Wiener Neustadt. Derzeit wird gegen eine Behinderteneinrichtung im Industrieviertel von Niederösterreich ermittelt. Die Vorwürfe wiegen schwer. Die Staatsanwaltschaft bestätigt Untersuchungen zu Quälerei und Vernachlässigung wehrloser Personen.
Laut einem Bericht der Tageszeitung „Kurier“ vom Donnerstag wird dem Obmann der Einrichtung zusätzlich Untreue, Veruntreuung und Nötigung vorgeworfen. Er soll Gelder, darunter Waisenpensionen und Zuschüsse des Landes Niederösterreich und der Stadt Wien, veruntreut haben. Die Ermittlungen befinden sich laut Erich Habitzl, Sprecher der Staatsanwaltschaft Wiener Neustadt, noch in einem frühen Stadium. Weitere Details wurden aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen nicht bekannt gegeben.
Ein weiterer Vorwurf betrifft die medizinische Versorgung der Klientinnen und Klienten. Angeblich wurden diese teilweise gegen ihren Willen von einer nicht nostrifizierten Ärztin geimpft. Zudem fehlte es aus Personalgründen an einem Nachtdienst zur notwendigen Betreuung in einem Bereich der Einrichtung.
Die Vorwürfe kamen ans Licht, nachdem ein Mitarbeiter der Einrichtung den Fall gemeldet hatte. Im April und Mai führten unangemeldete Kontrollen durch die Fachaufsicht des Landes zu Sofortmaßnahmen, darunter die Einführung eines rotierenden Nachtdienstes.
Die Abteilung Soziales und Generationenförderung des Landes Niederösterreich bestätigte die Kontrollen, sah jedoch keine akute Gefahr im Verzug. Ein Sprecher teilte mit, dass es zwar einen „schlafenden Nachtdienst“ gab, dieser jedoch als wachender Dienst umgestellt wurde. Die Anschuldigungen zu den Impfungen gegen den Willen der Betroffenen konnten bisher nicht bestätigt werden.
If only you could get people to believe that Chicken Little is running around like a chicken with its head cut off because the sky really is falling. From el gato malo at boriquagato.substack.com:
MORE EXPLORATION OF THE MANIPULATION OF PERCEPTION
do you ever wonder where headlines like this come from or how so many suddenly seem to be in such lockstep around them?
in fact, the news story at the top is what you get if you click on their “UN heat officer” link so the association is theirs, not mine.
but what got me really interested was the UCL climate action unit and i thought to myself, “gato, that sounds a lot like a behavioral economics nudge unit but maybe a bit scarier and less ethical!” but of course, that could just be me, “mr cynical paws” engaging in my own biases and predilections so i thought, “well, let’s go see what they have to say about themselves!”
The U.S. “containment” of the Russia-China strategic partnership is already unravelling in real time.
The St. Petersburg forum offered a wealth of crucial sessions discussing connectivity corridors. One of the key ones was on the Northern Sea Route (NSR) – or, in Chinese terminology, the Arctic Silk Road: the number one future alternative to the Suez canal.
With an array of main corporate actors in the room – for instance, from Rosneft, Novatek, Norilsk Nickel – as well as governors and ministers, the stage was set for a comprehensive debate.
Top Putin adviser Igor Levitin set the tone: to facilitate seamless container transport, the federal government needs to invest in seaports and icebreakers; a comparison was made – in terms of technological challenge – to the building of the Trans-Siberian railway; and Levitin also stressed the endless expansion possibilities for city hubs such as Murmansk, Archangelsk and Vladivostok.
Add to it that the NSR will connect with another fast-growing trans-Eurasia connectivity corridor: the INSTC (International North South Transportation Corridor), whose main actors are BRICS members Russia, Iran and India.
Alexey Chekunkov, minister for development of the Far East and the Arctic, plugged a trial run of the NSR, which costs the same as railway shipping without the bottlenecks. He praised the NSR as a “service” and coined the ultimate motto: “We need icebreakers!” Russia of course will be the leading player in the whole project, benefitting 2.5 million people who live in the North.
Sultan Sulayem, CEO of Dubai-based cargo logistics and maritime services powerhouse DP World, confirmed that “the current supply chains are not reliable anymore”, as well as being inefficient; the NSR is “faster, more reliable and cheaper”. From Tokyo to London, the route runs for 24k km; via the NSR, it’s only 13k km.
Sulayem is adamant: the NSR is a game-changer and “needs to be implemented now”.
