In the Russo-Ukrainian war, US propaganda has exploited a time tested syllogistic sophistry. First you identify the nation at war with the individual who leads the nation. It is not Russia’s war on Ukraine, it is Putin’s war on Ukraine. Then you identify the individual with Hitler. At various times, Hilary Clinton, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio and Zbigniew Brzezinski have all compared Putin to Hitler, as have James Clapper, Kevin McCarthy, Polish President Andrzej Duda, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and others. What powerfully follows psychologically, is that, since the war is a war against “a second Hitler,” any method used to stop him is morally and militarily justified.
[2017] Exploring the Shadows of America’s Security State
Die Klassengesellschaft
von sascha313
Herluf Bidstrup (1912-1988) war ein hochbegabter und politisch engagierter dänischer Zeichner und Karikaturist. Als überzeugter Kommunist zeichnete er sich durch eine erstaunliche Klarheit des Strichs und seine Fähigkeit aus, die ganze Bandbreite der Emotionen seiner Figuren mit nur einem oder zwei Details sehr genau wiederzugeben. Von 1936 bis 1945 war er Zeichner für das Regierungsorgan „Social-Demokraten“ und nach 1945 für die KP-Zeitung „Land og Folk“. Bücher mit Bidstrups Zeichnungen wurden in der UdSSR in großer Zahl veröffentlicht. Er war als fortschrittlicher Künstler in der UdSSR sehr bekannt, weil er in seinen Karikaturen den kapitalistischen Westen anprangerte. Sein treffsicheren politischen Karikaturen und vergnüglichen Bildergeschichten machten ihn auch in der DDR zu einem beliebten Künstler. Für sein umfangreiches Schaffen wurde er in der Sowjetunion mit dem Rotbannerorden und mit dem Orden für Völkerfreundschaft geehrt.
Metamorphose der Klassengesellschaft.
Im Laufe der Jahrhunderte hat sich das Wesen des Kapitalismus als sozioökonomisches System nicht verändert. Er basiert auf der gleichen Ausbeutung des Menschen durch den Menschen durch wirtschaftlichen Zwang zur Arbeit. Die Lohnarbeit für die Klasse, die die Produktionsmittel besitzt, ist nach wie vor die einzige Quelle für den Lebensunterhalt der großen Mehrheit der Weltbevölkerung. Eine Zeichnung des dänischen Karikaturisten Herluf Bidstrup veranschaulicht dieses Phänomen, das trotz allen technischen und technologischen Fortschritts über die Jahrhunderte hinweg im Wesentlichen unverändert geblieben ist. Aber natürlich ist der „Marxismus veraltet“!
Siehe auch: https://art-dot.ru/herluf-bidstrup/
Klassengesellschaft: Bezeichnung für die in antagonistische Klassen gespaltenen Gesellschaftsformationen. Während die Eigentümer der Produktionsmittel in den Klassengesellschaften auch die politische Macht ausüben, wird die Mehrheit des Volkes ökonomisch ausgebeutet und politisch unterdrückt. Der Klassenkampf ist die Haupttriebkraft der Entwicklung der Klassengesellschaft. Die Geschichte hat drei Klassengesellschaften hervorgebracht: die aus der Auflösung der Urgesellschaft hervorgegangene Sklavenhalterordnung, den Feudalismus, den Kapitalismus. Der Kapitalismus ist die historisch letzte Form der Klassengesellschaft. In ihm entwickeln sich alle Voraussetzungen für den Übergang zum Sozialismus. Obwohl in der sozialistischen Gesellschaft noch zwei Klassen, die Arbeiterklasse und die Klasse der Genossenschaftsbauern, existieren, ist sie keine Klassengesellschaft mehr, weil diese Klassen nicht mehr in einem antagonistischen Verhältnis zueinander stehen und ihr sozialökonomischer Boden das gesellschaftliche Eigentum an den Produktionsmitteln ist, das allgemeine Volkseigentum und das genossenschaftliche Eigentum. Im Prozeß des umfassenden Aufbaus des Kommunismus werden durch den Übergang des genossenschaftlichen Eigentums an den Produktionsmitteln in allgemeines Volkseigentum auch diese beiden Klassen aufgehoben. Der Kommunismus ist eine klassenlose Gesellschaft von sozial gleichgestellten Menschen.
