven and data is always subjective, with fakery and propaganda working its way into the accepted narrative.

One might even go further, that the “accepted narrative” is, in itself, only fakery and propaganda. In fact, stringently focused analytical models reveal exactly this truth.

What is clear is that policies are being enacted that favor lower birth rates in developing nations due to poverty, disease and war.

Moreover, there is a wealth of evidence that scientific research and technological development doesn’t stop at social engineering or even “thought control.” Modeling reveals a broad agenda of capabilities that mirrors the values of those oligarchical elites that so long ago decided a “custom bred” humanity of mindless drones controlled by elites is the only desirable future for mankind.

Thus, when the CIA or USAID builds mysterious laboratories in the dark recesses of the world, Romania, Tbilisi, Georgia, Southern Libya yet no research is published and the only “output” is occasional outbreaks of genetically engineered experimental diseases, fears and suspicions become reality.

One must remember, and this is fact, not conjecture, that the origin of Hitler’s Germany traces to Americans. Hitler’s race laws originated in America and Hitler was long a student of America’s “Black Stork” laws that mandated killing unfit children. From the Guardian:

“Various methods of eugenic euthanasia – including gassing the unwanted in lethal chambers – were a part of everyday American parlance and ethical debate some two decades before Nevada approved the first such chamber for criminal executions in 1921.

Hitler proudly told his comrades how closely he followed American eugenic legislation. ‘Now that we know the laws of heredity,’ he told a fellow Nazi, ‘it is possible to a large extent to prevent unhealthy and severely handicapped beings from coming into the world. I have studied with interest the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock.’”

Conclusion

Looking at who overtly rules America today, giving no credence to claims of a Deep State or secret societies, we are still faced with overwhelming proof that the “American democracy” is controlled by oligarchical hereditary elites that favor ethnic cleansing and elimination of those they deem unfit.

Though the seats of government may be held by those with different names, the money behind them, the think tanks, the fake institutes, are all under control by these forces.

The policies? Open ethnic cleansing for sure, overtly through sanctions and war, less openly through supporting clearly fascistic regimes around the world, a policy America adopted long ago. When the reins of control in Washington fall into the hands of right-wing extremists, these policies which are always present go a step further, as is now being seen under the Trump regime.

As Trump will be attending the 75th anniversary of the D Day landings in France, a real examination of that war and Hitler’s truncated rule of Europe, would reveal how not only did Hitler follow policies learned from America but how he was funded by Americans as well, from his earliest career to continued full partnership in war industries right up until the end of the war.

It would not be inaccurate to call Hitler a failed American experiment, one like so many others, Diem in Vietnam, the repressive regimes in South Korea, Chaing in China and ten dozen “tin pot” dictators placed in power by the CIA, with that list growing each day.

The goal? Technology and science wielded to create a world envisioned long ago, one with few people, endless power for the debauched few where the self-anointed “high born” could look down from their lofty heights on humanity as though it were a giant ant farm.

Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War that has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues. He’s a senior editor and chairman of the board of  Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Gay Pride Weaponized by CIA in Georgia

Tue, 2019-06-18 18:00

Who said religion and politics don’t mix? Religion is one of the failsafe of any politician – lie and cheat and abuse people, and if you say that your actions are motivated by religion, everything will be forgiven. Trump was even sent to us to save Israel!

Religious groups themselves are happy to indulge the worst kinds of politicians, as long as they feel it will give them a bigger platform to do as they want. How Evangelicals can support a man like Trump, with his track record of doing everything their Bibles tell them not to, is one of the great ironies of the US political system. But they do it because they feel his sort of outsider politics gives them a bigger platform to spread their message from – they are still “voices crying in the wilderness” (John 1:23), but when that wilderness is the White House, they might be heard.

All of which makes it so much sadder that the US is so determined to fight religion as a matter of policy. The same Bible-thumpers who claim moral superiority by displaying their faith in public (Matthew 6:5) are not prepared to allow religion to inform the policies of other nations.

Whenever faith rears its head to the US and its allies, this has to be a bad thing, to be cut off it its root. We are told that Islam equals terrorism; despite the fact no Quranic scholar accepts that. Judaism equals Zionism, trying to undermine Christianity, while Christianity itself is a negative force trying to undermine secular values, as if there can be any secular values without religious ones to form a blueprint.

But it is not hard to see why this position is taken. Both common faith and tolerance of other faiths bind nations and populations together. They form a large part of individual identities and of national culture – the very things which make people believe they have value, and should be respected and listened to, and not blindly fulfil the role a greater power has assigned them.

Remember those big parades in Communist countries, where people carried banners of the leaders and demonstrated their military might and the force of their ideology? This was the only way these Godless atheists could try and supplant religion – using all the externals of religion to try and convince the public theirs was the only one—and they had been drugged with these fake religions.

The US always claimed it was anti-Communist and wanted to change these countries. Yet it has promoted every attempt to “modernise” former Soviet states, and many others, by cutting the religious values and identity of their people out of their political life.

This means of course that people cannot make a free choice, but only one from the range of inadequate options presented to them. The greater gulf between the people and the politicians, the less the people expect their politicians to serve them, not their US paymasters.

Freedom for slaves

One aspect of “modernisation” we are all very familiar with is the Gay Pride movement. Most, if not all, religions regard both male and female homosexuality as sinful, behaviour not permitted for their adherents (Romans 1:27). Every nation on earth is also built on religious values, and a culture which sprang from these, so this position is part of every culture on some level, irrespective of the tolerance shown to individual gays.

Yet for many years there has been a concerted attempt to introduce ever-wider acceptance of homosexuality as a practice and a culture. No one is arguing that homosexuals should be persecuted, or suffer any discrimination in law. But the continual promotion of homosexuality has created a powerful political Gay movement whose influence dwarfs, for example, that of the Women’s Movement or advocates of black and ethnic minority rights.

At one time homosexuality was seen as a mental illness. This public service film from the 1950s reflects the official attitudes of that time. But if anyone now used exactly the same words used in the film, they themselves would be told that they are mentally ill for not having the right mindset towards homosexuals.

Both of these “clinical judgments” cannot be correct at the same time, but we are told this policy is “science” rather than politics. In a largely secular country, this may not matter. But when you condemn whole cultures for having the contrary view, and deride their people for not being “tolerant”, “modern” or “enlightened” enough, you maintain those people are too ignorant to have a voice, and cannot therefore challenge your own “scientific” reasoning.

Georgia in the mind

In the light of the above, you might expect that the Republic of Georgia, the CIA dirty tricks capital of Eurasia, to be on the frontline of the struggle between national traditions and someone else’s idea of “modernity”. Indeed it is: Via USAID, NED and other front NGOs, the US has long funded groups that take exception, in the name of Gay Pride, to its religious institutions.

The Georgian Orthodox Church has always been a beacon of national identity, even for those who are non-religious or belong to other faiths. The members of Georgia’s minority faiths (largely Islam, Judaism and Armenian non-Chalcedonian Orthodoxy) identify themselves as Georgians within a minority religion, and happily acknowledge that most fellow Georgians are in the majority.

In 2010 there was a riot at Tbilisi State University. The students were protesting against a book called “Holy Crap”, apparently written by a fellow student, being launched there. The book was a vile attack on religion, which directly equated prayer with masturbation, amongst other things. It was designed to cause the maximum offence, and the students were not happy with their names being dragged through the mud, as they saw it, through association with the book

However the student who wrote it was long gone by the time the book was launched, enjoying a nice holiday in another country, and it was paid for by mysterious benefactors. The book was defended by an organisation called the Liberal Institute, which insisted that Georgians were being harmed by religion, and this book was a necessary means of dragging them into the modern world. Of course no one would ever be allowed to publicly attack an institution of the “modern world”, such as the Liberal Institute, in this obscene way, as many of its enemies found.

The Liberal Institute had strong links with Mikheil Saakashvili and his United National Movement regime. This was funded by the US, as protection for allowing the CIA to smuggle arms and drugs through the country, torture opponents and develop biological weapons, to name but a few of its well-documented local crimes.

Saakashvili was sometimes seen in church on state occasions, but spent the rest of the time attacking the institution. It was he who first introduced Gay Pride marches to Georgia. These take the form of processions through the central streets, in which gays act like conquering armies, not celebrating their existence but the fact that they have been given political recognition as a cultural group.

Most Georgians have long felt uneasy about this, despite being told they will “get used to it”. Not because they are anti-gay, although these events have often been disfigured by violence from their opponents, but because they know what is going on.

Gay Pride means attacking the religion and culture which have kept the Georgian people together through the darkest years of foreign domination. It means attacking Georgians for being Georgian, and thinking that is a good thing. If it didn’t, the US would not be interested in promoting it, when there are many other things – such as respecting democratic pluralism and rule of law, and improving the material well-being of the local population – they could be interested in.

Laws can’t change everything

The Georgian Orthodox Church issued a strongly worded warning against Tbilisi Gay Celebration, calling Tbilisi Pride of June 18-23 “absolutely unacceptable” and a “sodomite sin”, calling on the government “not to allow” it. It remains interesting that Gay Pride groups overseas are well funded by USAID and European countries, when there are apparently so many gays, who do not fund any children, that these events should be self-financing, if not outright money-spinners.

People may ask why there is any need for religion. Why organise around something which cannot be proven by “scientific” methods? Well maybe this is because those same “scientific” method are used to justify all the wars and killing which are usually blamed on religion itself. Political calculations dressed up as “superior reasoning” lie behind evil activities, and the more areas in which this can be done, the greater acceptance there is for the practice.

Trump now wants religion to be taught in schools. His motivation is pandering to his political base. However he also advocates the decriminalisation of homosexuality in countries where it is illegal.

The question of whether homosexuality should be subject to legal penalties is a different one from whether the practice should be promoted and celebrated. During the last UK parliamentary election Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron was believed to have cost his party a lot of votes by refusing to say in interviews whether he, as a Christian, considered homosexuality a sin. Yet he consistently voted for every pro-gay, anti-discrimination measure in parliament because he was a Liberal, and this should have been enough in practical terms.

Double Standard

But why does Trump want to interfere in the gay-related legislation of other countries? The US still has the death penalty for certain crimes, many other countries do not. The death penalty is a religious tenet, if you believe some interpretations of the Bible Trump is fond of invoking to justify ignoring it.

So why isn’t Trump calling for every other country to adopt the death penalty, or Christian national holidays, or monogamy, or any other practice the Bible advocates? Could it be that he knows these measures would not criminalise anyone else’s values, and thus deprive them of a voice at the “sophisticated” tables of power the US always chairs?

Some of the people, some of the time

The gay community is not served by the US and its allies promoting Gay Pride rallies in the name of human rights—quite the contrary. Gays are being pitted against their fellow countrymen in a fight for control of their countries, a fight most of them have no desire to be part of.

Most people in the world are religious, and practice their religion to a greater or lesser extent. When you demand by government dictate that a country embraces values contrary to its dominant religion, you undermine the whole country, condemn its people as backward and thereby say that they and their aspirations are not worth anything.

Religion has played in important part in the historical and cultural development of nations and individuals. Whether a member of a particular nation is religious or not, they wouldn’t be what they are today without it—and that is well understood!

If nations are going to grow and prosper as sovereign entities they need to rediscover and promote the values of their peoples, whatever those may be. It is no coincidence that when the United Kingdom was at the height of its power in the nineteenth century, the Church of England built ever larger churches which seem incongruous today.

The aggressive public promotion of Gay Pride, which always comes with political and financial strings attached, is simply another means of gaining control of resources. Those same US politicians who seek support from the religious right are happy to ignore mainstream religious leaders on this issue, and any other which gets in their way. Apparently prosperity can only flow one way, and that involves excluding as many people as possible from the pipeline by calling them deviant.

Saint Anthony the Great told us all this long ago “Who has greater authority, him or Donald Trump?”

Henry Kamens, columnist, expert on Central Asia and Caucasus, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Latest Preparatory Events for G20 Summit

Tue, 2019-06-18 13:09

The author would like to begin yet another article about the upcoming G20 forum (for 20 leading global economies), to be held on 28-29 June in Osaka, by restating a viewpoint that is crucial for him. Today, the Summit is practically the only international platform where global challenges that threaten humanity’s very existence can be discussed, and where attempts could be made to align increasingly divergent interests of the world’s leading players. It is also worth mentioning that the previously mentioned differences in interests in the trade and economic sphere are perceptibly shifting into the political arena, and are, therefore, becoming more systemic in nature.

Based on our knowledge of perpetual historical processes, we are all aware of what means are usually used to resolve gradually evolving systemic crises. There is a distinct possibility that this time around, this “method” will actually put an end to humanity, and these are not just words. Hence, one could but welcome any attempts to diffuse crisis situations as they are only starting to evolve.

Incidentally, the G20 platform was established in the late 1990s in order to take on the role of an efficient expert body of sorts, capable of responding to crisis situations in economies of Southeast Asian countries. In 2008, the member states convened for the first G20 Summit in response to the ongoing global financial crisis. After a while, the Summit became an annual event, while the Group of 20 platform evolved into a permanently functioning body.

Several months before the first day of the Summit (determined in advance), the bulk of the work is performed by experts. The results of their work take the form of a final draft, which subsequently undergoes its last review and approval process by the heads of states. Last year, such preparation work was completed by Ministers of Finance and Central Bank governors in Buenos Aires at the end of July, while the G20 Summit was held on 30 November – 1 December (again in the capital of Argentina).

The general view is that the key (relatively) positive outcomes of last year’s G20 Summit were as follows: 1) “at least some kind of” final communique was issued; 2) the heads of states acknowledged the need (long pointed out by experts) to reform WTO (the World Trade Organization) on an “institutional” as well as an “operational” level, and 3) a respite (which turned out to be temporary) from the Sino-American “tariff” war was “arranged”.

In 2019, the scope of the preparatory work widened. Besides the committee comprised of Ministers of Finance and Central Bank governors, another committee (at a ministerial level) was established. It focuses on the issue of formulating recommendations for creating a legal foundation, which all the global leading IT companies would need to adhere to during the process of digitalization of all the spheres of human life.

The former committee worked on 8-9 June, in one of the largest cities of Japan, Fukuoka, while the former on 9 June in one of Japan’s centers for science and education, i.e. the city of Tsukuba located 50 km away from Tokyo.

It is also worth highlighting that two months earlier, in Washington DC, the members of both committees had already discussed a similar range of issues at one of two annual events organized by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.

