Category Archives: Trump

124 million Democrats have taken Trump vaccines… what happens if they start dying?

By Mike Adams (via Natural News)

In what might be one of the most devastating tactical maneuvers in the history of America, President Trump has managed to corral as many as 124 million Democrats to take “Trump vaccines” that are linked to infertility, autoimmune disorders and increasing deaths.

We will discuss the ethical implications below. That aside, if these vaccines begin to produce a significant number of deaths in the months and years ahead, based on current CDC numbers, it looks like two Democrats will be killed for every one Republican. If post-vaccine death rates hit just 10% — a number that’s far lower than what many doctors are currently warning may happen — Democrats stand to lose around 12 million people, while Republicans would lose around 6 million. Most Democrat losses would take place in blue states with high vaccination rates — see the state-by-state analysis below, based on CDC figures.

There is no question that today’s covid vaccines are, indeed, “Trump vaccines.” It was President Trump who pushed Operation Warp Speed and pressured the FDA to enact emergency authorization use. It was Trump who kept Anthony Fauci at the helm of the pandemic response effort. It was Trump’s White House that ran the swamp when science journals and government officials trashed ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and budesonide as a way to clear the path for emergency use of vaccines. (Emergency use is only legal when there are no other recognized therapeutics, hence the need to destroy the credibility of ivermectin.)

Trump accelerated vaccine development by holding administration meetings with Big Pharma vaccine makers, promising them a windfall in profits if they would just rush the vaccines and release them as quickly as possible, bypassing typical safety protocols in the process.

When Democrats rigged the 2020 election and allowed Biden to occupy the White House on January 20th, Biden simply resumed the pushing of the Trump vaccines. Biden and his administration had nothing to do with the rushed vaccine development of 2020. Instead, Biden simply inherited Trump’s vaccines at the moment they were ready to be released.

Critically, once Biden was in the White House, all Democrat opposition to “Trump vaccines” vanished, and suddenly taking vaccines was seen by Democrats as a way to support the Biden regime. Getting injected with experimental, unproven gene therapy nanotechnology was then declared by Democrats to be, “good science!”

Following the rigged 2020 election, Trump did virtually nothing to fight for election integrity. He failed to order a recount, failed to declare a national emergency and failed to invoke any executive authority whatsoever to investigate and expose the vote fraud. It’s almost as if he wanted to leave the White House.

Democrats only trusted Trump’s vaccines once Biden occupied the White House

Had Trump remained in the White House, Democrats would have rejected the vaccine in larger numbers. This was already becoming evident as Kamala Harris, Joe Biden and other Democrat leaders were publicly voicing their opposition to “Trump vaccines” throughout the summer and fall of 2020.

Harris spoke out against Trump’s vaccines with such vigor that she was dubbed, “Queen of the anti-vaccine movement” in late 2020:

https://www.brighteon.com/embed/9a3821dc-baf7-46e1-a05d-4886c6e7b86c

Had Trump stayed in power by successfully contesting the election, far more Republicans — and far fewer Democrats — would have taken the vaccine to date.

Yet because Biden currently occupies the White House, Democrats — who trend toward blind obedience to authority — are magically convinced that Trump’s vaccines are good for them and should be obediently taken. After all, Biden and Harris are now promoting them, so they must be good for you, right?

Roughly twice as many Democrats have taken Trump’s vaccines, compared to Republicans

According to the CDC, about 188 million Americans have taken at least one dose of a covid vaccine.

A look at state-by-state data from the CDC, as organized and published by Becker’s Hospital Review, shows that:

  • Vaccination rates vary from a low of about one-third of the population (Alabama) to about two-thirds of the population (Vermont).
  • All the states with the highest vaccination rates are blue states run by Democrats and dominated by Democrat voters.
  • All the states with the lowest vaccination rates are conservative (red) states.
  • States at about the mid-way point, with about half their citizens getting vaccinated, tend to be swing states.

As a result — and this is pure mathematics — should vaccines initiate any significant number of fatalities in the years ahead, those fatalities will disproportionately impact Democrats and blue states for the simple reasons that those states are where vaccination rates are the highest.

For the record, it’s important that I state my own ethical foundation in all this: I don’t want to see anyone die from any vaccine. In fact, I have dedicated my life to saving lives and ending human suffering through the sharing of knowledge about nutrition, disease prevention and protection against medical violence. Thus, while some people might celebrate one certain group dying in greater numbers than another group, I don’t want to see anyone suffer or die from the vaccine, no matter what their politics. Of course, I’ve been completely censored by Leftists and progressives, and their own platforms won’t allow me to educate their people on how to save their own lives from deadly vaccines and toxic pharmaceuticals, so they’re sort of wallowing in their own bad karma from censorship, it turns out.

States with the highest vaccination rates could plausibly lose one-third of their entire population

If covid-19 vaccines were to kill 50% of those who take the vaccine — and this number is plausible, given the long-term consequences of micro blood clots and vascular damage that even the Salk Institute warns is caused by spike proteins found in vaccines — then the fatality numbers would of course be concentrated in blue states.

With two-thirds of its population vaccinated, Vermont would lose one-third of its total population in this scenario.

While Alabama, with just one-third vaccinated, would likely lose about 16% of its population.

States that are currently at around 50% vaccination rates — such as Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska and Pennsylvania — would lose about 25% of their total population in this horrifying scenario.

We dare not call this a “worst case” scenario, by the way, since some medical professionals believe as many as 80% of those who have taken these vaccines will be dead in a few years. A true “worst case” would look more like that. A 50% fatality rate is nowhere near the worst case.

Of course, “official” propaganda sources such as the Biden White House are falsely claiming that vaccines are a miracle solution that only save lives and never destroy lives. This claim is a deliberate, malicious lie. But if Biden is correct, then there is still virtually no population loss in conservative states since covid-19 kills almost no one in the general population anyway. Whether people get vaccinated or not, almost no one dies from covid except those with strong comorbidity factors.

mRNA vaccines, on the other hand, represent a new, untested, unproven, and plausibly catastrophic gene therapy intervention that may have truly horrifying consequences in the near future. Even a death rate of just 25% of those who were vaccinated would be unimaginably catastrophic for the loss of human life in blue states, not to mention collapsing property values, property taxes, state income taxes, state representation in Congress, burdens on state health care costs and much more.

Put another way, the vaccine industry is playing Russian roulette with America’s health, and if they’ve bet wrong, the “vaccine Holocaust” will become a reality, with devastating consequences for us all.

Did Trump know this in advance?

So the ethical question that falls on Trump is relatively simple: Did Trump knowingly rush these vaccines and then bow out of the White House, knowing these vaccines would decimate Democrats and forever alter the demographic landscape of America?

We can’t know what’s in Trump’s mind, of course, so perhaps trying to answer this question is pointless. But if he wasn’t planning this, then the other explanation is just as disturbing: Did Trump rush unsafe vaccines and push them into the marketplace, mistakenly trusting Fauci and thinking they were safe?