Quelle: Kleines politisches Wörterbuch, Dietz Verlag Berlin, 1967, S. 333.
Inside The UN Plan To Control Speech Online
BY TYLER DURDEN
A powerful United Nations agency has unveiled a plan to regulate social media and online communication while cracking down on what it describes as “false information” and “conspiracy theories,” sparking alarm among free-speech advocates and top U.S. lawmakers.
Recommended VideosUnmuteAdvanced SettingsFullscreenPauseUp Next
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.605.0_en.html#goog_1631728027
In its 59-page report released this month, the U.N. Educational, Cultural, and Scientific Organization (UNESCO) outlined a series of “concrete measures which must be implemented by all stakeholders: governments, regulatory authorities, civil society, and the platforms themselves.”
This approach includes the imposition of global policies, through institutions such as governments and businesses, designed to stop the spread of various forms of speech while promoting objectives such as “cultural diversity” and “gender equality.”
In particular, the U.N. agency aims to create an “Internet of Trust” by targeting what it calls “misinformation,” “disinformation,” “hate speech,” and “conspiracy theories.”
Examples of expression flagged to be stopped or restricted include concerns about elections, public health measures, and advocacy that could constitute “incitement to discrimination.”
Critics are warning that allegations of “disinformation” and “conspiracy theories” have increasingly been used by powerful forces in government and Big Tech to silence true information and even core political speech.
Just this month, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee released a report blasting the “pseudoscience of disinformation.”
Among other concerns, the committee found this “pseudoscience” has been “weaponized” by what lawmakers refer to as the “Censorship Industrial Complex.”
The goal: silence constitutionally-protected political speech, mostly by conservatives.
«The pseudoscience of disinformation is now—and has always been—nothing more than a political ruse most frequently targeted at communities and individuals holding views contrary to the prevailing narratives,” states the congressional report, «The Weaponization of ‘Disinformation’ Pseudo-Experts and Bureaucrats.»
Indeed, many of the policies called for by UNESCO have already been implemented by U.S.-based digital platforms, often at the behest of the Biden administration, the latest congressional report makes clear.
On Capitol Hill, lawmakers nevertheless expressed alarm about the new UNESCO plan.
“I have repeatedly and publicly criticized the Biden administration’s misguided decision to rejoin UNESCO, putting U.S. taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) told The Epoch Times regarding the social-media plan.
Calling UNESCO a “deeply flawed entity,” Mr. McCaul said he is especially concerned that the organization “promotes the interests of authoritarian regimes—including the Chinese Communist Party.”
Indeed, UNESCO, like many other U.N. agencies, includes multiple members of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in its leadership ranks, such as Deputy Director-General Xing Qu, The Epoch Times has reported.
The CCP has repeatedly made clear that even while working in international organizations, CCP members are expected to follow communist party orders.
Lawmakers on the House Appropriations Subcommittee dealing with international organizations are currently working to cut or reduce funding to various U.N. agencies that lawmakers say are using U.S. taxpayer money improperly.
Already, the U.S. government has twice exited UNESCO—under the Reagan and the Trump administrations—due to concerns about what the administrations described as extremism, hostility to American values, and other problems.
The Biden administration rejoined earlier this year over the objections of lawmakers, The Epoch Times reported.
The UNESCO Plan
While being marketed as a plan to uphold free expression, the new UNESCO regulatory regime calls for international censorship by “independent” regulators who are “shielded from political and economic interests.”
«National, regional, and global governance systems should be able to cooperate and share practices … in addressing content that could be permissibly restricted under international human rights law and standards,” the report explains.
Unlike the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibiting any governmental infringement on the right to free speech or free press, UNESCO points to various international “human rights” instruments that it says should determine what speech to infringe on.
These agreements include the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which states that restricting freedom of expression must be provided for by law and must also serve a “legitimate aim.”
In a recent review of the United States, a U.N. human-rights committee called for changes to the U.S. Constitution and demanded that the U.S. government do more to stop and punish “hate speech” in order to comply with the ICCPR.
Another key U.N. instrument is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states explicitly in Article 29 that “rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”
In short, the U.N. view of “freedom of expression” is radically different from that enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
The UNESCO report says that once content that should be restricted is found, social-media platforms must take measures, ranging from using algorithm suppression (shadow banning) and warning users about the content, to de-monetizing and even removing it.