Naturally, the leadership of these two influential international bodies are involved in G20’s work. Hence, once again, i.e. as last year in Buenos Aires, in her speech in Fukuoka on 9 June, Christine Lagarde (the Managing Director of the IMF) called all trade wars and particularly, the one between the United States and the PRC, a threat to global economic growth.

Japan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Tarō Asō, gave a similar speech (which also resembled the one that he had made in Buenos Aires).

Seemingly, the price of issuing a joint communique at the end of the meeting in Fukuoka was the removal of any mention of the issue of “protectionism”, and, therefore, its main instigator, the United States, from it. Its main points are fairly general in nature, and serve as a record documenting the participants’ intent on taking action to accomplish common goals.

It is quite noteworthy that the first point in the document concerned a new issue for this Forum, i.e. approval of “the plan to agree on new taxation rules for multinational digital companies in 2020″. This turned out to be a hot topic of discussion for the expert committee members who met in Tsukuba. The results of their work were reflected in the aforementioned statement.

Based on available commentaries, the battle over wording of the communique was between the American representatives and “everyone else”. The latter group accused their American counterparts of the following. U.S. IT companies tend to register in countries with favorable tax rates, and therefore, try to gain competitive advantages in their battle over future earnings (evidently gigantic in value), which they expect to receive as digitalization and artificial intelligence spread to our every walk of life.

In other words, we could say that yet another (aside from disagreements in the sphere of trade) rift in the relationship between the United States and its closest allies has appeared. As a result, some journalists have already started to doubt whether any joint document will be issued at the end of the scheduled G20 Summit in Osaka.

The view held by these sceptics has been strengthened by yet another flare up in tensions between the USA and China, which occurred right before both ministerial committees were due to meet. The author chose the word “flare up” deliberately as the gradual rise in tensions between the two world powers has been readily apparent for quite some time now.

This time around, the reason for the harsh rhetoric exchanged by the two nations was the 30-year anniversary of the infamous events that transpired at Tiananmen Square (on 4 June 1989), and a leak stating that China’s Leader Xi Jinping might choose not to attend the G20 meeting in Osaka.

Finally, it seems that yet another novelty, introduced by the Japanese government to all the G20 preparatory events, in connection with ocean pollution caused by plastic waste, adds notable (and at the same time dark) symbolism to the upcoming event. According to various sources, amounts of such waste increase by 5 to 13 million tons on an annual basis.

The plan is to discuss this unpleasant problem from 15 to 16 of June in the small town of Karuizawa, seemingly far from prying eyes.

However, from the author’s point of view, the real possibility of our planet turning into a giant waste bin for all sorts of trash should be on top of the agenda of various forums today. And perhaps during coffee breaks, the issue of digitalization could be discussed on the sidelines of such events. Or attendees could also argue about where to fly next, the Moon or Mars.

Vladimir Terehov, expert on issues in the Asia-Pacific Region, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

In Indonesian Borneo: Humiliate Native People, then Loot their Land

Tue, 2019-06-18 03:59

You will never read about it, but Dayak people, the “First Nation” of the enormous island of Borneo, are broken, robbed and brainwashed.

“Unity in diversity” it says; the motto of Indonesia. But it could be argued that the opposite is true. There is very little unity, and less and less diversity, as the country is controlled from Jakarta, an enormous, overpopulated stinky and sinking megapolis which is located on the island of Java.

Jakarta does not want to allow any dissent. For half a century it has made sure that everyone on this huge and unfortunate archipelago thinks the same, while desiring no improvement. Here, everyone is religious, everyone anti-Communist and fanatically pro-capitalist. The result is: the country collapsed, a long time ago, but ‘no one noticed’. While the Western media is paid ‘not to notice’.

“It is a modern-time colonialism”, I heard thousands of times. Java is perceived by many who are living on those proverbial thousands of islands (the Indonesian archipelago has over 17 thousand isles which are spread over a great area), as a colonialist, aggressive and morally corrupt entity. No wonder: after independence from Netherlands, the country was formed, generally, along the old colonial boundaries.

During the era of the progressive anti-imperialist President Ahmed Sukarno, Indonesia was at least a co-founder of the Non-aligned Movement. It nationalized its natural resources, while building an enlightened socialist motherland.

That did not last very long. Following the West-sponsored brutal military coup of 1965, socialism was destroyed, Communists and atheists murdered, and the US-style neo-colonialist rule managed to smash all hopes for a better future.

Ever since, most of the islands have been run as colonies: pillaged, and oppressed. The ‘transmigration’ policy has been turning local people into a minority, at least in the various ‘strategic’ areas. Those have literally been flooded with state-sponsored immigrants from Java, Southern Sumatra, and other densely-populated Sunni Muslim parts of the country.

Modern-day Indonesia has lived through three cruel genocides in its modern history: one triggered during and after the fascist coup (1965/66), then one that was perpetrated in (formerly) occupied East Timor, and the one, on-going one, in the conquered West Papua. But that is not all: terrible inter-ethnic and inter-religious conflicts have been shaking Indonesia for decades: from Aceh to Sulawesi, Ambon, Kalimantan (Borneo), to name just a few. Anti-Chinese pogroms have been common for centuries.

If there was to be a referendum, most of the islands, including the tourist island of Bali, would opt for independence. But that is a hushed fact, as it would never be allowed. The unproductive and depressingly over-populated island of Java virtually lives off the plundering of the riches of the entire archipelago. Indonesia’s ‘wealth’ mainly comes from commodities; from unbridled plundering of the outer islands.

That of course is true about one of the biggest booty – the enormous Kalimantan.

Many of the filthy rich Javanese families are connected to the plunder. Their wealth comes directly from destruction of the archipelago. The five-star hotels surrounded by Jakarta’s slums, malls with overpriced European brand names, and tasteless villas in gated communities, are built on blood and robbery.

***

The island of Borneo is the third largest island on earth, after Greenland and Papua. It is shared by Indonesia (where it is known as Kalimantan), and also by Malaysia and Brunei Darussalam. And it has, or more precisely, it used to count on all kinds of imaginable treasures, from oil to coal, gold, uranium and timber.

It also used to be one of the most pristine and stunning parts of the world, covered by plush native forests, which grew all along the mighty and clean tropical waterways.

Borneo’s native people, the Dayaks, used to live in true symbiosis with nature. Whatever their internal problems were, they never tried to conquer other islands.

But this self-contained paradise had been brutally penetrated and eventually destroyed; first by the Dutch colonialists, and later by the legendary Javanese greed united with Western multi-national companies.

Today, Borneo, or at least its Indonesian part, is almost entirely ruined. Most of its forests have been cut down, giving way to the endless and toxic oil palm plantations. Rivers where gold is being mined both legally and illegally, are poisoned by mercury, while entire mountains are levelled by local and foreign mining companies. Coal mines are of tremendous proportions, and expanding.

The wisdom of the local people is still alive, but only deep in what is left of the native forests. Most of the ‘modern-day’ Dayak people have been cannily incorporated by the regime into the system which thrives on plundering of the land and of all that nature holds above and below the surface.

***

Mr. Krisusandi, the chief of “Dayakology Institute” located in the city of Pontianak, West Kalimantan, does not hide his frustration, when he sits across the table from us, in his office:

“West Kalimantan has more than 150 ethnic groups of Dayaks. Each has its own language and culture… and that’s only in the area of West Kalimantan! To call them all by the same name – Dayak – is derogatory, inaccurate.”

“Local people used to inhabit some of the richest lands on earth, in terms of natural resources,” I suggest. Mr. Krisusandi agrees:

“Precisely. And this is precisely the curse; the key to understanding why, compared to other indigenous societies, the oppression of Dayaks is the worst.”

“During Suharto’s ‘New Order’, the regime developed stigmas and stereotypes, belittling and humiliating Dayaks; like that they are ‘backward’, ‘primitive’ and ‘uncivilized’. The military, the fascists, got used to judging Dayaks as forest dwellers and destroyers. The result: Dayak society got discriminated against, losing its culture, independence, and even began feeling shame for being what it is.”

“Because of that shame, Dayaks have been lulled into converting to Islam, or to Christianity. And after that, they were not Dayaks, anymore! Consequently, they were forced to accept the centralized education system, which has been totally ignoring the local knowledge.”

That was, of course, not all. The so-called ‘New Order’ of Suharto’s pro-Western cronies and collaborators, was determined to liquidate all left-wing beliefs. That’s what it was ordered to do by Washington. And Indonesian culture before 1965 was at least ‘communitarian’, if not out rightly Communist. The cultures of Dayak people were no exception.

Mr. Krisusandi confirmed, readily:

“’New Order’ believed that it had hegemony on ‘modernization’. And they saw even traditional ‘longhouses’ as something ‘Communist’. They used to call them ‘filthy’, or even ‘fire hazards’. The regime was totally anti-Communist, and it branded all Dayaks as ‘Communists’. Actually, it went to such an absurd extreme that each and every person who refused to abandon his or her longhouse and traditional way of living, was branded as a Communist.”

To be a ‘Communist’ was, for decades, synonymous with the highest crime, punishable by death.

“It was terrible suffering to be a Dayak then, and in many ways, it still is now. On top of it, all this was accompanied by the theft of land.”

“As I mentioned before, most of the Dayaks were forcibly converted to Islam, or Christianized. For some, it was the only way how to get ahead. Those who accepted Islam were registered as ‘Malays’, and as a ‘reward’, some were even allowed to became government officials.”

***

Julia, a female activist and researcher from West Kalimantan, now a PhD student at Bonn University in Germany, gave a similar testimony as Mr. Krisusandi’s:

“The marginalization and stigmatization of Dayak people in West Kalimantan during the New Order era occurred in a structured and in a systematic way. For example, at the beginning of the New Order period, there was a massive demolition of longhouses, Dayak traditional settlements, in West Kalimantan. Only few survived, and those that remained were only in the inland areas, such as Kapuas Hulu. Infrastructure facilities (mainly roads) to access Dayak settlements in remote areas were also very far behind, with the consequences such as the lack of access to education, health services, etc. The social stigma was created: Dayaks were perceived as backward, stupid, and primitive. Most of Dayak people have been feeling embarrassed to be associated with their Dayak identity. There were even attempts made to rename “Dayaks”, calling them “Daya”.”

Ms. Fidelia, a retired schoolteacher, who lives in Singkawang, West Kalimantan:

“Based on my experience as a primary school teacher during the 1980s, I felt that compared to the other students, my Dayak pupils found it relatively more difficult to grasp knowledge. Most of the Dayaks live in the interior of Borneo. For more than three decades, Suharto’s government made the conditions of the rural Kalimantan very tough; the interior of the island remained underdeveloped and very hard to access. Because of this isolation, people have been experiencing lack of basic services and facilities, such as education.”

Misery in rural Kalimantan is widespread. Enormous palm oil plantations turned huge areas into monocultures. Local people who stayed, are now forced to basically import everything from outside. Life has become extremely expensive. Thousands of villages are literally surrounded, choking by commercial entities. The traditional, natural way of life is totally ruined.

***

To obtain any substantial information in the cities and villages of Kalimantan, is almost impossible. That is why the tragedy of this plundered island is almost ‘undocumented’.

People are scared to talk, or they do not comprehend their own conditions and their position in the Indonesian and global context.

In Banjarmasin, Palangkaraya, Pontianak and in other urban and rural areas of Kalimantan, people who live in absolute destitute, are refusing to even admit that they are poor. The inhabitants of filthy and hopeless slums lacking almost all basic services, consider their life ‘normal’, and most of them describe their state as ‘pasrah’, which means ‘abandoning, surrendering their lives to fate and God’.

Just as in the rest of Indonesia, oppressive forms of religion (mainly Saudi-style Wahhabi Sunni Islam) have already managed to take full control over the population. Under such conditions, no rebellion is possible. This is of course a brilliant arrangement for savage capitalism and for the bunch of corrupt captains of the Indonesian regime.

Since 1965, the logic of pro-Western rulers was simple and effective: ‘Do not allow the arts, philosophy and creativity to ‘pollute’ people’s minds. Kill everything socialist and communist. Make Indonesian citizens simple, pious, uniformed, and uninformed. Smash everyone who is different.

Native people in the resource-rich parts of the archipelago (such as Kalimantan) were the most affected. They have been treated precisely as the South Americans were treated by their Spanish or Portuguese colonialist masters and tormentors: all the resources have been stolen, while local beliefs and languages smashed. Simultaneously, totally foreign religious concepts have been pushed down their throats. Those who were willing to collaborate, were given important government and academic positions, ridiculous titles, and at least some cut from the loot.

The price was terrible: the destruction of both land and the original population. The ‘primitive people of the forest’ were actually much more advanced than their conquerors. They knew how to live with their nature, their environment. Before colonialism, rivers and forests, mountains and villages were intact and thriving. The destruction of local culture led to the collapse of the environment, and in the case of Borneo, of the entire island.

***

I am making a long documentary film here: about this damaged culture, and about the whole island that used to be much closer to ‘paradise’, than any other place on Earth. As I film, in all the corners of Borneo, I feel terrified. What I see is indescribable. I have to use visuals, images, to prove the point. Words are not enough. It often feels that the destruction is unreal; that all this is just a nightmare, that I will wake up, that the horror will go away. But it is real; nothing goes away. People, their greed, are capable of ruining anything, even the most stunning places on our planet.

Mr. Krisusandi speaks about his Institute of Dayakology with pride: “We established it, in order to return dignity to our people.”

Then he recalls the terrible on-going struggle:

“In the beginning, when the destruction of the longhouses began, there was a fight. But the government was canny; it introduced so-called logging concessions. It also accelerated trans-migration from several over-populated parts of Indonesia, predominantly from Java. In the name of ‘development’, government took over all land, and sold it to companies that began planting palm oil, or introducing indiscriminate mining. Dayaks could do nothing. They became powerless; coolies on their own land.”

“During the so-called ‘reform period’, after Suharto stepped down, the situation marginally improved; but by then, the Dayaks had almost no intellectuals. And those who were ‘educated’ during ‘New Order’, had typical ‘developmentalist’ mindsets. They sold out; they even began oppressing their own people.”

A prominent educator from West Kalimantan, who did not want to be identified out of fear of losing his job, clarified:

“On my island, being so-called educated could lead to something negative. A Dayak person who goes through the formal Indonesian education system, could and usually would end up following only his or her own mercantile interests, and consequently do harm to both community and nature.”

What he meant is that the person often chooses to work for the companies or the government, that are intensively ruining the Borneo island, while further indoctrinating and disempowering local population.

While deep in Borneo, one year ago, we visited a longhouse, where we were told by Mr. Paulus, the elder in a traditional Bali Gundi longhouse in the Putusibau area:

“People who go to school; they get smarter and cannier and then they work for the government and companies, they forget to help their villages and hometowns. As long as they get money they do not care anymore.”

