‘At time when world should unite to end terrible bloodshed in Gaza … it is distressing to see State officials threatening to retaliate against Court for pursuing international justice,’ experts say
A group of UN experts on Friday expressed “utter dismay” over statements made by US and Israeli officials “threatening to retaliate” against the International Criminal Court (ICC), saying such threats promote a “culture of impunity.”
“At a time when the world should unite to end the terrible bloodshed in Gaza and seek justice for those unlawfully killed, injured, traumatised, or taken hostage, since October 7, it is distressing to see State officials threatening to retaliate against a Court for pursuing international justice,” the experts said in a statement.
“It is shocking to see countries that consider themselves champions of the rule of law trying to intimidate an independent and impartial international tribunal to thwart accountability,” they added.
The experts underlined that threats of retaliatory action “violate human rights norms against attacks on justice personnel and exceed the accepted limits of freedom of expression.”
They urged states to respect the court’s independence as a judicial institution and protect the independence and impartiality of those who work within the court.
Last week, the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) denounced statements that “threaten to retaliate against the Court or against Court personnel” for actions taken by the prosecutor.
The OTP reminded all individuals that “threats of retaliation may amount to an offense against the administration of justice under Article 70 of the Rome Statute.”
The US will spend billions to “keep the torch of liberty burning,” President Joe Biden told the virtual Summit for Democracy
US President Joe Biden has announced an additional $690 million in spending on what he described as efforts to support democracy around the world, as well as plans to secure a further $9.5 billion from Congress for the same purpose.
Much of the money will go through a new bureau to be created within the US Agency for International Development, he said on Wednesday. The agency operates under the Department of State and is ostensibly responsible for humanitarian aid programs.
Biden revealed the funding plans during a virtual gathering of leaders of select nations, which his administration considers to be “democracies” as opposed to “autocracies.” The $690 million has been allocated to the Presidential Initiative for Democratic Renewal, which Biden launched in 2021 during the inaugural Summit for Democracy.
In a fact sheet accompanying the announcement, Washington described several areas in which it says American taxpayers’ money will help strengthen democracy abroad. The list of causes includes supporting “free and independent media,” strengthening “information integrity,” fighting corruption by having the US Treasury “unmask shell companies,” bolstering “human rights and democratic reformers” and defending “free and fair elections.”
In his remarks at the so-called Summit for Democracy, Biden praised his administration, saying it has demonstrated that the US political system “can still do big things and deliver important progress for working Americans.” Among its achievements, he mentioned lowering costs of some prescription drugs and health insurance premiums and “creating good union jobs” as part of an effort to renew US infrastructure.
The meeting, which Biden twice erroneously called “Summit of Democracies” before correcting himself, is meant to “galvanize action that translate[s] to concrete progress for people around the world,” he said, according to a White House transcript.
“The democracies of the world are getting stronger, not weaker. Autocracies of the world are getting weaker, not stronger,” he declared. “Our world needs to make democracies stronger, to keep the torch of liberty burning for ourselves and generations to come.”
This is a list of all the “democracies” the US has installed in other countries over the years:
____________________
____________________
____________________
That’s the entire list. You can see that it’s blank. But how can that be? We all know that the US has freed dozens of nations from their evil and repressive governments, and installed loving democracies where people lived happily ever after, swamped with freedoms and overwhelmed with human rights. We know this because we’ve read and heard it hundreds, or maybe thousands, of times. It’s in all the US history books. We’ve seen it in so many movies and even read it in comic books when we were kids. It must be true. So why is the list empty? How can that be? Sadly, the list is empty because everything we were told was a lie. It is often said that if you tell a lie five times, most people will believe it; the US as a “defender of democracy” is one of those lies.
In the West, we have for many decades been subject to an incessant barrage of highsounding pronouncements about the US ‘saving the world from communism‘ and promoting democracy and freedom throughout the world. But that has been little more than an effective propaganda campaign levied at the uninformed and simple-minded, since even a casual glance at the facts on the ground reveal something quite different.
In fact, rather than promoting democracy and freedom, the opposite is true. The US has instead been promoting dictatorships and serfdom, and with great success over 60 or 70 years. We have a list below of 42 countries where the US not only installed and financed a brutal dictator, but often and repeatedly sent in arms and troops to put down local rebellions and revolutions against those installed friendly dictators.
For all the talk about promoting democracy and freedom, there is no instance – NO instance – where the US has ever removed a dictatorship and replaced it with any kind of benevolent government, electoral democracy or otherwise. You may be aware of the statements by Major-General Smedley Butler who claimed that during his 33 years as a US Marine, he functioned simply as “a gangster for capitalism” and that all wars were bankers’ wars. On the topic of the US government installing democracies in the world, Butler himself denied such a thing had ever occurred, and said further, “The U.S. has routinely destroyed democracy throughout the globe while its leaders claimed to be spreading democracy.”
But if the US didn’t install “democracy” in all those places, what did they do? Well, while preaching democracy, freedom and human rights at home, the US government was actually running around the world installing dictatorships – about 50, at last count. Not only that, while boasting at home about defending democracy, the CIA and military were actually undermining and destroying functioning democracies and replacing them with dictatorships. There are many countries where the US military and/or CIA financed and led revolutions to depose electoral democracies and install a dictator, often by assassinating the incumbent president: Bolivia, Brazil, Haiti, Spain, Philippines, Zaire, Guatemala, Iran, Greece, Chile, Fiji, Nicaragua, Indonesia, The Congo.
Iran is one of the most obvious of these, where the CIA arranged the overthrow of the beloved leader of a perfectly-functioning electoral democracy and installed Shah Reza Pahlavi as one of the most brutal dictators in modern history. In 2000, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stated: “In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran’s popular Prime Minister, Mohammed Mossadegh. The coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs”. Yeah. No kidding.
There is Nicaragua, where the US initiated a revolution and installed Somoza – a truly brutal man. When the population finally rose up in arms (shovels and pitchforks, actually), and overthrew Somoza and formed their own democratic government with proper elections, the US waged one of the most unconscionable secret wars in history against that poor country. The stated purpose was to “make the economy scream”, and Reagan accomplished that in spades. The standard of living in Nicaragua fell by 90%; hundreds of thousands died of poverty and starvation, or were simply massacred by US-funded military rebels. That was their punishment for evicting their US master, and that story has often been repeated. There is no shortage of documentation of CIA-trained and funded “death squads” in Central and South America.
Another typical example of American reverence for the sanctity of democracy is Greece, where in 1967 the US government arranged a CIA-backed military coup two days before the country’s elections. Papandreou’s government had been elected in 1964 with the first (and I believe the only) only majority government in the Greek history, but one that wasn’t sufficiently accommodating to American business and European bankers, and had to go. To the US, Greece was just another undeveloped property to be plundered. When the Greek Ambassador complained to President Johnson that the American CIA and military action was contrary to the Greek parliament and violated the Greek constitution, Johnson’s response was to say “F… your parliament and f… your constitution.” He added that US corporations had investment plans for Greece, and that “If your Prime Minister gives me any talk about democracy, parliament and constitutions, he, his democracy, his parliament and his constitution won’t last very long”. And in fact, the US not only destroyed the Greek electoral government system but forced the new military dictatorship to pass legislation outlawing every other form of government. That’s democracy, American-style.