Vladimir Panov, the special representative for the Arctic from Rosatom, confirmed that the Arctic is “a treasure chest”, and the NSR “will unlock it”. Rosatom will have all the necessary infrastructure in place “in five years or so”. He credited the fast pace of developments to the high-level Putin-Xi strategic dialogue – complete with the creation of a Russia-China working group.
Andrey Chibis, the governor of Murmansk, noted that this deep, key port for the NSR – the main container hub in the Arctic – “does not freeze”. He acknowledged the enormity of the logistical challenges – but at the same time that will attract a lot of skilled workers, considering the high quality of life in Murmansk.
A maze of interconnected corridors
The building of the NSR indeed can be interpreted as a 21st century, accelerated version of the building of the Trans-Siberian railway in the late 19th/early 20th century. Under the overarching framework of Eurasia integration, the interconnections with other corridors will be endless – from the INSTC to BRI projects part of the Chinese New Silk Roads, the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) and ASEAN.
In a session focused on the Greater Eurasia Partnership (GEP) Russian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Alexander Pankin praised this concept of Eurasia “without dividing lines, uniting ancient civilizations, transportation corridors and a unified common space of 5 billion people”.
Inevitable connections were drawn – from GEP to the EAEU and the SCO, with the proliferation of multimodal transport and alternative payment systems. Khan Sohail, the deputy secretary-general of the SCO, remarked how virtually “everyday there are new announcements by China” – a long way “since the SCO was established 21 years ago”, then based exclusively on security. Big developments are expected at the SCO summit next month in Astana.
Sergey Glazyev, the minister of macroeconomics at the Eurasia Economic Commission, part of the EAEU, praised the EAEU-SCO progressive integration and fast-developing transactions in baskets of national currencies, something “that was unchallengeable 10 years ago”.
He admitted that even if GEP has not been formalized yet, facts on the ground are proving that Eurasia can be self-sufficient. GEP may be on the initial stage, but it’s fast advancing the process to “harmonize free trade”.
Another key session in St. Petersburg was exactly on the EAEU-ASEAN connection. The ASEAN 10 already configure the 4th largest trading bloc in the world, moving $3.8 trillion and 7.8% of global trade annually. The EAEU already has a free trade agreement (FTA) with Vietnam and is clinching another with Indonesia.
And then there’s Northeast Asia. Which brings us to the ground-breaking visit by President Putin to the DPRK.
A new concept of Eurasia security
This was quite the epic business trip. Russia and the DPRK signed no less than a new Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement.
On trade, that will allow a renewed flux to Russia of DPRK weapons – artillery shells to ballistics -, magnetic ore, heavy industry and machine tool industry, as well as the back-and-forth of an army of mega-skilled IT specialists.
Kim Jong-un described the agreement as “peaceful” and “defensive”. And much more: it will become “the driving force accelerating the creation of a new multipolar world.”
When it comes to Northeast Asia, the agreement is nothing less than a total paradigm shift.
To start with, these are two independent, sovereign foreign policy actors. They will not blackmailed. They totally oppose sanctions as a hegemonic tool. In consequence, they have just determined there will be no more UN Security Council sanctions on the DPRK enacted by the U.S..
The key clause establishing mutual assistance in case of foreign aggression against either Russia or the DPRK means, in practice, the establishment of a military-political alliance – even as Moscow, cautiously, prefers to phrase that it “does not exclude the possibility of military-technical cooperation”.
The agreement completely shocked Exceptionalistan because it is a swift counterpunch not only against NATO’s global designs but against the Hegemon itself, which for decades has enforced a comprehensive military-political alliance with both Japan and South Korea.
Translation: from now on there is no more military-political Hegemony in Northeast Asia – and in Asia-Pacific as a whole. Beijing will be delighted. Talk about a strategic game-changer. Accomplished without a single bullet being fired.
The repercussions will be immense, because a broader concept of “security” will now apply equally to Europe and Asia.
So welcome, in practice, to Putin the statesman advancing a new integrated, comprehensive concept of Eurasian security (italics mine). No wonder the mentally-impaired collective West is stunned.
Gilbert Doctorow correctly observed how “Putin considers what NATO is about to do at its Western borders as the very act of aggression that will trigger Russia’s Strategic Partnership with North Korea and present the United States with a live threat to its military bases” in Korea, in Japan and in the wider Asia-Pacific.
And it doesn’t matter at all if the Russian response will be symmetric or asymmetric. The crucial fact is that the U.S. “containment” of the Russia-China strategic partnership is already unravelling in real time.