Any digital platforms found to not be “dealing with content that could be permissibly restricted under international human rights law” should “be held accountable” with “enforcement measures,” the report states.
UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay, a former French culture minister with the Socialist Party, cited risks to society to justify the global plan.
«Digital technology has enabled immense progress on freedom of speech,” she said in a statement. “But social media platforms have also accelerated and amplified the spread of false information and hate speech, posing major risks to societal cohesion, peace, and stability.
“To protect access to information, we must regulate these platforms without delay, while at the same time protecting freedom of expression and human rights,» said Azoulay, who took over the U.N. agency from longtime Bulgarian Communist Party leader Irina Bokova.
In the forward to the new report, headlined “Guidelines for the Governance of Digital Platforms,” Azoulay says that stopping certain forms of speech and at the same time preserving “freedom of expression” is “not a contradiction.”
Citing a survey commissioned by UNESCO itself, the U.N. agency also said most people around the world support its agenda.
According to UNESCO, the report and the guidelines were developed through a process of consultation including more than 1,500 submissions and over 10,000 comments from “stakeholders” such as governments, businesses, and non-profit organizations.
UNESCO said it will work with governments and companies to implement the regulatory regime around the world.
“UNESCO is by not (sic) proposing to regulate digital platforms,” a spokesman for UNESCO, who asked not to be named, told The Epoch Times in a statement.
“We are, however, conscious that dozens of governments around the world are already drafting legislation to do so, some of which is not in line with international human rights standards, and may even jeopardize freedom of expression.
“Similarly, the platforms themselves are already making millions of human and automated decisions a day with respect to the moderation and curation of content, based upon their own policies,” the spokesman said.
The European Union, which already places severe limitations on free expression online, has already provided funding for implementation worldwide, UNESCO added.
The Biden administration told The Epoch Times that it wasn’t involved in creating the plan.
“We will reserve comment until we finish carefully studying the plan,” the State Department said in an email.
Free Speech Concern Grows
Concerns over the implications for freedom of speech and free expression online are mounting as awareness of the UNESCO plan spreads.
Sarah McLaughlin, a senior scholar at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), expressed alarm.
«FIRE appreciates that UNESCO’s new action plan for social media recognizes the value of transparency and the need for protecting freedom of expression, but remains deeply concerned about efforts to regulate online ‘disinformation’ and ‘hate speech,’” Ms. McLaughlin told The Epoch Times.
Read more here…
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/inside-un-plan-control-speech-online
It Will Happen Suddenly
As the Great Unravelling progresses, we shall be seeing many negative developments, some of them unprecedented.
Only a year ago, the average person was still hanging on to the belief that the world is in a state of recovery, that, however tentative, the economy was on the mend.
And this is understandable. After all, the media have been doing a bang-up job of explaining the situation in a way that treats recovery as a general assumption. The only point of discussion is the method applied to achieve the recovery, but the recovery itself is treated as a given.
However, as thorough a distraction as the media (and the governments of the world) have provided, the average person has begun to recognise that something is fundamentally wrong. He now has a gut feeling that, even if he is not well-versed enough to describe in economic terms what is incorrect in the endless chatter he sees on his television, he now senses that the situation will not end well.
I tend to liken his situation to someone who suddenly finds all the lights off in his house. He stumbles around in the dark, trying to feel his way. Although he can picture in his mind what the layout of his house is, he is having trouble navigating, often bumping into things. This is similar to the attempt to see through the media and government smokescreens during normal times.
But soon, as his government undergoes collapse, he will be getting some bigger surprises. He will find that the furniture has inexplicably been moved around. Objects are not where they are supposed to be, and it is no longer possible to reason his way through the problem of navigating in the dark.
Many of those who observe the daily news reports are beginning to figure out that they are being fed misinformation. Many are beginning to recognise that neither political party truly represents them or, for that matter, is even concerned for their welfare.
These folks are now navigating in the dark.
But the bigger surprises have not yet occurred. There will be a certain amount of lead-up, plus a great deal of confusion, but the actual occurrences will be sudden. No one will be able to predict the dates on which they occur, except those very few people who control the triggers to these events.