These are not popular questions across the pro-Trump landscape, but they need to be asked. Why did Trump push these vaccines so aggressively, encouraging Big Pharma to skip clinical trials and routine safety testing?

Either way you see this, Trump is largely responsible for the pushing of unsafe vaccines into widespread adoption, and that means the media is likely to target Trump if anything goes wrong with the vaccines on a large scale. While Trump has publicly stated he supports personal choice and is opposed to vaccine mandates, he’s the person most responsible for fast-tracking the dangerous vaccines being injected into people right now, no matter what the outcome.

It’s not difficult to imagine the media flipping the entire script one day and saying something like, “Well, most vaccines are safe, but these Trump vaccines were rushed and that’s why they’re killing people!” They might even throw Fauci under the bus at the same time they accuse Trump of vaccine murder, just to claim they’re not biased.

Either way, in my view it was highly unethical for Trump to rush these vaccines into production, and we still can’t fathom his motivations for doing so. It seems he was either negligent and risked the lives of all Americans in an effort to try to fast-track a deadly experimental intervention, or he was aware of all this and was hoping that Democrats would be pressured by Biden to commit vaccine suicide, thereby shifting the demographic landscape of the nation for generations to come.

Democrats are replacing their own soon-to-be-dead vaccine recipients with unvaccinated illegals who are flooding into the country

Interestingly, Democrats themselves may be aware of the mass vaccine deaths coming to blue states, as they seem to be hell bent on replacing soon-to-be-dead Democrat voters with unvaccinated illegal aliens to the tune of about half a million per month. In just one calendar year, they will be able to bring 12+ million illegals into the United States, which would almost exactly offset the 12 million Democrats would would die if the vaccine achieves about a 10% fatality rate in the months and years ahead.

It seems that Democrat leaders are rapidly replacing Democrat voters. That’s not a surprise, since Democrats have long since abandoned Black America, even if they can’t convince many Black people to take experimental, government-pushed injections for some mysterious reason… Tuskegee, anyone?

Either way, no matter what you personally believe are the motivations behind the players here, we’re all in deep doo-doo given that 188 million Americans have now been injected with dangerous substances that may kill some significant portion of them over the next few years. The big realization behind all this is even more shocking when you consider that Leftists and Democrats are constantly talking about how there are too many people on planet Earth, and how populations need to be reduced to “save the planet” and reduce CO2 emissions.

In fact, the very idea that the same people who claim there are “too many humans” also want to save everybody’s life with a miracle vaccine is absurd. These globalists want fewer people around, not more. And their scheme to kill off the masses with vaccine injections is consistent with their larger goals of planet-wide population reduction.

Dead people don’t exhale CO2, it turns out, and this might be their ultimate plan after all: Kill off tens of millions of Americans with the covid vaccine and seize power in the crisis, turning America into a medical dictatorship where votes no longer matter because all freedoms have been destroyed.

Learn more in today’s special report podcast via Brighteon.com:

Brighteon.com/767aff18-2c74-40f9-ba94-65f5cc7678ef

“Q Anon” May Have Been an FBI Psyop

By Swiss Policy Research (via Global Research)

A recent Reuters investigation may indicate that “Q Anon” was in fact an FBI cyber psyop.

The “Q Anon” phenomenon has generally been regarded as a hoax or prank, originated by online message board users in late October 2017, that got out of control. The “Q Anon” persona was preceded by similar personae, including “FBI anon”, “CIA anon” and “White House insider anon”.

“Q Anon” originally called himself “Q clearance patriot”. Former CIA counterintelligence operative Kevin M. Shipp explained that an actual “Q clearance leaker” – i.e. someone possessing the highest security clearance at the US Department of Energy, required to access top secret nuclear weapons information – would have been identified and removed within days.

However, in November 2020 Reuters reported that the very first social media accounts to promote the “Q Anon” persona were seemingly “linked to Russia” and even “backed by the Russian government”. For instance, the very first Twitter account to ever use the term “Q Anon” on social media had previously “retweeted obscure Russian officials”, according to Reuters.Social Media Blackout? FBI Emails Are Not ‘Trending Social Media Facebook, Twitter, Buzzfeed, Or Snapchat

These alleged “Russian social media accounts”, posing as accounts of American patriots, were in contact with politically conservative US YouTubers and drew their attention to the “Q Anon” persona. This is how, in early November 2017, the “Q Anon” movement took off.

But given the recent revelations by British investigator David J. Blake – who for the first time was able to conclusively show, at the technical level, that the “Russian hacking” operation was a cyber psyop run by the FBI and FBI cyber security contractor CrowdStrike – the Reuters report may in fact indicate that “Q Anon” was neither a hoax nor “Russian”, but another FBI psychological cyber operation.

Of note, US cyber intelligence firm New Knowledge, founded by former NSA and DARPA employees and tasked by the US Senate Intelligence Committee, in 2018, with investigating alleged “Russian social media operations” relating to the 2016 US presidential election, was itself caught faking a “Russian social media botnet” in order to influence the 2017 Alabama senate race.

If the “Q Anon” persona – similar to the Guccifer2.0 “Russian hacker” persona played by an FBI cyber security contractor – was indeed an FBI psychological operation, its goal may have been to take control of, discredit and ultimately derail the supporter base of US President Trump. In this case, the “Q Anon” movement may have been a modern version of the original FBI COINTELPRO program.

Postscript

Contrary to some media claims, the person or people behind the “Q Anon” persona have never been identified. Some media speculated that James Watkins, the owner of the 8chan/8kun message board, on which “Q” was posting his messages, might be “Q” or might be linked to “Q”, but Watkins denied this. In September 2020, the owner of QMap, a website aggregating “Q” messages, was identified as a Citigroup employee, but again no actual link to “Q” could be established.

Preparing Your Kids for the ‘Re-education Camps’

By Annie Holmquist (via Intellectual Takeout)

The little kids walking through the airport or the state fair wearing leashes disguised as monkey backpacks signal every parent’s worst nightmare: losing their child.

That nightmare increases ten-fold when the loss is inflicted upon parents via so-called authority figures such as Child Protective Services or other agencies with allegedly good intentions. Unfortunately, such an event may soon be par for the course in many American homes if the opinions of PBS attorney Michael Beller become mainstream.

In an interview with the undercover journalists at Project Veritas, Beller loosened up and advanced the need for “re-education camps”—or the more friendly-sounding “enlightenment camps”—for the children of Donald Trump supporters, arguing that they will “be raising a generation of intolerant, horrible people—horrible kids.”

Clearly recorded before the election, Beller lays out his plan: “Even if Biden wins, we go for all the Republican voters, and Homeland Security will take their children away. What do you think about that? … And we’ll put them [Trump supporters’ children] into re-education camps.”

If chills just ran down your back reading that, then take heart, for Beller doesn’t intend to mistreat these relocated children. Instead, they will have the best of care, watching PBS and learning in classrooms filled with Sesame Street characters. What could be better?