Top Iranian military officials Hasan Toofanian and Bahram Ariana with some Israeli officers in headquarters of Israel Defense Forces in 1975 (State of Israel via Wikimedia Commons). Source
In the Philippines, US President Lyndon Johnson had the CIA arrange for Ferdinand Marcos to assume power as puppet-dictator, a man whose political career began at age 21 for killing the man who had beaten his father in a local election. In Iran, with the support of US President Eisenhower, the CIA toppled the elected government of Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh and installed Shah Reza Pahlavi as dictator. With CIA encouragement, he forced all people to join his party or go to jail. Thousands were imprisoned or murdered. His agents raided a religious school and hurled hundreds of students to their deaths from the roof. The Shah’s secret police agency, SAVAK, was created in 1957 and managed by the CIA and Israel’s Mossad at all levels of daily operation, including the choice and organization of personnel, selection and operation of equipment, and the running of agents. Torture methods included electric shock, whipping, beating, inserting broken glass and pouring boiling water into the rectum, tying weights to the testicles, and the extraction of teeth and nails. Iran under the Shah became a devoted US ally and a base for spy operations on the border of the Soviet Union.
An aerial shot of the Parwan Detention Facility in 2009 (a.k.a. the Bagram military prison). Source
This is where you go if you object to US-style ‘democracy’, the secret “black-ops” torture facility at Bagram in Afghanistan. No one ever leaves here without a proper appreciation of democracy and freedom. In fact, no one ever leaves here at all.
In Indonesia, Suharto was one of the most brutal dictators in history. US President Johnson authorised a CIA-organized coup that brought Suharto to power in 1965, supporting his rule for 32 years. Suharto continued his savage atrocities under the support of seven US presidents: Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton. Entire populations of towns and villages were herded to central locations and massacred. Under the guidance of the CIA, more than three million people were hacked to death with machetes, in the largest and most savage slaughter in modern political history. But Indonesia was now safe to be plundered by US multinationals.
In Pakistan, US and CIA-backed Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq executed his elected predecessor, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1979, and by 1984 Pakistan was furnishing 70% of the world’s high-grade heroin. That same year, George Bush addressed a group of Pakistani officials and praised the government of President Zia for its anti-narcotics program. Henry Kissinger called Pakistan a “frontline state defending free people everywhere”, in spite of its record of narcotics and torturing dissidents. Pakistan under Zia was the largest recipient of US aid, over half of which was for weapons. But since US puppets are only “President for Life”, Zia died in a mysterious (CIA induced) plane crash in 1988. Still in Pakistan, another US-backed political ‘asset’ and dictator, Khan initiated a massive campaign of genocide, targeting Muslims, Hindus, Bengali intellectuals, students and political activists. While President Nixon looked the other way, three million people were killed in a few months along with another 400,000 women who were raped. Central and South America were not better in any respect, with the Somozas in Nicaragua and a long list of similar pathological killers.
The US has constantly interfered in Haiti’s internal affairs for well over 100 years, overthrowing elected governments and replacing them with dictators, invading Haiti six or seven times to seize government revenue on behalf what is now Citibank. More than once, US Marines invaded the country, broke into the nation’s central bank, and stole all its money, including all Haiti’s gold deposits. When Haiti refused to turn over its banks to Citibank and its railroads to an American company, the US launched a massive invasion during which it re-wrote Haiti’s constitution, turned over almost all industry to American firms, disbanded the country’s army and replaced it with a US military police force, slaughtered tens of thousands of civilians and enslaved hundreds of thousands of others to build a railroad that would carry Haiti’s resources to American ships. The US ran the country as a military dictatorship for decades and viciously suppressed all local resistance. In American history books and US government propaganda, the military was there only “to maintain order during threatened insurrection” and, of course, “to protect American interests”.
Guatemalan President Efrain Rios Montt speaks during a press conference, Guatemala City, Guatemala, January 1983. (Photo by Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images)
The CIA organized the overthrow of Guatemala’s elected government to install Ríos Montt, another US-financed pathological killer, and supported him during 40 years of CIA-trained and sponsored death squads. Montt specialised in torture, disappearances, mass executions, and unimaginable cruelty, resulting in more than 200,000 victims. This was one of the most inhumane events of the entire 20th century, much of it sponsored by US President Reagan. And not only sponsored, but praised; Montt attended Reagan’s Presidential Inauguration and was one of his good friends. But the US-supported dictator had given virtually all of his nation to the Jewish bankers and US corporations. At that time, the Rockefellers alone owned more than 40% of the arable land in Guatemala as well as the entire railroad network and telegraph system, and also the country’s only port. Earlier, when the US was preparing for its invasion of Guatemala, many of the planning documents were passed on to the Guatemalan government who published them in the media and demanded an explanation from the US. Of course, the State Department claimed the accusations were “ridiculous”, and added further, “It is the policy of the United States not to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations. This policy has repeatedly been reaffirmed.” And Time Magazine, always helpful, claimed that those documents were just a Russian plot to embarrass the US. And then the CIA continued with its plans for assassination and overthrow as if nothing had ever happened. Americans are not easily embarrassed.
In Peru, the people elected a socialist government who threatened the almost total control of commercial interests they received from the US-installed dictator. The US immediately sent in the CIA with a huge cache of weapons and funding, arranged an overthrow of the government and the appointment of a new dictator who immediately abolished all civil rights and re-embraced American style free markets, permitting US multinationals to continue freely plundering the nation’s resources.
Transfer of Getúlio Vargas’ body from Rio de Janeiro for burial in his hometown, São Borja, Rio Grande do Sul, 26 August 1954. National Archives. Source
In Brazil, the people replaced a US puppet dictator protecting US commercial interests with a man who began a program of reform and development, including the nationalisation of Brazil’s massive oil industry, thereby removing American firms like the Rockefeller-owned Standard Oil from their monopoly. He was very quickly assassinated by the CIA, and a new US puppet dictator appointed who again opened Brazil to unrestricted exploitation by US corporations. In Columbia, a new president planned land and corporate reform that threatened the criminal monopolies of the American corporate and banking elite, leading to immediate CIA-inspired violence, death squads and hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths. The CIA still refuses to release its thousands of documents on these issues, claiming US national security interests.
By 1984 the SOA had been relocated to Fort Benning near Columbus in Georgia, already the site of a huge military base. Source. Men line up in the Fourth Division at Fort BenningCredit: AP:Associated Press
In El Salvador, the US government organised and encouraged the wholesale slaughter of civilians in attempts to maintain its brutal dictator in power, and repeatedly held fake elections with massive electoral fraud. Citizens holding protests or strikes were openly murdered. US President Reagan provided unlimited funds, weapons and other military aid and training that included the dreaded ‘School of the Americas’ where all US puppet dictators and their personnel were taught the latest techniques from CIA manual of civilian repression and torture. In one brief campaign, more than 75,000 civilians were massacred by the CIA-trained death squads which would become ubiquitous in the Americas. All social change was stalled while US corporations maintained their unhindered freedom to plunder the nation’s resources. In one event, when the citizens succeeded in a revolution and rid themselves of their US-appointed dictator, the US launched a military invasion to put down the rebellion and re-install its dictator. Again, democracy, American-style. And of course, American history books list the event as sending in the US military “to protect American interests during political instability”.
In 1970, Salvador Allende had been elected the President of Chile in a universally-acknowledged clean election, though the US mounted an immense effort to have the election declared void or “unconstitutional“. Edward Korry, the US Ambassador to Chile, reported to Henry Kissinger that, “Once Allende comes to power, we shall do all within our power to condemn Chile and the Chileans to utmost deprivation and poverty”. When that failed, Nixon demanded the CIA immediately organise a coup to replace Chile’s new President. The CIA assassinated Allende and installed Augusto Pinochet as puppet dictator to rule, terrorise, torture and slaughter his countrymen in great numbers, in order to make Chile comfortable for the US multinationals that were plundering its copper and other resources.