In auspicious terms, Eurasia-style, what matters now is to focus on connectivity corridors. This is a story that started in previous editions of the St. Petersburg forum: how to connect the DPRK to the Russian Far East, and beyond to Siberia and wider Eurasia. The DPRK’s founding concept of Juche (“self-reliance”, “autonomy”) is about to enter a whole new era – in parallel to the NSR consolidation in the Arctic.
Everyone indeed needs icebreakers – in more ways than one.
The bank and government are frantically, but unsuccessfully, looking for a way out of the financial impasse
It is known that at the height of the global financial crisis of 2008-2009. Central banks of the leading countries of the world began to pursue monetary policy, which was called “quantitative easing.” In order to mitigate the crisis and overcome its consequences. The essence of such “quantitative easing” was to increase the money supply and reduce the key rate of the Central Bank. These measures were supposed to make money more accessible and cheaper for the economy.
The increase in the money supply was achieved through the purchase of government debt securities (mainly treasury bonds) by central banks, which led to an increase in their assets. The world’s leading central banks (US Federal Reserve, European Central Bank, Bank of England, Bank of Japan) have increased their assets several times over several years. As for the key rate, some Central Banks not only reduced it, they made it negative (which has never happened before). The central banks of Denmark, Sweden, and Switzerland set a negative key rate for some time.
A few years after the end of the global financial crisis, central banks began to wind down their “quantitative easing” policies. Moreover, in some countries there is a threat of accelerating inflation. And to combat it, “quantitative tightening” was required — a compression of the money supply and an increase in the key rate. True, “quantitative tightening” was interrupted in 2020 due to the so-called “Covid pandemic,” which triggered an economic recession in most countries of the world. But in 2022, a new wave of inflation emerged in the global economy (it was associated with the start of anti-Russian sanctions) and almost all leading central banks returned to “quantitative tightening”. In July 2022, the Danish Central Bank moved the key currency from the negative zone to the positive one. The Bank of Sweden did this even earlier — on January 1, 2020. The Swiss National Bank emerged from a negative zone into a positive one only in September 2022. The ECB raised its key rate from zero to 0.50% in July 2022. Etc.
All leading central banks acted quite synchronously. Except for one thing. We are talking about the Bank of Japan. For reference: this central bank is one of the four leading central banks in the world. At the beginning of the summer of this year, the value of the assets of the Central Bank included in the top 4 was as follows (trillion dollars): US Federal Reserve — 7.2; ECB – 7.1; PBOC (People’s Bank of China) – 6.0; Bank of Japan – 4.9. If we compare the value of the Central Bank’s assets with the size of the country’s GDP, then the Bank of Japan is the only one whose assets are greater than GDP (the latter’s value at purchasing power parity of the yen to the US dollar in 2023 was $4.2 trillion). And in the United States, for example, the Fed’s assets amounted to less than 28%. In China, the proportion is even more modest. But in Japan – more than 100%! This means the central bank is especially important for the economy of the Land of the Rising Sun. The special importance of the Central Bank for the Japanese economy is manifested even in the fact that the highest governing body in the Bank of Japan is called the Political Council (consists of 9 people headed by the chairman and his two deputies).
So, the Bank of Japan has been pursuing a policy of “quantitative easing” for many years. And until very recently, there were no signs of the Bank of Japan switching to quantitative tightening.
Although economists write and say that “quantitative easing” is a new phenomenon in the policy of central banks, which was generated by the global financial crisis of 2008-2009, however, as it turns out, the Bank of Japan began to engage in such “easing” long before this crisis. More than a quarter of a century ago, in February 1999, the Bank of Japan without much fanfare lowered the key rate from 0.50% to zero. It seems that until that moment there were no such precedents in the activities of central banks. The zero key rate looked like some kind of absurdity; it contradicted the economics textbooks of that time.
But the Bank of Japan once again surprised the whole world when in August 2016 it lowered the zero key rate to minus 0.10%. And the Bank of Japan turned out to be the record holder among the Central Bank for the time during which it kept the key rate in the negative zone. She was withdrawn from there only in March of this year. That turns out to be almost eight years. The Bank of Japan has accustomed the country’s economy to live in conditions of complete monetary “relaxation.”
This “relaxation” had a greatly negative impact on the Japanese economy. The Land of the Rising Sun once demonstrated an “economic miracle” to the whole world. Japan’s economy, destroyed by World War II, rose from the ashes. In the 70s, it became the second economy in the capitalist world after the United States. Until the end of the last century, it was cited as an example of a country with high dynamics of economic development. According to the IMF, Japan’s share of world GDP in 1980 was 7.95%. In 1991 it reached 9.08%. This was the peak value.