Shortly after this video surfaced, PBS released an official response, saying that Beller “no longer works for PBS,” and that his comments were not in line with those of the organization. Yet while it seems unfathomable that Beller or anyone else—liberal, conservative, or otherwise—could even entertain the idea of forcibly extracting millions of children from their homes just because the political ideologies of their parents are different, such an idea has been advanced before by a very prominent historical figure: Karl Marx.

Writing in The Communist Manifesto, Marx noted that the destruction of the family, particularly the separation of children and parents, was a main goal of communism.

“Abolition of the family!” Marx prescribed, noting that “Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists.” Yet this was the goal, for Marx believed the traditional family was built “On capital, on private gain” and would “vanish with the vanishing of capital.”

The father of Communism takes direct aim at the parent-child relationship in his next words: “Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime we plead guilty.”

Marx embraces the idea of “destroy[ing] the most hallowed of relations,” replacing the education of children in the home with a social form of the same, noting how Communists seek to co-opt schools as a means of intervention and indoctrination toward their way of thinking.

Is such a plan resurfacing under those who advance a new totalitarian government? Sure, Beller no longer works for PBS, but seeing as he flippantly passes off his opinions, it’s hard to imagine that he thinks his views are not socially acceptable in his circles. Thus, those who will not submit willingly to the new “woke” totalitarian way of thinking must be made to conform to the mold, and if not themselves, then most certainly their children.

So what do we do? Do we sit back and wait for the inevitable? Do we fight to the death to keep our children and train them in our values and beliefs?

Most of us would surely do the latter. But what if even that fails? How do we prepare our children for the time when—God forbid—they may be forcibly separated from us and indoctrinated with ideologies that we can’t and won’t accept?

Two answers to that question are offered in the concluding paragraphs of W. Cleon Skousen’s 1958 book, The Naked Communist:

If the challenge to our youth today is a war of ideologies, then it is time for us to take the offensive. We should not sit back and wait for our boys and girls to be indoctrinated with materialistic dogma and thereby make themselves vulnerable to a Communist conversion when they are approached by the agents of force and fear who come from across the sea. For two generations an important phase of American life has been disintegrating. As parents and teachers we need to recognize that if this pillar of our culture collapses, our own children will be the casualties. This disintegration must stop. …

Of course, we must do more than merely teach correct principles—certainly we must practice them. I therefore close with the words of Francis Bacon who said: ‘It is not what you eat, but what you digest that makes you strong. It is not what you earn, but what yousave that makes you rich. It is not what you preach, but what you practice that makes you a Christian!’ 

Teach and do. Simple words, but incredibly challenging to put into practice. The challenge is worth it, however.

So teach your children history. Train them to value things like truth, family, and morality. Take them to church and instill Scriptural principles in their hearts. But don’t just impress such things upon them. Personally adopting these practices and modeling them for your children will go much further in helping them stand strong in the possible event that one day, they may be brought under the influence of those whose values are in direct opposition to yours.

Macaulay Culkin Supports Digital Removal of Trump from ‘Home Alone 2’

By Randy DeSoto  (via The Western Journal)

“Home Alone” actor Macaulay Culkin says he supports digitally removing a cameo by Donald Trump in the 1992 sequel to the popular film.

In response to a tweet that read, “petition to digitally replace trump in ‘home alone 2’ with 40-year-old macaulay culkin,” the childhood star responded, “Sold.”

In response to a second tweet in which Trump was replaced with empty space in the movie, Culkin tweeted: “Bravo.”

In “Home Alone 2: Lost in New York,” Kevin McCallister, played by Culkin, gets separated from his family at the airport and ends up boarding a flight to New York instead of Miami.

While in the Big Apple, he decides he might as well take in the sights and heads to Central Park and ultimately to The Plaza Hotel, where he checks in.

The Plaza was owned at the time by Trump, who agreed the movie could be shot on his property if he got a cameo in the picture.

In the scene, Kevin has just entered the hotel and bumps into the New York businessman, whom he asks for directions to the lobby.

Last month in the Insider, “Home Alone 2” director Chris Columbus recounted that Trump “did bully his way into the movie,” but the audience loved seeing him.

“When we screened it for the first time, the oddest thing happened – people cheered when Trump showed up onscreen,” Columbus said.

“So I said to my editor, ‘Leave him in the movie. It’s a moment for the audience.’”

Though not as successful as the 1990 original, “Home Alone 2” was a box office hit, grossing about $173.6 million, which would be roughly $320.2 million in today’s dollars.

Canadian viewers do not see the seven-second scene featuring Trump when the movie airs on CBC, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation explained that the former reality television star was edited out along with other parts of the film to make room for advertisements.

The edits were made in 2014, before Trump got into politics.

While many knew the New Yorker through his NBC hit reality television series “The Apprentice,” which launched in 2004, Trump’s celebrity actually extends to the 1980s.

His New York Times No. 1 best-selling book, “The Art of the Deal,” made the real estate mogul a household name in 1987.

Encircling China and Praising India: The US Strategic Framework for the Indo-Pacific

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark (Via Global Research)



The feeling from Rory Medcalf of the Australian National University was one of breathless wonder.  “The US government,” he wrote in The Strategist, “has just classified one of its most secretive national security documents – its 2018 strategic framework for the Indo-Pacific, which was formally classified SECRET and not for release to foreign nationals.” 

Washington’s errand boys and girls in Canberra tend to get excited by this sort of thing.  Rather than seeing it as a blueprint for imminent conflict with China, a more benign reading is given: how to handle “strategic rivalry with China.”  Looming in the text of the National Security Council’s US Strategic Framework for the Indo-Pacific(SFIP) is a generous doffing of the cap to Australia’s reckless, self-harming approach towards China.  As an unnamed senior US official (of course) told Axios, the Australians “were pioneers and we have to give a lot of credit to Australia.”  Australian senior intelligence advisor John Garnaut is given high praise for his guiding hand.  When war breaks out between Beijing and Washington, we know a few people to thank.

The SFIP, declassified on January 5, is very much a case of business as usual and unlikely to shift views in the forthcoming Biden presidency.  The timing of the release suggests that the Trump administration would like to box its predecessor on certain matters, notably on China.

In a statement from National Security Advisor Robert C. O’Brien, the SFIP “provided overarching strategic guidance for implementing the 2017 National Security Strategy within the world’s most populous and economically dynamic region”.  The National Security Strategy, in turn, recognised “that the most consequential challenge to the interests of the United States, and those of our allies and partners, is the growing rivalry between free and repressive visions of the future.”  Beijing is cast in the role of repressive force in “pressuring Indo-Pacific nations to subordinate their freedom and sovereignty to a ‘common destiny’ envisioned by the Chinese Communist Party.”