In so many countries, the US government fostered revolutions against legitimate functioning democracies for the purpose of installing a dictator who would be more compliant with US commercial interests – and it is commerce and subjugation, not freedom, that has been the driving ideology behind US foreign policy, an ideology that has been consistent for many decades. A country that is obedient and compliant with US foreign policy interests will generally be permitted to survive. But those countries acting outside that framework, in fact acting in their best interest rather than that of the US, will very quickly become a candidate for “regime change” – preceded by voluminous media attacks to sway the American public against that nation. In the old days, they used to be condemned as communists; today they are ‘terrorists’, but all else is the same. The US has been promoting dictatorships, poverty, misery and serfdom with great success for well over a century, and has not only overthrown governments but often and repeatedly sent in arms and troops to put down local rebellions and revolutions against those installed dictators.
The US has repeatedly proven it does not much care what kind of government is in power, so long as it is amenable to control and will grant free rein to US corporations. That has been true since the day more than 100 years ago that the US sent its navy to hijack Hawaii so that Bob Dole’s relatives could obtain control of the sugarcane and pineapple plantations. It was true with the Dulles brothers and the United Fruit Company in Central America, and it has continued to this day in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya. By US thinking, the two best kinds of government are: 1) dictators that you install and control (Suharto, Somoza, Shah Reza Pahlavi) and (2) democracies you can influence, bully, subvert, and control (The UK, Canada, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Ukraine, Romania, The Czech Republic). The worst kind is China’s one-party system that doesn’t easily lend itself to outside meddling and subversion.
All the US blathering about democracy is just jingoistic hypocrisy for the masses. Rather than spreading democracy and freedom, the US has always propagated fear, repression and death, sowing dissent and overthrowing legitimate governments, a reality twisted by the media to label the victims with blame for their oppression. The US preaches democracy, but overthrows democracies and installs, finances, and supports dictatorships by the dozen. This has been true since the day more than 100 years ago that the US sent its navy to hijack Hawaii so that Bob Dole’s relatives could obtain control of the sugarcane and pineapple plantations. It was true with the Dulles brothers and the United Fruit Company in Central America, and it has continued to this day in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. As usual, American hypocrisy at its finest.
In its long determination to obtain global control for its masters, the US consistently removed by stealth or by military force many acceptable functioning governments, only to replace them with savage but compliant dictators. Any country that wanted to develop its economy by protecting local industries, by developing its own natural resources, by redistributing land to the poor, by initiating health care, education and social security programs, was labelled as “communist” or “socialist” and almost always overthrown. And in all of this worldwide “promotion of democracy and freedom”, countless millions have died at the hands of US troops, with the assistance of CIA and US military planning, or at least with the tacit permission of the US government. The most commonly accepted death estimate at the hands of the Americans is 30 million, with literally hundreds of millions reduced to poverty, misery and migration.
And it isn’t only the deaths but the brutality and torture, much of it done with specific training received from the CIA – which has been active in torture methods for at least the past 60 years. Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay are not news; it’s just that the US can no longer control the dissemination of information as it once could. Even details of the ghastly and inhuman CIA torture manuals have become publicly available, as has the news of the infamous “School of the Americas” – the only university in the world dedicated to teaching the fine points of torture and civilian population suppression. In all of this worldwide promotion of democracy and freedom, countless millions have died at the hands of US troops. American actions in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Congo, Vietnam, Chile, Angola, and a panoply of countries around the world have directly or indirectly led to the deaths of tens of millions of people. “As an example, the CIA conspired with Belgian colonial forces in the assassination of Patrice Lumumba, the democratically elected but broadly pro-soviet leader of Congo, which led to the rise of a brutal dictator and eventually to a series of civil wars and famines which killed approximately 5 million people.”
In most cases, the US overthrew governments for the purpose of installing a dictator who would be more compliant with US commercial interests – and it is commerce, not freedom, that has been the driving ideology behind US foreign policy, an ideology that has been consistent for many decades. A country that is obedient and compliant with US foreign policy interests will generally be permitted to survive, but countries acting outside that framework, in fact acting in their best interest rather than that of the US, will very quickly become a candidate for “regime change” – preceded by voluminous media attacks to sway the American public against that nation. In the old days, they used to be condemned as communists; today they are ‘terrorists’, but all else is the same. Any country that wanted to develop its economy by protecting local industries, by redistributing land to the poor, by initiating health care, education and social security programs, was almost always overthrown because it threatened American corporate and banking profits.
It is not a secret that US imperialism has produced enormous profits and economic growth for the US while keeping those countries impoverished for more than a century. In fact, a major cause of US economic supremacy today is precisely its active military and political colonisation of so much of the world – the actual plundering of so many countries, guaranteed by the installation of so many brutal military dictatorships – and all under the propaganda guise of protecting democracy and freedom in the world.
.
This is all why the US has for so long been listed as the most hated nation in the world. Former US President Jimmy Carter said, “We sent Marines into Lebanon, and you only have to go to Lebanon, to Syria or to Jordan to witness first-hand the intense hatred among many people for the United States because we bombed and shelled and unmercifully killed totally innocent villagers – women and children and farmers and housewives – in those villages around Beirut. As a result of that, we became kind of a Satan in the minds of those who are deeply resentful”. And it isn’t only in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan; the US is bitterly hated throughout the Middle East, Africa, Asia and South and Central America. There are few parts of the world today where Americans are welcome as a people, and for very good reason.
US-Supported Dictatorships
The US has always had a fond affection for repressive dictators, tyrants and corrupt puppet-presidents, who have been aided, supported, and rewarded handsomely for their loyalty to US interests. These men usually rise to power through bloody ClAbacked coups, and rule by terror and torture. Their troops receive arms, training and advice from the CIA and other US agencies. It is US military support that guarantees their hold on power – and the fact that they provide free access to US corporations to exploit their countries’ resources. There are no occasions where the US government has ever been held responsible in any way for installing, supporting and protecting some of the worst human rights violators in the world.
The US has, over the years, installed, financed, supported with cash and arms, about 50 bloody dictators. In many of those cases, the US hypocritically overthrew a democracy to install one of its own dictators who would be more pliable to US foreign policy. There are also many cases where the population of a country revolted and overthrew the US-installed dictator, upon which the US sent in its warships to put down the revolution and re-install its dictator to power. The Dominican Republic comes to mind as one of the more shameful episodes in US history. Even worse, the US has often sent in CIA hit squads to assassinate a democratically-elected leader who wanted to eliminate colonialism and free his country from US control.
Below is an incomplete listing of nations where the US has overthrown a government to install a dictatorship that was controllable and would permit US multinationals to freely plunder the resources, unrestrained by conscience or morality, and with an astonishing and hypocritical lack of concern for either ‘freedom’ or ‘human rights’. These are the nations that became subjugated military colonies of the US; financed, trained and controlled by the US government, the CIA and the State Department. This is only one act of a continuous play that has been on stage for well over a century, and these are all facts of history, not in dispute by anyone, not even the US State Department. The US not only installed, but in each case protected, both politically and militarily, and supported with arms, cash and military training, the corrupt dictatorships of:
Here are some countries where the US military and/or CIA financed and led revolutions to depose electoral democracies and install a dictator, in several cases by assassinating the incumbent president: Bolivia, Brazil, Haiti, Spain, Philippines, Zaire, Guatemala, Iran, Greece, Chile, Fiji, Nicaragua, Indonesia, The Congo.
Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 32 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’.
I’ll lead off by quoting a brief missive by Dr. Stephen Jones. On May 2, he wrote:
Yesterday congress passed what is called the Anti-Semitic Awareness Act.