Crashes in the Markets
Major bull markets rarely end with a whimper. They end with a major upside spike. And, unfortunately, brokers and investors alike tend to think that, if the market has been up for the last week, the last month, or the last year, it can be expected to be up again tomorrow. This makes them prime pickings for governments who may choose to falsely inflate a given market, creating an upside spike to encourage investors to toss their last few coins into the pot, just before the bottom drops out.
In previous eras, it could take time for people to sell, and even in panic times, the bloodletting was not instantaneous. However, with the Internet, all that is necessary is a major sell-off by one entity—one that goes through the stops of a large number of investors, and in a flash, the market goes though the floor. (Editor’s note: Stops are orders placed with a broker to sell a security when it reaches a certain price.) The average investor wakes in the morning to find that he has been wiped out.
Commitments by Governments
Should there be a currency crash, as is expected in many countries, promises made by governments will be abandoned suddenly, as though they had never existed. Whilst millions of people will find themselves lost, unable to function without their entitlements, governments will evade their guilt through finger-pointing. Tories will blame Labour; Labour will blame the Tories. (The equivalent will take place in other countries.) The net result will be the disappearance of entitlements, either in part or in total. The public will take out its anger through increased hatred of whichever party it is that they already consider to be the evil one. They will fail to understand that collapse was unavoidable.
Assumed National Strengths Will Vanish
International alliances will fall away. Former allies will suddenly not be at the side of the failing nation.
Former friends will sign alliances with the other side.
Trade agreements will suddenly cease.
Wealth, initiative, and favour will flow to the new foremost country and its allies.
All of the above will happen incrementally—not by any means on the same day—but in each case, the actual occurrence will be sudden.
Just as Julius Caesar was at his peak of power when his fellow members of the Senate drew their knives, a powerful nation is coddled right until the time of its fall. In this regard, the US will see the greatest abandonment of loyalties that any nation will experience.
(The greater the empire, the greater the pretence of loyalty to it. And the greater the abandonment when the fall comes.)
When an empire collapses, it dies slowly. Unless it comes to an end through conquest, it deteriorates in a series of sudden jolts. Its leaders grasp at anything that might cause a delay, even if this means a worse outcome in the end. The process may take years and even decades. However, it is in the first few years that the major events occur—the events that create the most significant damage.
This occurs for two reasons. The first is that the leaders of the country, believing in their own power, believe that they can maintain control of their trade, their overseas control, their military, etc. and find that, when the crashes come, the rats desert the ship in every area. The second reason is that any empire builds its strength upon lies and exaggeration as much as it builds on its true attributes. After a crash, these lies and exaggerations fall away, and in a short time, it becomes clear that the empire was, in its latter stages, a house of cards.
The warning signs are already taking place but are not heavily publicised.
The stage is set, and we are approaching the first major events.
The victims in this play are, unfortunately, the average people, who simply hope to have a decent life. They will be caught unawares and unable to even understand what has occurred, let alone take action to save themselves. Those who have not spent the previous years educating themselves and preparing an alternative life will suffer most greatly.
All who live in a country that is undergoing collapse will be negatively affected. Some will do better than others, but to live on this slim hope is much like being fortunate enough to live on the outskirts of Hiroshima in 1945.
There is little comfort in being one of the least injured. Better to have been in another country altogether—both during the actual event and during the terrible time that is sure to follow.
Editor’s Note: The political and economic climate is constantly changing… and not always for the better. Obtaining the political diversification benefits of a second passport is crucial to ensuring you won’t fall victim to a desperate government.
That’s why Doug Casey and his team just released a new complementary report, “The Easiest Way to a Second Passport.” It contains all the details about one of the easiest countries to obtain a second passport from.
Click here to download it now.
Has Neuroscience Found the Key to What Caused Zombie Nation? My Foreword to Bombshell New Book, ‘The Indoctrinated Brain’, by Dr. Naomi Wolf
Do the COVID vaccines kill personality and brainwash their recipients? From Dr. Naomi Wolf at naomiwolf.substack.com:
The Science of Brainwashing
Please enjoy – to the extent you can – my Foreword to ‘The Indoctrinated Brain’, by Dr Michael Nehls. The book, which explains the neuroscience of propaganda, will chill your soul, but may explain a great deal.
‘The fact that the brain is plastic—modifiable—has become much better understood by the public in the past few decades.