Recently, President Jokowi decided to at least give some land back to the Dayak people. It was a symbolic gesture, but practically, nothing changed, and almost nothing was returned to the native people.

As confirmed by Mr. Krisusandi:

“It is now actually almost impossible to give anything back to the people. West Kalimantan consists of roughly 12 million hectares of land. Concessions, those for palm oil, mining and other commercial activities, were already given 13 million hectares. With national parks, a total of 16 million hectares is already committed. So, just calculate: it is 4 million hectares more than total area of West Kalimantan!”

I think about those once mighty and pure rivers, endless tropical forests, deep and ancient cultures of local people. I close my eyes, trying to imagine hundreds of already vanished species of fauna and flora. Then, I imagine the huge, repulsive, kitschy dwellings of local ‘elites’, in Jakarta and Surabaya. I imagine European and North American cities built from the loot of places such as Kalimantan.

“Will Dayak people fight for their rights?” I asked.

“Maybe the next generation will,” comes the hesitant reply. “But not this one. Definitely not this one.”

In Palangkaraya city, we spoke to one of the most prominent Dayaks, an author J.J. Kusni, a man who spent long years in France, but finally returned to his native land.

I filmed his long, passionate testimony, in which he expressed sadness, even outrage over the state into which the Dayak people were reduced.

“Philosophically, a Dayak is a fighter,” he said.

But the spirit of Dayak people was obviously smashed. Most of them have become victims, while others were convinced to convert themselves into collaborators. The entire Indonesian part of the Island of Borneo is now burned down, poisoned and logged out. There are few ‘protected parks’, but even in the middle of them, commercial activities are now detectable. Entire original cultures here are humiliated. People are confused. Most of them gave up, accepted, resigned.

Destruction and thorough ruin are being propagated as ‘progress’, by the Indonesian regime. Brainwashing is passed as ‘education’.

“Through the national and even village government structures established by Suharto, everything in Kalimantan became “Javanized”,” explained J.J. Kusni.

“So, what are the Dayak people doing?” I asked.

“They are crying,” he replied curtly.

Andre Vltchek is philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He’s a creator of Vltchek’s World in Word and Images, and a writer that penned a number of books, including China and Ecological Civilization. He writes especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

New Thai Government and America’s Asia “Pivot”

Mon, 2019-06-17 19:31

After much uncertainty and a turbulent election, Thailand now has a new government led by its newly elected prime minister, Prayuth Chan-o-cha. This bodes well for Thailand’s stability and development as well as its growing ties with its ASEAN neighbours as well as with China.

For the US and its attempts to reassert “primacy” over Asia while encircling and containing the rise of China, the defeat of its “pro-democracy” proxies it is a nightmare.

The Western media, their media partners in Thailand and a small army of US-funded fronts posing as nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) have decried the new government as a “dictatorship disguised as democracy.”

Articles like, “Thailand Junta Leader Named Prime Minister After Contentious Vote,” published by the New York Times, set the tone of the West’s backlash against the newly formed government, citing unqualified claims like, “an election marred by charges of manipulation” or depicting the opposition as being “pro-democracy.”

Absent from NYT articles and others across the Western media is any mention of who PM Prayuth Chan-o-Cha was really running against or why there was a coup in 2014 to begin with. This omission is deliberate, because its inclusion by the media would provide crucial context both justifying the coup and exposing the “pro-democracy” opposition as anything but.

Putting Things in Context 

PM Prayuth led a 2014 coup, ousting the regime of Yingluck Shinawatra, which in turn served merely as a front for convicted criminal, fugitive and US-proxy Thaksin Shinawatra.

From 2001-2006, Shinawatra had loyally served US interests as Thai prime minister. He privatised Thailand’s energy concerns which were promptly bought up by US and European oil corporations, committed Thai troops to the 2003 US invasion and occupation of Iraq, invited the US Central Intelligence Agency to use Thai territory for its extraordinary rendition programme and even attempted to pass a US-Thai free trade agreement without parliamentary approval.

Additionally, Shinawatra carried out a brutal “war on drugs” which left over 2,800 innocent people dead in just 90 days and crippled free speech by suing, intimidating or outright killing critics, making him the worst human rights offender in Thailand’s history. He also carried out sweeping abuses of power, including changing the nation’s laws in order to sell his satellite concern, Shin Corp, to Singapore investors tax free.

For this and Shinawatra’s attempts to illegally consolidate power by eliminating his rivals which include Thailand’s military, courts and constitutional monarchy, it is clear why he himself was ousted in a coup in 2006 and his sister ousted in a similar coup in 2014.

Between 2006-2011 Shinawatra twice attempted to seize power by force, once in 2009 and again in 2010. The latter attempt included 300-500 heavily armed militants resulting in nearly 100 deaths and the destruction of several sections of Bangkok’s downtown districts.

He has been convicted of corruption and sentenced to now 4 years in prison with multiple arrest warrants issued against him.

Despite being a fugitive, from 2011-2014 he openly ran his sister’s government remotely from Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates.

In recent elections, Shinawatra openly headed his Pheu Thai Party (PTP) along with several other “hedge parties” fielded in case any one of them was disbanded. In fact one, Thai Raksa Chart, was disbanded. Another, Future Forward, had its leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit nominated as PM by Shinawatra’s Pheu Thai itself.

The fact a fugitive is to this day running these parties remotely or its obvious implications, is entirely omitted across the Western media.
Despite accusations of Thailand’s government being a “dictatorship disguised as democracy,” PM Prayuth Chan-o-Cha’s Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP) won the popular vote. Together with its coalition partners including the Democrat Party and Bhumjaithai Party (BJT) it also formed the larger coalition with both the most actual votes and the most seats in parliament.

Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit’s Future Forward Party came in third, then joined a smaller coalition with Shinawatra’s PTP. It is difficult to imagine in what sort of “democracy” the West believes the party with the least electoral support should lead the country.

Might Makes Right, Until You’re No Longer Mighty 

Washington’s defacto appointment of Juan Guaidó as “president” of Venezuela is another, if not extreme example of the West’s version of “democracy” in action. The sloppy, impotent regime-change campaign Washington is waging against Venezuela is owed to the United States’ shrinking global influence; militarily, politically and economically.

Likewise in Thailand, the West’s media and local fronts funded by the US government find themselves weaker relative to growing regional economic, political and military power.

At the same time, partners the West seeks to use to co-opt Thailand’s institutions are also increasingly weak. Thaksin Shinawatra for example, was once among the top 5 richest people in Thailand. He is now 19th. Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit’s family is not even in the top 20.

Their waning wealth is coupled with their waning influence. They also suffer from a severe lack of credibility. Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit for example campaigned on a platform of ambiguous values including democracy, equality and human rights, yet at his family’s auto parts factory he himself busted unions and denied workers collective bargaining rights.

As nations across the developing world continue to claim larger shares of global markets and industries, US influence around the globe will continue to wane. With it will shrivel the various client regimes and opposition groups the US sponsors around the globe, including in Thailand.

What’s Next? 

Thailand’s government now faces the challenge of consolidating its newly mandated power and moving development projects forward while continuing to build and balance regional and global ties.

As Thai-Chinese military cooperation continues to expand and infrastructure projects continue toward completion, the ability of Washington to reverse its waning regional influence fades. As the US has done in other regions of the world where the window is now closing on American hegemony, it may turn to more drastic measures no matter how unsuccessful they might be.

Domestically, the US-backed opposition will waste no time organising protests, violence and other measures to actively undermine the current government and the policies it seeks to implement. We should look out specifically for anti-Chinese “activism” and provocations aimed at souring ties between Bangkok and Beijing.

With the Western media attempting to already set the stage for such protests, claiming the election has been “stolen” from the opposition (a sentiment not surprisingly echoing Thaksin Shinawatra’s recent NYT op-ed), the machinations of yet another toxic US-backed colour revolution are already in motion.

The media, being a bellwether of Western interests themselves, continuing its campaign of undermining the current Thai government indicates that the West is far from giving up on coercing or even overthrowing Thailand’s current political order.

When the protests begin, Thailand and the wider world must be prepared for the now familiar disinformation campaigns waged by the Western media, fronts posing as NGOs funded by Western governments and all the tricks used to provoke violence or portray the sitting government as being “violent.”

Hopefully, with the fates of Libya, Syria, Ukraine and Venezuela already in full view, the uphill battle of exposing similar meddling in Thailand will be made a little easier, making it that much harder for Washington.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Will China Autos Trigger Next Economic Downturn?

Mon, 2019-06-17 03:59

Sales of new cars in China, today the world’s largest automobile market, plunged a dramatic 16.4% in May, making the worst month in the history of the relatively new China auto industry. According to the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers (CAAM), the disastrous May sales came after declines of 14.6% in April and 5.2% in March. It is questionable if this can be blamed on the US-China trade war. The depression in China vehicle sales, however, is having a significant impact on foreign automakers, especially in Germany. Could this China turn presage a major new global economic recession or worse?

One indication that the US trade war is not the main cause is the fact that May 2019 marks the 12th consecutive month of auto sales decline in China. Sales between automakers in China and car dealers were down 44%. Moreover, domestic sales of Chinese brand autos in May were down a significant 26%. Baojun, Dongfeng and Trumpchi are Chinese brands that have fallen 40% so far this year. Only Japanese Honda and Toyota could show sales increases. Clearly something major and not good is afoot in China, the world’s second largest economy.

A clue to what is driving (pun intended) the drop was given by Xu Haidong, CAAM’s assistant secretary general. He said, “a decline in purchasing power in the low-to-middle income groups as well as expectations of government stimulus to encourage purchases” was a major cause.

Consumer debt

What the “decline in purchasing power in the low-to-middle income groups” means is the worrisome point. As I noted in an earlier piece, the years of Chinese prosperity, much like in the West, have been driven by easy credit, especially since the global financial crisis in 2008.

In 2009 China became the country producing the largest numbers of autos in the world. Many are US or Japanese or EU brands with Chinese production factories. Its car output since a decade has exceeded that of the USA and Japan combined, as well as that of the entire EU. By 2010 China was producing almost 14 million vehicles annually, largest of any nation in history and most of it for its “low-to-middle income” domestic market. China’s middle income earners saw car ownership as essential, and banks and soon non-banks or shadow banks were eager to lend. In 2009 total registration of cars, vans and trucks in China was registered cars, buses, vans, and trucks on the road in China reached 62 million. It will exceed 200 million by 2020. That means that the market for car ownership is, if not saturated, at least up against limits of household debt capacity.

For the past decade Chinese younger families with rising incomes and a car, turned to buy their own apartments or homes for the first time in a major way. By 2018 the explosion of household and other debt, much of it unregulated, began to cause alarm in Beijing and with the Peoples’ Bank of China. It is estimated that an alarming $15 trillion in off-balance-sheet or shadow banking loans were outstanding. At least $3.8 trillion of that was in the form of so-called trust funds that drew savings from ordinary Chinese citizens to invest in local government projects or in housing construction. The World Bank estimated that all China shadow banking had grown from 7% of GDP in 2005 to 31% in 2016. The Basle BIS calculates that some $7 trillion of that is at risk of default.

The current consumer boom was triggered after the 2008 global financial crisis, when the Beijing government made what many saw as a near-panic infusion of cheap money into the economy in a bid to keep employment and incomes rising. As regulators began to try to bring the problem under better control, millions of middle-income Chinese families have suddenly found the economic paradise that seemed to exist the past two decades suddenly was becoming a debtor prison, as property values ceased double-digit rising. One difficulty is getting accurate government economic data. Contrary to the official 6+% GDP growth that seems unshakeable, some Chinese economists have suggested it could well be around 1% or even negative.

In this situation, the recent decline in the Chinese car sales is more than alarming. It has global implications, not least in Germany. Germany’s VW which has production in China is the largest selling car in China with over 3 million in 2017.

Global Impact

In recent months, in large part as a result of the continuing decline in China car sales, the global car industry has entered a new crisis phase. That, atop issues such as diesel emission scandals, is not good news for the industry. Germany’s Center for Automotive Research estimates that global car production in 2019 will fall at least 4 million units, a huge shock. Most Western analysts did not expect the severe drop in China car sales to occur.

In May German Daimler CEO Dieter Zetsche said that “sweeping cost reductions” are ahead to prepare for what he is calling “unprecedented” industry disruption. German auto parts suppliers such as Bosch and thousands of small-to-midsize supplier companies speak of their worst crisis since the oil shocks of the 1970s. Over the first six months of 2019 carmakers worldwide from Germany to Italy to USA and China have cut some 38,000 jobs in response to the global downturn. Bank of America Merrill Lynch auto analyst John Murphy stated, “The industry is right now staring down the barrel of what we think is going to be a significant downturn. The pace of decline in China is a real surprise.”

For German carmakers the timing of the China market collapse could not be worse. Just as they are pouring billions into developing future-generation electric vehicles, still believed years away from viability and far more costly than current gasoline or diesel models, they are being hit with draconian and arbitrary EU emission demands and uncertainty.

Were Washington now to impose new tariffs on imports of German and other EU cars, it could get quite nasty on the economic front. The globalization of industrial production since 2000 that has made China workshop of the world now begins to show tectonic cracks in the globalist foundation.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Is it Washington’s Turn to Occupy Poland?

Sun, 2019-06-16 20:33

Washington’s latest decision to deploy a reinforced contingent of military forces to Poland has been received with an outcry of disappointment by the European pro-democracy public, as it means the US is willing to roll back  obligations it assumed back in 1997 within the NATO framework, thus undermining one of the last surviving deals designed to enhance Europe’s security.

Moreover, the extensive military support Washington has been providing Poland resulted in Warsaw pursuing policies that can only be described as creeping authoritarianism. This opinion was voiced by the Director of Human Rights and Civil Society program at Human Rights First, Melissa Hooper, when she was asked to comment on the visit of Poland’s President Andrzej Duda to the United States. In turn, American human rights activist are convinced that Congress must establish whether Warsaw’s recent crackdown on democracy goes in line with stated US military goals.

Impartial observers would all point out that the role of a “Trojan horse” that Poland was supposed to play in Washington’s previous designs has now been replaced by the role of a battering ram that must clear the way for the advancement of American special interests across Europe. As a matter of fact, Poland has been a vocal opponent of both the European Union and Russian authorities, while the latter are not being described in any other terms than an “imminent threat from the east.” Their overseas masters whom Warsaw relies on to decide its geopolitical policies won’t prevent Poland from taking reckless steps upon the European stage, as those go in line with their “hardline policies”.