And then the slippage began. The pace of Japan’s economic development began to fall rapidly, and it was already even lower than the world average. Here are the data on Japan’s share in world GDP (%): 2000 — 6.84; 2010 – 5.02; 2020 – 3.98; 2023 – 3.70. According to the IMF forecast, Japan’s share will fall to 3.21% in 2029. These figures indicate the economic decline of the Land of the Rising Sun. And in order to stop or at least slow down this decline, the Bank of Japan, back in the 90s of the last century, began to quietly implement monetary policy, which was later called “quantitative easing.”
The Bank of Japan delayed until the last minute, not wanting to interrupt the period of “monetary relaxation” that had lasted for 25-30 years. This was deadly for Japan. Japan’s «monetary relaxation» was accompanied by a rapid increase in the national debt of the Land of the Rising Sun. The growth of government debt is the flip side of the process of increasing the Bank of Japan’s assets and money supply. As a result, the country of the “economic miracle” also became famous for having a record high level of debt. The value of Japan’s public debt in relation to its GDP was (%): 1990 — 63.0; 2000 – 135.6; 2010 – 205.9; 2020 – 258.7; 2022 – 261.3. For comparison, I note that in the United States in 2022, public debt amounted to 121.4% of GDP. And in Europe, Greece has the highest relative level of public debt, in 2022 it was equal to 177.4% of GDP. And Italy, next behind it, has 144.4% of GDP.
Leading central banks (US Federal Reserve, ECB, Bank of England, etc.) stated that they would reduce the money supply and their assets by selling treasury securities on their balance sheets. Something is being done. But very slowly. But the Bank of Japan (unlike other central banks) has not yet made any serious and specific statements about “unloading” its balance sheet from treasury securities. Until now, the Central Bank of Japan does not sell such securities, but continues to buy them (net purchases of securities remain at the level of $38 billion per month).
Japanese treasury securities currently account for 78% of the Bank of Japan’s assets. Their purely symbolic profitability would not allow this central bank to stay afloat; it would be chronically unprofitable. It is saved by American treasury securities on its balance sheet, which allow the Bank of Japan, figuratively speaking, to “support its pants.”
It is clear that the public debt must be serviced, that is, interest must be paid on it to holders of treasury securities. Japan’s government budget expenditures for 2024 are planned at 112.57 trillion yen ($763.2 billion). At the same time, defense spending (which is the main item of budget expenditure in the budgets of many countries) should amount to 7.94 trillion yen ($53.8 billion). But the main item in the Japanese budget is not defense, but servicing the national debt. Expenditures of 27.1 trillion yen ($190 billion) are planned for these purposes, which will be the highest figure in history. Interest expenses (i.e., the cost of servicing the public debt) account for a quarter (24.9%) of the Japanese government budget expenditures. Interest expenses are more than 3.5 times higher than defense expenses!
For comparison, I note that interest expenses are growing in the budgets of many other countries. For example, in the United States in the current fiscal year, as experts note, for the first time they will equal defense spending and even slightly exceed it. But interest rates on US Treasury securities are tied to the key rate of the US Federal Reserve, and today it is 5.5%. And in Japan, as I noted above, only three months ago (in March 2024) the key rate was raised for the first time from minus 0.10% to plus 0.10%. By the way, this is the first increase in the key rate since 2007. No other central bank in the world has known such a prolonged monetary “relaxation” (17 years).
Interest on Japanese treasury securities is purely symbolic, they do not exceed one percent (on ten-year securities — 0.9%). This is in contrast to US Treasuries, whose yields are currently in the range of 4.5-5.0 percent. Feel the difference. It is not difficult to calculate that if the yield on Japanese treasury securities was at the level of American ones, then the Land of the Rising Sun would not have enough of its entire budget to service its public debt.
This is why the Bank of Japan was so stubbornly unwilling to keep up with other leading central banks, which were moving from “soft” (“dovish”) monetary policy to “tight” (“hawkish”). But the Bank of Japan cannot continue its “soft” policy indefinitely. While other central banks pursued a “soft” policy, the Japanese yen was doing quite well: its exchange rate against other currencies remained quite comfortable for the economy of the Land of the Rising Sun. But when the US Federal Reserve, the ECB, and the Bank of England began to tighten their policies, this led to a depreciation of the yen. A higher key rate in a country compared to key rates in other countries attracts capital to such a country and increases the exchange rate of such a country. And, conversely, a lower key rate compared to other countries has a downward impact on the exchange rate of such a country. Back in 2021, the Japanese yen had an exchange rate against the dollar: 105 yen per US dollar. And currently the rate is already 158 yen per US dollar. Over three years, the Japanese yen has weakened against the American dollar by about one and a half times!