General readers understand by now that the human brain can be altered; and that experiences can modify its reactions and processes. We understand now for example that PTSD leaves lasting changes in brain functioning. It’s been established that motherhood changes the brain and that bonding itself is a chemical process modified by the brain.
We also understand, as general readers, that propaganda is real. Some of us have studied propaganda in the past. We have a working knowledge of Joseph Goebbels, and of the artistry and craft that underlay his manufacturing of National Socialist consent. The work of Edward Bernays, one of the earliest practitioners of what became the field of public relations, has been widely read in English. Decades-old bestsellers such as Subliminal Seduction by Wilson Bryan Key exposed the fact that advertisers use every tool at their disposal to alter our reactions to their products—down to the level of the subconscious mind.
Modern general audiences also understand that governments use “messaging”—and often, heavy-handed propaganda—to lead us to take actions that can be against our interests or our better conscious judgments; to create prejudices and divisions that may not otherwise exist; to heighten fears and to trigger a sense of vulnerability in us, so that we can be better manipulated and guided to goals that are not our own.
Por presionar a Kiev a rechazar la paz con Rusia, EEUU y el Reino Unido “tienen sangre en sus manos”
Se lo dijo a Sputnik, Scott Bennett, exoficial de guerra psicológica del ejército estadounidense y analista antiterrorista del Departamento de Estado, tras las revelaciones de un alto funcionario ucraniano confirmando el rol de Occidente alentando a continuar peleando.
El conflicto en Ucrania podría haber terminado en la primavera de 2022, pero entonces el primer ministro británico, Boris Johnson, convenció a los dirigentes ucranianos de rechazar un acuerdo de paz con Rusia y seguir luchando.
Así lo afirmó el pasado viernes 24 de noviembre en una entrevista el jefe de la delegación de Ucrania en las negociaciones con Rusia, David Arajamia. El líder de la facción Servidor del Pueblo en la Rada Suprema describió las circunstancias de las negociaciones entre Moscú y Kiev en 2022 en una entrevista con un canal ucraniano.
Según Arajamia, la principal exigencia de la parte rusa era la neutralidad de Kiev. La primera ronda de conversaciones tuvo lugar el 28 de febrero de 2022 en Bielorrusia, mientras que la segunda se celebró a finales de marzo en Estambul.
Según sus palabras, Rusia estaba dispuesta a poner fin al conflicto si Ucrania aceptaba el estatus neutral. “Y comprometernos a que no nos uniríamos a la OTAN. De hecho, el punto clave era este”, afirmó. A la pregunta de por qué Kiev se negó a aceptar las condiciones de Rusia, Arajamia dijo que en esta decisión influyó, entre otras cosas, el entonces primer ministro británico.
“Cuando volvimos de Estambul, Boris Johnson vino a Kiev y dijo que no firmaríamos nada con ellos [los rusos] y que fuéramos a combatir”, reveló.
Consultado por Sputnik, Scott Bennett dijo que esta información, largamente rumoreada, significaba que tanto Boris Johnson como el presidente de EEUU Joe Biden, quien ha financiado la escalada bélica de Kiev, son “responsables de que más de 500.000 ucranianos inocentes hayan perdido la vida innecesariamente” y que EEUU y el Reino Unido “tienen sangre en sus manos”.
El exoficial de guerra psicológica del ejército estadounidense y analista antiterrorista del Departamento de Estado añadió que la decisión “irracional, si no completamente loca” del entonces primer ministro británico “garantizaba la destrucción de Ucrania, que fue exactamente lo que terminó sucediendo”.
“Los términos originales de Rusia eran muy justos: número uno: no se ubicarían armas de la OTAN en Ucrania, lo que pondría a los rusos en peligro; y 2) ningún maníaco genocida nazi estaría en posiciones políticas para continuar masacrando a rusos inocentes o prohibiendo la lengua y la cultura rusas en Ucrania”, opinó Bennett, agregando que “cualquier persona y nación razonable habría aceptado estos términos”.
El exfuncionario de EEUU sugirió incluso que Johnson debería ser juzgado como un “criminal de guerra” por su rol alentando el escalamiento del conflicto en Ucrania. Consultado sobre la razón de que un funcionario ucraniano hiciera esta revelación ahora, Bennett dijo era porque en Kiev “saben que la batalla está perdida”.
