Washington’s Weak Hand in Syria By Tony Cartalucci

The US still holds territory east of the Euphrates, and – as American policymakers like to gloat – much of Syria’s oil wealth falls within this territory illegally occupied by US troops.

The New Dark Age

14 November 2018 — Land Destroyer
(Tony Cartalucci – NEO) – With Damascus and its allies firmly in control of Syria’s largest cities and the vast majority of Syrian territory west of the Euphrates – not only has the US-led proxy war against the nation failed – with Russian and Iranian forces involved indefinitely – the return of additional territory under Damascus’ control seems all but inevitable.

View original post 430 more words

The Lust for Libya: How a Nation Was Torn Apart

The Lust for Libya: How a Nation Was Torn Apart

Al Jazeera (2018)

Film Review

This is a two part documentary about the 2011 US/UN invasion of Libya, which triggered its descent into civil war.

Part 1 is about pre-independence Libya and Muamar Gaddafi’s rise to power during the 1969 revolution. Prior to Gaddafi’s 2011 overthrow, Libya had no history as an independent state. It was continuously occupied from ancient times, by Greeks, Romans, Ottomans, Italians and eventually a French/British and a British/US consortium.

Inspired by the pan-Arab movement started by Egyptian president Gamal Nasser, in 1969 Gaddafi led a successful revolution to oust the pro-US government. He went on to close the US/UK military bases and nationalize their oil companies and the Italian banks that controlled Libya’s economy.

With the 1973 oil embargo, the value of Libya’s oil doubled overnight. Gaddafi used the country’s new found wealth to rapidly build up Libya’s decaying infrastructure, as well as to provide free health care, housing and education (through university) for all residents.

Following Nasser’s death in 1970, Gaddafi sought to enshrine himself as the “man of the masses” who would unite the Arab world. In this role, he supported numerous international liberation struggle, including the Irish Republican Army, the African National Congress and the Palestinian Liberation Organization. He also developed a bizarre and grandiose habit of claiming responsibility for terrorist bombings (including CIA/NATO Operation Gladio false flag bombings*).

In 1973 he revoked the Libyan constitution and ruled independent decree. Although he established thousands of Jamahiriya (people’s committees), they had no real power independent of the Libyan  military. The analysts interviewed here view Gaddafi as a benevolent dictator who was genuinely concerned about the Libyan people but lacked any education or training in setting up democratic institutions of power.

Worried a prolonged Iran-Iraq war (1980-88) would hinder US access to Middle East Oil, the US would launch its first covert regime change operations against Gaddaffi in 1981. These included a 1981 assassination attempt (by bombing his palace) in 1981, as well as an effort to frame Libya for the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am passenger jet over Lockerbie Scotland.

The incident would lead to UN sanctions against Libya from 1992 until 2003, when Gaddafi signed an agreement he would end his nuclear program, assume financial responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing and assist the CIA in fighting global terrorism.


*Operation Gladio is the code name for a CIA/NATO backed paramilitary network that carried out thousands of false flag terrorist operations in Cold War Europe. The goal of these operations was to justify repressive government legislation against grassroots anti-capitalist organizers. It was exposed in a 1992 BBC documentary. See 1965-75: The Decade that Nearly Dismantled Capitalism

 

‘Completely safe’: Monsanto owner Bayer hit by new wave of lawsuits over Roundup weed killer

Source: RT

German chemicals and pharmaceuticals giant Bayer disclosed that lawsuits from 9,300 plaintiffs were pending at the end of October. The lawsuits allege that the company’s recently acquired weed-killing product causes cancer. Plaintiffs claim that Roundup weed killers, which Bayer acquired in its takeover of US agrochemical firm Monsanto, made them ill and that the company knew or should have known of the risks but failed to warn adequately.

Bayer rejected all the accusations, claiming there are hundreds of scientific studies and regulatory authorities that show glyphosate, the compound contained in the weed killers, is safe to use. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, which is the most popular weed killer in the US. “We continue to believe that we have meritorious defenses and intend to defend ourselves vigorously in all of these lawsuits,” said Bayer’s chief executive Werner Baumann. He acknowledged, however, that “more lawsuits are to be expected.”There were 8,700 lawsuits against the company as of the end of August.

According to Baumann, “glyphosate is an indispensable chemical for modern agriculture that is safe to use, very effective and saves resources.” He explained: “When used appropriately, glyphosate is a completely safe and good product,” repeating “completely safe.”