But is there any logical rationale behind such a policy?

The answer to this question has been provided by the Polish media source Interia which states that we’re witnessing the gradual vassalization of Warsaw which has become incapable to pursue its own independent foreign policy any longer. It’s clear that the US is taking full advantage of the fact that for decades Poland has been a faithful partner who would fulfill any demand or requirement put forward by Washington. As a result, these days Poland is being transformed into a silent instrument of US foreign policy, with its immediate neighbors beginning to perceive it as nothing more than an American weapon. According to a local analyst, Lukasz Stach, Warsaw is willing to buy all sorts of weapons and armored vehicles from Washington, as it will force Polish taxpayers to foot the bill one way or another.

It’s truly remarkable that one of the readers of the above mentioned site under the nickname “salo” would remind us that in his book The Grand Chessboard published back in 1997, Zbigniew Brzezinski would reveal that Washington sought to start a war with Russia, with the Poles being able to provide the US with such a pretext at some point in the future. The reader says that there will be a war between Poland and Russia, between Ukraine and Belarus, with the Baltic countries also becoming involved. In turn, the US will not participate in this conflict directly, while local powers will be busy fighting each other for a decade.

Yet another reader under an alias “Orzeł 1″ would point out that while becoming a vassal of Washington, Poland lost sight of the fact that it is situated in Europe, and while it does the bidding of an overseas power in its region, it will not be supported by its so-called ally should the need for such support emerge. Further still, he would state that the US has never been interested in a strong European continent, so it’s only logical that even when it has taken advantage of Poland on numerous occasions, it will continue doing just that. While Washington likes to occupy the moral high ground on human rights, it tramples them whenever there’s a profit to be made.

Yet another Polish media source – Teologia Polityczna would stress that Poland relies on the United States as a guarantor of its security. However, according to Błażej Sajduk, an analyst at Jagiellonian University, Washington is only going to rush to Warsaw’s rescue if it could reap benefits from doing so, so it is quite possible that Poland would at some point become a bargaining chip amid America’s grand designs.

However, Polish analysts are not the only ones concerned about the implications of the US occupation of their country. Last April, the US ambassador to Warsaw, Georgette Mosbacher revealed the number of American soldiers stationed in Poland, which increased by 50% over a period of just six months, approached 4,500.

Local journalists have already published a number of revelations depicting the face-off between the local residents of Powidz and the US military. According to their report, in Powidz where a NATO weapons depot is being built, local residents are prepared to launch a riot and they can often be seen starting fist fights with American soldiers. Locals complain that NATO forces remind them of locusts. Americans cut down huge strips of forest, heavy vehicles often block local roads, they do not pay any taxes and flood the local sewage system. At the same time, the Americans spat on the specially protected natural parks Natura 2000 and Powidzki Landscape Park, which remain under the protection of European Union authorities.

Meanwhile, Trump has already been doing business with the most faithful of US allies: he promised to send another thousand soldiers to Poland, with Warsaw being demanded to pay for this military contingent. He has also practically sold a total of 32 of the newest good-for-nothing F-35 jets to Warsaw. In addition, Poland has signed a contract on the purchase of another approximately 2 billion cubic meters of liquefied natural gas from the US for a grand total of 8 billion dollars, so the shipment is about to be shipped across the Atlantic.

Since at this point Warsaw is virtually incapable of standing up for itself, the UK has decided to join the feeding frenzy over Polish tax dollars, since they are so eagerly being wasted on all sorts of fancy weapons systems. This was revealed by British MP Owen Paterson during the Belvedere Forum, which took place in Warsaw in early March.

To add insult to injury, one has to add that Warsaw has also signed an agreement on the purchase of 20 US-made multiple-launch rocket systems (HIMARS) last February, with this deal estimated at 414 million dollars.

So the EU is not only the one to foot the bill for Washington’s desire to treat its military contractors in Poland, as local residents are going to have a good taste of the price of American friendship as well. But will the Polish taxpayer be willing to stomach it?

Jean Périer is an independent researcher and analyst and a renowned expert on the Near and Middle East, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook“.

Mongolia Playing Stabilizing Role in Situation on Korean Peninsula

Sun, 2019-06-16 15:58

First, a short history lesson. According to records, the relationship between Mongolia and Korea spans 800 years. Mongolian annals from the 13th to 14th centuries mention Korea’s (at the time known as Solongos) role in Genghis Khan’s conquest of China.

In the years preceding 1990, the Mongolian People’s Republic (MPR) and the DPRK cooperated on equal terms as members of an alliance of communist countries and states. Mongolia became the second nation after Hungary to recognize North Korea’s sovereignty in 1989. Diplomatic relations between the two countries were established in 1948, and last year the two sides marked their 70th anniversary with a grand celebration.

Since 1996, the MPR has continued to provide food aid to the DPRK as per trade agreements, and up until 2017 the nation had willingly welcomed a fairly large number of North Korean migrant workers. Due to the sanctions imposed by the United Nations, their numbers have dwindled to 500 people.

However, the relationship between the two nations remains friendly and stable.

In 2000, the President and the Prime Minister of Mongolia visited North Korea.

In recent years, the MPR has increasingly taken on the role of a mediator in the process of resolving the issues plaguing the Korean Peninsula and of improving communication between the leader of the DPRK and those of the United States, Russia and China.

Its involvement is not surprising considering the fact that a hundred thousand Mongols already speak Korean, as it is the second most popular language to learn after English in the MPR.

It is worth noting that Mongolia has been viewed as a mediator in the process of stabilizing the situation on the Korean Peninsula in media reports by political observers and researchers for quite some time. And the capital of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, has, on numerous occasions, been included in the list of potential venues for staging historic summits between the leaders of the United States and the DPRK. And only due to unfavorable weather conditions in Mongolia, i.e. a harsh 2019 winter, was Vietnam chosen to host the meeting between North Korea’s and U.S. leaders.

Since DPRK leader Kim Jong-un officially expressed his willingness to take part in a third Summit with the U.S. President during this year’s session of the Supreme People’s Assembly on 12 April, it is highly likely that the meeting will take place in Ulaanbaatar this time around. At least, Mongolia’s media outlets have been reporting that such a possibility is strong indeed.

The aforementioned topic was discussed during a face-to-face meeting between Davaasuren Damdinsuren, the State Secretary of Mongolia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ri Yong-ho, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of North Korea, as well as Ri Su-yong, the Vice Chairman of DPRK’s Workers’ Party, which was held on 18 April of this year during Damdinsuren’s visit.

In December 2018, North Korea’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Ri Yong-ho paid a visit to Ulaanbaatar, where Khaltmaagiin Battulga, the President of Mongolia, extended an official invitation to DPRK’s leader Kim Jong-un to visit the MPR.

In its role as mediator, Mongolia is supportive of efforts to ensure that Kim Jong-un meets with PRC’s head Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, the President of the Russian Federation, before any potential third summit, as without the involvement of these two leaders it will be impossible to resolve the security issues in the region. And it would be reasonable to assume that the historical meeting between Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un, held on the Far Eastern Federal University campus on the Russky Island on 25 April 2019, was facilitated by Mongolia in its mediator role.

Recently, Japan’s public broadcaster NHK reported that Damdin Tsogtbaatar, the Foreign Minister of Mongolia, urged the DPRK to stop any provocative actions involving testing new tactical weaponry, as this could have a negative impact on the situation in East Asia. He also appealed to observers and commentators to not be discouraged by the failed negotiations between the United States and the DPRK in Hanoi, since such talks were only a part of the processes of stabilizing the situation on the Korean Peninsula and of DPRK’s nuclear disarmament. MPR’s Foreign Minister added that Mongolia supported such initiatives and would continue to facilitate any negotiations between the USA and North Korea in the future.

Damdin Tsogtbaatar also highlighted that Mongolia and the DPRK, with their 70-year history of diplomatic relations, are continuing to strengthen their friendship.

It is worth highlighting that Mongolia’s mediator role in the Korean conflict, and its efforts to stabilize the situation on the Korean Peninsula and put an end to DPRK’s nuclear programme are all highly appreciated by the U.N. Security Council and the United States, who have urged the MPR to continue supporting initiatives of the international community in the future.

Mark Golman, Ph.D, history, head research partner at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.

Gizmodo and the Liberal World Order Decepticons

Mon, 2019-06-10 12:53

Here’s another good one for you. Gizmodo is now sure that Vladimir Putin and his Russian minions created a veritable network powered by Twitter Decepticons aimed at presidential candidate Hillary (Mrs. Optimus Prime) Clinton. Here’s an initial look into who is really manipulating social media for evil.

Now that the Trump-Putin conspiracy to turn the U.S.A. into a satellite of a new U.S.S.R. has been proven to be a hoax, it appears the liberal world order is turning up the stinky gas on Mr. Putin. Using a report provided by American cybersecurity company Symantec,

Gizmodo was just sold to Great Hill Partners, an equity and venture capital fund run by CEO Christopher (Chris) Gaffney, who also happens to be the Director at Ikon Science Limited in the EU. Pertinent to my “Decepticons” introduction, Ikon Science has joined the National Oceanography Centre, Shell, BP and OEAGHG in an initiative to close the gap on the missing research available for Carbon Capture and Storage. Please digest this tidbit for a moment.

Now that you suspect Gizmodo of pumping out propaganda against Russia’s energy and growth initiatives, let me add more fuel to any outrageous globalists fires I may have rekindled. An even more fascinating tidbit about Icon Science is the company’s dealings with a North Sea oil exploration outfit called Oilexco, which supposedly received (get this) 1 million barrels worth of oil in a program that led to supporting the regime of Sadaam Hussein. Back in 2004, the head of Oilexco, Arthur Millholland was under investigation but denied any culpability in such a program. Today, Millholland is in Nigeria at play for Canadian Overseas Oil.

Even the U.S. State Department’s Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty reported that every major and minor oil company in Iraq participated. Only the CIA broadcast network pointed the damning finger at Russian companies instead of our British and Canadian friends.

Much has been claimed with regards to Twitter accounts like the @TEN_GOP banned by the social network. Gizmodo, POLITICO, and other elitist controlled media attempted to loop as many so-called “bot accounts” as they could to the independent St. Petersburg, Russia operation deemed “The Agency” by The New York Times’ Adrien Chen. On these points, as a specialist in social media and geopolitics, the ludicrousness of the Russian meddling connections are sad/hilarious. I was labeled one of the top so-called “Kremlin Trolls” back when the Euromaidan coup erupted in Kyiv, Ukraine.

The idea that a cohesive Russian influence attack cannot be taken seriously. My book on the subject, Putin’s Praetorians sheds light on the real dissenters against westward NATO movement and Big Brother. You can trust in this, as a first adopter of every social media platform ever launched if Vladimir Putin was ordering Trump into office my social media accounts would be stronger than Lady Gaga’s. People who do not know what they are talking about are pulling the proverbial wool over the public’s eyes. Twitter “bots” are a function of shady digital business, more than espionage tools so-called “experts” suggest. The problem with Washington’s, London’s, Paris’, and Berlin’s troll theories is shortsightedness. Look at this.

Since the creation of startups like MySpace, the now-defunct Netscape (later Propeller), Digg, Facebook, and another 200 failed ones, digital experts and marketing gurus have sought to manipulate the users of social communities. I know because it was part of my job description as a technology writer to evaluate them. Later on, PR and marketing companies solicited me to take a more active role in “influencing” these communities. Since 2008, when a noted technology celebrity suggested I start a PR firm on the merits of my expertise, social media has been a key to the success of my companies and those which we represented.

Russian business people, even officials, are not doing anything western business and government have not already perfected. Take my word, or leave it, Russian social and digital strategy is a billion lightyears behind what APCO Worldwide, Waggener Edstrom, and other huge PR firms meet out. I know this because we were a part of the ecosystem that “trained” the big firms to migrate to digital. But let’s move on to a simpler subject, the idea those pesky Ruskys are deploying their Decepticons against the innocent simple people.

To simplify my story here, if the reader will simply Google the “Top Twitter bots,” he or she will find listed Twitter growth tools like TweSocial, the tweet bot Jarvee, and dozens more designed to help marketers expand following, reach, and so forth. You can trust that anything that is massively popular in social media was paid for, even including that viral video with millions of views. The geniuses that advise the U.S. Congress and parliaments in Europe cry about alleged Russian bots, when American marketers praise lists and lists of Twitter accounts they say social media “loves” – take the 1.1 million Tweets of @RealHumanPraise and a line of automated #PraiseFOX Tweets. Another bot account that Tweets other bot messages still posts the popular vote difference in between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump to selected #hashtags like #Istillcantbelieve #NeverForget, #BabyPresident, Impeachment, and so on. Somebody in the liberal world order camp must have failed to unplug the automatic Hillary weeping.

The problem with all these “investigations” is that there is no objectivity. The alleged “researchers” are only looking for ammunition to support their narrative. From the U.S. Congress to Number 10 Downing Street, nobody wants to hear the truth – leaders only want the PR hook. It’s high time our leadership employed some authentic expertise, gurus who can answer the question “Why is a service called discoverbot.com recommending the best Twitter bots to follow?” Better still, why aren’t super cybersecurity companies reporting to Washington on the 15% of Twitter users shown to be bots by the likes of Mozilla and others?

The people voted to represent us in government, the businesses that get them elected, the entire bureaucratic spaghetti mess running the world cannot even grasp how EVERYBODY is gaming the system. Here’s a description that shows how sophisticated these bots can be. This shows the blatant, out in the open arrogance of companies aligned with marketing in the west. Tweet Attacks Pro just comes out and advertise circumvent Twitter rules.

“After following the people, the bot will then unfollow the non-active users or those who did not follow back. By doing this, the bot will be hardly detected as it operates just the way other humans operate, but it does it effectively without consuming your time.”

I could spend the better part of a month laying out how unscrupulous marketers, content distributors, shady bloggers and journalists, and 1,000’s of companies in the digital space game the social media system, as well as the traditional media spectrum. Instead, I suggest the reader do his or her own research.