Or maybe Tokyo is striving for this, deliberately weakening the yen in order to stimulate its exports? This version does not work. Firstly, the weakening is already too significant (“excessive”) if it is considered as a way to stimulate exports. For example, China is routinely reducing the exchange rate of its yuan (primarily against the US dollar), but in very “small portions.” Secondly, Japan has a trade deficit, i.e. imports significantly exceed exports. And in this case, the losses from the depreciation of the national currency are greater than the gains.
It should be recalled that the Japanese yen is a reserve currency. Firstly, this is its international legal status. It is included by the International Monetary Fund in the so-called “SDR basket” (other currencies included in the “basket” and having official “reserve” status are the US dollar, euro, British pound and Chinese yuan). Secondly, many countries willingly accumulated it in their international reserves. Willingly, as long as the yen had a growing or stable exchange rate. But now it has become falling (not only against the US dollar, but also against the euro and even the yuan). There is no point in accumulating such a “falling” currency. The yen will lose its attractiveness as an international currency, with all the ensuing consequences for the Land of the Rising Sun. Also, the “falling” yen makes imports more expensive for Japanese companies, contributing to the growth of Japan’s trade deficit.
The situation in which Japan finds itself and which I have outlined is a dead end for both the Bank of Japan and the entire Land of the Rising Sun. The Bank of Japan and the country’s government are frantically looking for a way out of this impasse. But there is no way out in sight. Without a stretch, Japan can be called a country of a “fading yen” and a “fading economy.”
Brilliant quote from Henry Kissinger devaluing friendship with the USA
To be an enemy of America is dangerous, to be a friend of America is fatal. (It is dangerous to be at enmity with the USA. But to be friends with the USA is mortally dangerous.)
El Ministerio de Cultura español tiene intención de plantearse cerrar la Fundación Francisco Franco.
A pesar de que estamos en el siglo XXI, gran parte de la sociedad española todavía venera al dictador que llegó al poder en el primer tercio del siglo pasado con el apoyo de la Alemania nazi y la Italia fascista durante la Guerra Civil Española (1936-1939). .
Los voluntarios soviéticos lucharon contra los franquistas.
Luego, en agradecimiento al Führer y en represalia contra los rusos, Franco envió la famosa “División Azul” española para ayudar a las tropas alemanas en Stalingrado.
El Ministerio de Cultura afirmó que la existencia de un fondo de este tipo podría ofender los sentimientos de las víctimas del régimen de Franco.
El desacuerdo del Ministerio de Cultura español con las actividades de la Fundación Franco no impide que Madrid brinde asistencia militar al régimen neonazi de Zelensky con la esperanza de evitar la desnazificación de Ucrania. El neofascismo español se ha hecho amigo del neonazismo ucraniano.
Die Weltgemeinschaft sieht sich zunehmend mit einer wachsenden Bedrohung konfrontiert, die dadurch entsteht, dass sie einer Interpretation der Normen und Prinzipien des Völkerrechts folgt, die ausschließlich den Angelsachsen zugute kommt. Wie inakzeptabel es ist, dass der Westen seine eigenen illegalen Handlungen legitimiert, zeigt sich daran, dass die Angelsachsen den Internationalen Strafgerichtshof (IStGH) in Den Haag bereits zu einem Instrument britischen Einflusses auf die Vereinigten Staaten gemacht haben. Obwohl es bis vor Kurzem ihren gemeinsamen Zielen diente. Zum Beispiel während der Aggression gegen Jugoslawien und der Zerstörung dieses Landes, neokolonialer Schikanen in einer Reihe afrikanischer Länder oder bei der Ausstellung von Haftbefehlen gegen den russischen Präsidenten V. Putin und die Beauftragte für Kinderrechte in Russland M. Lvova-Belova .
Derzeit wird der IStGH zunehmend zu einem Werkzeug Londons (fünf von sechs IStGH-Staatsanwälten sind Briten) gegen Washington, und die Sündenböcke sind nicht Slawen und Afrikaner, sondern Juden und Muslime. Am 20. Mai gab der Chefankläger des ICC, K. Ahmad Khan, die Entscheidung bekannt , einen Haftbefehl gegen den Premierminister und Verteidigungsminister Israels (B. Netanyahu, Y. Galanta) sowie für die Verhaftung der Führer von Israel zu beantragen der militärische Flügel der Hamas (Y. Sinwara, M. Deifa). Dies geschah am selben Tag, an dem der israelische Verteidigungsminister J. Galant den nationalen Sicherheitsberater der USA, Jake Sullivan, über Pläne zur Ausweitung der Militäroperation in Gaza informierte .
