Der Friedensstifter

Genocidal Policies Towards Gaza and Other West Asian States Have Increased Solidarity Efforts with the Palestinian People

Part II of Pan-Africanism and Palestine Solidarity, Then and Now

Read Part I:

Pan-Africanism and Palestine Solidarity, Then and Now

By Abayomi Azikiwe, March 01, 2024

When the Al-Aqsa Storm began on October 7, 2023, the corporate and government-controlled media in the United States and European countries utilized their resources to justify the Israeli genocidal assaults on the Gaza Strip and the Occupied West Bank.

Israeli governmental and military spokespersons were given free reign by the television, radio and newspaper platforms to denounce the Hamas Resistance Movement and the Palestinian people as a whole.

Palestinians were referred to as “animals, sub-humans, murderers and rapists.” These comments made by the Zionist officials did not receive any rebuttal by the western media outlets.

However, despite the demonization of Palestinians and their allies in the region by numerous news agencies such as the British Broadcasting Corporations (BBC), Cable News Network (CNN), MSNBC and many others, hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets to denounce the blanket bombing and later ground invasion into the Gaza Strip. From New York City to the West Coast, protest actions were organized on college campuses, in business districts along with vigils outside the homes of leading Congressional figures such as Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

Although the majority of African American elected officials for both the Democratic and Republican parties tripped over themselves to express support for Tel Aviv, many rank-and-file activists issued statements and joined demonstrations in solidarity with the Palestinians. President Joe Biden was quickly labeled as “Genocide Joe” for his unconditional support for the Zionist state.

In an article published by the Black Agenda Report written by radio host Jacqueline Luqman, she emphasized:

“It shouldn’t need to be said at this late date, but imperialism and settler colonialism are the pertinent issues to address in any discussion of Zionism. The foundational issue in the ongoing and existential conflict between Israeli settlers and indigenous Palestinians, not a continued and historical hatred of Jews, as many Zionists claim. But why do we make the distinction that opposition to Zionism is not automatically opposition to Jewish people? I believe that to understand this is to understand what Zionism is and the contradictions therein. First, Zionism itself is not entirely synonymous with Judaism. Although it is true that the Zionist movement was ‘officially’ organized by Theodor Hertzl in Austria in 1896 to establish a Jewish homeland in response to the bigotry and repression against Jews, it is important to understand that Hertzl was not himself an Orthodox, or ‘observant’ Jew; he was more secular than religious.”

Biden who has described himself as a “Zionist” traveled to Tel Aviv just hours after a hospital was bombed in Gaza City killing hundreds of patients and civilians October 17. Biden in a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, apportioned blame for the Al-Ahli Hospital massacre on the Palestinian resistance absent any investigation by any outside entity. He quoted former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir as saying that the Jewish people had nowhere else to go other than Palestine. Biden has expressed no sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people who have been dislocated from their traditional homeland.

Millions Demonstrate Around the World in Solidarity with Palestine

Weapons were immediately sent to Israel while the Pentagon deployed an aircraft carrier to the Eastern Mediterranean to bolster the military onslaught in the Gaza Strip. U.S. military drones enhanced their surveillance over Palestine while it was revealed that the White House would bolster its already existent military base in the Negev.

Black Clergy Begins to Break with White House Calling for Ceasefire in Gaza

During late January after the annual federal holiday honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and on the eve of African American History Month, one thousand African American members of the clergy issued a statement indicating that the White House under President Biden was jeopardizing its possibility of reelection by its unconditional support for the Israeli war against the Palestinians in Gaza.

This clear message sent to Biden and the Democratic Party in general has been ignored by the administration and many within the U.S. Congress.

In a report published by the Root, a news website which is geared towards the African American community, it says in relations to these political developments:

“Black faith leaders from around the country are calling for an end to the Israel-Gaza war with an urgent message to President Joe Biden and Democratic leadership that inaction could cost them Black voters. According to The New York Times, a coalition of 1,000 Black pastors has launched a multi-tiered effort on behalf of their congregations, calling for a cease-fire and the release of Palestinian hostages in Gaza. In letters, ads and meetings with the White House, the pastors reportedly put Democrats in Washington on notice about where they stand on the issue. The Black faith leaders said their congregations feel a connection between the Palestinians’ struggle in the region and their fight for civil rights in the United States, and they are growing impatient with the president’s support for Israel. According to NBC News, an overwhelming 70 percent of all voters ages 18 to 34, disapprove of the way Biden is handling the war.”

The following month of February, yet another blow to the Biden administration took place when the Board of Bishops of the African Methodist Episcopal Church (AME) and the African Methodist Episcopal Zion (AMEZ), two of the oldest Black congregations in the U.S. which can trace their origins to the late 18th and early 19th centuries, made its opposition to the genocidal war in Gaza public. These two denominations combined represent 4.9 million members located across the U.S. and internationally.

AMEZ official statement calling for ceasefire in Gaza

The official statement issued by the AMEZ Church emphasized:

“Our faith and our heritage demand a consistent stand for the value of all life. Whenever we witness acts of violence and human suffering, we have no choice but to raise our collective voices in prayer but also in protest. It is in this spirit that the Board of Bishops of the A.M.E. Zion Church joins with other Faith Leaders, including Bishops of the A.M.E. Church, our sister denomination, to call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and the immediate release of all remaining hostages…. We call upon President Biden and the members of Congress to issue a call for an immediate ceasefire, the release of all remaining hostages, and reviving efforts towards a two-state solution where both Israelis and Palestinians can live with security, prosperity, and peace….

The International Court of Justice has issued a ruling calling on Israel to take all measures to prevent genocide and ensure access to humanitarian aid. We believe that the line has been crossed. According to UN human rights experts, much of the population in Gaza is starving and struggling to find food, drinkable water, healthcare, and fuel. Women and children are the disproportionate victims of this humanitarian crisis. It must be ended immediately.

Undoubtedly, the bulk of the AME and AMEZ members along with other clergy in opposition to the Biden policy on Palestine are participants in electoral politics as consistent voters. These events and other policy decisions of the Biden White House could easily lead to the Democratic Party losing control of the executive branch as well as the Senate.

The lawsuit filed by the African National Congress (ANC) government in the Republic of South Africa against the Israeli regime at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has drawn support worldwide. Former ANC leader and the first democratically elected President Nelson Mandela (1918-2013) stated repeatedly that the people of South Africa cannot be completely liberated until the Palestinians are freed.