It is a bill which criminalizes any criticism of the Israeli state or of Zionism. It also criminalizes any Bible passage (such as Acts 4:10) which states that the Jews crucified Jesus. And because the bill assumes that all Jews are Zionists, it confounds anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism.Facing the Beast: Cour…Wolf, NaomiBest Price: $23.99Buy New $4.82(as of 09:47 UTC — Details)
Many Christian congressmen voted for this bill. What will they do when the Bible is banned? No doubt they will claim that they never intended for this to happen, or that they voted for the bill without even reading it. Yet they should have known how unconstitutional the bill is, as it greatly restricts the right of free speech.
This would not have been possible had it not been for the support of Christian Zionists such as Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, who used to be a constitutional lawyer.
By restricting free speech, he has betrayed all of us and is a good example of a modern Judas.
Amen, Dr. Jones.
House Speaker Mike Johnson touts himself as being a strong man of faith. He calls himself an evangelical Christian. Yet Johnson has quickly joined the ranks of the Deep State and atheist Zionism as a big-government, warmongering, anti-free speech and antichrist toady: an enemy of God’s Holy Word.
The bill referenced above that Johnson rammed through Congress codifies into U.S. law blasphemy against New Testament Scriptures. Real Christians couldn’t have any part of such sacrilege.
Only the foolish ignore the words of Christ where He said, Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. (Matthew 7:15)
In a similar fashion, the Apostle Paul warned:
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. (II Corinthians 11:13 – 15)
Jesus also told us frankly: Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. (Matthew 7:20)
By his fruits, Mike Johnson has proven himself to be a false prophet and deceitful worker.
Remember, the Antisemitic Awareness Act is a bill which criminalizes any criticism of the Israeli state or of Zionism. It also criminalizes any Bible passage (such as Acts 4:10) which states that the Jews crucified Jesus.
Let’s read Acts 4:10. The Apostle Peter is the speaker:
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. [Emphasis added]
According to Mike Johnson’s bill, preachers and Christians cannot quote this verse from God’s Word without being guilty of “antisemitism.”
And let’s not forget Matthew 27:20:
But the [Jewish] chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. [Emphasis added]
Then, according to God’s Holy Word, the Jewish crowd shouted to Pilate,
His blood be on us, and on our children. [Emphasis added] (Matthew 27:25)
This proclamation by that Jewish mob was a public admission of their bloodguilt for the death of Jesus Christ.
Again, this passage of God’s Word is illegal under Johnson’s “antisemitism” bill.
Plus, Acts 7:52 records Stephen proclaiming to the Jews:
Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One [Jesus]; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers.[Emphasis added]
And then the Jews killed Stephen, the first Christian martyr.
This is another Biblical passage that Johnson has commanded that we tear out of our Bibles.
And notice the myriad of mentions in the Gospels where the Jews are recorded as trying to kill Jesus: Mark 14:44; John 5:16; 5:18; 7:30; 7:32; 8:59; 10:31; 10:39; 11:57; etc. Johnson demands that we tear these passages from the Gospels out of our Bibles as being “antisemitic.”
The passages in the Book of Acts that record the attempts by the Jews to persecute, beat, imprison and kill Christ’s apostles are almost too numerous to count. See Acts 9:23; 11:19; 12:3; 13:50; 14:5; 14:19; 17:5; 18:12; 20:3; 21:27; 22:30; 24:27; 25:7; 25:24; 26:2; 26:7; 28:17.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (a professing Christian) considers all of these Bible passages “antisemitic” and demands through law that they be banned and the people who quote or proclaim these Biblical truths be treated as criminals.
I invite readers to watch a short 5-minute video clip that I made last Sunday with the same title as this column challenging America’s pastors. Any pastor who submits to Mike Johnson’s tyrannical antichrist dictate will prove to all the world that their king is Caesar and not Christ.
The US Congress has become an extension of the Israeli government. We don’t need a president. We have the Israel Lobby.
The US House of Representatives just passed a bill that means prison for any Christian or anyone for that matter who quotes the Bible that says Jesus was handed over by Jews to Pontius Pilate to be scourged and crucified by the Romans.
The bill, which passed 320-91, criminalizes all criticisms of Israel and Jews as anti-semitism. If the Senate passes this bill, I suppose it will end up in book-burning of many works of literature including Shakespeare [and the Bible].A Faith That Will Not …Cushatt, MicheleBest Price: $12.64Buy New $11.77(as of 08:37 UTC — Details)
Clearly the majority of the House of Representatives is so much in thrall to the Israel Lobby that there is no hesitancy about normalizing genocide and setting the scene for the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
This bill is such an obvious violation of Constitutionally-protected free speech that it tells us that Congress will not come to the aid of free speech as it is closed down everywhere. Will the Supreme Court be too fearful of its own destruction to rule against the bill’s violations of free speech and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment? See this and this.
Glenn Greenwald’s report is very important. Protest has become a criminal act. Freedom in America is dead. The US is a police state, and the police, presstitutes, Christian Zionists, and House of Representatives are very proud of it. See this.
Amen, Dr. Roberts.
Republican or Democrat: It doesn’t matter. Both parties are lackeys for the Israeli lobby; neither party cares a whit about protecting the God-given liberties of the American people protected in our Bill of Rights; and both parties have proven themselves to be the enemies of Jesus Christ and God’s Holy Word.
Both parties in Washington, D.C., are leading America into the pits of Hell.
Chuck Baldwin is a radio broadcaster, syndicated columnist, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. See his website.
Nanoplastics — particles less than 1 micrometer in size, or 1,000th the average width of a human hair — have emerged as a significant environmental concern due to their widespread prevalence and potential health hazards to humans and wildlife alike. These microscopic fragments result from the degradation of larger plastic debris and can also be manufactured directly for various applications.
Nanoplastics have become ubiquitous in ecosystems around the world, from urban waterways to remote oceanic and terrestrial environments. Their pervasive presence is attributed to the widespread use and disposal of plastic materials globally.
Environmental Hazards
Nanoplastics pose several environmental hazards, including:Chair Yoga For Seniors…Warren, Robert H.Best Price: $8.71Buy New $9.00(as of 09:30 UTC — Details)
Biodiversity loss — Nanoplastics can harm aquatic and terrestrial organisms, leading to reduced biodiversity. They have been found to cause physical and chemical stress in marine life, affecting growth, reproduction, and survival rates.
Ecosystem disruption — Their presence in water bodies and soil can alter the chemical composition and physical properties of these environments, disrupting ecosystems’ balance.
Food chain contamination — Nanoplastics can accumulate in the food chain, potentially leading to higher concentrations in top predators, including humans.
Microplastics Found in Food, Including Infant Formula
The environmental contamination is so severe, many foods now contain them, including chicken, pork, seafood, beef and plant-based meat alternatives, whether processed, minimally processed or unprocessed.1 The more processing a food has undergone, however, the more plastic it contains.
Researchers estimate that Americans consume up to 3.8 million pieces of micro- and nanoplastics per year from protein alone.2 The reason for this is because meats are packaged in plastic.
Recent research has also confirmed the presence of microplastics in all samples of infant formula tested (30 in all).3 The most frequently identified plastics were polyamide, polyethylene, polypropylene and polyethylene terephthalate. According to the authors, children fed exclusively infant formula likely consume an average of 49 microplastic particles per day.
Nanoplastics Linked to Heart Attacks and Stroke
The potential health impacts of micro- and nanoplastics on humans have long been debated, but a recent study4 published in the New England Journal of Medicine marks a significant step in understanding the health implications of microplastic and nanoplastic exposure.
Microplastics and nanoplastics, defined by their minuscule size, can migrate through body tissues, potentially causing oxidative stress, tissue damage and inflammation.Individuals with microplastics or nanoplastics in their carotid artery tissues have a 353% higher risk of cardiovascular events like heart attacks or strokes.