Like I said previously, the idea that anybody in power is really relying on objective research is a joke. Take the case of Amazon using bots to influence public opinion and decisions concerning their low wage to workers. The reader has not heard of this “influencing” effort by the world’s richest man’s company, I know. We live in a world where the Democratic National Convention can be rigged, and when the manufactured villain of the day is to blame. The “pot calls the kettle black” on the front page of the New York Times, and nobody in America cares. The easiest deception of all is to operate in plain sight while convincing the victims that a manufactured enemy is to blame. Think about all this until our next research into who really manipulates social media for evil.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Mahatir Opens A Ukraine Political Pandora’s Box

Sun, 2019-06-09 22:32

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahatir Mohamad sent shock waves in a public speech where he dismissed a Dutch “official” report blaming Russia for the downing of Malaysia Air Flight 17 in July, 2014, weeks after a CIA-led coup toppled the elected President of Ukraine. Despite the downplaying in western mainstream media of the Malaysian leader’s comments, it is creating a major new potential embarrassment for ex-Vice President Joe Biden and his Ukraine collaborators such as Igor Kolomoisky, in their flimsy effort to blame Russia for their own misdeeds.

During a dialogue with the Japanese Foreign Correspondent Club May 30, Mahatir challenged the Dutch government to provide evidence for their claim that the civilian Malaysian FH17 jet that crashed in Ukraine was shot down by a Russian-made BUK missile fired from a Russian regiment based in Kursk. The Malaysian Prime Minister told the Japanese media, “They are accusing Russia, but where is the evidence? We know the missile that brought down the plane is a Russian type missile, but it could also be made in Ukraine.” The blunt-spoken Mahatir added, “You need strong evidence to show it was fired by the Russians; it could be by the rebels in Ukraine, it could be Ukrainian government because they too have the same missile.”

He went on to demand that the Malaysian government be allowed to inspect the black box of the crashed plane, stating the obvious, that the plane belongs to Malaysia, with Malaysian pilot and there were Malaysians passengers: “We may not have the expertise but we can buy the expertise. For some reasons, Malaysia was not allowed to check the black box to see what happened.”

He went on to state, “We don’t know why we are excluded from the examination but from the very beginning, we see too much politics in it, and the idea was not to find out how this happened, but seems to be concentrated on trying to pin it to the Russians.“

The Malaysian Air MH17 was en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur when it was shot down over the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014. Only in May 2018 the Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team issued its report alleging that a BUK missile was used to shoot down Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, claiming that it originated from the 53rd Anti-aircraft Brigade of the Russian Federation, stationed in Kursk near the Ukraine border. The Dutch Joint Investigation Team (JIT) declared that it “has come to the conclusion that the BUK-TELAR that shot down MH17 came from 53rd Anti-aircraft Missile Brigade based in Kursk in Russia,” according to top Dutch investigator Wilbert Paulissen. Paulissen added, “We are convinced that our findings justify the conclusions…”

The Dutch-led group presented no concrete forensic proof, and Moscow has repeatedly denied involvement in an act that would make no military or political sense for them. In 2018 the Russian Defense Ministry provided evidence that the BUK missile which had exploded to destroy the Malaysian passenger jet had been manufactured in a Russian plant in 1986, and then shipped to the Ukraine. Its last recorded location was at a Ukrainian military base.

By recasting doubt on those Dutch JIT conclusions, Mahatir has potentially opened a can of deadly worms that could come to haunt the Ukrainian government at the time, especially Igor Kolomoisky, the billionaire Ukrainian financial backer of the newly elected Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. It potentially could also implicate then-Vice President Joe Biden and many others.

Open Questions

Independent investigators into the destruction of MH17 stress the fact that the Dutch-led JIT deliberately excluded Malaysia as well as Russia from their group, but included the CIA-backed coup regime in Ukraine, hardly an unbiased party. Further, all telephone taps the JIT has presented as proof of the guilt of the Russians came from the Ukrainian secret service SBU. Since the CIA-backed coup in Ukraine in 2014, the SBU has been involved in repeated fake accusations aimed at Russia, including faked murder of a journalist later revealed to be quite alive.

One of the central issues that the Dutch JIT group never addressed is why, at a time it was a known warzone, and commercial international flights were told to avoid the airspace in eastern Ukraine, the MH17 flight was reportedly ordered by Ukraine air traffic control authorities in Dnepropetrovsk to change course and to fly directly into the war zone. According to a Dutch site, Post Online, Eurocontrol, European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation, gave information to the Dutch Parliament about the status of Ukraine radar in 2016 informing that the Ukraine air traffic control organization UkSATSE failed to inform Eurocontrol in summer 2014 about the non-operational status of three radar systems in Eastern Ukraine, a grave violation of law. One of the three was taken in the wake of the CIA Ukraine coup in April by a masked band that destroyed the radar facility.

Further, in another breach, the Ukrainian UkSATSE refused to permit their air traffic controller at Dnepropetrovsk, responsible for controlling flight MH17, to be questioned. According to Russian reports, the person “went on vacation” and never reappeared.

The Kolomoisky Factor

Notably, at the time of the MH17 downing, the Ukrainian governor of the Dnepropetrovsk Oblast or region, was Igor Kolomoisky. Kolomoisky, who is listed as the third richest man in Ukraine with an empire in oil, coal, metals and banking, was also reported to be directly linked via offshore entities to control of Burisma, the shady Ukrainian gas company that named the son of then-Vice President Joe Biden to its board.

Kolomoisky, who is notorious for hiring thugs and neo-nazis to beat up business and other opponents in Ukraine, reportedly secured the lucrative Burisma post for Hunter Biden, despite Biden’s lack of any experience in Ukraine or in oil and gas, in return for Joe Biden lifting Kolomoisky’s US visa travel ban. Joe Biden was the Obama Administration point person in charge of the 2014 CIA-orchestrated Maidan Square coup and toppling of the elected President Viktor Yanukovych.

Notably, the Mahatir remarks have drawn attention anew to the mysterious circumstances around the downing of Malaysian Air MH17 in 2014 and the potential role of Kolomoisky and others, in that. The role of corrupt Ukraine officials backed by the Obama Administration, is now under scrutiny.

Notably, the new President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, is widely reported to be a protégé of Igor Kolomoisky. Zelensky became a national name as a comedian on a Ukraine TV station owned by Kolomoisky, and the latter reportedly provided funds and personnel to run the comedian’s victorious May 2019 election campaign in which he defeated incumbent Petro Poroshenko, a bitter foe of Kolomoisky. Following Zelensky’s election victory, Kolomoisky returned to Ukraine after exile in Switzerland following a bitter falling out with Petr Poroshenko in 2015.

All these pieces of a very murky geopolitical puzzle underscore the dirty role that Ukraine and the Obama administration have played in demonizing Russia as well as the Trump Administration. Most recently, it appears that the US Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his staff, relied on a Ukrainian businessman named Konstantin Kilimnik, who worked for Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, as the key figure supposedly linked to Russian intelligence, as a key figure to make the case of Russian collusion or interference in the 2016 US elections.

Far from a Putin agent, however, new evidence shows that Kilimnik, since at least 2013 was a confidential Ukrainian informant to the US State Department, according to US journalist John Solomon. Solomon cites FBI documents including State Department emails he has seen where Kilimnik is described as a “sensitive” intelligence source for the US State Department. The Mueller report left that embarrassing detail out for some reason. Kilimnik worked for Paul Manafort who before the 2014 Ukraine coup had served as a lobbyist for Ukrainian elected president Viktor Yanukovych and his Party of the Regions.

Their shadowy acts in Ukraine may soon come to haunt key figures in Ukraine such as Kolomoisky, as well as people like Joe Biden and family. From the true authorship of the downing of MH17, which Dutch and other investigators believe was linked to Kolomoisky actors, to the Ukraine business dealings of Hunter Biden to the true facts of the Mueller “Russiagate” probe, all could well prove to be a far more revealing investigation for the US Justice Department than the obviously biased Mueller probe has been. Increasingly it is looking like the Ukraine and not Russia is the more likely source for interference in the 2016 US election, and not in the way we have been told by the establishment media such as CNN.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

What direction is China’s OBOR Initiative Moving in and How is it Progressing?

Sun, 2019-06-09 19:59

Discussions, meetings and banquets at the 2019 Belt and Road Forum in Beijing have finally come to an end. More than 150 delegates attended this event. What can we discern about this project at this stage? Have any new sceptics, opponents or proponents of China’s global initiative, which celebrated its 5-year anniversary last year, emerged?

If we were to start with criticism, which has yet again been levelled at OBOR (One Belt, One Road), then the annual report “China Security 2019”, prepared by think tanks and issued by Japan’s National Institute for Defense Studies on 30 January 2019, first draws our attention. It once again focused on the current and future project costs and problems, and the negative effect of the initiative on the world order. All in all, the report discussed the same tired old issues, and the same grievances were used as examples, i.e. threats of “debt traps” and the growing distrust towards OBOR in the nations of South East Asia, South Asia and other regions. The document mentions Malaysia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, but it would be reasonable to continue this list with Laos, the Maldives, Myanmar, Mongolia, Djibouti and others. These nations, according to the 2018 report issued by the Center For Global Development (in Washington DC), are in the high risk of debt (owed to China) zone.

Following the US lead, Japan officially issued stern criticism of OBOR. But starting in 2014, and especially since 2018, ties (less in the sphere of politics but more so in economic, investment and credit sectors) between Tokyo and Beijing have been improving, while the PRC has been experiencing more and more pressure from changes stemming from the “trade war” with the United States. In such a climate, on the one hand, the Japanese government has continued to compete with China and criticize the OBOR initiative, it has also endorsed India’s 2017 vision, i.e. the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor. The proposed initiative was viewed as a serious challenge to Beijing’s String of Pearls and 21st Century Maritime Silk Road (MSR) strategies. Japan has also been actively promoting initiatives within the framework of the “Quality Infrastructure” program that is also an alternative to OBOR. And in November 2018, Japan, the United States and Australia signed the Trilateral Partnership agreement on infrastructure investment in Asia.

On the other hand, on account of a thaw in Japan’s relationship with the former Celestial Empire, Shinzō Abe has found cooperation with China, as part of his Abenomics program, beneficial. But first, he had given the green light for such collaboration to the private sector and state-supported banks. Japanese corporations facilitated this thaw in relations with Beijing by striving to be a part of profitable projects, including the ones within the framework of OBOR. In addition, Tokyo and Beijing launched a scheme to jointly finance infrastructure projects in third countries. By doing so, Japan hopes to raise quality standards of Chinese projects. Some examples of both cooperation and rivalry between the two nations include a joint initiative to build a high-speed rail connecting Thailand’s three major airports, and the Japanese project to extend the Jakarta-Bandung railway (constructed by China) to Surabaya in Indonesia. It is hard to discern what direction this cooperation is heading in, however, in May 2019, China’s projects in Sri Lanka encountered a serious obstacle.

The government in Sri Lanka was one of the first to be “tempted” by the OBOR initiative at the end of 2013. China built the Hambantota Port in the south of the island and financed 81% of its $1.4 billion cost. The port was meant to become a sizable transfer hub between Singapore and Dubai, but the demand for it was grossly over-estimated. Annually, 60,000 ships sail across the Indian Ocean past the Hambantota Port, which lacks the necessary container handling capacity and essential equipment. Sri Lanka was unable to re-pay the enormous loan used to build it and, in exchange for reducing the size of the debt, it was forced to hand over the port to China on a 99-year lease. In addition, the PRC helped finance (with $200 million) the construction of a huge airport in Mattala, with a capacity to handle 1 million passengers a year. But, in reality, it has barely been used (the airport is one of the emptiest in the world) and many of the terminals are currently used to store rice. In the end, both of these projects became examples of flagrant failings of the OBOR strategy.

A difficult situation of a similar nature arose in the Maldives, a heaven for wealthy tourists. The President of the archipelago at the time, Abdulla Yameen, borrowed money (often with high interest rates) from China for projects that were not always financially sound, such as the construction of the 2-km China-Maldives Friendship Bridge linking two large islands; of a new railway to the main airport; a hospital, which cost three times more to build than the initiative proposed by India earlier, and of many others. In the end, the Maldives accrued a mountain of debt (equivalent to 20% of the nation’s GDP) as a result of various OBOR projects. After the pro-China President, Abdulla Yameen, lost in his re-election in November 2018, Ibrahim Ameer, the Minister of Finance, asked India for a $200 million loan, and urged everyone to support the nation’s “India-first” policy and put an end to China’s “arm-twisting” maneuvers.

In Pakistan military personnel, exasperated with predatory lending practices used in one of the nation’s regions, attacked the Chinese consulate in Karachi in November 2018 and killed 7 people there.

However, Asia is in dire need of infrastructure development projects. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) estimates that an astronomical amount of $26 trillion will be required in the next decade for the construction of roads and high-speed railways in Asia. In his assessment of OBOR’s progress, Andrew Small, a senior transatlantic fellow with the German Marshall Fund’s Asia Program, concluded that, in the first 5 years of its existence, the initiative focused only on speed and scale of implementation, which is not viable for the future. Even some high-ranking Chinese officials have started talking (quietly and anonymously) about the low quality of several construction projects and harsh loan conditions during their implementation, and the damage caused by these to the nation’s global standing and reputation.

Everything suggests that there will be more bitter comments expressing criticism and skepticism towards some projects proposed by the PRC. This pushed Beijing to take an unusual step at the 2nd 2019 OBOR Forum. On its opening day, in his speech President Xi Jinping admitted (perhaps not entirely sincerely) that some mistakes had been made, and that in the future, more transparent means of implementing projects, with less tolerance for any form of corruption, had to be sought. Undoubtedly, this part of his speech was his response to global wide-spread criticism of OBOR’s approaches.

After the first (we could say) far from discerning attempts to quickly receive loans and investments for developing infrastructure projects, and negative experiences associated with their implementation at times, governments of not particularly wealthy Asian nations have become more cautious when making their choice of whether to opt for Beijing’s offerings or not, and have started to search for more viable alternatives. Hence, the Chinese authorities were forced to become more willing to review various terms and conditions or quality standards, and to focus more on reducing costs. Moreover, they encounter rivals, who employ more transparent approaches, more often nowadays.

As a result, the situation that Beijing finds itself in Sri Lanka has worsened, as its rivals, India and Japan, and the local authorities are planning to sign, in June 2019, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on building a new terminal at the Colombo Port, which should bring more ships and commercial benefits to the nation. India and Japan will offer fairly reasonable (in contrast to China) terms and conditions for “quick and easy” and long-term loans. Sri Lanka will retain a 51% stake in the project, while its partners will jointly hold a 49% one. Many observers were quick to call the trilateral partnership, which is an alternative to China’s initiatives, a hard-felt blow to the PRC. India, Japan and a number of other countries are trying to actively gain ground along the 21st Century MSR by employing different investment methods, higher quality standards, transparency and fair terms and conditions. This is an example of an approach, which involves outperforming rivals rather than simply criticizing them.