The imperium’s interests, according to the SFIP, must be guarded (“strategic primacy in the Indo-Pacific region”); a “liberal economic order” must be promoted while China is to be prevented “from establishing new, illiberal spheres of influence”.  North Korea is deemed of high importance in terms of whether it threatens the US and its allies, “accounting for both the acute present danger and the potential for future changes in the level and type of threat posed” by Pyongyang.  The US is also to retain “global economic leadership while promoting fair and reciprocal trade.”

One of the “top interests” of the US in the Indo-Pacific is identified in pure power terms: retaining “economic, diplomatic, and military access to the most populous region in the world and more than one-third of the global economy”.  Washington is keen to preserve “primacy in the region while protecting American core values and liberties at home.”  But there is the spoiling presence of China, aspirational superpower, and keen for its bit of geopolitical pie.  “Strategic competition between the United States and China will persist, owing to the divergent nature and goals of our political and economic systems.”

China is ever the cheeky opportunist, seeking to “circumvent international rules norms to gain an advantage.”  Beijing “aims to dissolve US alliances and partnerships in the region” exploiting “vacuums and opportunities created by these diminished bonds.”  With this in mind, US defence strategy should be “capable of, but not limited to: (1) denying China sustained air and sea dominance inside the ‘first island chain’ in conflict; (2) defending the first-island-chain nations, including Taiwan; and (3) dominating all domains outside the first island-chain.”

The document also acknowledges an untidy region of shifting power balances and increased defence spending, which will “continue to drive security competition across the Indo-Pacific”.  Japan and India are singled out for special mention in that regard.  A measure of angst is registered: “Loss of US pre-eminence in the Indo-Pacific would weaken our ability to achieve US interests globally.”

The authors of the SFIP are unashamed about the fistful of principles that will maintain US power, the sort that masquerades in popular language as the “liberal rules-based order”.  Desirable objectives include the US being the “preferred partner” of “most nations” in the region; and that these powers “uphold the principles that have enabled US and regional prosperity and stability, including sovereignty, freedom of navigation and overflight, standards of trade and investment, respect for individual rights and rule of law, and transparency in military activities.”  No wobbling will be permitted; allies will have to get in line.

India, “in cooperation with like-minded countries,” figures as a shining hope.  Its rise is deemed essential, serving as “a net provider of security and Major Defense Partner”.  What is envisaged is a strategic partnership “underpinned by a strong Indian military able to effectively collaborate with the United States and our partners in the region to address shared interests.”

For its spiky anti-China message, the nature of the economic relationship with Beijing is hard to ignore, provided it is conducted on US terms.  The strategy is, to that end, most Trumpian in character, emphasising the need to “prevent China’s industrial policies and unfair trading practices from distorting global markets and harming US competitiveness.”

In what has become a tradition of the Trump administration, the Framework document does not tally with messages from other equivalent national security assessments.  The officials of empire are not speaking with a coherent voice.  The 2019 Indo-Pacific Strategy Report by the Department of Defense, for instance, makes good mention of Russia as a “revitalized malign actor”.  (Pentagon pundits can never seem to give the bear, or their paranoia, a rest.)  Despite tardy economic growth occasioned by Western sanctions and a fall in oil prices, Moscow “continues to modernize its military and prioritize strategic capabilities – including its nuclear forces, A2/AD systems, and expanded training for long-range aviation – in an attempt to re-establish its presence in the Indo-Pacific region.”

The authors of the Framework document are, in sharp contrast, barely troubled by Moscow and, surprisingly, sober on the issue.  “Russia will remain a marginal player in the Indo-Pacific region relative to the United States, China and India.”  Abhijnan Rej of The Diplomat could not help but find this inconsistency odd.  “So Russia is a threat in a public document but not one in a classified one?”

As for India, the 2019 IPSR does much to avoid exaggeration and elevation.  “Within South Asia, we are working to operationalize our Major Defense Partnership with India, while pursuing emerging partnerships with Sri Lanka, the Maldives, Bangladesh and Nepal.”  The Pentagon notes an increase in the “scope, complexity and frequency of our military exercises” with India.  But for all that, New Delhi hardly remains a jewel of defence strategy relative to such traditional allies as South Korea and Japan.

The SFIP, in contrast, makes a bold stab at linking the goals of maintaining US regional supremacy with New Delhi’s own objectives.  This is bound to cause discomfort in the planning rooms, given Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s rhetoric on regional multipolarity.  An article of faith in Indian policy on the matter is ensuring that no single power dominates the region.  Another potential concernis the prospect that India is being thrown into the US-China scrap.

Medcalf concludes his assessment of the framework document with his own call for what promises to be future conflict.  “America,” he insists, “cannot effectively compete with China if it allows Beijing hegemony over this vast region, the economic and strategic centre of gravity in a connected world.”  The conflict mongers will be eagerly rubbing their hands.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: bkampmark@gmail.comThe original source of this article is Asia-Pacific ResearchCopyright © Dr. Binoy Kampmark, Asia-Pacific Research, 2021

Trump Hardliners Poisoning US-China Relations. Pompeo “Spreads Political Viruses”

By Stephen Lendman (via Global Research)



In its waning days in power, Trump regime hardliners are going all-out to more greatly deteriorate US relations with China than already — Pompeo leading the assault.

Mindful of what’s going on with more coming, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said the following last Tuesday:

“Pompeo certainly went to great lengths to spread political viruses.”

“He’s truly in a league of his own when it comes to weaving lies and distorting facts.”

The US “is the biggest destabilizing factor threatening global peace and security and undermining multilateral cooperation.”

“In rampant pursuit of unilateralism, it blatantly withdraws from treaties and organizations and arbitrarily resorts to the threat of sanctions.”

“To date, it has exited a dozen international conventions and organizations.”

It “unilaterally announced the restoration of UN Security Council sanctions against Iran, and abused the venue of the UN to flagrantly smear other countries, drawing wide opposition from the international community.”

These actions…“gravely undermine international cooperation…world peace, stability and security.”

“Pompeo’s lying diplomacy has once again exposed the infamous ‘American double standard.’ ”

It undermines cooperation among world community nations, leaving America’s “international image and reputation” in tatters.

On Thursday, the Trump regime added nine more Chinese firms to its so-called “entity list.”

They include the China National Offshore Oil Corporation and mobile phone producer Xiaomi — on the phony pretext of ties to the country’s military.

The move blocks US exports to and imports from targeted firms without Commerce Department approval.

A statement by Secretary Wilbur Ross said the following:

“China’s reckless and belligerent actions in the South China Sea and its aggressive push to acquire sensitive intellectual property and technology for its militarization efforts are a threat to US national security and the security of the international community (sic).”

The above claim applies to the US and its imperial partners, not China.

Its leadership prioritizes cooperative relations with other nations, confrontation with none.

Separately, an anti-China propaganda report by a so-called Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC) falsely accused its government of “crimes against humanity  – and possibly genocide” against its Uyghur population.

Similar US charges were made before that falsely claim mass-internment of up to a million Uyghurs and other Muslims.

When accusations like these surface against sovereign independent countries free from US control, no credible evidence supports them because none exists.