The number of lawsuits against Monsanto has been surging lately and, according to expert estimates, could cost its new owner Bayer billions of dollars in damages in the coming years. The surge in lawsuits followed the $289-million California court verdict when Monsanto was ordered to pay damages to a man who alleged its glyphosate-based weed killers, including Roundup, caused his cancer.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maintains glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic. It had labeled glyphosate a carcinogen in 1985, but reversed the position in 1991. The World Health Organization’s cancer research agency classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” in 2015. California has listed glyphosate in its Proposition 65 registry of chemicals known to cause cancer.

Source: ‘Completely safe’: Monsanto owner Bayer hit by new wave of lawsuits over Roundup weed killer

Majority Of Men In US & Europe Will Be Infertile By 2060 – Study

Most experts agree that the data presented is of a high quality and that the conclusions, although alarming, are reliable.

Nwo Report

The majority of men in the US and Europe will be infertile by 2060 according to a disturbing new study by the Hebrew Univeristy in Jerusalem.Sperm count in men from North America, Europe and Australia is declining so quickly that “most men” in these countries will be infertile by the year 2060, according to disturbing new research from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Sperm count in men from Western countries plunged by 50-60% between 1973 and 2011, according to the new study, with the trend set to continue until men are completely infertile.

Interestingly, the study, which analysed data on the sperm counts of 42,935 men, found no decline in sperm counts in men from Africa, South America, and Asia — parts of the world less dominated by Big Pharma, GMOs and toxic, commercially processed “food.”

Chris Barratt, the Professor of Reproductive Medicine at Dundee University says “Overall, this is a very disturbing report.”

“There has been a longstanding debate among scientists as to whether sperm counts have decreased or not. But what’s different about this study…

View original post 369 more words

US Brazenly Violates Trump-Kim Singapore Agreement

Washington’s behavior following Trump’s signing of the Singapore Summit Agreement with Kim Jong-un must be described as schizophrenic.  The Singapore Summit agreement states:

  1. “The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new U.S.-DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.
  2. “The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.”

The DPRK has already fulfilled point “4.” Of the Singapore Summit, and repatriated POW/MIA remains to the USA.  It is fulfilling point “3.”, which requires “complete denuclearization of the  Korean Peninsula:  

It has ceased testing weapons, and on May 25, 2018 destroyed its major test-site, Punggye-ri. 

By contrast, the United States persistence in maintaining punitive and ultimately genocidal sanctions against the DPRK reached the savage extreme on October 17, 2018, when it was announced in The New York Times  that

“The Trump administration has barred American aid workers from going to North Korea…Barring aid workers from traveling affects humanitarian programs in North Korea, including efforts to alleviate tuberculosis and provide medical training and farming assistance.  ‘People are suffering,’said Robert King, a former American special envoy for human rights in North Korea.  ‘Ít’s not the same as limiting luxury goods for the elite or reducing access to military goods.   The idea of focusing effort and time on limiting humanitarian services strikes me as being totally counterproductive.’” 

“’The potential life-threatening consequences of this policy are far-reaching,’ said Keith Luse, spokesperson for these US humanitarian aid groups.”

Whether a manifestation of dangerous insanity, or vicious bad faith, Washington’s recent prohibition on humanitarian aid to the DPRK is a cynical violation of articles 1 and 2 of the Singapore Summit Agreement committing the US and the DPRK to establish new US-DPRK relations building peace and prosperity, and building a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula. 

Washington’s infamous ban on humanitarian aid to the DPRK will be condemned by history and by every civilized state and organization, and should have been condemned by the United Nations Secretary-General.  The ban on humanitarian aid to the DPRK is a sadistic act of war, targeting the most vulnerable civilians of North Korea, and consigning them to slow and agonizing deaths that could have been prevented or mitigated.

And, together with Washington’s refusal to sign a peace treaty, this exacerbation of the sixty-five year  US effort to destroy the socialist government of the DPRK, it would be preposterous to expect the DPRK to divulge one iota of its defensive capability.  The purpose of this ban on humanitarian aid is one and one only:  to demoralize and break the heroic spirit of the most sophisticated and advanced, and possibly the only remaining socialist country on earth.  Washington has zero interest in the human rights of the people of the DPRK;   if there were a scintilla of truth to Washington’s incessant droning on and on about human rights, this ban could not possibly have been passed under any circumstances.

According to UN humanitarian chief Mark Lowcock,   “sanctions are exacerbating humanitarian problems.” Reuters reported:

“The UN had to stop nutrition support for kindergartens in North Korea in November, due to the lack of funding.  Its $111 million ‘2018 Needs and Priorities Plan’ is nearly 90 percent under-funded.”  “A ban on the shipment of any metal objects, from health diagnostic instrments to spoons to nail clippers, makes it nearly impossible to deliver even basic healthcare to North Korea…Farm machines, greenhouses and ambulances, meanwhile, are sitting idle without spare parts.”