As the struggle against apartheid in South Africa during the 1980s was an issue which mobilized millions around the globe, the same situation is developing in regard to the Free Palestine movement. African Americans and peoples of African descent will continue to play a critical role in these efforts.

Electoral Challenge Through the Uncommitted Primary Vote

In the state of Michigan, activists led by young people within the Arab American community launched the “Abandon Biden” and “Listen to Michigan” campaigns. This protest action operating in the electoral arena encouraged voters in the primary to mark “uncommitted” as a rebuke of the White House policy on Palestine.

The call resulted in 101,000 voters casting their ballots as “uncommitted” sending a powerful message to the Democratic Party and the Biden administration. Michigan is considered a “swing state” where, as in 2016, its loss due to the negligence of the Hillary Clinton for president campaign, resulted in the victory of Donald Trump.

A mass rally held at the Dearborn Manor on February 25 by the Michigan Task Force for Palestine featured a panel composed of Maureen Taylor of the Welfare Rights Organization in the state as the chair; Nina Turner, former State Senator from Ohio; Dearborn Mayor Abdullah Hammoud; Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib; Gabriela Santiago-Romero of the Detroit City Council; Atty. Julie Hurwitz of Jewish Voice for Peace and the National Lawyers Guild; Rev. Ed Rowe, Pastor Emeritus of the Central United Methodist Church; Rev. Robert Smith, Jr., Senior Pastor of the Historic New Bethel Baptist Church; and Jay Makled, Financial Secretary of the UAW Local 600. Such an alliance of diverse forces is reflective of the growing support for not only a ceasefire in Gaza it represents a repudiation of the longstanding U.S. policy towards Palestine.

Dearborn rally for Palestine chaired by MWRO Chair Maureen Taylor, Feb. 25, 2024

Biden’s poor showing in recent polls indicates that his reelection is by no means certain. African Americans and their progressive leaders will continue to play an important role in the Palestine solidarity movement both inside the U.S. and around the world.

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Detroit Palestine solidarity march mobilized thousands on Oct. 28, 2024 / All images in this article are from the author

The original source of this article is Global Research

https://www.globalresearch.ca/genocidal-policies-towards-gaza-other-west-asian-states-increased-solidarity-efforts-palestinian-people/5851100

How Canada’s Liberal Party Was Infiltrated by Misanthropic Technocrats. Matthew Ehret

By Matthew Ehret-Kump

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Ever since the Liberal Party of Chrystia Freeland and Justin Trudeau took power in 2015, policies favorable to the formation of a technocratic dictatorship have incrementally taken control of Canada.

This policy outlook is a far cry from the “old school Liberal party” of the post-WWII decades which ushered in some of the greatest rates of technological and scientific progress ever seen in history under the leadership of C.D. Howe.

Even if you are not Canadian, it is worth understanding how and why that pro-industrial orientation was subverted, since similar programs occurred across Europe and the USA as well.

Although the operation created to re-organize today’s Liberal government is called Canada 2020, this think tank (formed in 2003) is merely the most recent manifestation of a systematic foreign takeover which goes back to 1933… and I’m not talking about the Russians or Chinese.

This takeover has been led by an operation called the Round Table movement and it’s sister organization the Fabian Society. In volume four of The Untold History of Canada, that story is told at some length.

Over the course of the past century, technocratic planning conferences have been instrumental in guiding this process geared towards Borg-like assimilation of target nation states into a homogeneous blob, and in this short essay I will outline two major examples as it applies to the Round Table/Fabian takeover of Canada…

Gordon’s Thinkers Conference: 1960 Kingston

The original conference that brought this new Liberal makeover scheme together was known as the Kingston “Thinkers” Conference of 1960, led by members of the Canadian Institute of International Affairs (CIIA) Walter Gordon, Maurice Lamontagne, Lester B. Pearson, Lionel Chevrier, Tom Kent, Keith Davey and other social engineers who were obsessed with cleaning out the political landscape of all forces committed to scientific and technological progress and continental cooperation with the pro-development America of John F. Kennedy (1).

Under the chairmanship of Walter Gordon, the participants of the “Thinkers” conference created the Committee to Restructure the Liberal Party Organization which set itself to work to counter the fight which President John F. Kennedy had recently launched against the oligarchy [2].

Under Kennedy’s leadership, Canada was in danger of slipping away from the hands of the oligarchy’s influence as a bold vision of new frontiers called forth the pioneering spirit of Canadian citizens and policy-makers.

Although the C.D. Howe Liberals and Diefenbaker Conservatives differed in their methods, both were fundamentally committed to achieving progress and increasing the productive powers of the nation through scientific and technological progress. Diefenbaker himself had attempted to found a new Canadian nationalism upon a bold vision for Arctic development which represented a grave threat to the oligarchy and had to be undermined at all cost.

In response to this danger, the Liberal party was wiped clean of C.D. Howe Liberals in what Henry Erskine Kidd, General Secretary for the Liberal Party, called “a palace revolution” run directly by Walter Gordon, while Gordon managed the downfall of Diefenbaker 3. C.D. Howe himself, now nearing his last days watched the Thinkers conference with sadness when he wrote: “I am afraid that Mike [Pearson] is being advised by the wrong type of officers. The meeting of the Thinkers Club certainly didn’t help him politically”[4].

On top of this, a new Fabian-inspired centralized-socialist planning structure was adopted to provide social incentives for Canadians to remain complacent and controlled, in 1963 a new national anthem and flag were adopted to promote the mythology that Canada had been freed from its British mother to become a sovereign country, and a new technocratic structure of bureaucracy and systems planning was adopted.

The blueprint that guided this reform was led by Gordon’s partner at Clarkson-Gordon John Grant Glassco, who ran the Royal Commission on Government Organization in 1962 and Gordon’s protégé Maurice Lamontagne, who ran the Senate Commission on Science Policy from 1968-1972. Both Gordon and Lamontagne served as Presidents of the Privy Council consecutively. Lamontagne went on to found the Canadian Club of Rome alongside Pierre Trudeau and Maurice Strong a little later.

To understand this structural overhaul which began to bring in a vast compartmentalized bureaucracy run by technocratic social scientists and accountants, it is worth noting that this 1960 conference was itself modeled on a yet earlier precedent that had occurred 27 years prior named the Port Hope Conference under the guidance of Gordon’s CIIA controller Vincent Massey.