In response to the above US charge, China’s Washington embassy slammed the CECC for being “obsessed with making up all sorts of lies to vilify China,” adding:

“The so-called ‘genocide’ is a rumor deliberately started by some anti-China forces and a farce to discredit China.”

House passed Uygur legislation called for sanctions against Beijing for human rights abuses.

The world’s leading human rights abuser domestically and worldwide USA time and again blames other nations for its own high crimes.

Reportedly, the Trump regime is set to release so-called “bombshell” information about made-in-the-USA covid it claims was released from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology before reported outbreaks last year.

As point man for Trump’s war on China by other means, Pompeo will release so-called evidence.

According to London’s Daily Mail, “America is set to present dramatic new evidence that the virus leaked from a Wuhan lab – in the final act of the Trump” regime, adding:

“Senior officials in Washington say that…Pompeo is set to make a ‘bombshell intervention.’ ”

“They say he will reveal evidence that SARS-CoV-2 did not leap naturally from bats, pangolins or other species to humans.”

“Instead he will claim it was cultured by scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology…”

“British Foreign Office and security sources confirmed they were expecting the claims from Washington but dismissed them in advance, saying ‘all the credible scientific evidence does not point to a leak from the laboratory.’ ”

“The established view of the US intelligence community suggests the pandemic was natural in origin.”

Pompeo is also expected to accuse the WHO of aiding an alleged Beijing cover-up with no credible evidence supporting the charge.

He’ll claim ties between the lab and China’s military to conduct experiments.

On Monday, a White House statement said the following:

“The world cannot continue to pay heavy prices for its naivete and complicity in Beijing’s irresponsible and harmful practices (sic) – whether it is ending the rule of law in Hong Kong (sic) or not cooperating with health officials on the pandemic (sic).”

The Trump regime “is examining further options to respond.”

As earlier explained, covid is renamed seasonal flu/influenza that occurs annually — with none of what’s going on now, no mass-hysteria fear-mongering propaganda.

What began since early last year is a diabolical brave new world US-led social control plot.

Its aim is transforming world community nations into ruler/serf societies.

It created the Greatest Main Street Depression in US history.

It’s facilitating the greatest ever wealth transfer from most people to the privileged few.

Lockdowns and quarantines (aka house arrest), social distancing, mask-wearing, and all the rest caused infinitely more harm to countless millions of households than any number of serious diseases combined.

What’s happening perhaps established a permanent new abnormal, the worst likely to come.

A diabolical social engineering plot with no end of it in prospect may eliminate freedoms as once existed — dystopian harshness replacing them.

Ongoing actions have nothing to do with protecting and preserving health and well-being, everything to do with harming them by police state social control.

Covid is the vehicle, a hoax perpetuated by Big Government/ Big Media mass deception — a state-sponsored coup d’etat against virtually everything just societies hold dear.

If successful, it’ll create what Orwell called “a boot stamping on a human face — forever.”

Everyone vaxxed with hazardous covid vaccines is playing fast and loose with their health, safety and well-being.

We can either resist to preserve and protect what’s too precious to lose or risk near-or-longer-term contraction of serious illnesses under draconian conditions.

The choice is self-evident.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

The Deep State: How it Came to Be and Why it Fights so Hard

The members of the Deep State are fighting not only for money and power, but their very sense of being.

By Devin Foley (via Intellectual Takeout)



Increasingly, it looks like the political fight isn’t between Republicans and Democrats, but rather the American people against the Deep State. More and more often we are seeing bureaucrats, lobbyists, and elected officials of both parties circle the wagons so to say in an effort to prevent any true reforms of our government.

While we the American people may believe the government isn’t working, for an elite group embedded throughout our government and media, the government is working quite well — for them!

So, how did this come to be in a nation that’s founding document begins with “We the People”? For a take on the development of the Deep State and what it represents, we turn to Joost Meerloo in his seminal book The Rape of the Mind. 

Presciently, in his discussion of the Deep State or the “administrative machine” published in 1956, Meerloo states,

“The burning psychological question is whether man will eventually master his institutions so that these will serve him and not rule him.”

Here’s how he describes the rise of the Deep State:

“… The development of a kind of bureaucratic absolutism is not limited, however, to totalitarian countries. A mild form of professional absolutism is evident in every country in the mediating class of civil servants who bridge the gap between man and his rulers. Such a bureaucracy may be used to help or to harm the citizens it should serve.

It is important to realize that a peculiar, silent form of battle goes on in all of the countries of the world — under every form of government — a battle between the common man and the government apparatus he himself has created. In many places we can see that this governing tool, which was originally meant to serve and assist man, has gradually obtained more power than it was intended to have.

… Governmental techniques are no different from any other psychological strategy; the deadening hold of regimentation can take mental possession of those dedicated to it, if they are not alert. And this is the intrinsic danger of the various agencies that mediate between the common man and his government. It is a tragic aspect of life that man has to place another fallible man between himself and the attainment of his highest ideals.

But you might say that only seems to describe the expansion of “red tape” that entrepreneurs and individuals complain about, not a group of individuals who seem united to keep government operating as it is currently, and under their control. Isn’t there a difference between red-tape bureaucracy and the Deep State that we’re seeing today? Arguably, yes. But it is the regimentation and red tape that seems to foster the environment in which the Deep State comes into being and then thrives.

Meerloo expands on that point in detail:

“Which human failings will manifest themselves most readily in the administrative machine? Lust for power, automatism, and mental rigidity — all these breed suspicion and intrigue. Being a high civil servant subjects man to a dangerous temptation, simply because he is a part of the ruling apparatus. He finds himself caught in the strategy complex. The magic of becoming an executive and a strategist provokes long-repressed feelings of omnipotence. A strategist feels like a chess player. He wants to manipulate the world by remote control. Now he can keep others waiting, as he was forced to wait himself in his salad days, and thus he can feel himself superior. He can entrench himself behind his official regulations and responsibilities.

At the same time he must continually convince others of his indispensability because he is loath to vacate his seat. As a defense against his relative unimportance, he has to expand his staff, increasing his bureaucratic apparatus. In order to become a V.I.P. one needs a big office. Each new staff member requests new secretaries and new typewriters. Everything begins to get out of hand, but everything must be controlled; new and better files must be installed, new conferences called, and committees set up. The staff-interaction committee talks for days on end. New supervisors are created to supervise the old supervisors and to keep the whole group in a state of infantile servility. And what was formerly done by one man is now done by an entire staff…”

Now we see how the Deep State became so deeply entrenched in our government and why its members will fight against any threat to it. The members of the Deep State are fighting for not only their jobs and their power, but their very sense of being. What meaning do they have in life if they were shown that they are in fact dispensable, that they can be replaced or their positions or departments can be eliminated? In the end, their egos depend upon the maintenance and growth of personal power and prestige.