Compellingly stated by an official of a large humanitarian NGO, “For humanitarian organizations the Sanctions are ‘Death by a Thousand Cuts.’

According to Christine Hong, Associate Professor at the University of California at Santa Cruz, 

“In point of fact, when you sanction things like fuel…fertilizer..or things that have any sort of dual-use capacity—things like plastic tubes that are used for IV fluid, you’re harming ordinary people.  This harm is not an inadvertent side effect of sanctions; it’s the deliberate impact of sanctions meant to destabilize a society..’’ The goal is to get the general population so restive that they rise up against the leadership of the society.  That is the sinister logic of sanctions.’” 

Truthout.org quotes Hong stating that

“sanctions are not a soft alternative to war, nor are they aimed at bettering the lives of ordinary North Korean people.  Rather, she calls sanctions against North Korea ‘an explicit part of US war policy’ dating back to the earliest days of the Korean War.’  “Part of the legacy of the US’s bombing campaign on North Korea are the 420,000 bombs dropped on Pyongyang in what historian and professor Bruce Cumings called a ‘bombing holocaust.’  ‘Historians routinely say 4 million, some even say 5 million North Koreans were killled in that war.  Seventy percent are understood to be civilians.   That’s not a clean war.  It’s a profoundly dirty war.  If there is to be normalization of relations between the US and DPRK, sanctions have to go by the wayside.’”

The UN Security Council sanctions are a cancer defiling the reputation of the UN and every member state supporting these genocidal resolutions.  The complicity of the UN Security Council is encouraging and enabling the US to  indulge its most pathological tendencies and its interest in exterminating a brave and remarkably advanced socialist people in Asia, (and one cannot exclude racism from the US agenda). . .

 

We should chop America up into 7 different countries. Seriously.

Quote

Only 7? Sounds a bit moderate. It’s interesting how these ideas keep getting circulated but never really catch on beyond the margins. Are that many people really that unhappy with the system? Or are political partisans really just equivalents of sports fans (with “extremists” like the Antifa and Alt-Right merely assuming the role of the football hooligans)?.

By Bonnie Kristian

The Week

Look, we had a good run.

Well, maybe “good” isn’t quite the right word … but certainly it’s been interesting. These United States were a grand experiment. But the experiment has gotten out of hand. It’s time to peacefully dissolve the union.

I know, I know. This is not what good Americans are supposed to suggest. “Four score and seven years ago” and all that. But to borrow a lesser-known phrase from that brief address, it seems to me we have tested whether this nation “can long endure,” and increasingly it is clear it cannot. It’s just not working. Do you really disagree? Do you like the way things are?

We are fresh off a midterm election which has guaranteed two years of gridlock and rancor. But the issues that animated this campaign season are in no sense resolved. David Brooks’ recent diagnosis of “two electorates” conducting entirely separate conversations and motivated by entirely different primal fears remains equally perceptive. Mutual partisan hatred is still nearly total. It is still the case that the sort of person who would attend a Trump rally and one who joined the Women’s March do not wish to share a country with each other.

They may not explicitly say so, but they do come very close. How else should we interpret, “If you don’t like it, leave,” or, “If [candidate] wins, I’m moving to Canada”? However unserious, these are basically expressions of a desire for separate nations. . .

 

 

via We should chop America up into 7 different countries. Seriously.

Radiation From Mobile Phones Can Cause Cancer? Insurance Underwriters Refuse Industry Cover, Legal Cases Underway

Insurance companies routinely refuse to protect manufacturers against health conditions attributable to non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation. As the lawsuits over cellphone related brain tumors pile up, courts are starting to rule in favor of patients.

Counter Information

Global Research, November 11, 2018
brain

First published on TruePublica and Global Research in July 2018

A recent Guardian article entitled “The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones” stated that “On 28 March this year, the scientific peer review of a landmark United States government study concluded that there is “clear evidence” that radiation from mobile phones causes cancer.”

The article went on to say that

For a quarter of a century now, the industry has been orchestrating a global PR campaign aimed at misleading not only journalists but also consumers and policymakers about the actual science concerning mobile phone radiation. Indeed, big wireless has borrowed the very same strategy and tactics big tobacco and big oil pioneered to deceive the public about the risks of smoking and climate change, respectively. And like their tobacco and oil…

View original post 1,389 more words