Massey was identified by American scholar Caroll Quigley as the leader of the Canadian branch of the Round Table Movement which was set up with funds and mandate of Cecil Rhodes in 1902. Both Gordon and Massey (along with Rhodes Scholar George Grant) are credited as the fathers of Canada’s post-1963 “New Nationalism”. Key founding blueprints for this ‘New [anti-American] Nationalism’ were laid out in Gordon’s powerful Royal Commission on Economic Prospects for Canada 1955-1957 which followed Massey’s 1949-1952 Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences.

Massey’s Conference: 1933 Port Hope

The 1933 Port Hope conference was sponsored by Vincent Massey. The danger for the Canadian-British oligarchy represented by Massey even then was that pro-nationalist forces had dominated the Liberal Party throughout the 1920s in the form of the “Laurier Liberals” of O.D. Skelton, Chubby Power and Ernest Lapointe, all three of whom exerted enormous influence on the leader of the Liberal Party, William Lyon Mackenzie King, who became Prime Minister once again in 1935 after the party had fallen from power in 1930.

Revenge of the Technocrats: How Canada’s Liberal Party Became an Appendage of the Great Reset

Then serving as President of the Liberal Party, Vincent Massey, a student of Lord Alfred Milner (5), noted that the 1933 Conference marked the transformation of the Liberal Party “from the laissez-faire traditions of the party to a new, more technocratic and interventionist view of government”[6]. Just as would occur 27 years later in Kingston, the challenge for the oligarchy involved

1) keeping Canada complacent by encouraging a technocratic managerial class and

2) blocking greater cooperation with an anti-Imperial America led by the great Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

This conference was designed to coincide with the 1933 London Economic Conference that had brought together 66 nations to deal with the global depression by the establishment of a globalized standard of balanced budgets, and currency controls under the dictatorship of the Bank of England.

Fortunately in 1933, the power of the oligarchy was thwarted as the London Economic Conference was sabotaged by Roosevelt who refused to attend and decided not to sacrifice American sovereignty on the City of London altar.

It was FDR’s sabotage of this conference that put a final nail in the coffin of the imperial League of Nations. Fabian Society eugenicist H.G. Wells blamed the rise of global fascism on FDR’s nationalist sabotage of this very conference.

Canada 2020 and the Kingston Conference of the 21st Century

In the modern period, the 1933 Massey Port Hope Conference and 1960 Gordon Kingston Conference has taken the form of a June 2006 conference in Mont Tremblant Quebec hosted by a London-run think tank known as Canada 2020 and a pack of Rhodes Scholars.

The two day conference sponsored by this new think tank was keynoted by none other than Al Gore, who was brought in by high level members of the Queen’s elite Privy Council such as John Manley, Bob Rae and Anne McLellan, in order to reform the policy structures of the federal government, the Liberal Party and the Canadian culture itself after the downfall of Paul Martin in February 2006.

The Liberal Party of Jean Chretien and Paul Martin, which had been in power from 1993-2006, distinguished itself as being the last major federal party to resist, even in some small form, aspects of the Empire’s agenda in the form of their rejection of Canada’s participation in the Iraq war in 2003, rejection of the Anti-Ballistic Missile shield in 2005 and the failed 1997 attempt to consolidate the “big 5” banks into the “big 3”.

Battles between Prime Minister Chretien and such pro-British establishment figures as Lord Conrad Black expressed this lack of British control over its Canadian dominion to a large degree. Such lack of control of an important dominion within the British Commonwealth had to be reined in and a more virulent form of Canadian nationalism more conducive to a globally extended empire had to be weaved in its place.

An important decision made during the conference of 2006 was to groom a young Justin Trudeau to become the spokesperson of the new liberal party.

Prize assets of Power Corporation, the World Wildlife Fund and the Canadian International Council (CIC)[7] were subsequently deployed to manage this new cult of “Justin” in preparation for the 2015 elections with CIC President Bill Graham playing a key role in the event. Both Al Gore, Barack Obama and Larry Summers have acted as leading spokesmen, appearing at Canada 2020 events over the years.

Today, the chairman of the Canada 2020 Advisory Council is non other than eco-warrior central banker Mark Carney, who joins his wife (and co-founder of Canada 2020 Diane Carney) managing Canada’s transformation into a fascist ‘post-nation state’ state. He is joined by Thomas Pitfield (co-founder of Canada 2020 and its current executive chairman).

Thomas Pitfield is one of Justin Trudeau’s boyhood friends’ whose Privy Council father Michael Pitfield was both the right hand man of both Pierre Trudeau and Paul Desmarais Sr.

Michael Pitfield got his start working as the assistant to Rhodes Scholar Davie Fulton, and went on to become Clerk of the Privy Council Office as key member of Pierre Trudeau’s powerful cabal. After forming CSIS in 1984, Pitfield went on to become Vice-President of Power Corporation. It was through these positions that Michael acquired a job for his son first on the Powercorp sponsored Canada-Chinese Business Council.

The Case of Axworthy and Manley

A vital player in this process is none other than former Principal Secretary to Pierre Trudeau, Thomas Axworthy. By the end of the 2006 conference, Axworthy had been made responsible for chairing the Liberal Party Renewal Commission in where he oversaw 36 task forces which examined each aspect of the party. The outcome of Axworthy’s task forces resulted in the current Obama-modelled behaviorist design represented by Justin Trudeau.

Not only is Axworthy the President of the Walter and Duncan Gordon Foundation, Senior Fellow at Massey College, former Executive Director of the Charles Bronfman Foundation, but has gotten his start in social engineering working as research assistant directly under Walter Gordon on the 1967 “Task Force on the Structure of the Canadian Economy” (aka: Gordon Task Force). Axworthy was joined by Walter Gordon’s other surviving protégé Keith Davey, who also helped co-found Canada 2020 and who participated in the Gordon 1960 Thinkers Conference.

It is also noteworthy that both Thomas Axworthy and the 2006 Conference co-chair John Manley were both members of the failed Independent Task Force on North America to integrate the North American Economies under a European Union-modeled zone called the “North American Union”.