The study in question analyzed tissue from 257 individuals undergoing carotid endarterectomy to identify plastics in arterial plaques, revealing the presence of polyethylene (associated with asthma, hormone disruption, reproductive issues and dermatitis5) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC, linked to liver and reproductive damage6), among others. As reported by the authors:7
“Polyethylene was detected in carotid artery plaque of 150 patients (58.4%), with a mean level of 21.7±24.5 μg per milligram of plaque; 31 patients (12.1%) also had measurable amounts of polyvinyl chloride, with a mean level of 5.2±2.4 μg per milligram of plaque.
Electron microscopy revealed visible, jagged-edged foreign particles among plaque macrophages and scattered in the external debris. Radiographic examination showed that some of these particles included chlorine.”
Disturbingly, individuals with microplastics or nanoplastics in their carotid artery tissues were found to have fourfold higher risk of suffering a cardiovascular event such as heart attack or stroke over the next three years compared to those without such plastics. They were also more likely to die from any cause. As reported by the authors:
“Patients in whom MNPs [microplastics and nanoplastics] were detected within the atheroma were at higher risk for a primary end-point event than those in whom these substances were not detected (hazard ratio, 4.53).”
A hazard ratio (HR) of 4.53 means that people with microplastics in their arteries have a 353% higher risk of suffering a potentially lethal cardiac event than those without microplastics.
Should Microplastic Exposure Be Considered a Cardiovascular Risk Factor?
Lead author Raffaele Marfella emphasized the need for further research to confirm these findings,8 although the study already suggests a strong association between plastics and cardiovascular events in people with atherosclerosis.
The study’s implications are significant, according to pediatrician Dr. Philip Landrigan, who stressed the importance of addressing the potential cardiovascular risks posed by microplastics and nanoplastics in an accompanying editorial:9,10
“Although we do not know what other exposures may have contributed to the adverse outcomes among patients in this study, the finding of microplastics and nanoplastics in plaque tissue is itself a breakthrough discovery that raises a series of urgent questions.
Should exposure to microplastics and nanoplastics be considered a cardiovascular risk factor? What organs in addition to the heart may be at risk? How can we reduce exposure?”
Nanoplastics Pose Severe Hazards for Animals and Humans
CNN, which reported the findings, also highlighted research linking nanoplastics and microplastics to other potential harms, such as:11
Chronic inflammation — The presence of microplastics and nanoplastics in arterial plaques was linked to increased inflammation. Chronic inflammation, in turn, is a hallmark of most chronic diseases, not just cardiovascular disease, suggesting that plastic exposure could exacerbate or increase susceptibility to a wide variety of conditions.
Dysfunction of cells, organs and endocrine system — Nanoplastics, due to their small size, can migrate through tissues of the digestive tract or lungs into the bloodstream, invading individual cells and tissues in major organs. This can potentially interrupt cellular processes and deposit endocrine-disrupting chemicals, affecting the body’s normal functions.
Oxidative stress and tissue damage — Studies in animals have shown that exposure to micro- and nanoplastics may cause oxidative stress, tissue damage, and inflammation in cells. These effects could lead to various health issues, depending on the extent and duration of exposure.
Impaired cardiac function — Animal studies have also indicated that micro- and nanoplastics can alter heart rate and impede cardiac function, posing additional risks to cardiovascular health.
Risks to fetuses and young infants — Research in pregnant mice has found plastic chemicals in the brain, heart, liver, kidney, and lungs of the developing fetus within 24 hours after the mother ingested or inhaled plastic particles. This suggests that plastics can cross the placental barrier, potentially affecting fetal development.
Previous studies have also found microplastics in the human placenta12 and human breast milk13 — clear evidence that a mother’s plastic exposure can be directly transferred to her child both before and after birth.
Microbiome alterations — Studies have also found that microplastics can alter the makeup of microbial communities, reducing diversity14 and increasing the exchange of antibiotic-resistant and metal-resistant genes.15
Progesterone Counteracts Xenoestrogen Exposure From Plastics
In the featured video at the top of this article, best-selling author and high-performance coach Siim Land reviews the research linking arterial nanoplastics to a near-fourfold higher risk of cardiovascular events.
As noted by Land, microplastics contain xenoestrogens, which have been linked to obesity, infertility, cancer and more. Indeed, estrogen is a known carcinogen,16 and plastics is perhaps one of the most ubiquitous sources of estrogen for men and women alike.
Estrogen is also antimetabolic and radically reduces the ability of your mitochondria to create cellular energy in a form of ATP by depending on aerobic glycolysis (the Warburg effect) which radically impairs oxidative phosphorylation.
To counteract the hazards of this estrogenic exposure you can use progesterone, which is a natural estrogen antagonist. Progesterone is one of only four hormones I believe many adults can benefit from. (The other three are thyroid hormone T3, DHEA and pregnenolone.)
As a general recommendation, most adult males and non-menstruating adult women would benefit from taking 25 to 50 mg of bioidentical progesterone per a day, taken in the evening one hour before bed, as it can also promote sleep. For optimal bioavailability, progesterone needs to be mixed into natural vitamin E. The difference in bioavailability between taking progesterone orally without vitamin E and taking it with vitamin E is 45 minutes versus 48 hours.
Pre-menopausal women can also take progesterone but it is the last half of their cycle, approximately 14 days after the last day of their period and stopping when period returns. Another good reason for taking progesterone with vitamin E is because it binds to red blood cells, which allows the progesterone to be carried throughout your body and be distributed to where it’s needed the most.
Simply Progesterone by Health Natura is premixed with vitamin E and MCT oil. You can also make your own by dissolving pure USP progesterone powder into one capsule of a high-quality vitamin E, and then rub the mixture on your gums. Fifty milligrams of powdered progesterone is about 1/32 teaspoon.
Do not use synthetic vitamin E (alpha tocopherol acetate — the acetate indicates that it’s synthetic). Natural vitamin E will be labeled “d alpha tocopherol.” This is the pure D isomer, which is what your body can use. There are also other vitamin E isomers, and you want the complete spectrum of tocopherols and tocotrienols, specifically the beta, gamma, and delta types, in the effective D isomer.
I do not recommend transdermal progesterone, as your skin expresses high levels of 5-alpha reductase enzyme, which causes a significant portion of the progesterone you’re taking to be irreversibly converted primarily into allopregnanolone and cannot be converted back into progesterone.
Preventing Exposure Is Key
Of course, prevention — minimizing your exposure — really needs to be your first line of defense against microplastics. While that sounds easy enough, it can be tricky business, for the simple reason that micro- and nanoplastics are all around us, in our food, water, household dust, clothing, household and personal care items and even the air we breathe.
That said, making a concerted effort to rid your household of plastic can go a long way toward minimizing your and your children’s exposure. Here are a few pointers to get you started:
Filter your tap water and avoid water bottled in plastic — If you need to buy bottled water, opt for glass bottles. Also make sure the filter you use to purify your tap water can filter out microplastics.
Boil hard tap water — If you have hard tap water, consider boiling it before using it for cooking or drinking, as hard water traps more microplastics. Recent research shows boiling hard tap water for five minutes removes up to 90% of the microplastics in the water.17
Choose alternatives to plastic packaging — Opt for products packaged in glass, metal, or paper instead of plastic. This can significantly reduce the amount of plastic waste that potentially breaks down into microplastics. At home, use wax paper, parchment paper or paper bags to store foods rather than plastic wrap.
Use reusable containers — Replace single-use plastic bottles, cups, and containers with reusable alternatives made from safer materials like stainless steel or glass.