The United States has used a similar approach while acting within its interests. In November of last year, Washington announced that it intended to create a new development finance agency to offer loans etc., with a budget of $60 billion. The agency has already pledged to finance a $1.7 billion plan to create an electricity grid in Papua New Guinea (this will become the first loan made using the new lending scheme). Still, it is impossible not to admit that the US initiative cannot really compare to OBOR with its $1.3 trillion budget by 2027.

There is yet another negative aspect to OBOR, among the far from positive consequences and risks associated with this initiative, in the political sphere, which, for now, has not received much attention globally. China, which has become subject to more frequent and harsher criticism, has begun to gather intelligence about election processes and their outcomes in various parts of Asia and Africa. The aim is to research how local candidates for high-level positions use topics, such as public’s wariness towards debt and other OBOR-associated risks, and China’s overall policy, in their election campaigns, and to gauge the extent of anti-Chinese or pro-Chinese mood in these nations, as these factors may determine whether some OBOR projects succeed or fail. Indonesia, Kenya, Zambia and Thailand have been mentioned in this context, as there may be heated debates and battles over critical issues during elections in these nations because of their overly close ties with China.

It is impossible for Beijing to avoid criticism about OBOR (any project of such a scale will lead to problems and outlays), still, as of April 2019, 126 nations and 29 international organizations from Asia, Africa, Europe, Oceania and Latin American were part of the initiative. This means that progress is being made, and that there is development, despite all the obstacles.

Naturally some questions arise though. Has the Chinese government taken into account its past mistakes and failures as it moves forward? Are there any new supporters and detractors of the initiative? What interests is Italy pursuing with its decision to become the first Western European nation to participate in OBOR? What are the US and EU responses to this? Will other European nations follow the suit? Will South Korea or some African nations decide to become a part of OBOR?

Surely, the answers to these questions will follow.

Nina Lebedeva, Candidate of Historical Sciences, leading research fellow at the Centre of Indian Research, part of the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Oriental Studies, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

 

 

Washington’s “Tiananmen” Lies Begin to Fray

Sun, 2019-06-09 12:17

Washington and its allies across the Western World have been particularly eager in observing this year’s anniversary of their version of the 1989 Tiananmen protests.

It has become an opportunity to add political pressure atop economic pressure already being exerted on Beijing by Washington in its bid to encircle and contain China’s rise.

This pressure comes mainly through the Western media.

But the monopoly the US once enjoyed over the flow of global information is coming to an end. The more attention the US tries to draw to certain events, the more objective scrutiny others apply resulting in growing, irreversible damage to some of Washington’s most valuable propaganda narratives.

Attempts to characterise the Tiananmen protests as a violent crackdown on peaceful protesters is meant to portray China, then and now, as an violent authoritarian regime and a threat to not only freedom in China, but freedom worldwide.

But as this lie is exposed, the US itself appears to be the real risk to global peace and freedom.

US State Department Cables Contradict US Secretary of State’s Version of Events 

The US State Department itself would set the tone of Washington’s annual propaganda drive. In a press statement titled, “On the 30th Anniversary of Tiananmen Square,” US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo would claim:

On June 4, we honor the heroic protest movement of the Chinese people that ended on June 4, 1989, when the Chinese Communist Party leadership sent tanks into Tiananmen Square to violently repress peaceful demonstrations calling for democracy, human rights, and an end to rampant corruption. The hundreds of thousands of protesters who gathered in Beijing and in other cities around China suffered grievously in pursuit of a better future for their country. The number of dead is still unknown.

Yet according to the US State Department’s own cables, thanks to Wikileaks, what Secretary Pompeo stated is categorically untrue.

In a 2011 Telegraph article titled, “Wikileaks: no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, cables claim,” it is admitted that:

Secret cables from the United States embassy in Beijing have shown there was no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square when China put down student pro-democracy demonstrations 22 years ago.

While the Telegraph attempts to claim Chinese troops merely killed protesters they portray as peaceful and unarmed “outside” the square, evidence within the US State Department’s own cables proves precisely the opposite.

One cable dated June 3, 1989 admits:

[Embassy officers] encountered a number of incidents in different locations in which crowds harassed military or police personnel, forced their vehicles to turn around, jeered at displays of captured military equipment, or vandalized captured military vehicles.

Further detailing the violence was an oblique admission in the New York Times in a recent article titled, “Witnessing China’s 1989 Protests, 1,000 Miles From Tiananmen Square,” in which now US Representative Andy Levin of Michigan gives his account of what he saw as a student during the protests.

The article admits (my emphasis):

Word spread quickly about what had happened. Rumor had it that protesters were being held in a particular police station, and a huge crowd massed outside it. The students weren’t there after all, but the crowd set fire to the police station. 

Three fire trucks arrived, sirens blaring. The first instinct of the crowd was to move aside. But then, I could see the crowd change its mind. As in, “Wait a minute, we set this fire on purpose, so we don’t want this fire truck putting it out.” The crowd converged on a truck, chased off the firemen, flipped the truck on its side and set the truck itself on fire.

A forgotten Washington Post article from 1989 deceitfully titled, “Images Vilify Protesters,” attempts to dismiss evidence the article itself admits proves violence and atrocities were indeed carried out by protesters against soldiers who were displaying restraint.

The article admits (my emphasis):

The government’s case is bolstered by the fact that, in some areas, demonstrators did attack troops who did not respond, and these incidents were captured on videotape. On nightly television now, images are broadcast of protesters stoning troops, beating them with poles and, in some particularly dramatic photos, firebombing trucks, buses and even armored personnel carriers. In some cases, soldiers were still inside at the time. On one avenue in western Beijing, demonstrators torched an entire military convoy of more than 100 trucks and armored vehicles. Aerial pictures of the conflagration and columns of smoke have powerfully bolstered the government’s argument that the troops were victims, not executioners. Other scenes show soldiers’ corpses and demonstrators stripping automatic rifles off of unresisting soldiers.  

If Chinese troops did kill “thousands” of protesters as many across the West claim, there is no evidence of it. This is why Secretary Pompeo himself admitted even this year, “the number of dead is still unknown.”

If Chinese troops fired into crowds at all, the US State Department itself, witnesses now holding political offices in the US government and prominent US newspapers all admit it was at mobs carrying out deadly violence against troops, police and rescue workers.

We don’t have to imagine what the US government itself would do if mobs attacked military personnel, burned down police stations then attacked responding rescue workers before destroying their equipment in a large US city. During the 1992 Los Angeles riots, thousands of US Army soldiers and Marines were deployed and authorised to use deadly force.

We could, however, try to imagine how absurd it would be if Beijing and media concerns it controlled tried to portray the LA riots as peaceful protests which the US “cracked down” on with disproportionate force. Only the West’s enduring monopoly over global news and information affords its the ability to portray Tiananmen Square in such absurd terms, despite evidence disclosed by the US government and media itself proving precisely the opposite.

Tiananmen Anniversary: A Time for US-Backed Political Stunts, Hypocrisy 

Across Asia, the US is determined to drive a wedge between Beijing and the many nations in the region eager to build ties and do business with it. By promoting Washington’s Tiananmen narrative across the region, the US hopes to turn local opinions against Beijing.

The US has invested tens of millions of dollars a year in building up fronts posing as nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) or “student activists” to oppose regional governments doing business with China and to sour ties between regional nations and Beijing itself.

A perfect example of this is Thai “student activist” Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal.

He opposes a 2014 coup and the resulting government which ousted the US-backed client regime of billionaire fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra and his sister Yingluck Shinawatra.

The current Thai government has since cemented significant ties with Beijing through arms deals, military cooperation and the beginning of major infrastructure projects including a high-speed rail network.

Netiwit’s opposition to the government is tenuously hidden behind “democracy promotion” and “human rights.” His ties to and cooperation with US-funded NGOs along with his regular visits to Western embassies in Bangkok expose him instead as a lobbyist backed by some of the worst offenders of human rights on the planet today.

A 2017 Twitter post by pro-Western commentator Pravit Rojanaphruk showed himself posing with Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal inside the British Embassy enjoying wine together.

While not sipping on wine inside Western embassies or undermining the current Thai government, Netiwit annually protests in front of the Chinese embassy in Bangkok on the anniversary of the Tianaman protests.

An article by US government-funded media front Prachatai about this year’s anniversary protest titled, “Student group gathers in front of Chinese Embassy in memory of Tiananmen massacre,” claims:

The student group, calling themselves “Humanity Without Borders”, was led by Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal and Sirin Mungcharoen, both students at Chulalongkorn University. The group placed white flowers in front of a printout of a tank, and observed a moment’s silence in memory of the dead.

The article includes a picture with a large, professionally printed tank cut-out with a sign that reads, “a tank crushing those who think differently.”

Here, Netiwit and others not only repeat US lies regarding Tiananmen, they do so specifically to portray China, then and now, as a despotic regime that should be protested and resisted, not cooperated with, a notion that only Western embassies and the interests they represent could benefit from.

It might be relevant at this point to note that Netiwit has close ties with another US-backed “student activist,” Joshua Wong of Hong Kong, only further exposing the foreign-backed nature and motives of his activities, particularly in regards to China.

It should be noted that Netiwit was born in 1996. While he protests in front of the Chinese embassy in Bangkok annually promoting a dubious account of events that took place years before he was born, he has not been spotted protesting in front of the US or British embassies for illegal wars and atrocities both nations are carrying out today.

By reminding the world of Washington’s Tiananmen lies based on evidence the US government and media itself has documented, and exposing the truth behind cheap public stunts like those carried out by agitators like Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal, the West’s lies regarding Tiananmen will continue to fray each year.

Whole articles can be dedicated to emerging evidence that the US provoked the protests in 1989 to being with. It is admitted that the US CIA and British MI6 coordinated operations to rescue leaders from arrest after order was restored, the Financial Times would report. Many of those who led the mobs in 1989 are openly backed by the US government to engage in anti-government activities against Beijing today.
The more attention the US attempts to focus on its annual propaganda drive, the more attention to these truths it will attract.

While the events of Tiananmen lay in the past, the US still to this day seeks to provoke similar violence against not only China, but nations all around the world in a strategy now so regularly used by Washington it has a name; colour revolutions.

By exposing the truth about past colour revolutions, we may be able to blunt or even prevent future ones from taking place, along with all the death and destruction that accompany them.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

The Geo-Port-Politics of Gwadar and Chabahar

Sun, 2019-06-09 02:00

In a highly surprising move, Iran’s foreign minister, on an unscheduled and unannounced visit to Pakistan on Thursday (May the 23rd), announced the proposal to link Pakistan’s port of Gwadar with Iran’s Chabahar port. This announcement signals tectonic geo-political shift taking place in the region in the wake of increasing tensions between the US and Iran. The US has already successfully forced India, its chief South Asian ally, to scrap its purchase of oil from Iran, a country India was not long ago claimed to have entered into a strategic alliance with. Although the US has somehow left Chabahar out of its net of sanction, India’s decision to follow the US in its footsteps does signal its participation in the US policy of crippling Iranian economy and take Iran to the verge of massive political disruption and eventual regime change. Iran, obviously, is not unmindful of the implications of this particular decision of India.

Iran’s proposal to link Chabahar with Gawadar, despite the fact that the US sanctions don’t apply on the post, shows the deep sense of Indian betrayal prevailing in Tehran and a counter-manoeuvre to avoid isolation. Iran, obviously, does not expect India to be as robust and committed to building the rest of the port as it would have in a peaceful and sanction-less scenario. Iran, logically enough, is boosting its ties with its immediate neighbour, a country that already is deeply allied with China and aims to expand CPEC to Iran to increase regional connectivity. With Chabahar and Gwadar being linked, Iran will thus have two major regional states on its side i.e., Pakistan and China and will be far better placed in China’s extended regional connectivity programme than it is now. Zarif’s connectivity proposal itself tells everything. To quote him:

“We believe that Chabahar and Gwadar can complement each other. We can connect Chabahar and Gwadar, and then through that, connect Gwadar to our entire railroad system, from Iran to the North Corridor, through Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, and also through Azerbaijan, Russia, and Turkey.”

As far as the US—Iran tension is concerned, unlike India, Pakistan has already said that it will not take sides in the conflict. Pakistan’s neutrality in the on-going scenario suits Tehran far more than it does for the US, that is if it does at all.

There is also no gainsaying that Tehran’s proposal to connect the two ports couldn’t have come with prior consultation with the Chinese, who are practically running the port in Pakistan. Accordingly, before coming to Pakistan, Zarif was in China where he met his Chinese counterpart and certainly discussed this proposal, leading Chinese foreign minister to “Welcome Iran” to actively take part in the joint building of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) through Chabahar.

China also re-affirmed its support for Iran. “China firmly opposes unilateral sanctions and the so-called ‘long-arm jurisdiction’ imposed by the United States on Iran,” Wang said, pledging to maintain the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and safeguard the authority of the United Nations and basic norms governing international relations.

Chinese support’s major manifestation came a few days ago when Chinese oil tanker Pacific Bravo left the Persian Gulf with 2 million barrels of Iranian light crude, ignoring the US sanctions and practically challenging the US unilateralism.

Pacific Bravo is owned by Bank of Kunlun, a financial institution that is owned by the Chinese state oil company CNPC. Bank of Kunlun has long been the financial institution at heart of China-Iran bilateral trade—a role for which the company was sanctioned during the Obama administration. Despite already being designated, Bank of Kunlun ceased its Iran-related activities in early May when the oil waivers were revoked. But Bravo’s current moves point to a change in Chinese policy. Importantly enough, Bravo sailed from the Persian Gulf on the same day as Zarif arrived in Beijing and met Chinese foreign minister to discuss Iranian participation in BRI (through linking Gwadar and Chabahar).

With Iran now taking this fundamental shift, what is apparent is that a major foreign policy shift in Iran has taken places whereby its leadership has come to an understanding that their relations with the US are unlikely to take a positive turn for a long time and that a necessary adjustment in the foreign policy is absolutely needed. As a matter of fact, it was only a few days ago when Iran’s supreme leader criticised Iran’s foreign policy and dropped a major hint about why changing the course of foreign policy was an utmost necessity.

Of course, its major manifestation is reorienting Iran’s relations with Pakistan via participation in BRI. Pakistan will be least concerned about any US reaction over linking Gwadar with Chabahar, for the US sanctions do not apply to the Iranian port. But the fact that geo-political significance of the port will undergo a significant change after a successful linkage between the two ports and that China will become a major player, the US might feel ‘compelled’ to direct its sanctions toward the port eventually.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

US Direction in Middle East Subject to More and More Criticism

Sat, 2019-06-08 22:59

In recent time, U.S. actions in the Middle East have been subject to more and more criticism in European as well as Asian capitals.