Where We Stand Now

The Canada 2020 agenda calls for an absolute commitment to the nation-destroying measures such as a banning of all arctic development, a commitment to depopulation through low quality green energy grids, carbon taxes, smart grids, Public Private Partnerships and green victory bonds (aka: the Green New Deal)… all punctuated by a destruction of nuclear power.

This arrangement must be recognized for what it is: a scheme which is designed to reduce the world population. Canada’s low population density of 9 people/ square mile is an idealized global density for the oligarchy.

Bering Strait Tunnel

The only way to stop this green zero-growth program from being acted upon is the immediate restoration of Glass-Steagall and the re-enactment of national banking measures to produce the productive credit necessary to finance those projects which can increase the productive powers of society such as building the Bering Strait tunnel joining the Polar Silk Road, launching Arctic development and pushing for high intensity investments into fission, fusion power and space exploration.

Rejecting this “Great Reset”/London Conference means picking up the torch which was dropped with the demise of C.D. Howe, the Kennedy brothers, Charles de Gaulle, W.A.C. Bennett and Quebec’s great statesman Daniel Johnson Sr.

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on Matthew Ehret’s Insights.

Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review, Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow, and Director of The Rising Tide Foundation. He has authored three volumes of the Untold History of Canada book series and four volumes of the Clash of the Two Americas. He hosts Connecting the Dots on TNT Radio, Breaking History on Badlands Media, and The Great Game on Rogue News.

Notes

[1] It is important to note that Pearson was not terribly respected by these “new reformers” led by Gordon, and was largely used as their Nobel Prize winning instrument. When Pearson became too easily influenced by the pro-C.D. Howe Liberals remaining in his party such as Robert Winters and Mitchell Sharp, as well as JFK himself, Pearson was scrapped for a more effective replacement in the form of Pierre Trudeau in 1968.

[2] For the full story of Kennedy’s battle to liberate the world from the British Empire, see JFK vs the Empire

[3] As Diefenbaker himself wrote in his autobiography “One of the ironies of recent Canadian history is that Walter Gordon, a man whom I only met for a few minutes when he delivered to me his Royal Commission Report, has stated that he decided to do everything in his power to make Mr. Pearson Prime Minister because he hated me and feared that my policies would wreck Canada”, Diefenbaker Memoirs, p.202. Rhodes Scholar Governor of the Bank of Canada, James Coyne, and two Rhodes scholars embedded in Diefenbaker’s own cabinet (J.M. Mcdonald, and Davie Fulton) played a key role in Diefenbaker’s final 1963 downfall and failure of his Northern Vision.

[4] Stephen Azzi, Walter Gordon and the Rise of Canadian Nationalism, McGill-Queens Press, 1999, p.80

[5] The young Massey, then on the cusp of inheriting the fortunes of his family’s farm equipment dynasty, had helped install a Round Table chapter in Ontario in 1910 and was rewarded for his services by being sent off to Oxford to study under the Round Table’s founder and controller, the eugenics obsessed “race patriot” Lord Alfred Milner in 1911.

[6] Vincent Massey is quoted from Richard Blake’s From Rights to Needs: A History of Family Allowances in Canada, UBC Press, p.33

[7] The Canadian International Council became the new name for the Canadian institute for International Affairs (CIIA) in 2007. The CIIA had been the new name for the Round Table Movement, formed in London by Lord Milner in 1910 and run by the Rhodes Trust network of Oxford scholars in order to advance Cecil Rhodes’ design to recapture America as a lost colony and form the rebirth of a new globally extended British Empire. For more on how this hive has mis-shaped the 21st century, see “British Dictatorship or American System part I and II” by this author in the Canadian Patriot #7 and 8, downloadable on http://www.canadianpatriot.org

Featured image is from the author

The Clash of the Two Americas

Vol. 1 & 2

by Matthew Ehret

In his new two volume series The Clash of the Two Americas, Matthew Ehret introduces a new analysis of American history from the vantage point that the globally-extended supranational shadow government that managed the British Empire was never fully defeated and has acted within the USA itself since 1776 as a continuous multi-generational fifth column managing every significant event and assassination of American presidents for the next 250 years.

Click here to order.

The original source of this article is Global Research

https://www.globalresearch.ca/how-canada-liberal-party-infiltrated-by-misanthropic-technocrats/5851001

New York Times’ Exposé Details Expansion of CIA Secret War in Ukraine Over a Decade Ago

By Uriel Araujo

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

The US “has nurtured a secret intelligence partnership” with Ukraine “for more than a decade”, and it “has transformed Ukraine” into “one of Washington’s most important intelligence partners against the Kremlin”.

In the past eight years, particularly, a CIA-backed “network of spy bases” has been created, and it includes

“12 secret locations along the Russian border.”

Moreover, in 2016 the Central Intelligence Agency even started training an elite Ukrainian commando force which captured Russian drones for the agency to reverse-engineer them.

This is no “Russian propaganda”, but a recent New York Times story by Adam Entous, a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner, and Michael Schwirtz.

Screenshot from The NYT

Maybe top Russian officials have known something about it for a while.

One may recall how Russian President Vladimir Putin has accused the US of having played a major role in the 2014 Maidan revolution in Ukraine – naming the CIA particularly. Well, considering the aforementioned NYT exposé, if one looks at the timeline, it would be difficult not to wonder how much involvement the American espionage agency had with Maidan or with the training and funding of the Azov battalion, the far-right militia turned National Guard regiment in Ukraine.

The CIA’s Blind Spot About the Ukraine War

This is precisely what Mark Episkopos, a Eurasia Research Fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft reasons:

“within days of the February 2014 Euromaidan Revolution that culminated with the ouster of President Viktor Yanukovych and ushered in a firmly pro-Western government, the newly appointed head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, reportedly proposed a ‘three-way partnership’ with the CIA and MI6, the UK’s foreign intelligence service.”

He adds that a “graduate of one such CIA training program, then-Lt. Col. Kyrylo Budanov, went on to become the chief of Ukrainian military intelligence”, and that “Kyiv-CIA partnership deepened under the Trump administration.” Here, some context on the US agency is needed.

Far from being a mere “spy agency”, with a focus on HUMINT (human intelligence), the CIA is actually known for years to also play a “central combat role”, having for instance organizing a “hidden war” in Afghanistan, “with secret paramilitary units on the ground”, according to a 2001 Washington Post story. Through its Special Activities Center, the division tasked with covert and paramilitary operations (carried out by the SOG – Special Operations Group), and with covert political action (conducted by the PAG – Political Action Group), plus other departments, the Agency coordinates training in torture to foreign groups, promotes false flag terrorist attacks, assassinations of foreign leaders, “regime chances” (a code for coup d’état) and much more.