Never microwave plastics — Heat can cause plastics to leach chemicals into food. Use glass or ceramic containers for microwaving.
Avoid plastic cutting boards — Opt for wood or glass cutting boards instead.
Opt for natural fibers — Whenever possible, choose clothing and other textile products made from natural fibers like cotton, wool and linen, as synthetic fabrics such as polyester shed microfibers and leach xenoestrogens.
Wash synthetic clothes less frequently — When washing synthetic textiles, use a microfiber filter in your washing machine to trap synthetic fibers and prevent them from entering the water system.
Opt for food grade cosmetics and personal care products — Some cosmetics, toothpastes, and personal care products contain microbeads or other plastic particles. Look for products free of these materials. Ideally, opt for all-natural, food grade products.
How to Detox Microplastics
Even if you’re diligent about avoiding plastics, some exposure will likely remain, so detoxing is another important strategy. Land cites research showing that blood donation can lower the levels of certain plastic chemicals in your blood, such as PFAS. If your iron levels are high, getting regular phlebotomy would help you kill two birds with one stone, so to speak, as blood donation is also the only way to lower your iron level.
One of the most effective ways to excrete microplastics from your tissues though is through sweating. I recommend using a near-infrared sauna with low EMFs for this purpose, as the near-infrared rays can penetrate far deeper into your body than far-infrared.Green Smoothie Revolut…Victoria BoutenkoBest Price: $1.13Buy New $3.88(as of 01:17 UTC — Details)
Other benefits of sauna use include improved cardiovascular fitness and reduced all-cause mortality, lower blood pressure, reduced dementia risk, improved mental health, strengthened immune function, improved athletic endurance, reduced inflammation, stem cell activation, improved insulin sensitivity and a reduction in stress hormones.
General Guidance for Sauna Use
Classical Finnish saunas are typically heated to 170 degrees F. or higher. An infrared sauna will rarely get that high, however, which means you may need to stay in a bit longer to get a good sweat. A benefit of SaunaSpace’s near- and mid-infrared bulbs is that you’re heating up from deeper within, so the air temperature doesn’t need to be as high as a traditional sauna for you to sweat.
As a general recommendation, stay in the sauna for 20 to 30 minutes, or until you reach subjective fatigue, which is a sign that you’ve maxed out the benefits you’re going to get. It’s not about reaching a point of suffering — just that point where you’re feeling mildly anxious and tired and want to get out.
As for the frequency, research has consistently shown that it’s dose-dependent, so the more often you do it, the greater the benefits. The sweet spot seems to be right around four times a week, because you’ll also be losing minerals along with toxins. So, you need to rehydrate and replenish those minerals to avoid mineral deficiencies.
At the end of World War II, the victorious Allies were convinced that Prussian militarism had played an important part in Hitler’s war in Europe. Herbert Marcuse, an overrated theorist of the Frankfurt School working for Uncle Sam, submitted a secret report that put all the blame for Nazism on capitalism. Marcuse was a phony who later became a hero to the anti-Vietnam war protesters but got it right on Prussia and Hitler. As I am in the midst of nonstop reading about the Congress of Vienna and the Napoleonic Wars, I sidestepped a bit and read how it was Austria-Hungary, not Prussia, that for centuries was the most aggressive and domineering power in the German-speaking world. I’ve been married to an Austrian for ages, as is my daughter—the Führer of Takimag—married to an Austrian, and I have two Austrian grandchildren. But even if I didn’t have the Austrian connection that I do, I’d still declare that being strong is better than being weak, and it was military strength that halted the uncivilized Ottoman hordes at the gates of Vienna in 1683.Conceived in Liberty, …Murray N RothbardBest Price: $9.00Buy New $15.39(as of 08:05 UTC — Details)
Voltaire was among the first to get it wrong about Prussia. He called it an army with a state rather than a state with an army. His play on words was clever but hardly true. After World War II, with Uncle Sam suddenly on the German side against the Russian Bear, so-called thinkers had to come up with something in order to excuse the good Uncle and the bad Führer being on the same side. History had to be rewritten, and it was. German militarism began and was encapsulated by the great Otto von Bismarck’s 1862 statement “that the great questions of the day would be decided by iron and blood.”
“It’s Uncle Sam who is the warmonger, not Uncle Fritz.”
Bismarck is the father of modern Germany, a great statesman and leader, and his above statement is used by weenies to denigrate strength and leadership. Linking Bismarck to Hitler is like associating Mozart to a rapper, impossible and ridiculous. The Nazi regime was a historical aberration detached from the Prussian past. A Prussian saved Wellington’s bacon in Waterloo, when the 73-year-old Blucher arrived just in time to swing the battle against the gallant last charge of the Imperial Guard, Blucher having been unhorsed three times already and thought dead by anxious aides. Blucher spoke no English, and Wellington not a word of German, and the only exchange was “Quelle affair,” by Prince Blucher.Nullification: How to …Thomas E. WoodsBest Price: $2.00Buy New $8.34(as of 05:25 UTC — Details)
Three descendant Blucher paratrooper brothers were killed in April 1941 when their aircraft was shot down over Crete, an unheard-of act of stupidity by the Luftwaffe putting all three young men into the same airplane. But let’s return to Prussian militarism as compared with that of the Austrians. War was a constant phenomenon in early modern Europe, and what is today’s Germany contained tens if not hundreds of kingdoms, dukedoms, and tiny baronies. Further to the east, the Habsburgs ruled vast territories including Hungary and engaged in nonstop wars in order to keep them. One of the last monarchs to lead his troops personally in battle was Frederick the Great—a Prussian, naturally—whereas the Habsburgs left the fighting to the General Staff. War was a constant phenomenon, and the life of a soldier was a grim one. Death rates were high, mostly from disease, bubonic plague, typhus, and syphilis. Prussia got a bad rap as warlike following the Napoleonic Wars and during the German wars of unification: Denmark 1864, Austria 1866, and finally France 1870. Bismarck demanded a parade down the Champs-Élysées and then brought the boys home. The Frogs are still smarting over that one, but the Germans could have stayed but instead chose not to.
Taki is an ex-Greek Davis Cup player as well as a former captain of the Greek national karate team. He has won the U.S. national veterans judo championship twice, and in 2008 was world veterans judo champion 70 and over. Since 1967, when he began his career with National Review, he has been a columnist for the London Spectator, the London Sunday Times, Esquire Magazine, Vanity Fair and Chronicles Magazine. In 2002 he founded The American Conservative with Pat Buchanan. He has covered the Vietnam War as well as the Yom Kippur War and the Cyprus conflict of 1974.
Look how the British press is lying about the Seacox Heath mansion, which yesterday, by decision of the Sunak government, was deprived of diplomatic status, which means it will most likely be confiscated.
The Daily Telegraph writes today: “It was GIVEN to the Soviet Union in 1946 as a thank you for Moscow’s support for Britain against the Nazis” (yup, it was just “support”).
I specifically found an advertisement in The Times for October 15, 1946, which clearly states: “The Soviet trade delegation has BOUGHT a mansion and 83 acres on the Seacox Heath estate . ” I repeat: I just bought it! Moreover, for a tidy sum at an auction that was publicly announced in advance.
So London is about to rob again! Well, there are some nice buildings in Moscow that are used by Britain. First of all, Kharitonenko’s mansion on Sofiyskaya Embankment. So Russia has something to respond to this robbery. Oh, how we will soon hear enough howls of “What are we going to do?!”