Clearly, Washington’s pro-Israeli course has resulted in growing disapproval in Arab nations.

It is well-known that in December 2017, Donald Trump announced U.S. recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and moved the American embassy there. In response, the Palestinian National Authority severed ties with Washington.

On 22 May, Jason Greenblatt, the U.S. Special Representative for International Negotiations, called for the dismantling of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

In order to somehow stem the wave of discontent engulfing the Arab and Muslim world, Americans have continued to promise that they will unveil a new plan to resolve the Middle East conflict, called the “deal of the century”, in the nearest future. The United States intends to stage a conference in Manama (the capital of Bahrain) on 25 of June in order to discuss economic and financial aspects of the peace treaty between Palestinians and Israelis that Americans have been working on. But as stated by the Al-Ahram newspaper recently, numerous issues that plague the Middle East region cannot be resolved by catering only to Israeli interests.

Seemingly, there was a view in Washington that the victory of Benjamin Netanyahu’s right wing party (in the elections to the Knesset in April) would greatly support and facilitate the American plans for the region.

However, at the end of May, there was an unprecedented internal political crisis in Israel. Benjamin Netanyahu was unable to form a coalition government, and the newly-elected members voted to disband the Knesset and hold new elections. The influence of religious and ultra-Orthodox parties has grown noticeably in Israel. And their combined political clout is gradually increasing. They oppose drafting religious Jews to serve in the military. During the most recent election, the two ultra-Orthodox parties jointly won 16 seats in the Knesset, thus, essentially, transforming into the third most sizable political force to be reckoned with.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s fate is also on the line, since he is being investigated by the prosecution in connection with three criminal cases. He has been accused of fraud, abuse of power and bribery. He has categorically denied any wrong-doing. The preliminary hearing before any official indictment has been scheduled for July. However, Benjamin Netanyahu has managed to convince the prosecution to postpone it until autumn.

Besides, more and more doubts are being expressed in both Israel and the United States as to whether Benjamin Netanyahu would be able to survive all of these political upheavals. At any rate, the peace plan to resolve the Middle Eastern issue, which was supposed to be unveiled on President Donald Trump’s behalf by his son-in-law and senior advisor to the White House, Jared Kushner, will most likely not survive. The treaty’s main focus, according to some leaked reports about its contents, is not on the establishment of an independent Palestinian state but on large-scale investments into the Palestinian economy.

The Palestinian National Authority has already stated that they would not take part in the conference in Bahrain, and neither would leading Palestinian entrepreneurs (hence, a joke has been circulating in U.S. media outlets that Donald Trump “has organized a wedding in Bahrain but without the groom”).

In the current climate, more and more skepticism is being expressed in the United States about the viability of the plans, being prepared by Washington (which include, among other things, an aim to align Israeli positions with those of other Arab nations of the Persian Gulf more closely), especially given the fact that U.S. influence in the Middle East has been decreasing steadily.

Under the present circumstances (especially on account of tense relations between the United States and both Europe and China), the Trump administration decided to discuss the issues facing the Middle East with Russia. At the end of May, there were serious talks about Syria between Americans and their Russian counterparts. In June 2019, the National Security Advisor to the U.S. President, John R. Bolton, is scheduled to meet with Nikolai Patrushev, the Secretary of the Security Council of Russia, and Meir Ben-Shabbat, Israel’s National Security Advisor, in Jerusalem in order to discuss issues of regional security.

Vladimir Mashin, Ph.D. in History and a political commentator, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Trump in the UK: A Marriage Made in Hell

Sat, 2019-06-08 18:22

We have all seen it time and again – the US walks into some developing country, gives its support to its favoured politicians, irrespective of whether they are in government or not, and then starts trying to dictate domestic policy by offering “aid” the poor country is in no position to refuse.

But this is how we tell the developing countries from the developed ones. Mature democracies with large economies are not treated this way. The US may not see such countries as equals, but it regards their governments as legitimate, and deals with them accordingly. It expresses support for, or sometimes disagreement with, their policies, but does not openly support their opponents in preference to themselves, or one member of the governing party as opposed to another.

Donald Trump’s State Visit to the UK has to be one of the most disgusting spectacles ever seen on the world stage. Maybe as a businessman, or rather legalised conman, he looks at every country as a potential addition to the corporate portfolio he is not supposed to have, or profit from, while he is in office.

But even he knows you don’t come on a state visit to the UK and meet Nigel Farage, who has never been elected to parliament, and tell the government he should be leading the Brexit negotiations.

You don’t go round saying that the National Health Service, such a jewel in the UK’s crown, can be part of any US-UK trade deal he is banking on the UK being desperate to accept, even though he backtracked on these comments later.

You don’t arrange meetings with politicians behind the back of the Prime Minister, and start spouting off about who you want to win the Conservative Party’s internal leadership election to replace her.

The sight of Donald “Grab ‘Em Right by the Pussy” Trump, as President of the United States, walking into America’s former colonial master, as an honoured guest of the crown and the nation, and tearing down every previous standard of decency belongs to some sort of porn movie rather than anything the international audience should be exposed to on primetime TV. Brits have the right to ask, “How has it come to this?” But they don’t ask too loud, because they already know, and they have done it to themselves.

Cat food out of the bag

If Trump knew about anything apart from his own ego he might consider that one of the reasons the Russian autocracy was long regarded so negatively in the UK was Peter the Great’s notorious visit of 1698, during which he came across as drunk and boorish, chopping up priceless furniture for firewood and using paintings as target practice.

As England had only recently had its Glorious Revolution, designed to end absolute monarchy, this behaviour was considered an inevitable consequence of a country having a backward, inherently corrupt system of government. Two centuries later, King George V would not allow Tsar Nicholas II to settle in England after his abdication due to fear of the negative public reaction that the 1698 visit, though forgotten in itself, still engendered in the British public.

But Trump can and will get away with behaving as a later-day Peter the Great because the United Kingdom is living in a virtual reality which everyone else sees through. Of course it can offer Trump pageantry, the Queen, parliament and all the things the American colonies turned their backs on in 1776.

Indeed that is why London attracts so many American tourists: they go there to see historical fantasy, a sugar cake of their own imaginings of what life was like in a gentler era, in which they were all aristocrats rather than peasants. But that pageantry is increasingly just that: fantasy. The UK may still have one of the world’s strongest economies, but it is increasingly a house of cards waiting to fall down, even without Brexit.

For over thirty years the UK has made a point out of progressively cutting welfare assistance, a practice now disguised by the pseudo-scientific term “austerity”. The UN has criticised the country for its treatment of the poor and vulnerable, and UK state pension levels are amongst the lowest in the developed world.

The economic reforms of the Thatcher era, designed to ensure that British industry paid its way and no longer lived on public subsidy, were supposed to have swept this situation away. People who are claiming pensions now began their working lives during that period, and paid their contributions. They are entitled to believe that, having been part of these reforms and paid their way, they should now be suitably cared for by the state: they are not demanding anything they have not worked and paid for, as they were told they now had to do.

When such a situation exists, the country itself is sick. It doesn’t matter what economic or social policies you adopt: there is an inherent malaise which is resistant to reform. Sometimes it lies in the attitude of the people, sometimes the system of government is so compromised that the country is incapable of progressing. Modern Turkey is a very different animal to the old Ottoman Empire, because the Ottoman Empire as constituted could not survive, and cannot be resurrected.

The US has known the truth about the UK, the old motherland and “special friend”, for a very long time, but has been too polite to say it. Trump could never be accused of being polite, but even he isn’t saying it directly.

Nevertheless he is demonstrating by his actions that the UK is as sick as it is, because he knows he can. Brits may not like it, but their government is powerless to resist, as at present it cannot convince anyone that he UK is anything better than the Third World countries it is always so dismissive about for the crime of not copying the British.

Trump has visited the UK because he knows it is easy pickings. All that history and grandeur is for sale, and dirt cheap. As George Soros once found, all it takes for a currency to lose a significant chunk of its value is for currency traders to stop believing in its stated worth. The value on the pound note remains the same, but it is worth nothing more than Trump thinks it is, as he shows by behaving like the arrogant crook he has always been.

Pips that can’t even squeak

Now Theresa May is standing down there is a scramble to replace her. Or rather it is more like a collection of ducks, some fat and some scrawny, waddling into each other and waiting to be shot.

There have always been times when governing parties have been punished at the polls, at local council elections, by-elections and European elections when they have fallen in a mid-term. When people aren’t actually voting for the government in Westminster, they often display a healthy desire to kick whichever party is in power just to remind it that it is there to serve the people, not the other way round.

The Conservatives have sunk low when in government before, most notably in 1995, when after the local elections in they controlled only around 13 local authorities in the UK as a whole, out of a total of over 300. This made them the third party in local government, after Labour and the Liberal Democrats.

But on that occasion they gained 25% of the UK wide vote, and although clearly in serious trouble they had no serious competitors for their significant share of the electorate. People who would otherwise have voted Conservative either defected to other parties temporarily or stayed at home, and could expect to be won back if the party got its act together.

At last month’s European parliament elections the Conservatives won 8.8% of the vote, by far their lowest total in any national election. They were squeezed on the right by the Brexit Party and on the left by the Liberal Democrats, and to a lesser extent Labour and the Greens. Those who remain in the Conservative fold are clinging on to something which used to be, but no longer exists. Yet this is the party of government, albeit minority government, whose next leader will become Prime Minister.

The parade has passed the Conservative Party by, at least while Nigel Farage is still roaming the media outlets and running from the law. The idea of the leader of the Conservative Party being the next British Prime Minister is about as credible as O.J. Simpson being the next US President.

The new leader may command a majority in parliament, with the support of the Ulster Unionists, but will have no relevance to the population. There has never been a greater threat to the UK’s long and distinguished tradition of parliamentary democracy than the government being run by people who only got 8.8% of the vote last time anyone was asked to cast one.

Despite this dire situation, nearly twenty MPs announced candidacies or suggested they would do so. This was not a ringing endorsement of the health of the parliamentary party however. It was more of an attempt to stop Boris Johnson, by any means possible – or get up on the coat tails of his supporters, if this endeavour succeeded.

The party is making up the rules as it goes along, in the hope that it can get someone in quick and avoid complete meltdown. The remaining ducks now need to gain the support of eight colleagues to be nominated, and then go through two more rounds of voting before the final two face a broader party vote.

The broader vote is designed to give the elected leader greater legitimacy, but is likely to have the opposite effect given the small rump of Conservative members still supportive enough to vote, or care about who gets the job if it isn’t Boris. It is the equivalent of the Lord Mayor of London being chosen by a random selection of customers voting in the back room of a supermarket, which wasn’t even in London. Even if the new leader is broadly acceptable to the public as well as the party the mere fact that they lead the Conservative Party will make them untenable as Prime Minister.

This is before they even discuss what they are going to do about Brexit. Predictably, the various candidates have different views on this subject, from “crash out on October 31st with no deal” to “renegotiate the best possible deal and sell it to the public”. Neither of those outcomes has ever been capable of existing, and now they are being promoted by a Prime Minister from the rump Conservative Party, it is crazy to even think that they might.

Bad mouths kiss

The general opinion of Trump’s presidency is that he has debased the office he holds. Whether you agree or disagree with his policies, the way he conducts himself makes people wonder why the US is such an important country, which demands everyone else should jump to its tune, when this is the best person it can elect to its highest office.

It would be unfair to say that Theresa May debased the office of UK Prime Minister by her behaviour. But she has undoubtedly done that by pursuing Brexit and pleasing nobody. History will not be kind to her legacy.

Previous UK policy failures were seen as reversible negatives, with the strength of the country’s economy and institutions, not to mention its international reputation, containing all the necessary building blocks to turn the country round. But Brexit has divided and weakened the fabric of the nation so much that it cannot point to its considerable previous achievements as the index of its worth.

All those achievements were before the monster called Brexit was invented, and that monster has cut the UK off from its past and left it no future worth speaking of. So says the international community as well as Donald Trump, as you aren’t seeing a rush of world leaders defending the UK against his behaviour, even though they don’t condone it when he goes to their countries.

When the Labour Party, in opposition, elected a new leader in 1963 leading moderate Anthony Crosland lamented that the two serious candidates were Harold Wilson and George Brown, which he said was “a choice between a crook and a drunk”. It may have been an invidious choice, but the crook and the drunk were in the same party, not opposing ones.

Throughout their careers, Wilson and Brown demonstrated that they needed each other, even if both were deeply unpopular with their colleagues. Donald Trump, the crook, has come to the UK to abuse it, making him even more unpopular than ever, and the UK government, and the country as a whole, are now so drunk and incapable that they need to cling to this wretch to walk upright while the rest of the world walks disdainfully by.

Seth Ferris, investigative journalist and political scientist, expert on Middle Eastern affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

YouTube and the War on Truth

Sat, 2019-06-08 08:59

As of June 2019, YouTube, owned by Google Corporation, with a long history of peddling “big data” to spy agencies and right-wing extremist groups, is going to “clean house.”

Their claim, that they will remove all “hate speech” and unspecified other “objectionable material” is a huge threat against free speech around the world.

You see, Google’s YouTube has actively molded a world of its own, financially partnering with the fake, the inane, the absurd while deeply censoring free speech from day one. For years, YouTube has run an obscure system of fake volunteers financed by think tanks and spy agencies, hundreds of them housed in special facilities in Haifa, Israel, that ban users whose material reflects badly in Israeli apartheid.

Moreover, YouTube has provided, in partnership with the highly secretive military contracting firms, Idea Groups and Jigsaw, to give terror groups like al Qaeda and their many “nephews” along with ISIS, “on the fly” covert communications and operational intelligence.

The same “troll rooms” in Haifa that clean free speech from YouTube help secure private posting boards for ISIS and other terror groups who communicate their operational plans using comment boards on videos.

This was the ISIS fallback when their use of Facebook chat was exposed, and the NSA began tracing terror cells through their “Zuckerman channel.”

ISIS and al Qaeda members simply stay logged into their YouTube app and run “tear sheet” coded transmissions under the protection of Google Corporation. More than that, this process, using YouTube chat to plan terror bombings, mass shootings or gas attacks is taught by advisory groups financed under Google Jigsaw’s program of fostering “democratic resistance to tyranny.”

Google financed resistance organizations have been active in support of what they term “democratic movements” in Syria, Egypt, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Ghana, Cameroon, Nigeria, Ukraine, Georgia, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Bahrain, Sri Lanka, Italy, France, Germany, Belgium and two dozen other nations.