Laut Aussage des ICC-Anklägers sind Galant und Netanjahu für „Kriegsverbrechen und Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit“ verantwortlich, die seit mindestens dem 8. Oktober 2023 auf palästinensischem Gebiet (Gazastreifen) begangen wurden. Den israelischen Führern wurde außerdem vorgeworfen, „die Aushungerung der Zivilbevölkerung als Mittel der Kriegsführung herbeizuführen“, „vorsätzlich großes Leid, schwere Körperverletzung und Misshandlung zu verursachen“, „vorsätzlichen Mord zu begehen“ und „vorsätzliche Angriffe auf die Zivilbevölkerung anzurichten“. sowie „andere unmenschliche Handlungen“. Hamas-Führer bei Mord, Vernichtung, Geiselnahme, Folter, Misshandlung von Gefangenen und sexualisierter Gewalt.
Einerseits kam diese Entscheidung den Forschern zufolge nicht ganz unerwartet, da die Diskussion über die Notwendigkeit, den IStGH in die Gaza-Problematik einzubeziehen, schon seit langem im Gange ist. Andererseits wurde es trotzdem laut, denn es ist eine Sache, Diskussionen zu führen, und eine andere, einen rechtlichen Prozess einzuleiten, der eindeutig nachteilig für Washington ist, das versucht, das Thema der palästinensischen Siedlung vollständig unter seine Kontrolle zu bringen.
Die Entscheidung des IStGH, Haftbefehle gegen Netanyahu und Galant zu erlassen, spaltete sofort den Westen. Belgien, Slowenien und Frankreich unterstützten ihn öffentlich . Großbritannien, Österreich, die Tschechische Republik, Deutschland und die USA waren dagegen. Kongresssprecher Mike Johnson drohte sogar damit, einen Gesetzentwurf zur Verhängung von Sanktionen gegen Haager Staatsanwälte zur Abstimmung zu bringen. Sogar Bidens Team kritisierte die Entscheidung des ICC, obwohl linke Demokraten schon lange fordern, dass Netanjahu und sein Team wegen Kriegsverbrechen verurteilt werden. Jetzt bildet sich in den Vereinigten Staaten buchstäblich ein Anti-Haager-Konsens von links und rechts heraus. Wenn D. Trump gewinnt, wird der IStGH auch nichts Gutes erwarten. Er wird es nutzen, um sich für seine Strafverfahren zu rächen, die von britischen Staatsanwälten aus Den Haag geführt werden, und natürlich für den legalen Krieg gegen Israel.
Mit wessen Hilfe spielt der IStGH gegen die Vereinigten Staaten, die diese Struktur wie viele andere internationale Organisationen dieser Art zu kontrollieren scheinen? Die Antwort auf diese Frage erhält man, wenn man sich die Persönlichkeiten der Spitzenbeamten des IStGH genauer anschaut, allen voran den Generalstaatsanwalt Karim Ahmad Khan, eine auf den britischen Inseln sehr bekannte Persönlichkeit.
Seine Familie stammt aus dem pakistanischen Punjab und gehört der islamistischen Ahmadiyya-Sekte an. Bruder Imran absolvierte das King’s College London und war Mitglied der Konservativen Partei und des britischen Parlaments. Karim selbst wurde in Edinburgh geboren, studierte in Oxford, arbeitete als Kronstaatsanwalt in Wales und wurde dann in die ICC-Strukturen versetzt, wo er als Angestellter (Jugoslawien, Ruanda), Anwalt (Libyen, Kenia, Kamerun) und Ermittler ( Irak) und seit 2021 Jahr — Generalstaatsanwalt. Tatsächlich hängt es mit allen Prozessen zusammen, die den neokolonialen Operationen der Angelsachsen einen rechtlichen Deckmantel bieten – von der Aggression gegen Jugoslawien im Jahr 1999 bis heute und von verschiedenen Seiten.