Understanding that the fight is not just about power and money, but self-identity and ego, goes a long way to seeing how ugly the battle between the American people and the Deep State over the government will become — and how the battle has actually been raging for years.

“Compulsive order, red tape, and regulation become more important than freedom and justice, and in the meantime suspicion between management, employees, and subjects increases.

Written and printed documents and reports have become dangerous objects in the world. After a conversation, even when there are harsh words, inanities are soon forgotten. But on paper these words are perpetuated and can become part of a system of growing suspicion.”

That sounds quite a bit like some of the latest intrigues in D.C., does it not? And how about this insight about the politicians who perpetuate and strengthen the Deep State, rather than dismantle it?

“Sooner or later nearly all politicians become infected with the bug. Under the burden of their responsibilities, they give in to the desire to play the game of diplomacy. They start to compromise in their thinking, to bend backwards and to be circumspect, lest their remarks be criticized by the higher echelons. Or they fall back into infantile feelings of magic omnipotence. They want to have their fingers in every pie — to the left and to the right.

All these are dangerous mental streaks of every human being which can develop more easily in politicians and administrators because of the growing impact of modern governmental techniques and their threat to free expression. When a man gets entangled in strategical and political talk, something changes in his attitude. He is no longer straightforward; he doesn’t express and communicate what he thinks, but he worries about what others are thinking about him behind their facades. He becomes too prudent and starts to build all kinds of mental defenses and justifications around himself. In short, he learns to assume the strategic attitude. Forget spontaneity, deny enthusiasm; don’t demand inner honesty of yourself or others, never reveal yourself, never expose yourself, play the strategist. Be careful and use more buts and howevers. Never commit yourself.”

We, the American people, have quite a task ahead of us if we are to wrest control of our government from the Deep State. Over many decades, it has put in place compulsive orders, red tape, and regulations while growing layer upon layer to enforce what it creates. All the while, its roots drive deeper and deeper into our government. Even the politicians who we send to D.C. to represent us are ensnared in the game. They begin to play by the rules set forth by the Deep State; indeed, our elected officials even become dependent upon the Deep State.

And so it is that we face an interlocking defense apparatus that is employed full time by us, using its time to further entrench itself. Further, the politicians who promised to take on the Deep State on behalf of their constituents, though not in so many words, have actually joined forces with those who they were supposed to uproot.

Without a doubt, the Deep State must be confronted and defeated for the health of our nation. But how?

Evidence Mounts of a Capitol Hill False Flag

By Stephen Lendman



GR Editor’s Note

With regard to the coverage of the Wednesday Capitol Event, Global Research will be publishing opposing and contradictory points of view by several of our authors.

We are dealing with a complex and far-reaching political process. We are at the crossroads of a major political, economic and social crisis which has bearing on the future of the United States. This crisis must be the object of debate and analysis rather than confrontation of opposing political narratives.

America’s road to hell is paved with diabolical intentions.

9/11 changed everything — followed last year by unleashing The Great Reset war on humanity (sponsored by the World Economic Forum) and Wednesday, January orchestrated Capitol Hill violence that climactically ended Trump’s challenge to stolen US Election 2020.

The above comprise America’s holy trinity of actions on a path toward full-blown tyranny.

Last year may have been a test to see how far US “dark forces” could push Americans to sacrifice fundamental freedoms voluntarily.

A year ago, whoever could have imagined what was about to unfold — based on Big Lies and mass deception.

Who would have thought we’d sacrifice our fundamental right of free movement and assembly, the right to work unobstructed, to travel, enjoy eating out, attend sporting events, the theater, movie theaters, and be involved in other public activities?

Imagine how much worse things may get in the new year.

Will its climax be voluntary acceptance of full-blown tyranny — masquerading as protecting and preserving health, well-being and safety to be lost if dark forces achieve their aims.

We’re lied to with headlines like the following on January 7:

“US counts record of almost 4,000 COVID-19 deaths in a day as virus continues to wreak havoc (sic).”

These deaths, if accurate in number, were from seasonal flu/influenza, perhaps pneumonia, and/or related illnesses — not covid.

Individuals succumbing are largely elderly, infirm, likely with other health issues, and weakened immune systems.

Headlines like the about are part of a diabolical, state-sponsored fear-mongering campaign.

They’re all about wanting us to voluntarily sacrifice vital freedoms to a higher power — hostile to our health and well-being at the same time.

Wednesday night Capitol Hill violence was likely orchestrated to elevate Biden/Harris to power by ending the Trump-led GOP challenge.

It had earmarks of a well-planned false flag by US dark forces.

It appears that hostile-to-Trump elements infiltrated largely nonviolent Trump protesters.

They got access to Capitol Hill after police and federal law enforcers opened barricades surrounding it, letting them storm the building to commit violence.

Wrongfully blaming Trump for what happened got him to pledge a smooth transition to Biden/Harris on January 20 — ending his hope for a second term.

It also intimidated most Republicans to go along with what came off with military precision by a superior force against an easily overwhelmed weak one.

Inside Capitol Hill, guards led hostile-to-Trump elements to designated areas.

Instead of preventing violence, Capitol Hill security facilitated it in what appears to have been the climax to a homeland color revolution to end Trump’s election challenge by violently quashing it.

It worked as planned when Congress began debating the GOP electoral fraud challenge, ending it violently.

There’s a made-in-the USA war ongoing that aims for transformational change to a ruler-serf society, what’s untenable if achieved.

It’s what the diabolical Great Reset is all about.

We can swim with the tide and lose all rights or resist all-out nonviolently to save them.

At stake is retaining governance as it once was, warts and all, or replacing it with what’s intolerable for anyone to accept.

I’m old school in my 9th decade to pass from the scene when my end time comes ahead, my future largely in the past.

Younger generations have most to lose, a land of opportunity I enjoyed growing up — eliminating in plain sight what’s fast slipping away.

The nation I grew up in no longer exists.

The one diabolical dark forces plan is a lower level of hell that Dante forgot.

Resist or lose everything, including hope.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

COVID-19 bill started a 180-day countdown for UFO disclosures



President Trump’s signature Sunday on the $2.3 trillion COVID-19 relief and government funding billstarted a 180-day countdown for the Pentagon and spy agencies to say what they know about UFOs.

The provision received very little attention, in part because it wasn’t included in the text of the 5,593-page legislation, but as a “committee comment”attached to the annual intelligence authorization act, which was rolled into the massive bill.

The Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), said in the comment that it “directs the [director of national intelligence], in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of such other agencies … to submit a report within 180 days of the date of enactment of the Act, to the congressional intelligence and armed services committees on unidentified aerial phenomena.”

The report must address “observed airborne objects that have not been identified” and should include a “detailed analysis of unidentified phenomena data collected by: a. geospatial intelligence; b. signals intelligence; c. human intelligence; and d. measurement and signals intelligence,” the committee said.

The report must also contain “[a] detailed analysis of data of the FBI, which was derived from investigations of intrusions of unidentified aerial phenomena data over restricted United States airspace … and an assessment of whether this unidentified aerial phenomena activity may be attributed to one or more foreign adversaries.”