In Greg Grandin’ words (a professor of history at Yale University), the CIA has, for the last decades, used terror to fortify “illiberal forces”, and “militarized societies”, particularly in Latin America. It has been described as being involved in drug trafficking by the likes of professor and diplomat Peter Dale Scott, historian Alfred McCoy, and journalists Gary Webb and Alexander Cockburn. It is no exaggeration at all to describe the CIA as one of most (if not the most) dangerous organizations on the planet today.

It would make a lot of sense for the CIA to have helped orchestrate the ousting of Ukrainian President Yanukovych and set up a new regime in that country – because that is precisely what the CIA does.

Referring to NATO expansion and the possibility of Ukraine becoming a NATO member, Putin once famously asked how would Washington react if China decided to sign a military pact with Mexico and established military bases near the border. Likewise, one could rhetorically ask: what if the Russian FSB mounted a network of spy bases alongside the US-Mexican border? Well, Washington has been doing precisely that, for years.

The aforementioned expert Mark Episkopos wrote this week that

“Moscow repeatedly warned — for many years before 2014 – that it was and remains prepared to take drastic action to prevent Ukraine from being used by the West as a forward operating base against Russia.”

He adds:

“Yet that, as recounted in lurid detail by The New York Times, is precisely what has happened over the past 10 years.”

Thus, he argues, Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine (launched in 2022), whether one agrees with it or not, “is also not without its context, which includes a litany of grievances that, however unjustified from the perspective of the West, constitute what the Kremlin saw as sufficient provocation.”

Many people have written on the important topic of NATO enlargement, which is all about the militarization of Europe and the encirclement of Russia. It is about time to talk about CIA enlargement – which in turn is all about assassinations, clandestine and covert actions and paramilitary activity. The CIA role in the Ukrainian crisis is yet another thus far untold part of the story of post-Soviet Eastern Europe.

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Uriel Araujo is a researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.

Featured image: President Joe Biden travels to Kyiv, Ukraine Monday, February 20, 2023. (Official White House Photo by Adam Schultz)

The original source of this article is Global Research

https://www.globalresearch.ca/new-york-times-expose-details-expansion-cia-secret-war-ukraine-decade-ago/5851183

Military Escalation: UK Brags About Direct Involvement in Attacking Russian Navy Ships

By Drago Bosnic

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Russophobia has always been present in the political West. Whether it’s simply the fear of a near-peer adversary or perhaps the age-old sea power (thalassocracy) vs. a land power (tellurocracy) competition, the fact is that the belligerent power pole really does not like Russia, to put it mildly. Moscow has been trying to find common ground with the political West for centuries. However, that seems all but impossible, as the latter stubbornly refuses to engage with the Eurasian giant. It can even be argued that this has been the defining characteristic of European and global geopolitics, pushing the “old continent” and the world into several destructive conflicts. Interestingly, the leading Western power, the United States, doesn’t really have a long history of Russophobia, unlike many European countries.

After WWII and the advent of the (First) Cold War, the enmity between America and Russia became the standard in the global geopolitical arena. And yet, even then, a level of mutual respect existed, while international treaties were largely respected and played a significant role in keeping the balance of power relatively intact. The unfortunate dismantling of the Soviet Union put an end to this, especially after neocons and Atlanticists took power in Washington DC. However, of all US allies, vassals and satellite states, there’s one that makes even such endemically Russophobic countries like Poland or the Baltic states seem “moderate enough” – the United Kingdom. London’s Russophobia is so deeply ingrained in its geopolitical strategy, even when it was officially allied to Moscow, both during the Napoleonic and World Wars.

The escalation of the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict exposed this hatred to the fullest, as the UK was among the first to insist on a broader confrontation with Russia. Realizing that trying to talk to anyone with such pathologically Russophobic policies is simply pointless, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) even contemplated cutting all diplomatic ties with Downing Street. The latter’s extremely escalatory actions such as the delivery of ever more advanced and longer-range weapons to the Kiev regime, as well as various dangerous munitions, particularly the depleted uranium ones, made it impossible to maintain normal diplomatic contacts. Moscow has repeatedly warned London to stop its ever-growing meddling in Ukraine, but to no avail, as the latter only keeps escalating it.

Is the World Falling Apart? Are Europeans Throwing Each Other Under the Bus to Avoid Russian Retaliation?

In the latest revelations about the UK’s involvement in helping the Neo-Nazi junta, the Times essentially praised the British military’s contribution to the destruction of Russian naval assets. According to the report, the UK’s General Staff, headed by Admiral Tony Radakin, directly took part in planning and executing attacks on the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Radakin also seems to have been involved in other covert operations in Ukraine, all aimed at diminishing Russian capabilities. Worse yet, it seems that other NATO assets have also been involved, presumably various ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) platforms, meaning that London certainly wasn’t alone in this “noble endeavor”. In other words, this isn’t a simple arming of the Kiev regime forces, but a direct participation in hostilities.

For all intents and purposes, it’s tantamount to a declaration of war. And that’s precisely how Moscow sees it. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova slammed the UK for its involvement. She said the Russian MFA has repeatedly pointed out the undeniable evidence of the complicity of UK intelligence and other special services in the ongoing hostilities in Ukraine. Worse yet, this includes their involvement in terrorist attacks on Russian territory. Zakharova also said that Russian intelligence detected British involvement long ago, but London refused to acknowledge their presence, insisting that only individuals with UK passports participate as “volunteers”. And while there are certainly such people in Ukraine, direct British military presence is a very different story.

“It has been detected that the British, along with the US, acted as spotters, supplying the Kiev regime with coordinates of targets. As for the terrorist attacks against the Black Sea Fleet, they were literally conducted under the direction of British special services,” Zakharova said, adding: “In general, the question that should be asked is not about Britain’s involvement in separate episodes of the conflict in Ukraine, but about the unleashing and participation of London in the anti-Russian hybrid war.”