Our projections show that these groups have been tied to assassinations, literally hundreds of bombings, kidnappings and mass rape, theft of antiquities, massive arms trafficking and, of course, manipulation of the media.

In fact, the Google-Facebook partnership which includes YouTube, operates cells on 3 continents with a playbook taken directly from NATO’s failed Gladio operation. For those unaware, Gladio was established by NATO in the late 1970s to train resistance fighters in case of a Soviet invasion of Europe. Gladio, however, soon became Black September, the Red Brigades and eventually ISIS, according to our sources. For 20 years, Gladio terror attacks, an organization intended to fight the Soviet Union, terrorized Europe. History is now repeating itself, but the scale is a thousand times greater.

Liars Decide What is True

YouTube’s earliest targets are to be BDS, the movement to force governments to use Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions to enforce UN resolutions involving Palestine. It is good to note that over 45 % of what is called Israel, without Gaza, Golan or the West Bank, is legally the Palestinian State of Judea and Samara, in accordance with UN resolutions with BDS programs directly in accord with international law as stated in the Fourth Geneva Convention. YouTube has decided to operate outside UN resolutions and to oppose the authority of the International Criminal Court at The Hague and the Geneva Convention.

Naming YouTube-Google-Facebook a “rogue state” is legally supportable. Calling them the Deep State may well be even more accurate.

From the New York Times, June 5, 2019:

“YouTube announced plans on Wednesday to remove thousands of videos and channels that advocate neo-Nazism, white supremacy and other bigoted ideologies in an attempt to clean up extremism and hate speech on its popular service.

The new policy will ban “videos alleging that a group is superior in order to justify discrimination, segregation or exclusion,” the company said in a blog post. The prohibition will also cover videos denying that violent events, like the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, took place.

YouTube did not name any specific channels or videos that would be banned. But on Wednesday, numerous far-right creators began complaining that their videos had been deleted, or had been stripped of ads, presumably a result of the new policy.

“It’s our responsibility to protect that, and prevent our platform from being used to incite hatred, harassment, discrimination and violence,” the blog post said.”

It is funny that the Times mentions Sandy Hook. A prominent American academic is facing a defamation trial for editing a series of papers by independent journalists who comment on inconsistencies in the official narrative.

Our own investigation of the incident, from a counter-terrorism, counter-intelligence standpoint found massive irregularities in the investigation and handling of evidence and, moreover, the fact that funds used to punish or silence members of the independent press, is of mysterious origin.

In fact, so many investigations are botched or rather faked. For some years, I managed security firms that, among other capabilities, investigated critical incidents, including air crashes, mine disasters and terrorism. Most of our investigators and forensics experts came from the FBI or other agencies.

The mechanism believed to have been employed at Sandy Hook was certainly employed at 9/11, at Khan Sheikhoun in Syria, during the murders of John and Robert Kennedy along with the alleged Skripal poisonings in Britain.

In case after case, as is easy to ascertain, governments are overthrown, bombing attacks ordered, countries invaded, sanctions employed, all based on “findings” from fake investigations of incidents where the real perpetrators are those who benefit, as is always the case, from the mayhem and suffering caused.

Of course now, YouTube has stepped in to remove the offending videos, which include CBS anchor Dan Rather reporting the arrest of Mossad agents with explosives on the George Washington Bridge on 9/11, videos of tactical nuclear weapons used against Yemen or outside Damascus in May 2013 and, most telling of all, the statements of dozens of witnesses describing how the White Helmets stage gas attacks including, in one video, 40 former White Helmets themselves. Are we seeing an agenda here?

This reminds me of a personal experience. I had just returned from Nairobi where I was tasked with making recommendations to the Interior Ministry after the infamous shopping mall attack that killed 71 people.

When I got home, a local attorney asked for pro bono aid in investigating a fatal car crash involving two vehicles that hit head on outside Wauseon, Ohio. The police investigation, made entirely on the scene in less than 30 minutes, found a young woman driving one of the vehicles responsible of homicide.

Our investigation showed that, at the scene, the young woman was refused medical care though in critical condition and was later arrested based on a coerced confession made while she was in a semi-coma in the intensive care unit of a local hospital. She nearly died during the helicopter ride, something worth note.

There was one problem. Both cars were found in the lane where the young woman was driving and the other driver, an older woman, had actually crossed over the line and caused the accident. Review of medical records showed the older woman to have been heavily drugged on Ambien, a hypnotic sedative and a cocktail of opioids and anti-psychotic drugs. She was, medically, a “zombie.”

Worse still, when the “black boxes” were downloaded from each vehicle and uploaded into a “full physics” crash simulator, the animations, which exactly mimic car movements, steering, speed, braking, easily demonstrated that the police had faked the investigation.

A review of the officers involved showed that they had performed hundreds of similar investigations, all with no forensic evidence, all simply fabricated.

It isn’t just traffic accidents, criminal investigations of all kinds are much the same, pick a guilty person, engineer fake evidence, and send them to prison.

There’s a pattern here. If an official source comes forward, then we have a whistleblower, a “criminal.” They can’t be believed. In fact, they must be hunted down and imprisoned.

If it is an independent journalist, they are “conspiracy theorists” and YouTube erases their work. If video evidence is so compelling it cannot be ignored, then it is “fostering hate” and is removed.

Being policed by the police is bad enough, being policed by tech companies controlled by extremist political movements, which aptly describes all Google and Facebook functions, redefines tyranny.

Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War that has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues. He’s a senior editor and chairman of the board of  Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

This Outlaw Power

Fri, 2019-06-07 21:00

On June 4th the Chinese government issued a travel alert for Chinese tourists thinking of visiting the United States, a day after it issued a similar advisory to Chinese students thinking of studying in the US over concerns for their safety and security. Chinese in the US are reporting harassment and interrogations by US immigration authorities and many now have the impression they are not welcome in the US.

The Global Times, speaking on behalf of the government stated,

“The Chinese people find it difficult to accept the fact that they are being taken as thieves. The US boasts too much superiority and has been indulged by the world. Due to its short history, it lacks understanding of and respect for the rules of countries and laws of the market. The Americans of the early generations accumulated prosperity and prestige for the US, while the current US administration behaves like a wastrel generation by ruining the world’s respect for the US.”

It seems to me they are being generous to the US since the “early prosperity” of the US was built on the backs of slave labour, extermination of the indigenous peoples and theft of their lands, colonization and exploitation of other countries, including China, and two hundred years of continual warfare to secure the resources and markets of first the western hemisphere, then the world. Their “prestige” comes out of the barrel of a gun. The US economic and military aggression against those nations that refuse to obey American demands to serve their interests ever increases and never abates. A few days ago Mike Pompeo stated, with feigned innocence, that the US was willing to talk to Iran “without preconditions” when the real conditions Iran faces include an almost total embargo of its trade and threats of immediate attack by US forces, including nuclear attack. The Iranians quickly rejected this hypocrisy.

In the Balkans the US and its NATO war machine have again stirred up problems in Serbia where, in the NATO occupied province of Kosovo-Metohija, Serbs and Russians were detained and beaten up by Albanian security forces designed to put further pressure on Serbia to fall into the NATO camp so that the NATO machine will have complete control of the Balkans to complete the encirclement of Russia. The war goes on in Syria, goes on in Ukraine, goes on in Afghanistan. The terrible situation of the Palestinians becomes even worse as the US plans the final solution for them-their disappearance as a people to be absorbed as citizens of other states, while Israel continues its aggressive expansion and acts as agent of the US bully in the region; the threats against Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea continue.

But the principle preoccupation of the US is still China and Russia. On May 30th the US Department of Defense released its strategy paper for the Indo-Pacific region in which, after several pages of lies about its role in the world as savior and benefactor, set out America’s intentions to dominate China and Russia. It is another item of evidence that the United States government and its allies are conspiring to commit crimes against peace by planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression against those nations. These designs by the American leadership reflect not only the desire of the owners of capital in the US to dominate the world. They also reflect the Americans’ preoccupation with themselves as “exceptional” people, as the “exceptional” nation, above all others, answerable to none, which has been a characteristic of their culture since its foundation.

The aggressive objectives of the successive American governments were and are not accidents or mistakes arising out of immediate political circumstances but are a deliberate and necessary part of American foreign policy. From its inception the American political leadership has claimed to unite the American people with a consciousness of their mission and destiny to dominate the world. War is seen as inevitable or highly probable to accomplish these objectives where intimidation and bribery fail.

To accomplish its objectives the United States has done all it can to disrupt the world order established after World War Two when world nations joined together for world peace in the United Nations Charter in 1946. Within 3 years the US set up the NATO military alliance to threaten the Soviet Union, soon waged wars across south east Asia and overthrew governments the world over. The rise to power of President Trump has resulted in the United States withdrawing from a series of treaties designed to reduce the threat of war and of nuclear armaments, or promote free trade, in order to free the United States from its obligations under the treaties involved to allow it to pursue its objectives using any means necessary. They have rejected international law and diplomacy in interstate relationships and now rely on threats and violence.

The Indo-Pacific Strategy Report, of June 1, 2019 begins with the claim that,

“Inter-state strategic competition, defined by geopolitical rivalry between free and repressive world order visions, is the primary concern for U.S. national security. In particular, the People’s Republic of China, under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, seeks to reorder the region to its advantage by leveraging military modernization, influence operations, and predatory economics to coerce other nations.”

Time and again the Report ascribes to China the actual behavior of the United States for is it not the United States that has sought to reorder the world since it became a world power; has it not used all these methods and more to coerce other nations? The world knows it. Yet once again their sense of being exceptional makes them blind to their stupefying arrogance and hypocrisy.

The Report then warns that,

“We will not accept policies or actions that threaten or undermine the rules-based international order – an order that benefits all nations. We are committed to defending and enhancing these shared values”.

What they mean by “rules based international order” is not the order of international law as accepted by the world governments in the United Nations Charter and other international agreements but a US imposed international order, – an order that does not yet exist except in the fantasies of these gangsters-but which they never stop trying to impose on the world, an order of militarism, fear, and tyranny for the rest of the world.

The balance of the Report sets out their strategy of building up a “networked region” that is, a US controlled system of vassal states to prepare for war with China by prepositioning ammunition, equipment, logistics supplies, transportation networks, intelligence sharing and rapid deployment of forces to threaten China. The vassal states; Japan, South Korea, Australia New Zealand, Canada, Indonesia, The Philippines, Thailand, Singapore, Taiwan, are all patted on the head for assisting the United States and promised they will be rewarded with peace and prosperity so long as they accept their subservient role to the saintly United States. Other southeast Asia nations are referred to as potential “partners” for the future as they try to brag that they have Vietnam, India, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Laos and Cambodia on their side when all they have are courtesy arrangements and cooperation on a low level that all nations have with each other. Their vision of their influence is greater than the reality.

But the three targets remain the same for according to the Report, China is a “Revisionist Power, ”Russia is a “Revitalized Malign Actor,” while the DPRK, keeps its status as a “Rogue State,” all of which the Americans claim are intent on challenging their fictional “rules based order.” There then follows, in each case, paragraph after paragraph of distortions of the facts about the nature and behavior of these three nations so that one feels compelled to break into laughter when reading these ludicrous labels that seem to come from a very bad 1950’s Hollywood film script.

But finally, after all the verbiage, they get down to it and set out their real objectives by referencing the US Defense Strategy of 2018 which sets out the four pillars of their hegemonic designs:

1. Defend the Homeland;

This is a curious phrase we have been seeing the past number of years in American parlance, this concept of ‘homeland,” but in contradistinction to what is never stated. Well, the to the rest of the world, of course, which they now consider their lands as well, their outlands, and so the need for a phrase to identify the US as the “homeland”. What could more display their colonial mindset than the use of this phrase?

2. Remain the preeminent military power in the world;

This is a threat to the world, to humankind, and can only be maintained by the pauperization of its own people.

3. Ensure the balances of power in key regions remain in our favour;

Meaning that they intend to keep playing one nation off against another and create chaos where necessary, to play both sides against the middle, whatever it takes so that the United States maintains the ruling hand,

4. Advance an international order that is most conducive to our security and prosperity

And here we have their principle objective, meaning that, despite all the rhetoric about shared values, shared goals and friendships with its vassal allies, the world is meant to enrich and serve the United States.

To make sure the world knows of their power and what they are willing to do with it the Report states,

“In the region, US INDOPACOM currently has more than 2,000 aircraft; 200 ships and submarines; and more than 370,000 Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airmen, DoD civilians, and contractors assigned within its area of responsibility. The largest concentration of forces in the region are in Japan and the ROK. A sizable contingent of forces (more than 5,000 on a day-to-day basis) are also based in the U.S. territory of Guam, which serves as a strategic hub supporting crucial operations and logistics for all U.S. forces operating in the Indo-Pacific region. Other allies and partners that routinely host U.S. forces on a smaller scale include the Philippines, Australia, Singapore, and the United Kingdom through the island of Diego Garcia”. Other bases are planned in Australia and New Guinea.

In describing its relations and military cooperation with its vassal allies it places special emphasis on Taiwan and uses language that in direct terms violates the One China Policy of China, which the US pays lip service to. It is tantamount to a declaration that Taiwan is a US protectorate instead of an integral part of China.

They state,

“The objective of our defense engagement with Taiwan is to ensure that Taiwan remains secure, confident, free from coercion, and able to peacefully and productively engage the mainland on its own terms.”

So when US, Australian, French, or British naval forces claim they are traversing the Straight of Taiwan as an exercise in “freedom of navigation” we know that what they are really doing is using force to divide China, to treat it as if it were still the weak China of the 19th century when American gunboats until as late as 1949 ran up and down the Yangtze River as if they owned it; to slap it in the face, to dare it with insults.

The situation has become so tense that the Global Times on June 6,th in an op ed by Wei Jianguo, said,

“China is able to withstand US maximum pressure, due to the country’s economic resilience, and Chinese people’s resolute determination. Suffering from a century of humiliation, the Chinese nation has been accustomed to such pressure, as shown in the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression, as well as the Korean War or the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea. The unity of Chinese people is a vital reason for the country’s fundamental victory in history.”

The Peoples’ Daily stated, “America is the enemy of the world.”

Russia and China, in their defence, are intensifying their economic and military cooperation but the threat remains and is increasing. The answer may lie in the fact that the US strategy is ultimately self-defeating. The more they try to dominate the world, the more intense the resistance becomes. Even their alliances are coming apart at the seams as the thieves bicker about their share of the loot. But the question remains, what to do about this enemy of the world, this outlaw power.

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel “Beneath the Clouds. He writes essays on international law, politics and world events, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Pages