Former Pentagon and legislative officials confirmed Tuesday to the publication The Debrief that the package begins the clock on UFO disclosures. 

Defense Department spokesperson Sue Gough told The Post: “We are aware that the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence committee report on the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal 2021 included a requirement for the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, to submit a report on unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs) within 180 days of enactment.”

Spokespeople for Rubio, who pushed for more UFO transparency, did not respond to The Post’s multiple requests for comment.

The push for more information follows the Pentagon’s April publication of three Navy videos showing unidentified objects.

Chris Mellon, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for intelligence, told The Debrief that “the newly enacted Intelligence Authorization Act incorporates the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report language calling for an unclassified, all-source report on the UAP phenomenon. This was accomplished in the Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the bill.”

“Consequently, it’s now fair to say that the request for an unclassified report on the UAP phenomenon enjoys the support of both parties in both Houses of Congress,” said Mellon, who is also a former staff director of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

“Assuming the Executive Branch honors this important request, the nation will at long last have an objective basis for assessing the validity of the issue and its national security implications. This is an extraordinary and long overdue opportunity.”

Mellon added: “I’m hopeful the new Administration will rigorously execute its oversight prerogatives because the concerns of the public and numerous U.S. military personnel have been ignored by a complacent national security bureaucracy for far too long.”

Nick Pope, who ran the “UFO office” of the UK’s Ministry of Defence, told The Post, “I welcome this move, which shows how seriously the phenomenon is being taken in the intelligence community.”

Pope said that “the Pentagon’s Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force is probably already drafting the report for DNI to send to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Questions remain about what the report will say and how much can ever be made public, given the highly classified nature of some of the material, but this is a step in the right direction.”

Trump as commander-in-chief has brushed off questions about UFOs and possible alien life. “I’m not a believer, but you know, I guess anything is possible,” he said in an interview last year.

A New War in the New Year? Trump Again Takes Aim at Iran

By Philip Giraldi

One of the most perplexing narratives presented during the waning days of the administration of President Donald J. Trump is his apparent disengagement from dealing seriously or providing leadership regarding the surging Coronavirus while at the same time continuing an activist foreign policy that in no way benefits any American. Ironically, the new administration of Joe Biden will, undoubtedly, establish its own priorities after January 20th, presuming the result of the election holds, and could easily reverse any government actions initiated overseas by Trump.

So it is all perhaps much ado about nothing, but meddling in the politics of others, creating enemies where enemies do not actually exist, and starting “little wars” to make a point about one’s virility create an unfortunate legacy in that they do not exactly win friends and influence people around the world.

There have been interactions in a number of contexts, perhaps most dangerously in the continued promotion of the “threat” coming from China. The U.S. continues to emphasize the growth of Chinese foreign investments, the creation of its new Silk Road across Asia and into Europe, and Beijing’s growing military might. The mainstream U.S. media regularly fearmongers that the Chinese economy will surpass that of the U.S. inside a decade if it has not done so already.

The Administration, sometimes subtly and sometimes not so subtly, links China directly to the emergence of the Coronavirus and has implied that its propagation is part of a global plan to destroy western democracy and replace it with communism. The new defense budget includes a shift in spending to dramatically increase expansion of the navy to confront the Chinese in their own coastal waters. To be sure, China’s armed forces are being reshaped commensurate with its world role, but it does not realistically challenge that of the United States and will not do so even if it chooses to continue its expansion. Nevertheless, what began as a trade war is now being recast as an Armageddon-like conflict for global dominance, with the White House, Democrats, Republicans and the media all on board.

Russia too, the perpetual enemy, has fortunately escaped direct assault from the White House, leading to renewed claims that Trump is Putin’s puppet. The latest assertion is that a wave of hacking of government and other internet sites in the United States was done by Russia, though there has been precious little evidence provided to support that claim. Joe Biden has picked up the slack by asserting that he will be responding to the attack “in kind,” hello cyberwar, while several Democratic Senators have asked rhetorically whether the hack is an “act of war.” It is even being suggested that Russia will be interfering in the upcoming runoff election for the two Senate seats in Georgia, which will possibly decide who controls the upper chamber of the U.S. Congress for the next two years.

But the biggest winner in the “hated by America” sweepstakes is the usual favorite, Iran. On December 20th several rockets landed inside the fortified U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, which in turn sits inside the heavily guarded and protected Green Zone along the Euphrates River where most embassies and government offices are located. Insofar as has been reported, the missiles did little damage and killed one Iraqi civilian. It should be observed that the weapons were not very sophisticated and are of a type that is readily available in the Middle East. Similar attacks on the Green Zone using the same kind of unguided and crude rockets have become a regular feature of diplomatic and government life in Iraq’s capital.

Donald Trump responded three days later with a characteristically truculent series of tweets:

“Our embassy in Baghdad got hit Sunday by several rockets. Three rockets failed to launch. Guess where they were from: IRAN. Now we hear chatter of additional attacks against Americans in Iraq… Some friendly health advice to Iran: If one American is killed, I will hold Iran responsible. Think it over.”

There is no evidence whatsoever that Iran either carried out or sponsored the attack on the Embassy and the photographs of the unexploded rockets, of a standard 107mm caliber widely available and used worldwide, have markings written in English, not Farsi. As is often the case, Trump chose to interpret the actual story and seeks both to demonstrate Iranian involvement and to define it as a provocation that would merit a military response that could start a war. He and his Pentagon wordsmiths would choose to call it “establishing deterrence” or “self-defense.”

A spokesman for Central Command described the attack as “…almost certainly conducted by an Iranian-backed rogue militia group,” adding also that the 21-rocket barrage was “clearly NOT intended to avoid casualties.” “Almost certainly” in government speak means “we don’t know”: while a judgment of “clearly NOT intended” would be, under the circimstances, impossible to make definitively.

So unhinged is the hatred for Iran and all its friends that the Trump Administration has, in its last days in office, gone so far as to sanction Asma, the wife of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, as well as all her highly respectable family living in England, where she was born and raised. The reality is that the United States and Israel will stop at nothing to denigrate what they conveniently describe as “rogue regimes” when the only real rogues are in Washington and Jerusalem. Trump and Netanyahu have been wanting to start a war with Iran for the past four years and have been seeking to provoke the Iranians into a response that could be used to justify a massive counter-attack.

Why all the tip-toeing around is taking place is because Americans and Israelis are seeking to establish a fig leaf to hide behind while they commit a war crime, i.e. initiating a war of aggression where there is no threat coming from the other side. Instead, they are engaging in what they refer to as “maximum pressure” using economic sanctions and assassinations, hoping to have Iran strike back hard against them so they can plausibly claim that they are the victims and are engaging in “deterrence” or “defense.”