“Ucrania está destruida. Su ejército está completamente disuelto y todos los ciudadanos ucranianos se volverán contra los dirigentes políticos ucranianos por esta guerra innecesaria y destructiva, que nunca debería haber ocurrido en primer lugar”, vaticinó.
Y concluyó: “Esto es similar a cuando en la Segunda Guerra Mundial, el coronel Stauffenburg y algunos funcionarios militares y políticos alemanes intentaron asesinar a Adolf Hitler antes de que Alemania quedara absolutamente arruinada por su locura y egoísmo. La misma situación se aplica a [Volodímir] Zelenski”.
There Never Was a “New Virus”, There Never was a Pandemic
La guerre d’Israël contre les hôpitaux
https://reseauinternational.net/la-guerre-disrael-contre-les-hopitaux/
Israël mène une campagne pour rendre Gaza inhabitable. Cette campagne comprend la destruction de tous les hôpitaux de Gaza. Le message qu’Israël envoie est clair. Vous n’êtes nulle part en sécurité. Si vous restez, vous êtes morts.
Israël n’attaque pas les hôpitaux de Gaza parce qu’ils sont des «centres de commandement du Hamas». Israël détruit systématiquement et délibérément l’infrastructure médicale de Gaza dans le cadre d’une campagne de la terre brûlée visant à rendre Gaza inhabitable et à aggraver une crise humanitaire. Il a l’intention de forcer 2,3 millions de Palestiniens à franchir la frontière vers l’Égypte où ils ne reviendront jamais.
Israël a détruit et presque vidé l’hôpital-Al-Shifa dans la ville de Gaza. L’hôpital indonésien de Beit Lahia vient ensuite. Israël déploie des chars et des véhicules blindés de transport de troupes autour de l’hôpital et a tiré sur le bâtiment, tuant 12 personnes.
Le manuel de jeu est familier. Des tracts sont largués par Israël au-dessus d’un hôpital pour demander aux gens de partir parce que l’hôpital est une base pour les «activités terroristes du Hamas». Les chars et les obus d’artillerie arrachent des parties des murs de l’hôpital. Les ambulances sont détruites par les missiles israéliens. L’électricité et l’eau sont coupées. Les fournitures médicales sont bloquées. Il n’y a pas d’analgésiques, d’antibiotiques et d’oxygène. Les bébés prématurés les plus vulnérables dans les couveuses et les plus gravement malades meurent. Les soldats israéliens font irruption dans l’hôpital et forcent tout le monde à sortir sous la menace des armes.
C’est ce qui s’est passé à l’hôpital Al-Shifa. C’est ce qui s’est passé à l’hôpital pour enfants Al-Rantisi. C’est ce qui s’est passé au principal hôpital psychiatrique de Gaza. C’est ce qui s’est passé à l’hôpital Nasser. C’est ce qui s’est passé dans les autres hôpitaux détruits par Israël. Et c’est ce qui va se passer dans les quelques hôpitaux qui restent.
Israël a fermé 21 des 35 hôpitaux de Gaza, y compris le seul hôpital oncologique de Gaza. Les hôpitaux encore en activité connaissent de graves pénuries de médicaments et de fournitures de base. Un à un, les hôpitaux sont détruits. Bientôt, il n’y aura plus aucun établissement de santé. C’est par conception.
Des dizaines de milliers de Palestiniens terrifiés, contraints d’évacuer par Israël, leurs maisons réduites en ruines, cherchent refuge contre les bombardements incessants en campant dans et autour des hôpitaux de Gaza. Ils espèrent que les centres médicaux ne seront pas pris pour cible par Israël. Si Israël respectait les Conventions de Genève, il aurait raison. Mais Israël ne mène pas de guerre. Il commet un génocide. Et lors d’un génocide, une population, et tout ce qui la soutient, est anéantie.
Signe inquiétant qu’Israël se retournera contre les Palestiniens de Cisjordanie une fois qu’il aura fini d’aplatir Gaza, des véhicules blindés ont encerclé au moins quatre hôpitaux de Cisjordanie. L’hôpital Ibn Sina a été attaqué par des soldats israéliens, tout comme l’hôpital de Jérusalem-Est.