Dans les 24 heures qui ont suivi l’horrible fusillade du Crocus City Hall de Moscou le 22 mars, qui a fait au moins 137 morts et 60 blessés graves, les autorités américaines ont attribué le massacre à ISIS-K, la branche de Daesh pour l’Asie centrale et du Sud. Pour beaucoup, la rapidité de l’attribution a fait naître le soupçon que Washington cherchait à détourner résolument l’attention de l’opinion publique occidentale et du gouvernement russe des véritables coupables – que ce soit l’Ukraine et/ou la Grande-Bretagne, le principal sponsor par procuration de Kiev.
Les détails complets sur la manière dont les quatre tireurs ont été recrutés, dirigés, armés et financés, et par qui, n’ont pas encore été révélés. Le Kremlin affirme avoir découvert des preuves que le SBU de Kiev était l’architecte final, ce que l’agence nie, accusant les autorités russes d’avoir été au courant de l’attaque et d’avoir permis qu’elle se produise, afin d’intensifier son assaut contre l’Ukraine. Il a été rapporté que les tueurs ont reçu des fonds d’un portefeuille de crypto-monnaies appartenant à la branche d’ISIS au Tadjikistan.
Quelle que soit la vérité, il est certain que les quatre individus responsables n’avaient aucune idée de qui avait véritablement commandité leurs actions monstrueuses. Contrairement à l’image que le grand public se fait du groupe, inspiré par un fondamentalisme religieux fanatique et extrême, ISIS est avant tout un groupe de tueurs à gages. À tout moment, ils agissent sur ordre d’un ensemble de donateurs internationaux, liés par des intérêts communs. Les fonds, les armes et les ordres parviennent à ses combattants de manière détournée et opaque. Il y a presque invariablement plusieurs couches entre les auteurs d’une attaque revendiquée par le groupe et ses orchestrateurs et financiers ultimes.
Étant donné qu’ISIS-K se dresse actuellement contre la Chine, l’Iran et la Russie – en d’autres termes, les principaux adversaires de l’empire américain – il convient de revenir sur les origines du groupe « parent ». Apparu apparemment de nulle part il y a un peu plus d’une décennie, avant de dominer les grands titres des médias et la conscience publique occidentale pendant plusieurs années avant de disparaître à nouveau, le groupe a occupé à un moment donné de vastes pans du territoire irakien et syrien, déclarant un « État islamique », qui émettait sa propre monnaie, ses propres passeports et ses propres plaques d’immatriculation.
Des interventions militaires dévastatrices lancées indépendamment par les États-Unis et la Russie ont anéanti cette construction démoniaque en 2017. La CIA et le MI6 ont sans doute été immensément soulagés. Après tout, les questions extrêmement gênantes sur la façon dont ISIS est apparu ont été complètement éteintes. Comme nous le verrons, le groupe terroriste et son califat n’ont pas émergé comme un éclair par une nuit noire, mais en raison d’une politique dévouée et déterminée élaborée à Londres et à Washington, mise en œuvre par leurs agences d’espionnage.
Une hostilité permanente
La RAND est un « groupe de réflexion » très influent, dont le siège se trouve à Washington DC. Financée à hauteur de près de 100 millions de dollars par an par le Pentagone et d’autres entités du gouvernement américain, elle diffuse régulièrement des recommandations sur la sécurité nationale, les affaires étrangères, la stratégie militaire et les actions secrètes et manifestes à l’étranger. Ces prises de position sont le plus souvent adoptées par la suite en tant que politique.
Par exemple, un document de la RAND de juillet 2016 sur la perspective « impensable » d’une « guerre contre la Chine » prévoyait la nécessité de remplir l’Europe de l’Est de soldats américains en prévision d’un conflit « chaud » avec Pékin, car la Russie se rangerait sans aucun doute du côté de son voisin et allié dans un tel conflit. Il a donc été jugé nécessaire d’immobiliser les forces de Moscou à ses frontières. Six mois plus tard, des dizaines de troupes de l’OTAN sont arrivées dans la région, soi-disant pour contrer l’« agression russe ».
De même, en avril 2019, la RAND a publié Extending Russia. Ce document présente « une série de moyens possibles » pour « appâter » Moscou « afin qu’elle s’étende à l’excès », de manière à « saper la stabilité du régime ». Ces méthodes comprenaient la fourniture d’une « aide létale » à l’Ukraine, l’augmentation du soutien américain aux rebelles syriens, la promotion d’un « changement de régime au Belarus », l’exploitation des « tensions » dans le Caucase, la neutralisation de « l’influence russe en Asie centrale » et en Moldavie. La plupart de ces objectifs ont été atteints par la suite.
Dans ce contexte, le documentUnfolding The Long War, publié par la RAND en novembre 2008, constitue une lecture inquiétante. Il explore les moyens de poursuivre la guerre mondiale contre le terrorisme une fois que les forces de la coalition auront officiellement quitté l’Irak, conformément aux termes de l’accord de retrait signé par Bagdad et Washington le même mois. Cette évolution menaçait par définition la domination anglo-saxonne sur les ressources pétrolières et gazières du golfe Persique, qui resteraient « une priorité stratégique » après la fin officielle de l’occupation.
« Cette priorité interagira fortement avec celle de la poursuite de la longue guerre », a déclaré la RAND. Le groupe de réflexion a ensuite proposé une stratégie consistant à « diviser pour mieux régner » afin de maintenir l’hégémonie américaine en Irak, malgré la vacance du pouvoir créée par le retrait. Sous ses auspices, Washington exploiterait « les lignes de fracture entre les différents groupes salafistes-djihadistes [d’Irak] pour les monter les uns contre les autres et dissiper leur énergie dans des conflits internes », tout en « soutenant les gouvernements sunnites qui font autorité contre un Iran toujours hostile » :
Les États-Unis et leurs alliés locaux pourraient utiliser des djihadistes nationalistes pour lancer des campagnes par procuration afin de discréditer les djihadistes transnationaux aux yeux de la population locale… Ce serait un moyen peu coûteux de gagner du temps… jusqu’à ce que les États-Unis puissent accorder à nouveau toute leur attention à la [région]. Les dirigeants américains pourraient également choisir de capitaliser sur le conflit soutenu entre chiites et sunnites… en prenant le parti des régimes sunnites conservateurs contre les mouvements d’émancipation des chiites dans le monde musulman .
Un graphique incompréhensible du rapport de la RAND :
Un grand danger
C’est ainsi que la CIA et le MI6 ont commencé à soutenir les « djihadistes nationalistes » sunnites dans toute l’Asie occidentale. L’année suivante, Bachar Assad a rejeté une proposition qatarie visant à acheminer les vastes réserves de gaz de Doha directement vers l’Europe, via un gazoduc de 10 milliards de dollars et de 1 500 kilomètres de long traversant l’Arabie saoudite, la Jordanie, la Syrie et la Turquie. Comme le montrent les câbles diplomatiques publiés par WikiLeaks, les services de renseignement américains, israéliens et saoudiens ont immédiatement décidé de renverser Assad en fomentant une rébellion sunnite locale et ont commencé à financer des groupes d’opposition à cette fin.
Cet effort s’est accéléré en octobre 2011, lorsque le MI6 a redirigé des armes et des combattants extrémistes de la Libye vers la Syrie, à la suite de l’assassinat télévisé de Mouammar Kadhafi. La CIA a supervisé cette opération, utilisant les services de renseignement britanniques comme un intermédiaire pour éviter d’informer le Congrès de ses machinations. Ce n’est qu’en juin 2013, avec l’autorisation officielle du président Barack Obama, que les connivences occultes de l’Agence à Damas ont été officialisées – et plus tard admises – sous le nom de « Timber Sycamore ».