That is what was behind the U.S. assassination of Iranian General Qassim Soleimani eleven months ago and the Israeli killing of top Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in November. Ironically, if there is considerable tension in the Middle East, to include the rocketing of the U.S. Embassy, it is due to actions undertaken by Israel and the U.S. themselves. Israel has kept the pot boiling by regularly attacking “targets” in Syria, many of which are described as “Iranian-linked.”

On Christmas Day Israel violated Lebanese airspace before hitting the city of Masyaf in Syria, which has a large Christian minority, reportedly killing five and destroying a research facility. The relatively low intensity warfare by the Jewish state is a practice that is fully supported by the United States, which continues to maintain forces in Syria to “guard the oil fields” while also supporting the efforts to bring about regime change in Damascus.

The possibility that there will be a war in the Middle East instigated by the Trump White House as a final gift to Israel must be taken seriously in spite of the short time frame remaining. Trump is also pushing ahead with U.S. taxpayer funded “deals” with various Arab states to get them to establish diplomatic ties with the Jewish state. And there are other signs that something is about to happen.

The Israelis have moved one of their nuclear missile capable and cruise missile armed submarines into the Persian Gulf to provide a better window for attacking Iran and are hinting that military action might be impending. And there are also rumors in Washington that the U.S. might be closing its embassy in Baghdad due to the “threat,” a possible first step in reducing the number of Americans vulnerable to a war zone that would inevitably include heavily Shi’a Iraq. And what might the Congress and American people do to stop it all from happening? Nothing that would actually have any impact.

This article was first published by The Strategic Culture Foundation

Tensions Between China and India May Soon Rise as Trump Approves Historic Tibet Act

By Uriel Araujo

US President Donald Trump signed into law on Sunday the historic Tibet bill. US Congress had passed this bill on December 21. The Tibetan Policy and Support Act (TPSA), which supports Tibet in key areas, even includes possible sanctions against Chinese authorities should they try to appoint the next Dalai Lama themselves and calls for building an international coalition to ensure such appointment is only carried out by the Tibetan Buddhist community. The bill has bipartisan support and demands Beijing allow Washington to set up a consulate in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa. Finally, it has safety provisions regarding the Tibetan environment calling for greater international cooperation to monitor this issue besides providing funds.

The Act also allocates $6 million for Tibetans living in India and 3 million for Tibetan governance, as well as $575,000 for scholar exchange programs, $675,000 for scholarships, and $1 million every year for the Special US Coordinator on Tibet. The Act also extends to Taiwan (another hot topic in the region), supporting its participation in United Nations bodies.

China sees such move as interference in its internal affairs and has responded by announcing it could start imposing visa bans against US officials.

In 1995, the Chinese government arrested Gedhun Choekyi Nyima (aged 6 then) who was identified by the Dalai Lama as a reincarnation of the Panchen Lama who is the second most important figure in Tibetan Buddhism after the Dalai Lama himself. Gedhun Choekyi Nyima remains detained by Beijing, residing along with his family in an undisclosed location since 1995. In light of this incident, there are concerns over the choice of the next Dalai Lama. The current one, Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, is now 85 years old. From a Chinese perspective, Tibet is a domestic issue and the current 14th Dalai Lama (exiled in India) is a separatist. The Dalai Lama, besides being a spiritual leader for Tibetan Buddhists, is the Head of state of the Central Tibetan Administration in exile based in Dharamshala, India.

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin warned last week after Congress passed the bill, that such “meddling in China’s internal affairs” could harm “cooperation and bilateral relations” between Washington and Beijing. Lobsang Sangay (president of the Central Tibetan Administration), stated that the Act sends a “powerful message” of “justice and hope” for Tibetans.

Over 80,000 in exile Tibetans currently reside in India, and 150,000  others live in other countries, especially the US and in Europe.

On November 23, Lobsang Sangay, Head of Tibet government-in-exile, visited the White House for first time in six decades. In October, the US named Robert Destro as its Human Rights Envoy for Tibet, a post which had been vacant since 2017.

The environmental provisions are clearly aimed at some Chinese projects in the Tibetan region. Retired Indian official Amitabh Mathur stated that after Trump signing the bill, “it’s time for India to also follow suit” blacklisting companies engaged in environmental damage through mining and other actions.

The Tibet issue can potentially increase Chinese-Indian tensions, especially after the Ladakh standoff. Tensions are already high. On December 14, Indian Chief of Defence Staff General Bipin Rawat commented that there was Chinese development work going on in Tibet but this should not be a cause for concern because India was “ready for any eventuality”.

China in fact plans to build a historic hydropower project in Tibet on the Yarlung Zangbo River, which also passes through Bangladesh and India. New Delhi is concerned that Chinese activities there could have ecological impacts. Part of the Tibet Autonomous Region, controlled by China, is claimed by India: the Aksai Chin region which is part of the larger Kashmir region claimed by India. India has often been accused by Beijing of using the Tibet issue as a kind of bargaining card.

Tibet is also important for China to access Pakistan (a traditional Indian rival) since Beijing has orchestrated the China Pakistan Economic Corridor infrastructure projects since 2013. The China Pakistan Economic Corridor complements the so-called Western Development plan, which includes Xinjiang, Tibet and Qinghai. One could say that in a number of ways, the Tibetan issue lies at the heart of India-China relations and tensions.

US President-Elect Joe Biden dreams of a great US-India alliance – after the new BECA US-India defence deal, and now such dream might become closer to reality. This new development regarding Tibet might place India in a position to be pressured to strongly support Tibet, further increasing Chinese-Indian tensions. As of now, India has its hands tied, so to speak. Should New Delhi take a clear stand on Tibet now, Chinese retaliation would be sure to follow. However, should the QUAD group (US, India, Japan and Australia) in fact become a kind of Asian NATO or something resembling it – as China fears – would India feel empowered enough to pursue such line of action regarding Tibet in the near future?

For Beijing, its interests in Tibet (as well as in the South China Sea) are essential; should New Delhi meddle into it, Beijing will retaliate. Tensions could then escalate, maybe even leading to a new Chinese-Indian war – ironically over the same border issue of the 1962 war.

Biden is expected to continue pursuing a kind of “dual containment” policy on both China and Russia. Nonetheless Biden has signaled, that the US under his presidency will antagonize Russia mainly, trying to isolate it from Europe as a kind of rogue state – while treating China more “cordially”, so to speak, as a competitor while trying to forge closer ties with India and other Chinese rivals to “counter” Beijing. That being so, Biden would be expected to back off from some of Trump’s policy regarding Tibet. However, the bipartisan support for the bill in the Congress, under the guise of “human rights” and “care for the environment” narrative will pressure him into not backing off. So, as is also the case with Trump’s support for Morocco (Trump’s “parting gift” to his successor, as it has been described), Biden might find himself with his hand tied too, in a way.

Once more, a US move has heightened tensions and may also have created a dilemma for all parties involved.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Credits to the owner of the featured image/taken via InfoBrics

The original source of this article is Asia-Pacific Research

Copyright © Uriel Araujo, Asia-Pacific Research, 2020