L’État colonial d’Israël a été fondé sur des mensonges. Elle est soutenue par des mensonges. Et maintenant, alors qu’il est sombrement déterminé à commettre le pire massacre et nettoyage ethnique de Palestiniens depuis la Nakba de 1948, ou «catastrophe», qui a vu 750 000 Palestiniens subir un nettoyage ethnique et une cinquantaine de massacres perpétrés par des milices juives, il crache une absurdité grotesque après un autre.
Il parle des Palestiniens comme d’une masse déshumanisée. Il n’y a pas de mères, de pères, d’enfants, d’enseignants, de médecins, d’avocats, de cuisiniers, de poètes, de chauffeurs de taxi ou de commerçants. Les Palestiniens, dans le lexique israélien, constituent une contagion unique qui doit être éradiquée. Regardez cette vidéo d’écoliers israéliens chantant «Nous allons anéantir tout le monde» à Gaza.
Les Jeunesses hitlériennes chantaient des chansons comme celle-ci sur les juifs.
Ceux qui se lancent dans des projets de massacres mentent pour éviter de démoraliser leurs propres populations, font croire aux victimes qu’elles ne seront pas toutes exterminées et empêchent les forces extérieures d’intervenir.
South Korea does not need nuclear submarines (very like Australia!)
The waters around the Korean peninsula are relatively shallow, which favors the employment of quiet conventional subs. South Korea now operates seven Son–Won II–class diesel-electric submarines, powered by a hybrid diesel‐electric/fuel cell with air-independent propulsion technology. These subs are extremely quiet; they can travel up to 20 knots when submerged and remain under water for seven weeks. They are perfectly suited for operations around the Korean Peninsula.
the country could acquire three state-of-the-art conventional submarines for less than the cost of one nuclear-powered sub.
The Hill BY DOV S. ZAKHEIM, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR – 11/24/23
South Korea is again debating whether to develop and build a nuclear-powered submarine.
During a National Assembly confirmation hearing that took place last week, Admiral Kim Myung-Soo, the nominee for chairman of South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, responded positively to a question about the utility of nuclear-powered submarines, stating that “those capabilities are needed.” He noted, however, that the current U.S.-Korean nuclear agreement restricts the use of nuclear materials for military purposes.
Nevertheless, there appears to be a growing sentiment on the part of both of South Korea’s leading parties and the general public in favor of Seoul acquiring nuclear-powered boats. The government should resist the temptation to do so.
In theory, South Korea could avoid America’s restrictions by turning to France to help it develop or acquire a nuclear-powered submarine. France could help South Korea develop its own nuclear-powered sub, much as Paris has assisted Brazil with its own nuclear-powered submarine program.
However, there are many reasons why Seoul should not imitate the Brazilians and forge ahead with its own program. To begin with, it was only in April of this year that President Biden and South Korean president Yoon Suk Yeol reached an agreement that not only calls for greater consultation on nuclear matters between the two countries, in the form of a newly created nuclear consultative group, but also provides for an enhanced American nuclear presence around the peninsula to deter North Korean aggression…………………………………………………..
In any event, it is not clear how Seoul could afford to undertake a nuclear-submarine program unless it were to dramatically increase its defense spending beyond current levels…………………………………
…………………… Lastly, there are good operational reasons why South Korea should continue to acquire conventionally powered submarines rather than nuclear powered boats. The waters around the Korean peninsula are relatively shallow, which favors the employment of quiet conventional subs. South Korea now operates seven Son–Won II–class diesel-electric submarines, powered by a hybrid diesel‐electric/fuel cell with air-independent propulsion technology. These subs are extremely quiet; they can travel up to 20 knots when submerged and remain under water for seven weeks. They are perfectly suited for operations around the Korean Peninsula.
The South is currently planning both to upgrade the Son-Won II for about $100 million per boat and is proceeding with a new Son-Won III class at about $900 million per submarine. In other words, the country could acquire three state-of-the-art conventional submarines for less than the cost of one nuclear-powered sub.
The costs, the technologies, and operational realities all weigh against South Korea acquiring nuclear-powered submarines. If that were not enough, America’s recent commitment to bolster the nuclear umbrella that it has long provided to South Korea and that is so critical to its deterrent should settle the argument once and for all.
Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987. https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4324038-south-korea-does-not-need-nuclear-subs/
Der Friedensstifter 