Other high-ranking Russian officials, such as the Kremlin Spokesman Dmitriy Peskov, also warned about London’s direct involvement in the Ukrainian conflict. Russian military experts note that the recognition of direct participation in hostilities against the Russian Federation could also serve to prepare the public in NATO countries for a full-fledged entry into the war. This could also be a demonstrative crossing of Moscow’s red lines, recently reiterated by Russian President Vladimir Putin during his speech to the Federal Assembly. Perhaps the UK was hoping to “encourage” NATO member states that are too reluctant to enter a direct confrontation with Russia. However, they don’t seem to be very keen on doing so, as evidenced by their rejection of a similar proposal by French President Emmanuel Macron.

For some inexplicable reason, London believes that Moscow will leave such unashamedly hostile actions unanswered. Responsibility and patience may be the bedrock of Russian foreign policy, but that certainly doesn’t mean that the Eurasian giant will follow these principles even when it becomes ultimately self-defeating to do so. It’s perfectly clear to Moscow that the political West decided to deliberately cross all Russian red lines long ago. However, even though the Eurasian giant is trying its best not to push the world into the abyss by reciprocating such actions, it may soon be left with no other choice. It’s yet to be seen in what ways Moscow will react, but for the time being, I would be extremely worried if I were a British sailor, as the Russian military may soon decide to start responding tit for tat.

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Drago Bosnic, Global Research, 2024

https://www.globalresearch.ca/uk-brags-about-direct-involvement-attacking-russian-navy-ships/5851153?utm_campaign=magnet&utm_source=article_page&utm_medium=related_articles

Military Escalation: UK Brags About Direct Involvement in Attacking Russian Navy Ships

By Drago Bosnic

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Is the World Falling Apart? Are Europeans Throwing Each Other Under the Bus to Avoid Russian Retaliation?

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

The original source of this article is Global Research

https://www.globalresearch.ca/uk-brags-about-direct-involvement-attacking-russian-navy-ships/5851153?utm_campaign=magnet&utm_source=article_page&utm_medium=related_articles

Erdrutschsieg für die AfD: Könnte ein Krieg den Machtwechsel noch verhindern? (Wochenstart)

Erdrutschsieg für die AfD: Könnte ein Krieg den Machtwechsel noch verhindern? (Wochenstart)

Erdrutschsieg für die AfD: Könnte ein Krieg den Machtwechsel noch verhindern? (Wochenstart)

Björn Höcke: Ukraine-Krieg für die Versager-Regierung ein Glücksfall?

Angesichts der Zündelei im Zusammenhang mit dem Ukrainekrieg kann einem nur angst und bange werden. Die derzeitige Situation erinnert mich auf erschreckende Weise an die Verquickungen am Vorabend des Ersten Weltkriegs, die der Historiker Christopher Clark in seinem wichtigen Buch »Die Schlafwandler: Wie Europa in den ersten Weltkrieg zog« schildert.

Von Björn Höcker auf Telegram

Die wichtigsten politischen Akteure der damaligen Vorkriegszeit beschreibt Clark als »wachsam, aber blind, von Alpträumen geplagt, aber unfähig, die Realität der Greuel zu erkennen, die sie in Kürze in die Welt setzen sollten«. Heute wird die Politik in Deutschland von Leuten bestimmt, die keinen persönlichen Bezug zum Krieg haben und offenkundig keine Großeltern, die wie mir die meinen, vom Schrecken des Krieges viel erzählten.

Vielleicht denkt der eine oder andere in der derzeitigen Chaos-Regierung sogar, daß der Krieg in unserer Nachbarschaft eigentlich ein Glücksfall ist, weil er vom Versagen der eigenen Innenpolitik ablenkt. Nun kann man es so verkaufen, daß nicht etwa die Energiewende oder das Exekutieren US-amerikanischer Interessen Schuld an der existenziellen Belastung der Bürger sei, sondern irgendwie »Putin«. Auf der anderen Seite offenbart die von den regierungsnahen Medien als »Abhörskandal« umgeframte Kriegszündelei bei der Bundeswehr, daß es auch andere — überstaatliche — Kräfte gibt, die es darauf anlegen, uns immer mehr in einen offenen Konflikt mit Rußland zu drängen. Welche Netzwerke sind da im Spiel, die diese Eskalation immer weiter vorantreiben? Erst wurde über die Lieferung von Helmen diskutiert, dann über Leopard-Kampfpanzer und nun soll es um TAURUS-Marschflugkörper und konkrete Angriffsszenarien mit (mehr oder weniger verdeckter) deutscher Beteiligung gehen — Schritt für Schritt wird so versucht, die Akzeptanz der Bevölkerung auszuweiten.

Fast schon müssen wir Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz dafür dankbar sein, daß er diese Dynamik ein bißchen ausbremst. Aber können wir uns auf ihn wirklich verlassen? »Whatever it takes«, waren seine Worte, mit dem er seine unverbrüchliche Unterstützung für die Ukraine angesichts eines Krieges beteuerte, von dem jetzt schon klar ist, daß er nicht gewonnen werden kann.

So oder so muß er jetzt ein Zeichen setzen, wenn er das Primat der Politik verteidigen will.

Auf dem Bild zu diesem Beitrag ist nicht etwa der Eintags-Ministerpräsident Thomas Kemmerich zu sehen, sondern Generalleutnant Ingo Gerhartz, der oberste Luftwaffenchef, der dieses »Strategiegespräch« leitete. Er inszeniert sich hier photographisch als starker Mann. Ich habe kein Problem damit, wenn sich ein Militär als kraftvoll darstellt. Und ja, ich möchte eine gut ausgerüstete und soldatische Tugenden lebende deutsche Verteidigungsarmee. Aber ich habe ein Problem damit, wenn Kraftmeierei Hirn frißt bzw. hohe Offiziere ohne finales Denken Deutschland sehenden Auges erneut in einen Krieg mit Rußland treiben. Das Ganze einfach als »normales Lagegespräch« einzuordnen, ist albern. Das durchgestochene Gespräch hätte mündigen deutschen Offizieren nicht passieren dürfen. Es muß zur Entlassung der Beteiligten führen — wegen des gezeigten Dilettanismus’, aber vor allem wegen der politischen Kollateralschäden.

Wenn Verteidigungsminister Pistorius involviert war, dann muß auch er seinen Hut nehmen.

Dieser Vorfall ist aber nicht nur ein innenpolitischer Skandal, er ist auch ein außenpolitischer: Er muß zu einer 180-Grad-Wende in der bisherigen Außenpolitik beitragen: hin zur Deeskalation, zur echten Friedenspolitik und zur deutschen Emanzipation!