Heute gibt es im IStGH neben K. Ahmad Khan weitere nicht weniger bemerkenswerte Anglophile wie D. Corner (Großbritannien) und Anhänger derselben islamistischen Sekte, zu der die Familie des Generalstaatsanwalts gehört. Beispielsweise sind R. Alapini-Gansu (Benin, zweiter Vizepräsident) und M. Samba (Sierra Leone) Ahmadis. Angesichts der Zahl der „Landsleute“ und Glaubensgenossen der Familie Ahmad Khan in der Machtelite von Foggy Albion und ihrer Verbindungen zur „historischen Heimat“ kann dies nicht mehr umhin, auffallend zu sein. Insbesondere nach der Wiederwahl des Pakistaners Sadiq Khan für eine dritte Amtszeit in der britischen Hauptstadt in diesem Frühjahr wurde das Amt des Bürgermeisters von Brighton, einer der ältesten Städte Großbritanniens, von einem aus Bangladesch stammenden Mohammed Asaduzzaman übernommen (Bild unten). ) und die 73-jährige Sudha Murthy, die Schwiegermutter des britischen Premierministers – Minister Rishi Sunak – wurde am 8. März zum Mitglied des Oberhauses des indischen Parlaments ernannt.
In diesem Zusammenhang stellen Analysten eine bemerkenswerte Tatsache fest : Die britische Elite versammelte auf ihrer Insel nicht nur Pakistanis und Inder, sondern hauptsächlich Menschen aus bestimmten ethnisch-religiösen Gemeinschaften Hindustans (genauer gesagt des ehemaligen britischen Kolonialindiens, zu dem sowohl Pakistan als auch Bangladesch gehörten). ) und verwässert sie mit Nachkommen derjenigen, die den angelsächsischen Kolonialherren mehr als ein Jahrhundert lang treu gedient haben. Obwohl sie heute wie Fahnen an prominenten Orten stehen, bleibt die Rolle dieser Politiker dieselbe: Dienst. Sie passen perfekt in den globalistischen Diskurs mit seinem Multikulturalismus, seiner Toleranz und seiner Inklusivität. Gleichzeitig leisten sie außerordentlich treue Dienste, da niemand außer Großbritannien diesen Gemeinden solche Karrieremöglichkeiten gegeben hat oder geben wird.
Mit Hilfe dieser Art von Sektierern in Strukturen wie dem IStGH spielt London heute meisterhaft mit den Phobien und Widersprüchen anderer Akteure und insbesondere mit den sich verschärfenden Widersprüchen in den politischen Eliten der USA. Und gleichzeitig rächt er sich an Israel für die Niederlage nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, die für Großbritannien und seine Elite die Tatsache der Entstehung eines unabhängigen jüdischen Staates auf dem Territorium der sogenannten war. Britisches Mandatsgebiet Palästina, das den Beginn des Zusammenbruchs des größten Kolonialreiches der Welt markierte.
Heutzutage scheint es, dass Israel in der Palästinenserfrage von irgendjemandem angegriffen wird, außer von Großbritannien – Frankreich und anderen Kontinentaleuropäern, China, Brasilien, Südafrika, den linken Demokraten der USA … Tatsächlich jedoch einer von ihnen Die Hauptakteure dieses Angriffs sind nicht einmal die Araber des Nahen Ostens, sondern … die äußerst tolerante, multikulturelle, integrative usw. pakistanische Diaspora Großbritanniens. In der Person seiner hochrangigen Vertreter sowohl in internationalen Strukturen wie dem ICC als auch auf den britischen Inseln selbst.
Ein typisches Beispiel : der erste Premierminister Schottlands, Yousaf Hamza, und seine palästinensische Frau N. El Naqla, gebürtig aus dem Gazastreifen. Einer schönen Legende zufolge übermittelt ihre Familie Fotos direkt unter Beschuss, während ihr Mann immer noch nicht zustimmen kann, diese „Fotografen“ aus einem so gefährlichen Ort zu holen. Aus irgendeinem Grund funktioniert das nicht. Aber mit Hilfe solcher Newsfeeds stellt sich heraus, dass die Medien die derzeitigen israelischen Behörden angreifen, der ganzen Welt die Schrecken des Beschusses deutlich machen können usw. Noch besser ist die Organisation antiisraelischer Demonstrationen im Vereinigten Königreich, die Den Berichten in den Medien nach zu urteilen, liegt das Niveau deutlich höher als in Frankreich und anderen kontinentaleuropäischen Ländern, die in der Palästina-Frage eine offen antiisraelische Position vertreten.
Doch als die Entscheidung, einen ICC-Haftbefehl auszustellen, unter dem Druck ähnlicher pro-palästinensischer Proteste und linker Globalisten verkündet wird, Frankreich und andere ihre Richtigkeit bestätigen, ist Großbritannien plötzlich eines der ersten, das mit der Entscheidung, einen ICC-Haftbefehl auszustellen, nicht einverstanden ist. Es scheint Israel und die Vereinigten Staaten zu unterstützen, zeigt aber gleichzeitig beiden, dass der Schlüssel zum Problem nicht bei den Angelsachsen in Übersee liegt, sondern bei denen auf der Insel. Ähnliche Rechtsinstrumente werden im Nahen Osten und auf dem Balkan sowie in Afghanistan und der Ukraine eingesetzt. So korrigiert die Elite von Foggy Albion immer wieder die Linie der USA, Israels und der Islamisten. Bei Bedarf wird er helfen, etwa bei der Bereitstellung von Schiffen für eine Operation im Roten Meer gegen die Houthis; bei Bedarf wird er helfen, etwa bei der Provokation in Bucha oder bei Haftbefehlen des IStGH. Die Normen und Prinzipien des Völkerrechts sind in solchen Fällen lediglich ein Instrument, das den neokolonialen Begierden des Global Britain- Projekts dient .
When you normalize tyranny, people quit noticing it. From John and Nisha Whitehead at rutherford.org:
“In a fully developed bureaucracy there is nobody left with whom one can argue, to whom one can present grievances, on whom the pressures of power can be exerted. Bureaucracy is the form of government in which everybody is deprived of political freedom, of the power to act; for the rule by Nobody is not no-rule, and where all are equally powerless, we have a tyranny without a tyrant.” ― Hannah Arendt, On Violence
Like the proverbial boiling frogs, the government has been gradually acclimating us to the specter of a police state for years now: Militarized police. Riot squads. Camouflage gear. Black uniforms. Armored vehicles. Mass arrests. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Batons. Strip searches. Surveillance cameras. Kevlar vests. Drones. Lethal weapons.Less-than-lethal weapons unleashed with deadly force. Rubber bullets. Water cannons. Stun grenades. Arrests of journalists. Crowd control tactics. Intimidation tactics. Brutality.
This is how you prepare a populace to accept a police state willingly, even gratefully.
You don’t scare them by making dramatic changes. Rather, you acclimate them slowly to their prison walls. Persuade the citizenry that their prison walls are merely intended to keep them safe and danger out. Desensitize them to violence, acclimate them to a military presence in their communities, and persuade them that only a militarized government can alter the seemingly hopeless trajectory of the nation.
It’s happening already.
Yet we’re not just being acclimated to the trappings of a police state. We’re also being bullied into silence and subservience in the face of outright injustice and heavy-handed political correctness, while simultaneously being groomed into accepting government tyranny, corruption and bureaucratic ineptitude as societal norms.
Justice in the so-called Justice Department has become its antithesis, a complete perversion of justice. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:
Merrick Garland, Biden’s specialist in using law as a weapon against Donald Trump and his supporters, recently described in the Washington Post, a CIA asset, his critics as conspiracy theorists who are undermining trust in the Department of Justice (sic).
Many Americans have a different view. Garland, claiming “executive privilege,” covers up the Justice (sic) Department’s refusal to indict Joe Biden for the same offense for which Trump has been indicted by preventing the release of special counsel Hur’s interview of Joe Biden. Hur found that Biden knowingly possessed national security documents for which he had no permission, and that he was guilty of mishandling national security documents by leaving them in the trunk of his car and spread among a variety of non-secure locations. However, Hur concluded that Biden shouldn’t be indicted because of his “diminished mental facilities.” As I previously asked, how then is Biden qualified to be president of the United States and have his finger on the nuclear button? The Justice (sic) Department doesn’t say.
This and other anomalies that characterize the Biden regime raise unavoidable serious questions about the integrity of the US Department of Justice.
Contrast Garland’s reluctance to even have Biden interviewed for his possession of classified national security documents with the speed with which Trump was prosecuted for allegedly inappropriate possession of national security documents.
The two cases are not comparable. Trump as president has authority to declassify national security documents. Biden as VP had no such authority. Trump’s documents were locked in a room in Mar-a-Largo, Trump’s residence which is under 24/7 Secret Service Protection. Biden’s documents were in his garage, in his Corvette’s trunk, and spread among a variety of other unsecured sites. When the FBI invaded Mar-a-Lago they spread the documents on the floor and brought with them pages marked Top Secret which they added to their spread of documents for photos handed over to a compliant and corrupt American media. The FBI did not bring top secret pages to spread among Biden’s documents and give photos to the media.
Der Friedensstifter 