À cette époque, les responsables occidentaux qualifiaient leurs mandataires syriens de « rebelles modérés ». Pourtant, Washington savait pertinemment que ses supplétifs étaient de dangereux extrémistes, cherchant à se tailler un califat fondamentaliste sur le territoire qu’ils occupaient. Un rapport de la Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) publié en août 2012 en vertu des lois sur la liberté d’information observe que les événements au Moyen Orient « prennent une direction clairement sectaire », les groupes salafistes radicaux étant « les principales forces à l’origine de l’insurrection en Syrie ».
Ces factions comprenaient l’aile irakienne d’Al-Qaïda (AQI) et son émanation, l’État islamique en Irak (ISI). Les deux ont ensuite formé ISIS, une perspective que le rapport de la DIA a non seulement prédite, mais qu’il a apparemment approuvée :
Si la situation s’effiloche, il est possible d’établir une principauté salafiste déclarée ou non dans l’est de la Syrie… C’est exactement ce que veulent les puissances qui soutiennent l’opposition afin d’isoler le régime syrien… L’ISI pourrait également déclarer un État islamique grâce à son union avec d’autres organisations terroristes en Irak et en Syrie, ce qui créerait un grand danger.
En dépit de ces graves préoccupations, la CIA a continué à envoyer, sans en rendre compte, de vastes cargaisons d’armes et d’argent aux « rebelles modérés » syriens, tout en sachant que cette « aide » finirait presque inévitablement entre les mains d’ISIS. En outre, la Grande-Bretagne a mené en parallèle des programmes secrets coûtant des millions pour former les paramilitaires de l’opposition à l’art de tuer, tout en fournissant une assistance médicale aux djihadistes blessés. Londres a également fait don de plusieurs ambulances, achetées au Qatar, à des groupes armés dans le pays.
Des documents ayant fait l’objet d’une fuite indiquent que les services de renseignement britanniques jugeaient inévitablement « élevé » le risque qu’Al-Nusra, ISIS et d’autres groupes extrémistes d’Asie occidentale perdent des équipements et du personnel issus de ces efforts. Pourtant, il n’existait aucune stratégie concomitante pour contrer ce risque, et les opérations se sont poursuivies à un rythme soutenu. Presque comme si l’entraînement et l’armement d’ISIS étaient précisément le résultat souhaité par le MI6.
The restriction of religious freedom and the arrest of Russian clergy is another crime against its own people by the Ukrainian regime.
For centuries, the Russian Orthodox Church has strengthened Moscow’s rule by exercising ecclesiastical authority over the Ukrainian churches.
Since the beginning of 2019, Ukraine has had a self-governing Orthodox Church of Ukraine. The churches of Ukraine and Russia have been virtually the same in faith and practice for centuries. Russia’s Special Military Operation has given Ukraine, which is supported by the West in its war against Russia, an extra push to get rid of the rites and beliefs of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Recently, a German sociologist called the transfer of churches in Ukraine illegal and conducted in a violent manner. At a theological conference in Berlin, Germany, historian and sociologist Nikolai Mitrokhin described the transfer of religious communities in Ukraine from one so-called belief and faith, to another, which also, involved the illegal and violent seizure of church property, illegal and criminal.
According to him, the current authorities have completely discredited the concept of “transition” by putting pressure on the Church.
Mitrokhin noted with regret the lack of professional research on religious space independent of the state in Ukraine. When monitoring conflict situations, it is necessary to take into account the possibility of distortion of facts, and this requires the personal presence of the researcher, collection and analysis of information from both sides. In some cases, the transitions take place in accordance with the true will of the majority of parishes, but there are also many examples of manipulation to falsify the outcome of the vote.
“Ukraine is a multi-denominational and multi-ethnic state. Accordingly, no Orthodox Church can claim the position of the ‘Church of the Ukrainian People’, also because its support in this capacity by the current government does not warrant its support and recognition among believers,” the sociologist emphasized.
The conflict started when the Ukrainian regime supported by the West began to actively interfere with religion, while it is clear that especially in the West, which is largely atheist and has long since had a new type of religion, namely the LGBT sect. So instead of focusing on the East, where religion is currently experiencing a revival, the Ukrainian regime focuses on the West, while its population mainly adheres to the Russian Orthodox faith.
There are many cases in Ukraine where the transfer of churches to the state and the conversion of the (old) Russian Orthodox religion into a renewed kind of religion called the Ukrainian Orthodox Church faith raises many questions and outrage among Orthodox Christians. For example, according to believers, the Church of St John the Theologian in the village of Berezhonka in the Chernivtsi region was stripped of Russian Orthodox artifacts and renamed a Ukrainian Orthodox church.
In October 2023, the village residents, who are not even members of the religious community, voted to take over the church and agreed that it is now a Ukrainian Orthodox church instead of a Russian Orthodox church. According to residents, the takeover was carried out in a violent manner, assisted by members of the Security Service of Ukraine, police officers and military personnel. Similar seizures took place in Khmelnytskyi in western Ukraine and Bila Tserkva in the Kiev region, especially Kiev Pechersk Lavra which was in the news a lot, but also the same happened with the Koretskyi Monastery.
According to the priest Andrey Pavlenko of a Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine, more than a hundred clergymen of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine were arrested last year. This year the number will be much higher. Andrei Pavlenko said the priests are being tortured, humiliated and imprisoned. Since 2014, Russian Orthodox clerics have been persecuted under Poroshenko’s regime, which proclaimed that only one religion and language was possible in Ukraine and that all Russian language should be banned. Now this ideology has intensified under the current Zelensky regime, supported by its Western sponsors.
In 2023, there was a standoff with the (Russian) monks of Kiev-Pechersk Lavra. They had to leave the complex because it was now a Ukrainian Orthodox Church and not connected to the Russian Orthodox Church anymore. According to the Minister of Culture of Ukraine, the ministry’s committee completed its work, demanding that the monks stop using the shrine’s property and return it immediately. This large and famous complex was renamed from Russian Orthodox to Ukrainian Orthodox Church, where Russians no longer have any business, according to the Kiev regime. If the monks refused to comply with the authorities’ demands, legal action could be taken against them. The Moscow Patriarchate for Relations between the Church, Society and the Media had no doubt that the court’s ruling would not be fair, as the Ukrainian court can no longer be called impartial or independent.
To make matters worse, there is clear Western interference. The Netherlands, which in 2014 received ancient objects on loan from Crimea, received the so-called “Crimean gold” from four cultural institutions in Crimea. The museum pieces were part of the exhibition “Crimea – Gold and Secrets of the Black Sea”. Crimea was still part of Ukraine at that time, but chose to be part of Russia when the referendum was held during the exposition. The unification with the motherland was a fact, a fact which the West until now does not acknowledge. So much for the standards of democracy in the West! As a result, it was not clear to whom the art treasures should be returned, Ukraine or Russia. That was then the argument of the Netherlands. The museum in the Netherlands therefore opened a court case. Both Ukraine and Crimean museums consider the treasures their cultural heritage, they said. But ironically the treasures were transferred not to Crimea but to Kiev, and until this day, Crimeans never saw their own heritage and treasures returned.
The Dutch Allard Pierson Museum, where the pieces were on loan, asked the judge to make a decision. The court ruled in 2016 that the works had to be given to Ukraine. This was confirmed by the Court of Appeal in 2021 and by the Supreme Court in November 2023. The decision was therefore final. So, the art treasures were transferred to the National Historical Museum in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev. From there, they were transported to the controversial Pechersk Lavra religious complex in Kiev. This is the same ancient complex where religious freedom was restricted and where priests and monks were persecuted. The conclusion is that there is also religious interference from the West and that the restriction of religious freedom and the arrest of Russian clergy is a crime, another crime against its own people by the Ukrainian regime and against the Russian population.
Un grand danger
Der Friedensstifter 