Björn Höcke: Ukraine-Krieg für die Versager-Regierung ein Glücksfall?

BRICS-Staaten stören die sterbende Nachkriegsordnung: Sind die Tage des US-Dollars gezählt?

Die BRICS-Länder gewinnen zunehmend an Bedeutung. Im Januar erst traten denn Bündnis sechs neue Nationen bei. „Die BRICS-Staaten stören empfindlich die sterbende Nachkriegsordnung“, sagt der Wirtschaftsfachmann Thomas Bachheimer. In der neuen Ausgabe von „AUF1 Spezial“ spricht er mit AUF1-Redakteurin Kornelia Kirchweger über den enormen Zuwachs der BRICS-Staaten, die globale wirtschaftliche Entwicklung, aber auch über den Nahost-Konflikt und die wirtschaftliche Lage von Österreich und Deutschland.

Auf Dauer würde der Dollar seine Funktion als Leitwährung verlieren, die BRICS-Staaten würden derzeit noch ihre Geschäfte in den Landeswährungen abwickeln. Eine eigene goldgedeckte Währung dürfte schon geplant sein. Im letzten Jahr hätte die BRICS-Staaten allesamt Gold zugekauft. Diese Staaten bereiten sich vor, sagt Bachheimer. „Der Goldstandard wird kommen, aber dafür wird es keinen formalen Akt geben.“ Er berichtet in diesem Zusammenhang von einem großen Waffendeal zwischen Russland und dem Iran, der vorige Woche in Gold (umgerechnet 1,7 Milliarden US-Dollar) abgerechnet wurde.

US-Dollar als Konstrukt für Finanz-Eliten

Die Entdollarisierung sei im Gange. „Der Dollar ist ein geniales Konstrukt zum Machterhalt von Washington und Finanz-Eliten, nicht aber für den wirtschaftlichen Akteur.“ Immer weniger Währungsreserven würden in Dollar angelegt, dafür in Gold umgemünzt. Auch im internationalen Handel erlebe der Dollar einen Verlust von rund einem Prozent im Jahr. „Die Finanzwelt weiß: Es ist vorbei!“, so Bachheimer, der auch sagt: „Der Euro ist der arme Verwandte des US-Dollar.“ Denn im Gegensatz zum Dollar hatte der Euro nie ein breites Netzwerk. „Wir haben den Euro jetzt seit 22 Jahren und die Kaufkraft ist vaporisiert gegenüber dem Gold. Dieses hat seitdem 650 Prozent gemacht!“

Wenn in mehreren Währungssystemen der Goldpreis ansteige, sei das Vertrauen in die Fiat-Geldregime massiv gesunken, erklärt Thomas Bachheimer. Bis zu den US-Wahlen im Herbst werde der Goldwert nicht ansteigen, denn ein explodierender Goldpreis und ein sinkender Dollarwert sei schlecht für einen Kandidaten. Das bedeute Unsicherheit.

„Österreich richtet sich in Deutschlands Windschatten hin“

Bachheimer über Österreichs Zustand: „Energieministerin Leonore Gewessler ist gefährlicher für die Energiepreise als jeder Nahost-Krieg!“ Unsere Länder seien zu Tode demokratisiert und hätten die falschen Leute gewählt. Die Inkompetenz müsse abgewählt werden. Anhand der Rohstoffstaaten zeige sich, dass Arbeit kaum besteuert wird. Der Finanzfachmann dazu: „Wenn Staatshilfeempfänger die gleichen Stimmrechte haben wie produzierende Leute, wählen diese jene, die ihnen das Geld schenken. Und die, die das Geld verschenken, müssen die Wirtschaft kaputt machen, weil sie ja mehr vom Produktiven kassieren müssen! Wie sollen wir da konkurrenzfähig sein gegenüber anderen Staaten?“ (TPL)

BRICS-Staaten stören die sterbende Nachkriegsordnung: Sind die Tage des US-Dollars gezählt?

Mistakes, Misfiring and Trident: Britain’s Flawed Nuclear Deterrence

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

***

Nuclear weapons are considered the strategic silverware of nation states. Occasionally, they are given a cleaning and polishing. From time to time, they go missing, fail to work, and suffer misplacement. Of late, the UK Royal Navy has not been doing so well in that department, given its seminal role in upholding the doctrine of nuclear deterrence. In January, an unarmed Trident II D5 nuclear missile fell into the Atlantic Ocean after a bungled launch from a Royal Navy submarine.

The missile’s journey was a distinctly shorter than its originally plotted 6,000 km journey that would have ended in a location somewhere between Africa and Brazil. In language designed to say nothing yet conceal monumental embarrassment, UK Defence Secretary Grant Shapps called it “an anomaly” while the Labour opposition expressed concern through its shadow defence secretary, John Healey. An anonymous military source was the most descriptive of all: “It left the submarine but it just went plop, right next to them.”

The anomaly in question, which Shapps witnessed on board the HMS Vanguard, took place off the coast of Florida during a January 30 exercise at the US’s Navy Port site. Its failure is the second for the missile, which was also tested in 2016 and resulted in its automatic self-destruction after veering off course and heading to the United States. It was therefore galling for the Defence Secretary to then claim in a written statement to Parliament that Trident was still “the most reliable weapons system in the world”, a claim also reiterated by the missile’s manufacturers, Lockheed Martin. With a gamey sense of delusion, Shapps continued to argue that the test merely “affirmed the effectiveness of the UK’s nuclear deterrent, in which the government has absolute confidence. The submarine and crew were successfully certified and will rejoin the operational cycle as planned.”

“We Only Carry Seeds.” A Christmas Tale of Pure Consciousness

Reports of the misfiring were first noted in The Sun, a newspaper otherwise given to bellicose airings and tits-and-bums rhetoric. “The government has absolute confidence that the UK’s deterrent remains effective, dependable, and formidable,” Shapps insists. “That is why we are continuing to invest in the next generation of Dreadnought Class ballistic missile submarines, in extending the life of the Trident missile and replacing the warhead, to keep us safe for decades to come.”

This is tickling, if only for reiterating talking points supplied by the Ministry of Defence. In its statement to The Sun, the MoD expressed much confidence that,

“HMAS Vanguard and her crew [had] been fully capable of operating the UK’s Continuous At-Sea Deterrent, passing all tests during a recent demonstration and shakedown operation (DASO) – a routine test to confirm that the submarine can return to service following deep maintenance work.”

In all of this, Shapps comes across as a mock figurine and stuffed effigy, with the MoD the exemplar of wishful thinking. If nuclear deterrence ever had any reason for existing, it would surely do so on the presumption that the platforms launching the warheads would work. As David Cullen of the Nuclear Information Service saliently notes,

“The whole point of billions we are spending on the nuclear weapons programme is that it supposed to work, and be seen to work, at the prime minister’s command. Without that assurance, the entire endeavour is a failure in its own terms.”

Even at the best of times, deterrence, as a claim, is the stuff of fluffy fiction, astrological flight and fancy. It is unverifiable, speculative, highly presumptuous. Who is to know if a nuclear weapon will be fired at any point, at any time, against any target, on whatever pretext presents itself?

The madman theory suggests that such a weapon will be deployed, though we are not sure when this might eventuate. Keeping company with such a theory is the rational, mass murderer type who takes comfort in the prospect that 100 humans might survive a holocaust killing billions. Shoot and take your chances. Human stupidity glows with the hope that errors will be healed, and mass crimes palliated.

In actual fact, the true proof of such deterrence would lie in hellish murder: weapons launched, catastrophe ensuing. Those recording such evidence are bound to be done by coarse skinned mutants with plumbing problems.

The Trident misfiring episode can be seen in one of two ways. First, it illustrates the point that we are here because of dumb luck, having survived error, misunderstanding and miscommunication. In the second sense, it yields an uncomfortable reality for the war planners in White Hall: Trident may not work when asked to.

Whether a system fails because of faulty machinery or accident, the problem of misfiring does not go away. At some point, a misfire with potency will result in deaths, though we can perhaps be assured that Trident may simply fail to live up to the heavy sense of expectation demanded of it. We can hope it just plops.

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Featured image source

The original source of this article is Global Research

https://www.globalresearch.ca/mistakes-misfiring-trident-britain-flawed-nuclear-deterrence/5851255

Nach Erhöhung der Politikergehälter empfiehlt Experte jetzt Streichung der Rentenerhöhung

Zum Jahresbeginn zeichnet sich ein deutlicher Kontrast ab: Während Beamte, Regierungsmitglieder und Abgeordnete sich auf höhere Bezüge einstellen dürfen, wird nun die Streichung der Rentenerhöhung für die breite Bevölkerung diskutiert (Bild: 28.02.24). Die Ankündigung einer „Rekord-Erhöhung“ für Politikergehälter, die im März für Beamte und die Regierung beginnt und im Juli mit den Diäten der Abgeordneten fortgesetzt wird, lässt viele Rentner von ähnlichen Zuwächsen nur träumen. Mit Ausnahme von Nancy Faeser und Boris Pistorius profitieren fast alle Minister doppelt, da sie neben ihrem Ministeramt auch ein Bundestagsmandat innehaben (berliner-zeitung : 27.02.24).

Ein Beitrag von Blackout-News

Sparalarm im Bundeshaushalt: Experten fordern Stopp der Rentenerhöhung

Angesichts einer prognostizierten Finanzierungslücke von bis zu 25 Milliarden Euro im Bundesetat 2025, wie Finanzminister Christian Lindner warnt, werden Sparmaßnahmen dringend benötigt. Prof. Bernd Raffelhüschen, ein renommierter Sozialexperte, schlägt vor, die geplante Rentenerhöhung von 3,5 Prozent im Juli auszusetzen.

„Ein Renten-Moratorium wäre sinnvoll“, so Raffelhüschen gegenüber BILD. Diese Maßnahme würde nicht nur der Rentenkasse helfen, sondern auch den Bundeshaushalt entlasten, indem etwa zehn Milliarden Euro eingespart werden könnten.

Zwischen Rentenplus und Spardebatte: Der schmale Grat der sozialen Gerechtigkeit

Darüber hinaus empfiehlt Raffelhüschen, den „Nachhaltigkeitsfaktor“ bei der Rentenberechnung wieder einzuführen, um die Steigerungen der Renten in den folgenden Jahren zu dämpfen. Dies würde nicht nur die Rentenkasse, sondern auch den Bundesetat nachhaltig entlasten. Er betont, dass die heutige Generation der Rentner finanziell besser dasteht als je eine Generation zuvor.

In den vergangenen Jahren haben Rentner tatsächlich nennenswerte Zuwächse ihrer Bezüge erlebt. Seit 2022 sind die Netto-Durchschnittsrenten um elf Prozent gestiegen, was einen deutlichen finanziellen Aufschwung für Männer und Frauen bedeutet. Die Bezüge von Politikern steigen. Gleichzeitig denkt man über Kürzungen bei den Renten nach. Diese Situation zeigt einen starken Gegensatz. Die Debatte über das Stoppen der Rentenerhöhung berührt viele Themen. Dazu gehören finanzielle Nachhaltigkeit, soziale Gerechtigkeit und politische Prioritäten

Nach Erhöhung der Politikergehälter empfiehlt Experte jetzt Streichung der Rentenerhöhung

Part II of Pan-Africanism and Palestine Solidarity, Then and Now

Black Clergy Begins to Break with White House Calling for Ceasefire in Gaza

Electoral Challenge Through the Uncommitted Primary Vote

Поделиться ссылкой:

Gordon’s Thinkers Conference: 1960 Kingston

Massey’s Conference: 1933 Port Hope

Canada 2020 and the Kingston Conference of the 21st Century

The Case of Axworthy and Manley

Where We Stand Now

The Clash of the Two Americas

Vol. 1 & 2

by Matthew Ehret

Click here to order.

Поделиться ссылкой:

Поделиться ссылкой:

Поделиться ссылкой:

Поделиться ссылкой:

Поделиться ссылкой:

Поделиться ссылкой:

US-Dollar als Konstrukt für Finanz-Eliten

„Österreich richtet sich in Deutschlands Windschatten hin“

Поделиться ссылкой:

Поделиться ссылкой:

Sparalarm im Bundeshaushalt: Experten fordern Stopp der Rentenerhöhung

Zwischen Rentenplus und Spardebatte: Der schmale Grat der sozialen Gerechtigkeit

Поделиться ссылкой: