The world's biggest fake media BBC's "news" presenter Evan Davis exemplifies its insidious way of cheating its less awake listeners with the most disgusting and hate spreading mis- and disinformation.

A recorded public time-line of Peter Klevius original research on evolution, consciousness, existencecentrism, anthropology and sociology 1979-2012 - and some thoughts about self-citation  

Read Peter Klevius Origin of the Vikings from 2005 - now again available after Google deleted it 2014 and again in February 2024. 

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa. 

Peter Klevius opposite reading and correction of Greenland data compared to researchers biased with climate hysteria.

 Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct. 

Evan Davis is clearly the most streamlined disinformer among BBC's otherwise openly clumpsy ones. This is why Peter Klevius thinks he is one of the best examples of BBC's evil tactics, not the least because he's got a way of nice sounding talking that dupes most people.  

Here's just a tiny but revealing example so to see how the insidious mechanism works almost unnoticed.

How many tragedies has BBC's racist and militaristic Sinophobe Evan Davis anti-China ranting from the world's biggest platform caused among Chinese people in UK and elsewhere - and of course never or rarely reported by BBC?!

* When UK's (already outdated quality disaster - compare the US controlled costly Trident and Aukus quality failures) aircraft carrier was launched Evan Davis complained that UK had 'only two' to attack China (sic). Talking about a megalomanic mouse with underlying inferiority complex. Btw, at that time China had only one in service because it focused more on peaceful trade and cooperation than militarism. However, precisely due to US aggression China had to prepare itself. So China's latest (and several forthcoming ones) is superior to US best, in a class UK can only dream about - no matter how much warmongers like BBC's Evan Davis push for robbing even more money to useless and needless military equipment from already poverty stricken UK people.

UK is 28th on the per capita list.

20241219 17:00 On BBC's "News" Putin said: 'Russia's GDP is fourth in the world in terms of purchasing power parity, and first in Europe. I don't think UK is even in the top five.'To this BBC's warmonger* Evan Davis pukes: 'I think Russia's per capita GDP is a great deal lower than UK. I don't know what metrics he was referring to when he said 'we're ahead of UK'. Peter Klevius: Really! How could you possibly miss that? And that UK's per capita GDP is heavily inflated by London's gold and finance flow that little benefit ordiunary UK people. In China the situation is the very opposite. There are a couple of hundred millions of rural population that pulls down China's overall per capita GDP but simultaneously greatly benefit from the 105 cities with more than a million people (UK has one and US 9) whose per capita GDP is much higher than China's general. Also do note that China's Macao has a per capita GDP which is more than double that of UK.

 

Peter Klevius wrote:

Is BBC/Jonny Dymond committing, or complicit to, war crimes/crimes against humanity* by deliberately misleading the public via the world's biggest fake news media platform?

November 26, 2024

* In the context of international crimes, falsehoods — ranging from selective reporting of facts, deliberate mischaracterization of events and adversaries, or even plain fabrication and lies — constitute a breeding ground in which incitement to support the committing of violence (i.e. war) can thrive. While disseminating such falsehoods does not constitute a direct call to commit physical violence, it nevertheless sows the seeds for mass atrocities. The outer limits of International Criminal Law (ICL) — defined by the principle of culpability — depends on whether campaigns of disinformation in the context of mass atrocities could ever give rise to individual responsibility. On the basis of the Fritzsche, Gvero and Mbarushimana cases, liability for disseminating disinformation might in principle be engaged before, during and even after the commission of such crimes. Concerns about the role of media may also pose the question whether media or their personnel may be liable for amplifying disinformation campaigns.

News media fascism, hate incitement, misinformation and warmongering far from impartiality: BBC's Jonny Dymond used the main Sunday news (20241124) together with Nato's former Assistance Secretary General Baiba Braze - a notorious war hawk - pushing for censoring critics of the war that US/Nato started as a result of Obama's 2013 plan to place US nukes around Russia's military base Sevastopol/Crimea (see below).

However, Dymond and Baiba didn't mention with a word that more than half of western Ukrainians (eastern Ukrainians and Crimeans overwhelmingly support Russia but weren't asked) now want negotiations and peace with Russia. In other words, BBC/Dymond not only produced deliberate disinformation, but thereby also committed war crime** and crime against humanity by inciting hate from UK's biggest state media outlet.

BBC "news" is a modern global copy of Goebbel's domestic Nazi propaganda.

Background (but see a more in depth analysis below).

February 9, 1990. James Baker III, US Secretary of State, said to Mikhail Gorbachev, NATO will not move one inch eastward if you agree to German unification, basically ending World War II. And Gorbachev said, that’s very important. Yes, NATO doesn’t move, and we agreed to German unification. The US then cheated on this, already starting in 1994 when Clinton signed off on, basically a plan to expand NATO all the way to Ukraine.

2008 Angela Merkel laid the foundation for a prosperous Germany/EU by approving Nord Stream gas supply from Russia - thereby going against dollar freeloader (since 1971) US pressure.

2013 Obama threatened Russia with his plan to place US nukes around Russia's miltary base at Sevastopol/Crimea. Obama's meddling started by arranging a rough Gallup poll among Crimeans which, to his disappointment, clearly revealed that an overwhelming majority didn't want to belong to Ukraine at all but wanted to be part of Russia. However, Obama didn't care but instead continued to puch for Ukraine's Nato membership - and thereby also US nukes (compare the Cuba crisis 1962). So Putin arranged a full referendum which overwhelmingly supported Russian annexation.  

2014 US toppled Ukraine's elected Russia friendly president and started the US supported civil war against Russians in eastern Ukraine which culminated in Russia's intervention in late February 2022.

In April 2022 Ukraine was ready for negotiations with Russia but was stopped by US (via UK PM Johnson's intervention).

Olaf Scholz tried to stop the war and reopen Nord Stream. This led to US destroying three of the four Nord Stream pipelines after Biden publicly promised to do so.

2024 US/Nato escallated the war by using US most sophisticated military neans - in a flagrant opposition to the will of the majority of Ukrainians.

The Nord Stream gas supply was essential for Germany, EU and Russia - so how could it be in Russia's interest to not participate peacefully?! However, dollar thief (since 1971) US had a main interest in destroying EU-Russia relations.

The Nord Stream gas supply was essential for Germany, EU and Russia - so how could it be in Russia's interest to not participate peacefully?! However, dollar thief (since 1971) US had a main interest in destroying EU-Russia relations. 

Read Peter Klevius' recorded public timeline about his original scientific breakthroughs on evolution, consciousness, the dynamics of human societies, sex segregation/heterosexual attraction, psychoanalysis, and sociology.

Read Peter Klevius Origin of the Vikings from 2005 - now again available after Google deleted it 2014 and again in February 2024.

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa. 

Read Peter Klevius opposite reading and correction of Greenland data compared to researchers biased with climate hysteria.

Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct.

How US robs the world since it 1971 by violated the Bretton Woods agreement and then started printing dollar costed by the rest of the world. Relase US fiat bomb by clicking it.

The Obama Regime’s Plan to Seize the Russian Naval Base in Crimea

November 2, 2019 

by Eric Zuesse

Clear and convincing evidence will be presented here that, under U.S. President Barack Obama, the U.S. Government had a detailed plan, which was already active in June 2013, to take over Russia’s main naval base, which is in Sevastopol in Crimea, and to turn it into a U.S. naval base. There can now be no question that the war in Ukraine started, and resulted from, the U.S. Government’s plan to take over all of Ukraine, and especially to take over that Russian naval base, in Crimea, which then was in Ukraine.

The war in Ukraine didn’t start at the time when a lot of people think that it did, with the overthrow of Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych. It was already underway considerably before that time, because it started in Washington, as the folloowing masterful 11-minute documentary makes clear — it started as a subterranean war by Washington to take over Ukraine, before it became an overt war (a “civil war”) within Ukraine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWkfpGCAAuw

The CIA-edited and written Wikipedia claims that the war commenced in “a series of military actions that started in February 2014”; and, that, from the outset, it has been a “Russian military intervention in Ukraine (2014–present)” — not any sort of American intervention in Ukraine. However, to the extent that Russia has been involved in the Ukrainian war, that involvement came later, and was a reaction against what the U.S. Government and its agents had done to Ukraine (which nation is, of course, on Russia’s doorstep, and so Russia inevitably did respond). Therefore, the propagandistic function of Wikipedia must be acknowledged, even though Wikipedia is adequate for providing an introductory overview of some non-geostrategic subjects.

The U.S. regime, under Barack Obama, had been planning, ever since June 2011, a takeover of Ukraine, in order to become enabled ultimately to place its nuclear missiles within less than five minutes flying-time to a first-strike blitz destruction of the Kremlin (thus preventing any effective Russian counter-attack). However, things didn’t work out quite according to the plan for the takeover of Ukraine, and here is how the war in Ukraine actually began:

We’ll open by describing the planning for the conquest of Russia’s key naval base, in Sevastopol in Crimea. Crimea was inside Ukraine during 1954-2014, but had otherwise been inside Russia, going all the way back to 1783. (During 1954, the Soviet dictator, Khrushchev, arbitrarily transferred Crimea, from Russia to Ukraine, even though the vast majority of Crimeans considered themselves to be Russians, and their native language was Russian — but, after all, the Soviet Union was a dictatorship. Crimeans had no say in the matter.)

The U.S. regime prepared for its planned takeover of Crimea by commissioning Gallup to poll Crimeans in 2013 to find out whether the residents there considered themselves to be Ukrainians (which would make the U.S. regime’s job in Crimea easier), or instead still Russians (which would foretell resistance there); and the findings were that Crimeans overwhelmingly still considered themselves to be Russians, definitely not Ukrainians. Nonetheless, the plan for the takeover went forward — the U.S. team, it is clear, decided that the residents of Crimea could be dealt with, in such ways as is shown here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loKajkXoTBU

Some were clubbed to death, others became permanently disabled from their injuries, but this was a warning to Crimeans, to buckle under, and give up: be ruled from Kiev, by Washington’s regime. It didn’t work. A referendum was quickly held in Crimea about whether they wanted to be ruled by the newly installed Ukrainian government, and the results were in line with Gallup’s findings: Crimeans wanted to be ruled from Moscow, not from Kiev.

The U.S. then hired Gallup to survey Crimeans soon after the referendum. (Perhaps the U.S. regime was hoping to find that a scientific sampling of Crimeans would show a far smaller percentage favoring the breakaway of Crimea from Ukraine than the referendum had reported, which could greatly intensify international skepticism about the legitimacy of Russia’s takeover of Crimea. But, if that was the purpose, Gallup’s findings again turned out to be a disappointment.)

Here is what Gallup found in both its 2013 and 2014 polls of Crimeans:

When Gallup did their “Public Opinion Survey Residents of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea May 16-30, 2013” (which was called that because even when Crimea was part of Ukraine, it had a special status, as being an “Autonomous Republic” — not a province), only 15% (slide 8) of Crimeans viewed themselves as “Ukrainian,” but 40% said “Russian,” and 24% said “Crimean.” 53% (slide 14) wanted Crimeans to be part of the “Customs Union with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan,” but only 17% wanted Crimeans to be part of “The European Union.” 68% (slide 15) said their feelings toward “Russia” were “warm,” but only 6% said their feelings toward “USA” were “warm.

When Gallup in April 2014 (right after the referendum) polled Crimeans again (slide 25), 76.2% had a “negative” view of the United States, and 2.8% had a “positive” view of it; 71.3% had a positive view of Russia, and 8.8% had a negative view of it. Asked whether (slide 28) “The results of the referendum on Crimea’s status likely reflect the views of most people there/here,” 82.8% said yes; 6.7% said no. 89.3% in the poll expressed an opinion on this matter, and 93% of those who expressed an opinion said that the referendum “likely did reflect the views” of Crimeans. That was almost exactly the same percentage as those who in the referendum had voted to rejoin Russia. It couldn’t have been stronger verification of the referendum-results, than that. The Gallup poll findings (like its predecessor) were hidden from the public — not broadcast to the public by the regime’s propaganda-media. After all: the U.S. Government is a regime — it’s not a democracy. All of the formalities, now, are just for show. Both of its political parties are imperialists (“neoconservative”). Only their style differs.

So: the U.S. regime knew that it wasn’t, at all, wanted nor welcomed by Crimeans, but that Russia very much was. The U.S. regime thus moved forward on the basis that the government of Ukraine owned that land; the residents who lived there did not, and should have no say about what government owned it and would rule them. The idea was that, if the people there didn’t like it, they should emigrate to Russia (and, according to a Russian source, “4.4 million went to Russia” — removed themselves from Ukraine — after the coup).

The U.S. regime, clearly, wanted the land, not  the people who were living on it. The expectation, as soon as Ukraine was under U.S. control from the coup, had been that America would get the entirety of Ukraine, including Crimea; but, then, Russia’s Vladimir Putin stepped in and protected Crimeans who were clamoring to hold a referendum in order to express their collective will on this matter; and this referendum was held, on 16 March 2014, and it produced over 90% voting for Crimea to be a part of Russia, such as Crimea had been before Khrushchev transferred it to Ukraine.

So: the U.S. regime failed to get the naval base that it had expected to get in Sevastopol in Crimea. That was a crucial failure for Obama.

Those events — the coup and, three weeks later, the Crimean referendum — occurred in 2014, but the planning for the coup had already been going on for years, and it wasn’t being called off once Gallup reported in 2013 that most Crimeans loathed the U.S. The active operation to take over Ukraine had started actually on 1 March 2013 inside the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, which was almost 9 months before Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, on 20 November 2013, rejected the EU’s demand that Ukraine must bear the full $160 billion cost of abandoning its existing trading relationships with Russia and its allies, in order to join the EU. Wikipedia says that the overthrow of Yanukovych started on 21 November 2013 when he said no to the EU, but actually it started on 1 March 2013; and the planning for it had started by no later than June 2011. And it may be said to have begun even prior to that, when, near the very start of Obama’s Presidency, Obama called the then-Ukrainian-Presidential-candidate Yanukovych to Washington in order to sound him out on — if Yanukovych would become the winner — getting Ukraine into NATO, America’s anti-Russian military alliance. Getting Ukraine into the EU was really just to be a steppingstone to getting it into NATO so that U.S. nuclear missiles could be placed there against Moscow. This is what everything was really about. On 7 January 2010, the Kiev Post bannered “Yanukovych: Ukraine will remain a neutral state” and this is what actually sealed his fate. Yanukovych, with that now in his platform, won the Presidential election on 7 February 2010. So: he was in Obama’s gunsight even at the very moment when he won the Presidency.

There was no question as to whether Ukrainians wanted to be in NATO: they did not. During 2003-2009, only around 20% of Ukranians wanted NATO membership, while around 55% opposed it. In 2010, Gallup found that whereas 17% of Ukrainians considered NATO to mean “protection of your country,” 40% said it’s “a threat to your country.” Ukrainians predominantly saw NATO as an enemy, not a friend. But after Obama’s February 2014 Ukrainian coup, “Ukraine’s NATO membership would get 53.4% of the votes, one third of Ukrainians (33.6%) would oppose it.” The coup turned what remained of Ukraine sharply against Russia. NATO is the key; the EU is more like an excuse for Ukraine to be admitted into NATO.

In June 2013 (well before the ‘democratic revolution’ in Ukraine started), NAVFAC, the U.S. Naval Facililities Engineering Command, published on its website, a “Project Description” for “Renovation of School#5, Sevastopol, Ukraine,” under the euphemistic title “EUCOM Humanitarian Assistance Program”. EUCOM is the U.S. European Command — it is purely military, not “humanitarian,” at all. The 124-page request for proposals (RFP) showed extensive photos of the existing school, and also of the toilets, floor-boards, and other U.S.-made products, that the U.S. regime was requiring to be used in the renovation (by some American corporation, yet to be determined) of that then-Ukrainian school in Crimea, which at that time was a Ukrainian Government property, not at all American-owned or operated. So: why were U.S. taxpayers supposed to fund this ‘humanitarian’ operation, by the U.S. military?

A remarkably full description, of what that extraordinary RFP was about, was provided on 24 April 2014 by a “Lada Ray,” under the headline “Breaking! US Planned to Turn #Crimea into Military Base Against Russia”, and here is its opening:

—

Breaking! US Planned to Turn #Crimea into Military Base Against Russia

24 April 2014, Lada Ray

A couple of weeks ago Crimea and Sevastopol almost unanimously voted to re-join Russia. The Crimeans said: we had been unappreciated guests, now we are returning home after a long voyage. More about that in my articles:

Why is Crimea Overwhelmingly Pro RE-Unification With Russia? https://futuristrendcast.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/why-is-crimea-overwhelmingly-pro-re-unification-with-russia/

Prediction: Crimea Independence Vote https://futuristrendcast.wordpress.com/2014/03/15/prediction-crimea-independence-vote/

The information coming to the surface now shows that if Crimea stayed as part of Ukraine, it would have become a huge NATO/US military base. I seriously doubt that the people of the Crimea would have stood for that, but if such a thing did happen, it would have meant WWIII as Russia would never allow it. From this perspective it’s especially clear why NATO, USA and EU were so shocked that Russia decisively accepted Crimea back. They already considered it theirs.

The city of Sevastopol is the prized possession. This is one of the best harbors in the world. But the entire Crimea is of huge strategic importance – first and foremost, if you want to attack Russia. In addition, Crimea is important for the control over other countries, including Iran and Turkey. As they say, he who controls Crimea, controls the Black Sea.

At least one hospital in Crimea’s capital Simferopol and at least one school in Sevastopol were targeted by the US/NATO just recently. They were planning on turning the hospital into a base for their troops after a massive renovation. One of the high schools (a gymnasium) in Sevastopol the Kiev authorities were about to sell to the US to be repurposed as a school for spies, targeting Russia. It was planned that the kids going to that school would be learning languages and spying techniques since an early age.

It appears Americans wanted to turn the Crimea into a massive military/navy/intelligence complex. The famous, one-of-a-kind Soviet underground submarine base in Balaklava, which is now the Museum of the Cold War, was visited in the past several years by at least 25 delegations from the Pentagon, US Navy, NATO, and Western political circles. Kiev gave them access to super-secret Russian/Soviet sectors of the base, which were supposed to be off limits. They studied with great interest the secret documentation and technology.

In Sevastopol, called “the city of the Russian glory” and the “hero city,” the NATO and US navy ships and military have been present for years. The population greeted them with constant protests, which prevented some of the planned joint military exercises between NATO and Kiev. Sometimes, the NATO ships had to leave because of the population’s resistance (protest footage on video below at 1:54). US/NATO ships in the Sevastopol harbor tried many times to “park” right in front of the Russian ships stationed there just out of spite. As we know, for 23 years, since the breakup of the USSR in 1991. Russia has been leasing its own base on its historic land for $100mln a year from Kiev.

Sevastopol had been the important base of the Russian Fleet since 1776. Sevastopol is a large and beautiful city populated with ethnic Russians, many of whom are retired navy officers and their families. These people dreamed for 23 years of going home – and by home they always meant Russia. Add to that that Kiev constantly attacked Russian language, little by little taking away the right of the Russian-speakers to speak their native language.

In Crimea, the US financed very generously various media, NGOs, and politicians, who would essentially become their agents. Of course, much of that was styled as support for democracy.

People of the Crimea felt deeply insulted by such attitude by the bought-and-paid-for Kiev and such disrespect of their heritage and wishes by the US/NATO.

—

You didn’t see that information in the New York Times, Washington Post, London Times, Telegraph, Guardian, or any other U.S.-regime propaganda-organ; and, so, the facts that are told there might be surprising (or even shocking) to readers under the U.S. regime; but they are true, and the propaganda isn’t.

Then, Ukraine’s far eastern Donbass region, which had voted over 90% for the democratically elected President of Ukraine whom Obama had overthrown, also broke away. Here is how that happened:

Ukraine started its war against resisters by drafting everyone they could grab, and sending them in tanks into the south and east, in order to prevent any more secessions than Crimea had already done. The draftees were terrified, and didn’t want to kill. On 16 April 2014, the Kiev Post bannered “A day of humiliation, as Ukrainian military offensive stalls, six armored vehicles seized”. It opened: “On April 15, Ukraine’s military began an anti-terrorist operation against Kremlin-backed insurgents who have taken over numerous government buildings and police headquarters in several cities of Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine’s most populous region where 10 percent of the nation’s 45 million people live.” The residents in Donbass were now officially (by gther Obama-installed government) called “terrorists,” and Ukraine called its war to exterminate them the “Anti-Terrorist Operation” or ATO. Its objective was to eliminate as many of Yanukovych’s voters as possible (and Donbass having voted over 90% for Yanukovych meant that all of it was now a free-fire zone for Ukraine’s soldiers and bombers), so that the new regime would be able to win future elections (by eliminating the government’s opponents).

On 2 May 2014, thugs who were organized by the newly installed American regime in Kiev burned to death an uncounted number, perhaps over a hundred, individuals inside the Odessa Trade Unions Building, who had been distributing flyers against the coup-regime. Some of the massacre’s key organizers had friends inside the Obama White House. That event set off a panic throughout the eastern and southern half of Ukraine, where Yanukovych had overwhelmingly won the Presidency. The secession movement in the areas where Yanukovych had won (southern and eastern Ukraine), formed, and during 4-9 May 2014 took over some government buildings. Donbass, where Yanukovych had won by over 90%, seceded. The bombings and cannonades against Donbass — and sometimes even firebombings against them— took over.

That’s how the war started.

The U.S. regime and its supporters imposed severe sanctions against Russia for responding.

The accounts that have been given about the Ukrainian war by U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media have been boldly blatant lies.

 

Peter Klevius wrote:

Same day as China's Chang'e 6, as the world's first ever, had landed back on Earth with samples from the far side of the Moon, BBC's radio troll Sarah Montague didn't manage with a word to mention it in her 45 min "news"!

June 26, 2024

 

See how US stole the world-dollar 1971 - and how China's rise challenges US stolen dollar hegemony.

The US demonized China has nothing to do with the real China, but all to do with US dollar embezzlement that makes it possible for US to spend despite constant trade deficit. US is the world's biggest counterfeiter - and a dangerous loser!

To understand US fear of China (the "China threat"), you need to understand 1) the background, i.e. US enormous 1971 dollar theft and its escalating consequences now, 2)  the fact that China is already superior in every area* of tech and science, as well as meritocratic real democracy.  Moreover, China has no reason to start wars - while US whole existence (the stolen dollar hegemony) depends on warmongering (militarization), and starting and continuing wars. And to understand how low the US led West has sunk, just consider BBC implying Russia deliberately targeting a children's hospital (why would Russia ask for more negative news?!) while not mentioning with a word Israel's slaughtering in Gaza and West bank the same day - not to mention the more than 40,000 Palestinians already murdered - most of them children and innocent adults!

* Both US and China itself try to downplay China's success - for different reasons.

 Watch how US stole the dollar. When Nixon 1971 admitted US dollar theft (while lying it was temporary) said 'your dollar may not give you as much abroad as before", that statement actually defined the amount of US embezzlement, because when the US dollar was no longer pegged to gold - only pegged to the whims of US Federal Reserve - it meant that the world dollar (outside US) had to pay for US deficit. So the Bretton Woods (1944) all world currency dollar that was pegged to gold under the custodianship of the Fed, after the theft 1971 (i.e. US violation of the gold connection) the dollar became split in two: a US dollar covering US deficit, and a world dollar that pays for it - both under the custodianship of US. What the US Fed is doing is controlling both currencies while favoring the US dollar.

 

 US is the real enemy - and modern meritocratic high tech China is the real friend for any country that chooses peace and prosperity instead of militarism, war and misery!

 

 

 

Read Peter Klevius Origin of the Vikings from 2005 - now again available after Google deleted it 2014 and again in February 2024.

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa. 

Read Peter Klevius opposite reading and correction of Greenland data compared to researchers biased with climate hysteria.

Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct.

Sarah Montague's hateful and racist Sinophobia is part of BBC's perverted anti-China propaganda that not only clashes with English consumers and companies* interest, but is also dangerous because it goes now in desperate $-embezzler US lead.

* Except of course military ones. However, because China is the technological world leader, Western (i.e.US made or controlled, with Chinese parts) military equipment is already outdated in an accelerating tempo.

People in England have to pay a compulsory fee to BBC under threat of penalty, no matter if they like its misleading propaganda or not. The only thing worth listening on BBC are a few consumer and private economy programs. All the others are BBC in-house propaganda added with out of house* propaganda - which are promoted in ads equally annoying and frequent as on commercial media. And BBC's s.c. "science" programs constitute a joke

* Usually oligarchially connected to already well-off BBC staff.

Cherry picking hate

BBC impartiality: Although BBC's radio troll Sarah Montague is extremely eager on "reporting" made up negatives about China, she always completely misses positives! 

If BBC's Sarah Montague is so dumb that she doesn't get what she's doing, then Peter Klevius will of course forgive her. However, then she shouldn't be rewarded by BBC for spreading misleading propaganda.

Apart from BBC's Sarah Montague & Co's fake "news" and deliberate lying by choosing guests bolstering BBC's lies, BBC also violates every journaistic communication rule:

BBC's Sarah Montague & Co appeal to force or threat is a form of communication meant to support violence/militarism against China.

BBC's Sarah Montague & Co try to force compliance with words as weapons, directly intended to exert power.

BBC's Sarah Montague & Co use name calling instead of engaging in fair arguments, and  don't engage substantive reasons or arguments, hence clearly aiming to amplify feelings of conflict against China.

BBC's Sarah Montague & Co's objectification makes it easier to defend violence/militarism against China/Chinese.

BBC's Sarah Montague & Co's reification of Chinese, their government etc. steals from the Chinese people their humanity and complexity in order to amplify perhaps alredy existing emotional disdain in the listeners.

BBC's Sarah Montague & Co overgeneralize in a distorted way and draw conclusions that are too broad to be justified. The purpose of this distorted thinking and communication is to advance a Sinophobic position that strengthens an us/them division and amplifies emotions directed toward the absolute majority of Chinese people.

When innocent Julian Assange was released from UK jail (jailed on order from US that its puppet "ally" UK obeyed), 

 

The plea deal was a ploy by the US Government to avoid embarrassment - but BBC continues following criminal US lead by implying guilt.

Julian Assange never risked anyone's life - but he told the world that US both risked and did murdered and tortured innocent people.

Peter Klevius judicial criticism of plea deals: 

A plea deal is a medieval form of torture that US has reinstated (to its other forms of torture) - and some other countries have followed. Even though Assange has accepted a plea deal to avoid trial, a truly independent judge could still change the sentence proposed in the plea deal. So if the sentencing judge accepts it, one may ask why? This constitutes the weak link because if the judge is independent as s/he should be, then what value does a sentencing proposal in a plea deal really have?

When Chinese AI/LLMs proved to be superior to US ones, then US accuses them for not repeating US lies about Tiananmen "protesters" 1989 who were actually violent terrorists supported by US!

A recorded public time-line of Peter Klevius original research on evolution, consciousness, existencecentrism, anthropology and sociology 1979-2012 - and some thoughts about self-citation  

Read Peter Klevius Origin of the Vikings from 2005 - now again available after Google deleted it 2014 and again in February 2024. 

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa. 

Peter Klevius opposite reading and correction of Greenland data compared to researchers biased with climate hysteria.

 Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct. 

The US supported protesters in China were very wrong. Deng Xiaoping's reform policy away from Maoism and Xi Jinping's meritocratic anti-corruption campaign has easily outperformed US "democracy" on every front. So the only reason to propose "democracy" in China is to weaken it and open it for US robbing. But China says no - and US criminal behavior is doomed!

US "democracy" is extremely bad compared to modern China's people supported meritocracy. This is why US spends billions (trillions?) on smearing China via US media and web monopoly. 

China's one child policy (except for Uyghurs who were allowed to have more) has saved massively on global resources, and gave Chinese women more time for career. But presented as a problem by US led media.

And today China is the most successful nation adopting world's best green technologies. And when other countries want to buy it, then US and US steered politicians say no and call it "overproduction" and a "threat".

We never hear about US spread of missiles and censored dis- and misinformation via its media and finance monpoly and due weaponized web control and total spying as a threat, do we.

China's capitalist reform got severely hit 1988-89 because of US Feds chock rate increase. That caused havoc in a still extremely vulnerable China on its path out from Maoism.

Unarmed soldiers were sent to keep order but were murdered by armed protesters supported by US.

Do understand that $-thies US China smear is all about keeping its "allies" onboard in its criminal authoritarian dictatorship resting on its stolen gains from the world dollar it stole 1971.

 Peter Klevius wrote:

Thursday, May 23, 2024

Media's US led deception of the 1989 Tiananmen "democracy"* riots in China is as far you can get from the truth. 

* Even if some of the violent rioters really believed that "democracy" would be better for China, history now tells them how wrong they were. Moreover, just consider dollar embezzler (1971-) US reaction if China had become even stronger technologically, economically, politically and morally (if the latter is even possible for a 1.4 billion country)? That wouldn't have extended US stolen hegemony, right. 

$-freeloader US extreme anti-China cognitive, financial, militaristic warfare is made possible with US 1971 stolen world dollar hegemony and is a crime against humanity and most people are too busy/ignorant to understand the danger of the cornered US - but instead fear China which offers best consumer goods, infrastructure etc, without imposing its system as US does! 

 Sadly, many haven't understood the enormity of US financial fraud 1971. And US economists - and some stupid US puppets called "allies" - just "explain" away how US as the only country in the world can prosper and militarize the rest of the world despite constant trade deficit. "We're just so good" is Bloomberg's and others answer!

When US 1971 stole* the world dollar it could manipulate it as it wanted and have the world pay for its trade deficit. However, China is now back and challenges it with superior tech which makes consumers happy. China's capitalist reform got severely hit 1988-89 because of US Feds chock rate increase. That caused havoc in a still extremely vulnerable China on its path out from Maoism.

 * 1944 Bretton Woods "agreement" pegged the world dollar to US dollar which was then pegged to gold under US Feds custodianship. 1971 US was bankrupt and arbitrarily violated the gold connection but kept the custody over the world dollar. Although it hit poor countries the most, China was especially vulnerable because it was in an intensive opening-up trade development following Deng Xiaoping's capitalist reform policy. 

Peter Klevius analysis of the US controlled media massacre of the truth about the Tiananmen square incident by neglecting cause and effect while producing anti-China* smear. 

* No, it's not just CCP! Undemocratic Christian theocracy US uses Sinophobia as synonymous with "democracy", well knowing that the absolute majority of Chinese people don't share the US view on "democracy", although young Chinese in the late 1980s realized the difference in living standard between US and China after Deng Xiaoping opened up the China that Mao had closed. So when US again manipulated the world dollar it hit hard (up to 19% 1989 inflation from 7% 1987) on China's economy. 

 Peter Klevius agrees with Klaus Schwab (WEF) who said "I respect China's tremendous achievements … over the last forty years. China could act as a role model for many countries, but in the end, each country should be left to make its own decision regarding the system it wants to adopt. We should be very careful in imposing systems but the Chinese model is certainly a very attractive model for quite a number of countries." Peter Klevius: Especially for US!

Wu'er Kaixi (aka Örkesh Dölet) Of Uyghur heritage from Xinjiang had a leading role during the 1989 protests.

Peter Klevius: What did he think about the old Uyghur jihad battle cry "kill the Han and the Hui"?

Summary of Peter Klevius Tiananmen analysis: There were two distinct and mutually exclusive groups of protesters who were not distinguishable by their appearance. 

The absolute majority were peaceful protesters. However, the rest were intent for violence, and their leaders even openly admitted that they wanted to provoke PLA to also use violence "so the world could see it". But even this wasn't enough. As crit­ics of Chai Ling’s role in the move­ment point to the infam­ous “last words” interview she gave to US journ­al­ist Philip Cun­ning­ham on May 28, just days before the riots. With the move­ment facing an uncer­tain future, a deeply pess­im­istic and fear­ful Chai gave video testi­mony to Cun­ning­ham in which she described her intention to leave the square, adding “I want to live”. But, other stu­dents would have to stay until the square was “washed with blood,” she said.

Much of the rioters brutality was the result of Beijing’s decision on June 2 to send in unarmed soldiers to clear the Square. The unarmed soldiers  were set upon immediately by rioters around the Square waiting for the chance to attack the soldiers. Beijing’s armed battalions were sent in later.

US Embassy daily reports of what was happening at the time.

The US Embassy report for June 4 notes:

    “the beating to death of a PLA soldier, who was in the first APC to enter Tiananmen Square, in full view of the other waiting PLA soldiers, appeared to have sparked the shooting that followed.”

So it was the rs, not the government soldiers, that started the bloody confrontation.

State Department chroniclers continue their unbiased summary of events:

    “.. the initial moves against the students suggested to many that the Chinese leadership was still, as of the morning of June 3, committed to a relatively peaceful resolution to the crisis.”

From there we go to:

    “fascinating eyewitness accounts of the disorganized and confused retreat of PLA soldiers from the center of Beijing after their advance on Tiananmen Square was halted by crowds of demonstrators on the morning of June 3.’ ..the soldiers were ridiculed by Chinese citizens and scolded by elderly women who called them “bad boys” and “a disgrace to the PLA.”

On the day after, on June 4, however: “thousands of civilians (rioters - not peaceful protesters) stood their ground or swarmed around military vehicles. APCs were set on fire, and demonstrators besieged troops with rocks, bottles, and Molotov cocktails.”

Media reports confirmed this rioters violence.

According to the Wall Street Journal of June 4:

    “As columns of tanks and tens of thousands soldiers approached Tiananmen many troops were set on by angry mobs … [D]ozens of soldiers were pulled from trucks, severely beaten and left for dead. At an intersection west of the square, the body of a young soldier, who had been beaten to death, was stripped naked and hung from the side of a bus. Another soldier’s corpse was strung at an intersection east of the square.”

Even ABC, later to one-sidedly dramatize cruelties by government forces, describes how in front of the Australian embassy a PLA solder was beaten to death, disembowelled and left with his penis stuck in his mouth.

But those who condemn government violence  at Tiananmen need to explain the seeming hatred of the government among protesters that triggered Tiananmen events .

Chai Ling, like many other Tianamen rioters became Christian and welcomed in US. Listen to her video to measure her bloodthirstiness - and cowardice.

The "tank man" hoax* 

* The photographer used Peter Klevius favorite film camera (before F4) Nikon Fe2. 10 years earlier Peter Klevius bought a Nikon Fe because of its fast (for fill in flash) titanium shutter, which also handled better in cold than Canon's slow and cold sensitive fabric shutter. Moreover, whereas Canon A1 was useless with low battery (which was also really expensive), Nikon Fe (and Fe2) could still do B and 1/90 mechanically. Double exposure and good depth and field control also helped. However, the best thing was the wonderful metering system with both manual and auto relative to each other on the side of the viewer.

Although the "tank man" photo is authentic, its usage is almost never. As Peter Klevius has always said: Cameras never lie - pictures do. And in this case it's the presentation against a background on an extremely distorted Western presentation of the "Tiananmen massacre", that completely eliminates the "hero" against the "evil CCP" mantra - at a time when CCP had abandoned everything Maoist. 

Peter Klevius was first reluctant to even mention the "tank man" in the post because he thought most people already understood the silliness in it. However, a brief check revealed that BBC and other fake media still uses it deeply tendentiously and polemically. According to Peter Klevius, the incident clearly shows that PLA had strong orders to be careful with non-violent people no matter what they did. Otherwise any army would hav just taken the guy for interrogation - as a ny police would have done in any other country. Moreover, his strange behavior can only be described as either mad or just joking in front of the crowd. There was nothing to "protest" against - or did he want them to park on a normally busy street, or even worse, return to Tiananmen square?! 

1) 5 June 1989 everyone in Beijing knew that PLA wouldn't hurt non-violent civilians. Yes, that happened accidently in the chaotic battle the day before with the rioters who deliberately started the violence (already 3 June) against unarmed PLA soldiers whom they burned alive and hanged etc. That the PLA may have used excessive force is in line with any army in a similar situation. Just listen to Chai Ling and understand how deliberate the provocations from the rioters side were. Btw, also check the Waco siege and similar incidents in US.

2) It didn't happen at Tiananmen square, and the tanks were not going against protesters but just the contrary, i.e. back home.

3) Little, or nothing is publicly known of the man's identity or that of the commander of the lead tank. 

4) An endless list of "theories" have been put forward. Shortly after the incident, London newspaper Sunday Express named him as "Wang Weilin" (王维林), a 19-year-old student who was later charged with "political hooliganism" and "attempting to subvert members of the People's Liberation Army." This claim has been rejected by internal Chinese Communist Party documents, which reported that they could not find the man, according to the Hong Kong-based Information Center for Human Rights. One party member was quoted as saying: "We can't find him. We got his name from journalists. We have checked through computers but can't find him among the dead or among those in prison."

There are several conflicting stories about what happened to him after the "demonstration". In a speech to the President's Club in 1999, Bruce Herschensohn, former deputy special assistant to US President Richard Nixon, alleged that he was executed 14 days later; other sources alleged he was executed by firing squad a few months after the Tiananmen Square protests. In Red China Blues: My Long March from Mao to Now, Jan Wong writes that she believes from her interactions with the government press that they have "no idea who he was either" and that he is still alive somewhere on the mainland. Another theory is that he escaped to Taiwan and remains employed there as an archaeologist in the National Palace Museum. This was first reported by the Yonhap news agency in South Korea.

The Chinese government has made few statements about the incident or the people involved. The government denounced him as a "scoundrel" once on state television. In a 1990 interview with Barbara Walters, then-General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party Jiang Zemin was asked what became of the man. Jiang first stated (through an interpreter), "I can't confirm whether this young man you mentioned was arrested or not", and then replied in English, "I think [that he was] never killed." The government also argued that the incident evidenced the "humanity" of the country's military.

In a 2000 interview with Mike Wallace, Jiang said, "He was never arrested." He then stated, "I don't know where he is now." He also emphasized that the tank stopped and did not run the young man over.

Cui Guozheng, was an unarmed cook in the 348th Regiment of the 116th Division. He was murdered by rioters because he did not stay close enough with the other troops.

Listen to this bloodthirsty "protester for democracy"

 The Chinese government sent unarmed soldiers to guard the protests precisely so to not instigate more violence. However, they were attacked and murdered in their vehicles by organized militant "protesters" who used Molotov cocktails etc, weapons. Only later armed officers were used against the militant terrorists on the streets leading to the Tiananmen square - were nothing actually happened except for the public thanking the soldiers and feeding them.
Chine

.

Why isn't Obama indicted in The Hague for 2012 inciting the war and IS chemical use* in Syria, and the nuke threat and proxy war in Ukraine? Is it because US congress made a law that says US can militarily attack the court to free him?

* No evidence exists that Assad used chemical weapons - and why would he even risk it?! However, Obama/CIA knew that the islamist terrorists possessed chemical weapons - and encouraged them by "warning abt red lines against Assad"! But there do exist evidence of chemical attacks, e.g. in Douha. And UN report S/2016/738 reveals who did it - but is never mentioned by BBC etc. fake media: The Syrian-Saudi Chemicals Company had a chlorine production facility producing caustic soda and liquid chlorine 29 km east of Aleppo. The Government stated that the facility had been seized by the Nusrah Front (al-Qaeda) in August 2012 and that the Nusrah Front and some armed opposition groups (e.g. ISIS) had the capability to transport chlorine across the country. The Government provided information that approximately 400 tons of chlorine had been present at the plant at the time of its seizure. The Mechanism confirmed that chlorine containers at the facility had been moved after August 2012. No information is available on to where the containers were transported or how their content might have been used. The Government also stated that there was a pulp and paper plant in Dayr al-Zawr, which included a chlorine-producing unit. According to the Government, 59 tons of hydrochloric acid and 3 tons of sodium hypochlorite had been stored at the facility when it was seized by armed opposition groups in the first quarter of 2012. There is open-source information claiming that storage and safety features of the unit were maintained after the plant was seized. This suggests that some chemicals remained stored at the plant.

Moreover, rogue state $-thief (since 1971) US has since 1949 meddled in, and used Syria as one of its main torture chambers abroad - until Assad said no, and US turned on him. An irony then that Assad who tried to stabilize Syria is blamed for US crimes!

A recorded public time-line of Peter Klevius original research on evolution, consciousness, existencecentrism, anthropology and sociology 1979-2012 - and some thoughts about self-citation  

Read Peter Klevius Origin of the Vikings from 2005 - now again available after Google deleted it 2014 and again in February 2024. 

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa. 

Peter Klevius opposite reading and correction of Greenland data compared to researchers biased with climate hysteria.

 Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct. 

 

The CIA used Syria as an illicit base of operations to torture so-called "ghost detainees", as part of a program known as extraordinary rendition. This program was established in the mid-1990s and expanded in the 2000s.

One target of this program, Syrian-born Canadian Maher Arar, was detained in New York and sent to Syria, where he was interrogated and tortured. Arar, a telecommunications engineer who has been a Canadian citizen since 1991, was asked to confess his connections to al-Qaeda and to terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. Arar was held for more than a year; after his release, he sued the US government. According to a US Judge (and confirmed by Canadian investigators):

    During his first twelve days in Syrian detention, Arar was interrogated for eighteen hours per day and was physically and psychologically tortured. He was beaten on his palms, hips, and lower back with a two-inch-thick electric cable. His captors also used their fists to beat him on his stomach, his face, and the back of his neck. He was subjected to excruciating pain and pleaded with his captors to stop, but they would not. He was placed in a room where he could hear the screams of other detainees being tortured and was told that he, too, would be placed in a spine-breaking "chair", hung upside down in a "tire" for beatings, and subjected to electric shocks. To lessen his exposure to the torture, Arar falsely confessed, among other things, to having trained with terrorists in Afghanistan, even though he had never been to Afghanistan and had never been involved in terrorist activity.

    Arar alleges that his interrogation in Syria was coordinated and planned by US officials, who sent the Syrians a dossier containing specific questions. As evidence of this, Arar notes that the interrogations in the United States and Syria contained identical questions, including a specific question about his relationship with a particular individual wanted for terrorism. In return, the Syrian officials supplied US officials with all information extracted from Arar; plaintiff cites a statement by one Syrian official who has publicly stated that the Syrian government shared information with the United States that it extracted from Arar. See Complaint Ex. E (21 January 2004 transcript of CBS's Sixty Minutes II: "His Year in Hell").
 

The US initially invoked the "state secrets privilege". When legal proceedings began anyway, the Ashcroft Justice Department was ridiculed for arguing that Arar was in fact a member of al-Qaeda. The Canadian government apologized to Arar but the US has not admitted wrongdoing.

Journalist Stephen Grey has identified eight other people tortured on behalf of the CIA at the same prison ("Palestine Branch") in Syria. The CIA imprisoned a German businessman, Mohammad Haydr Zammar, and transferred him from Morocco to the Syrian prison. They subsequently offered German intelligence officials the opportunity to submit questions for Zammar, and asked Germany to overlook Syria's human rights abuses because of cooperation in the War on Terror.

According to a 2013 report by the Open Society Foundations, Syria was one of the "most common destinations for rendered suspects" under the program. Former CIA agent Robert Baer described the policy in 2004: "If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear – never to see them again – you send them to Egypt".

The horrifying results of US crimes* in Syria, Ukraine, Palestine etc. Why is the worst threat (US) to the world still applauded while the best opportunity (China) for the world is called a "threat"?! This perverted presentation is in itself a crime against humanity.

*The atrocities made by islamist terrorists in Syria were all made possible by US - much like Israel's war crimes and genocide.  After all, tiny Israel is the same population size as Sweden but much poorer. So when Israel uses 1,000 kg bombs on Palestinian tent camps with mostly women and children, then just undertand it's only made possible with US support.

When Assad got enough of CIA, US turned on him

On Sunday, 26 October 2008, the CIA conducted a paramilitary raid on the town of Sukkariyeh in eastern Syria. The raid involved "about two dozen US commandos in specially equipped Black Hawk helicopters". The US said it had killed an Iraqi who was supplying insurgents from across the Syrian border.

Syria accused the US of committing "terrorist aggression" and said that eight civilians had been killed. The US responded that all people killed in the raid were "militants". The Syrian government closed an American cultural center and the US-sponsored Damascus Community School in response.[38] The incident also led to a mass rally in Damascus in which protestors criticized the raid (the Syrian government supported the rally but deployed riot police to protect the US buildings from angry protestors).

Following the raid, the New York Times revealed the existence of a secret 2004 military order authorizing actions by the CIA and the Special Forces in 15–20 countries, including Syria. US officials acknowledged that they had conducted other raids in Syria since 2004, but did not provide details.

2009 Finland's president and Alexander Stubb (now president) visit Assad and pointed out that here were no problems between their countries and that EU was already preparing a trade and cooperation deal with Syria. However, Obama destroyed everything and put Syria in hell.

In 2011, a civil war broke out in Syria. Leaked diplomatic cables reported that the US government had been covertly funding Syrian opposition groups since 2006, mainly the London-based Movement for Justice and Development in Syria and an associated satellite TV channel Barada TV. Special Activities Division teams were deployed to Syria during the uprising to ascertain rebel groups, leadership and potential supply routes.

Islamists of the Army of Glory got US BGM-71 TOW anti-tank missiles to be used against Syrian government forces.

Under the aegis of operation Timber Sycamore and other clandestine activities, CIA operatives and US special operations troops have trained and armed nearly 10,000 rebel fighters at a cost of $1 billion a year. In early September 2013, President Barack Obama told US senators that the CIA had trained the first 50-man insurgent element and that they had been inserted into Syria.

The program Obama approved was designed not to give the rebels enough support to achieve victory, but rather to engineer a stalemate that would encourage a negotiated resolution of the Syrian Civil War—which US officials envisioned as including the resignation of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The CIA trained 10,000 rebels "in Jordan and Turkey" at facilities run with the cooperation of the Jordanian and Turkish governments, but strict prohibitions were placed on the US or its allies introducing "certain classes of weapons" (such as MANPADs) into the conflict due to fears they could be captured by terrorists—this despite the fact that all CIA-supported rebels are "vetted" for possible extremist ties. Assad was in danger of being overthrown until the 2015 Russian military intervention in Syria changed the course of the war, causing a split within the Obama administration between officials like CIA Director John O. Brennan and Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter—who advocated "doubling down" on the program—and opponents including White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and Secretary of State John Kerry—who expressed doubts that escalating the CIA's role could achieve meaningful results without forcing "an asymmetric response by Russia."

On 14 October 2016, against the backdrop of the siege of "rebel-held sections" of the city of Aleppo by Russian and Syrian aircraft, Obama was presented by his National Security Council with a "Plan B" to "deliver truck-mounted antiaircraft weapons that could help rebel units but would be difficult for a terrorist group to conceal and use against civilian aircraft"; Obama declined to make a decision on the matter, raising the prospect "that tens of thousands of CIA-backed fighters will search for more-reliable allies, and that the United States will lose leverage over regional partners that until now have refrained from delivering more-dangerous arms to Assad's opponents." Following Russia's intervention, top US officials began emphasizing "the fight against the Islamic State [ISIL], rather than against the Assad government," but supporters of the CIA program "disagree with this rationale, saying that the Islamic State can't be eradicated until a new government emerges capable of controlling the terrorist group's territory in Raqqa and elsewhere," and that "the [Free Syrian Army] remains the only vehicle to pursue those goals." In contrast, "one senior US official said that it is time for a 'ruthless' look at whether agency-supported fighters can still be considered moderate, and whether the program can accomplish anything beyond adding to the carnage in Syria," asking: "What has this program become, and how will history record this effort?" After the Defense Department's overt $500 million effort to train thousands of Syrians to fight ISIL was revealed to have produced only "four or five" active combatants as of September 2015, largely because the vast majority of potential recruits considered Assad their main enemy—an admission that prompted widespread congressional derision—the US military began airdrops of lethal equipment to established rebel organizations; reports soon emerged of "CIA-armed units and Pentagon-armed ones" battling each other.

While the Defense Department's program to aid predominantly Kurdish rebels fighting ISIL will continue, it was revealed in July 2017 that President Donald Trump had ordered a "phasing out" of the CIA's support for anti-Assad rebels, a move some US officials characterized as a "major concession" to Russia. According to David Ignatius, writing in The Washington Post, while the CIA program ultimately failed in its objective of removing Assad from power, it was hardly "bootless": "The program pumped many hundreds of millions of dollars to many dozens of militia groups. One knowledgeable official estimates that the CIA-backed fighters may have killed or wounded 100,000 Syrian soldiers and their allies over the past four years."

In July 2017 President Donald Trump claimed many of the CIA-supplied weapons ended up in the hands of Al Qaeda, which often fought alongside the CIA-backed rebels.

In December 2018, US President Donald Trump announced that US troops involved in the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS) in northeast Syria would be withdrawn imminently. Trump's surprise decision overturned Washington's policy in the Middle East. It fueled the ambitions and anxieties of local and regional actors vying over the future shape of Syria. Some experts proposed that President Trump could mitigate the damage of his withdrawal of US military forces from Syria by using the CIA's Special Activities Center.

When the world dictator rogue state $-embezzler US (since 1971) sanctions governments it wants to topple, then its useful "allies" obey as soon as they have processed US dictated demands through their "democratic" systems. 

The first sanctions applied on the country - after the March 2011 outbreak of the crisis US had fertilized - was on 29 April 2011, after an executive order was issued by President Barack Obama.

Ordered by US* Canada imposed its first sanctions on 25 May 2011 in the form of a travel ban, asset freeze, ban on the export of certain goods and technology that may be used by the armed forces, and suspension of all bilateral agreements and initiatives.

* 'Ordered by US' could take many shapes but always wears the hallmark of US stolen $-hegemony - without which the world would have looked much different. After all, when a country's leadership allowed the world's biggest embezzlement (the s.c. "Nixon shock" 1971) to continue, that very action started a spiral of even more embezzlement insteade of bankruptcy. This made US not only to step out of the world community of other countries, but also to make it harder by the year to normalize. Many wrongly still assume that it was US strength as a wealthy country that just continued after 1971, when in fact a severe transgression occurred (violation of Bretton Woods agreement) - which unlocked US from the deficit problems other countries face - and which has now spiralled as an accelerating fiat dollar inflation - paid by countries outside US using the world-dollar which, like the US-dollar, is totally controlled by US Fed who only cares about how its actions affect US. In other words, US Fed continues committing US embezzlement with impunity and with no regard for how it affects orhers (incl. less wealthy and poor US people). Against this background US other criminal behavior (made possible with stolen assets) would in normal judicial thinking render it extra grave. US is clearly a continuously dangerous offender and the assessment of dangerousness should consider: The seriousness of the offence itself, together with other offences associated with it, as well as the level of danger to the public posed by US, and whether there is a reliable estimate of the length of time US will remain a considerable danger to the world. However, the end game is approaching quickly when Western consumers, researhers etc, understand how they've been chated, After all, contrary to US propaganda via its web monopoly, US is already a dwarf in every aspect compared to China. A desperate and fast rottening banana republic which keeps hanging on the semiconductor machinery thread that anyone with open eyes understand wil break when China has patched the last tiny gaps in its already almost 100%  R&D superiority. Moreover, absolute every indicator point to China accelerating its leading position. And that's much better for the rest of the world than a losing criminal desperado. Put this reality in the context of Yellen's pathetic threat to use US stolen dollar hegemony to stop Chinese banks. Please do! That wouldn't stop the Chinese but rather crashing US dollar once and for all.


Also ordered by US in May 2011, the European Union adopted sanctions against Syria, in particular by prohibiting the trade in goods that could be used for the repression of the civilian population.

Ordered by US in August 2011, the United States put in place an embargo on the oil sector, freezing the financial assets of a number of personalities, as well as those of the Syrian state itself. In addition, the United States prohibits the export of goods and services originating in the territory of the United States or from United States companies or persons to Syria. This prohibition concerns any product of which at least 10% of the value comes from the United States or one of its nationals.[16] This measure has a wide impact on the Syrian population and on the price of commodities and medical products.

Ordered by US in September 2011, the European Union, in turn, adopted an embargo against the Syrian oil sector.[17][better source needed]

Ordered by US Australia announced a set of sanctions against Syria in 2011, in response to Assad government's violence against civilians. Sanctions ban Australians from all transactions related to weaponry, oil & natural gas, precious metals, petro-chemicals, toxic substances, banking partnerships, etc. with firms operating in Syria. They also prohibit dealings with regime-affiliated individuals, organizations and designated militant groups; which are involved in war-crimes and human rights violations.


When Obama attacked Syria it had already suffered from the worst drought ever with due crop failure etc., while also trying to deal with the heavy consequences of the US made 2008 financial crash that hurt the rest of the world more than US.

However, Obama brutally utilized it for trying to topple Syria's president, the Shia muslim Bashar al-Assad, by instigating Sunni islamist hate in Syria. And when the Sunni islamist terrorists brought violence to the protests resulting in heavy handed response from the police, Obama attacked Syria with what he thought would be the final blow to an already lying down country, i.e. heavy sanctions and embargoes. And of course US "allies" in US crimes followed US order as quickly as it took to get it through the "democratic" channels.

In March 2011,  popular discontent with the rule of  triggered large-scale protests and pro-democracy rallies across Syria, as part of the wider Arab Spring protests in the region. After months of crackdown by the government's security apparatus, various armed rebel groups such as the Free Syrian Army began forming across the country, marking the beginning of the Syrian insurgency. By mid-2012, the insurgency had escalated into a full-blown civil war.

Rebel forces, receiving arms from mainly US and its puppets of Western countries, and Turkey, initially made significant advances against the government forces, who were receiving financial and military support from Iran and Russia. Rebels captured the regional capitals of Raqqa in 2013 and Idlib in 2015. Consequently, Iran and Russia launched separate military interventions in support of the Syrian government in 2014 and 2015 respectively, shifting the balance of the conflict. By late 2018, all rebel strongholds except parts of Idlib region had fallen to the government forces.

In 2014, the US created and Turkey supported Islamic State won many battles against both the rebel factions and the Syrian government.

 

Peter Klevius wrote: 

Monday, December 09, 2024

US should be held accountable for Syrians' suffering. E.g. 2012 US hinted to islamist terrorists that US would help them if US "believed" Syrian army used chemical weapons. Chemical* attacks in Syria started in 2012. Shia muslims were held in cages on roofs etc. by Sunni islamists.

* The s.c. "evidence" against Assad was that 'chemical weapons had been used in Syria'. One may ask why Assad would do something that would weaken his war against Sunni islamist insurgents. One may also compare the immoprality of Assad with the immorality of Bush, Obama and Trump when it comes to their acts in Syria and their torturing, extrajudicial murdering and detaining practices, millions of war victims etc. Moreover, isn't US an obvious complicite to the suffering of the Syrian people? Could the Syrian government perhaps had been less brutal with less medling? Also do note how US "by mistake" bombed the Syrian army at a critical time when it had surrounded the ISIS.

2012 Saudi islamist dictator family reported that islamist terrorists had seized their chemical weapons factory in Syria. Same year the first chemical attacks began in Syria.

20 August 2012*, during the Syrian civil war, US president Barack Obama responded to a reporter’s question on the safety of chemical weapon stockpiles in Syria by claiming that “a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus.”

* Barack Obama, “Remarks by the President to the White House Press Corps,” White House Office of the Press Secretary, August 20, 2012, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2012/08/20/remarks-president-white-house-press-corps.

Peter Klevius: Obama/CIA knew very well that the islamist terrorists possessed loads of chemical weapons!

UN report S/2016/738:

The Syrian-Saudi Chemicals Company had a chlorine production facility producing caustic soda and liquid chlorine 29 km east of Aleppo. The Government stated that the facility had been seized by the Nusrah Front (al-Qaeda) in August 2012 and that the Nusrah Front and some armed opposition groups (e.g. ISIS) had the capability to transport chlorine across the country. The Government provided information that approximately 400 tons of chlorine had been present at the plant at the time of its seizure. The Mechanism confirmed that chlorine containers at the facility had been moved after August 2012. No information is available on to where the containers were transported or how their content might have been used.

The Government also stated that there was a pulp and paper plant in Dayr al-Zawr,
which included a chlorine-producing unit. According to the Government, 59 tons of
hydrochloric acid and 3 tons of sodium hypochlorite had been stored at the facility when
it was seized by armed opposition groups in the first quarter of 2012. There is open-
source information claiming that storage and safety features of the unit were maintained
after the plant was seized. This suggests that some chemicals remained stored at the
plant.

Although it's hard to find Assad's views on what happened in Syria, here's one from 2016 with an extremely hostile host.

US, Israel and Turkey have all occupied parts of Syria. Peter Klevius wonders if this is what the US dictated "world's rules based order" mean?

When Assad was toppled, US (and  its proxy puppet Israel) immediately started an intense bomb campaign against ISIS, which US previously had happily let harrass Assad. US used all means available to weaken/topple the Syrian government.

Nato-Turkey supports what Nato-US has designated as terrorists, i.e. the HTP-led insurgents led by a radical islamist group with roots in Al Qaeda, while US supports Kurds whom Turket has designated as terrorists.

When Syria's civil war began, Ankara sided with the rebels, breaking off all diplomatic relations with Damascus. More recently, President Erdogan has attempted to revive diplomatic ties but Assad rejected the overture, saying normalization was out of the question until Turkish troops are withdrawn from northern Syria.

Turkey's ultimate goal is to topple the Kurdish Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, where the Democratic Union Party (PYD), an offshoot of the banned Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), is in conrol.

At the moment, the two most powerful groups operating in the region are HTS and the SNA. The latter, according to Turkish Middle East expert Erhan Kelesoglu, immediately started an offensive against the Kurds as soon as Aleppo fell.

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) and also known as the Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army (TFSA), is a coalition of armed Syrian mostly terrorist groups in the Syrian proxy war. Comprising various factions that emerged at the start of the war in July 2011, it was officially established in 2017 under the auspices of Turkey, which provides funding, training, and military support.

 

Peter Klevius wrote:

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Were Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, US and UK accomplices to the gas attack/s in Syria?

Acknowledgement: Klevius is no fan of Assad. Not only because of the accusation of Syrian involvement in the February 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and support for muslim anti-Jewish terror groups etc, but also because of him being a muslim who happily and shamelessly, like most others, utilizes islam (the worst crime ever against humanity) for his agenda.

And those muslims who don't fit in either category need to face Erdogan, OIC and Human Rights violating Sharia - or admit they are no real muslims

Klevius comment: I for one cannot see the slightest space for political islam in a democratic society based on the belief in Human Rights. Can you?

Not taking responsibility for the evilness in one's ideology is pathetic. Klevius will elaborate on this in the next posting. In a way so most muslims should understand - if they dare to admit it.



Why do Western politicians support islamic terrorists? Is it because Western tax payers are ignorant and misinformed about what islam really is? But the truth is that the victims' bodies are all labeled 'political islam'!

Fly Qatar islamofascism while bowing towards the Saudis

When George W Bush in a week managed to topple Iraq's chemical weapons using dictator Saddam Hussein (whose Sarin victims were counted in tens of thousands) he was spat on by many. However, in Syria everything seems the opposite. The Sarin is used by the terrorists but Obama & Co are asked to topple Assad. How come?! The answer is simple: Saddam was Sunni and Assad is Shia.


The fact that launching indiscriminate biological attacks makes absolutely no sense militarily for Assad means it’s far more likely that such attacks are being staged by rebels – many of whom are being led by Al-Qaeda/Al-Nusra islamic terrorists – with support from the likes of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.

Gearóid Ó Colmáin, Global Research, May 30, 2013: According to a report in Turkey’s state media agency Zaman, agents from the Turkish General Directorate of Security (Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü) ceased 2 kg of sarin gas in the city of Adana in the early hours of yesterday morning. The chemical weapons were in the possession of Al Nusra terrorists believed to have been heading for Syria.

Sarin gas is a colourless, odorless substance which is extremely difficult to detect. The gas is banned under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention.

The EGM identified 12 members of the AL Nusra terrorist cell and also ceased fire arms and digital equipment. This is the second major official confirmation of the use of chemical weapons by

Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria after UN inspector Carla Del Ponte’s recent statement confirming the use of chemical weapons by the Western-backed terrorists in Syria.

The Turkish police are currently conducting further investigations into the operations of Al-Qaeda linked groups in Turkey.

This further confirmation that the Syrian ‘rebels’ are using chemical weapons while also using Turkey as a base of terrorist operations against Syria, could cause further domestic problems for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom Turkish opposition leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu has called the ‘chief of the terrorists’.

The Syrian National Coalition abroad has persisted in accusing the Syrian government of using chemical weapons. The Syrian National Coalition Head of Media Khaled Saleh told Al Jazeera on May 26th that Turkish authorities were certain about the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.

Saleh also claimed that he was in contact with several ‘brigades’ fighting in Syria. Perhaps, Mr. Saleh should be advised to consult the Turkish police now that one of his ‘brigades’ has been arrested in possession of chemical weapons.

Unsurprisingly, this Turkish report failed to make international headlines. From the beginning of the Syrian war, the international press agencies have attempted to portray the Al-Qaeda invasion of Syria as a ‘popular revolution’, which started out as a ‘peaceful protest’ against a ‘brutal regime’. The fact that there was never a modicum of evidence to support such claims has not hindered the avalanche of vituperation and demonization of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad and the Syrian Arab Republic.

France’s daily Le Monde published an ‘exclusive’ report on the 27th of May 2013 which claimed to have ‘proof’ that the Syrian government was using chemical weapons ‘against its own people’. However, the report simply relied on statements by ‘activists’ and ‘rebels’, who most serious commentators have described as unreliable sources of information.

Le Monde’s report came just in time as the French government was pushing the European Union to lift the embargo on arms to the terrorists in Syria. The confirmation by previous articles in Le Monde that the opposition in Syria is in fact Al Qaeda, together with the reluctance of EU partners Germany, Austria, and other countries to openly back the terrorists, has isolated Paris and London, exposing the British and French governments as state sponsors of terrorism.

In January 2013, Russian television station RT published leaked documents from British corporation Britam Defense, which revealed a plan by Qatar to deliver chemical weapons to Homs in Syria, with the aid of Britam Defense. The British company was to provide Ukrainian personnel to act as Russian military advisors in order to implicate the Russian government in the crime. The email suggested that the Qataris were providing ‘enormous’ amounts of money for the plan and that it was approved by Washington. 

The Japhat Al-Nosra terrorist organization has not hidden its desire to gas the Alawite minority in Syria. A video was posted on U Tube on December 4th 2012 showing terrorists testing chemical weapons on rabbits, while vowing to exterminate Alawite Syrians in a similar fashion.

Iran’s Press TV also published a report which showed terrorists using chemical weapons.

As the Western-backed terrorists lose ground to government forces in Syria, the likelihood of further massacres committed by the terrorists and blamed on the Syrian government grows. However, as more and more reports contradict the official media narrative on the Syrian war, the voices of truth are acquiring critical mass, threatening to bring down once and for all NATO’s oppressive media empire.

Jabhat al-Nusra, Obama's & Co's terrorist ally against Syria

Many of Jabhat al-Nusra's members are Syrians who were part of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's Jihadist network fighting the American forces in Iraq. Many of these Syrians remained in Iraq after the withdrawal of American forces, but upon the outbreak of Syrian civil war in 2011, the Islamic State of Iraq sent the Syrian Jihadists and individual Iraqi experts in guerrilla warfare into Syria. A number of meetings were held between October 2011 and January 2012 in Rif Dimashq and Homs where the objectives of the group were determined.

The al-Nusra Front released its first public statement on 24 January 2012 in which they called for armed struggle against the Syrian government. The group claimed responsibility for the 2012 Aleppo bombings, the January 2012 al-Midan bombing, the March 2012 Damascus bombings the murder of journalist Mohammed al-Saeed and possibly the 10 May 2012 Damascus bombing.

Patrick Henningsen: Chemical weapon only miles away from the very hotel that the UN weapons inspector booked into only a few days ago. They see this as a distraction and if we look at the history of this particular region where the attack is set to take place it is very active with Al-Nusra Front and they also have been implicated in using make shifts chlorine bombs in Aleppo back in March, so there is a track record there.

RT: It is still clear why the fingers are being pointed at the Syrian government, because it is the government which has chemical weapons.

PH: All this at this point is innuendo. This is why the UN team is in Damascus to investigate these claims. Unfortunately Washington, London and Paris drew a red line in 2012. They said that if any side deploys chemical weapons then that would be a pretext for a military intervention either by NATO or some sort of coalition force backed by US resolution. Who benefits from a chemical attack in Syria? The opposition benefits. It is quite obvious that the government does not benefit. The opposition benefits because that would be the key to unlock the airstrikes and bombing campaign over Syria, a la Libya. The opposition would like a Libyan-style coalition with NATO in order to force the regime in power out of Damascus. They benefit from any report of chemical attack in Syria.

RT: Al-Arabiya puts the number of killed at more than 600 while other main stream media talk about just dozen of victims. Why is there such a difference?

PH: You have to consider the source. I believe Al-Arabiya has certain affiliations with certain Gulf states who might also have some interest in this particular conflict already so might see a more exaggerated report on different sides. But again, there is no independent verification, it is simply anecdotal and innuendo to this point. But the timing of it is very suspect.

William Engdahl: In the text of (Saudi) Al Arabiya's article we read that the “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said dozens of people were killed, including children, in fierce bombardment.” Now the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) has been the source of every news report negative against the Syrian Assad government since the war began in 2011. More curious about the humanitarian-sounding SOHR is the fact, as uncovered by investigative journalists, that it consists of a sole Syrian refugee who has lived in London for the past 13 years named Rami Abdul Rahman, a Syrian Sunni muslim who owns a clothing shop and is running a Twitter page from his home. Partly owing to a very friendly profile story on the BBC, he gained mainstream media credibility. He is anything but unbiased.

The other aspect of the suspicious reports is the “convenient” fact they coincide with the arrival two days earlier of an official UN weapons inspection team, allowed by the government, to investigate allegations of chemical weapons use in the Syrian war. It begs the most obvious question: What conceivably would Bashar al Assad stand to gain from using banned chemical weapons just at the time he has agreed to let a UN chemical weapons team into Syria? 

Sarin and its distribution

Paul from Allen Vanguard:

How long would it take Sarin to become harmless, or dissipate?  In general terms are we talking minutes, hours, weeks?

This is difficult to answer because of the variables that could exist but Sarin is a non-persistent and highly volatile liquid which disperses and vaporises rapidly dependent on conditions of temperature and air flow.  A single projectile of Sarin fired in a hot, sunny featureless environment during a windy day could feasibly take minutes to dissipate.  At the other end of the spectrum, a sustained bombardment/barrage in an urban area during a period of no wind and no sustained periods of sun would be more likely to create a scenario where pockets of exposed Sarin would last for days, unexposed Sarin could last for weeks and CW UXO could remain in the area for years.



Dan Kaszeta, a US Army Chemical Corps veteran:

Submuntions: A highly effective way of dissemination would be a munition that scattered bomblets or submunitions at some height, with the submunitions designed for ground impact detonation.  Other factors being equal (…but they often aren’t), submunitions are generally considered a more efficient method of dispensing Sarin. 

In Tokyo it had been intended initially to aerosolise but ended up being stabbed bags left to evaporate (which is pretty good due to the speed at which it evaporates).

 The canisters recovered from the scene of the attacks matched canisters also recovered from an attack reported in Sheikh Maqsoud in Aleppo, where there were again claims of them being dropped from a helicopter, with photographs showing the canister remains covered in white-grey powder. 
The same design of canister has also been filmed in a cache of weapons reportedly captured by the Syrian opposition from the Syrian military, and a journalist in Syria has shown the image of the canister to various armed group, many of which have claimed to have seen them in the possession of opposition fighters, claiming to have captured them from the Syrian army.
Another type of grenade, using an identical fuze, was also photographed in Syria, with the photographer being told it was a normal smoke grenade.

 The Russian government has claimed the Syrian opposition was responsible for the Khan al-Assal attack, with a DIY rocket delivering a payload of Sarin. 

What do you think would be involved in putting together a DIY chemical warhead for a DIY rocket?

Crude devices are not that hard. Removal of explosives or whatever payload had been carried, followed by introducing the agent. You would need protective gear and it wouldn’t be very safe doing the filling.
Accuracy would be lost (if a missile) and performance of rockets could be affected by different weight distribution. I don’t really want to go in to too much detail about the how, lest I give ideas or advice, but early CW munitions were very simple.

If you don’t really care where it goes then its achievable.

Considering the Russian government's claim that a DIY rocket was used  in the attack, what would be the most effective dispersal method once the rocket reached it's target? 

Air burst or base ejection were used by military munitions but require more complex fuses. If aimed at hard targets then you’d get a level of dispersal by simple impact, but if it hit the earth then the payload could just get driven in to the earth.




Syrian Rebels use D-30 Howitzers capable of distributing Sarin



The D-30 is a Russian-made 122 mm towed howitzer that first entered service in the 1960s with the Russian army. The D-30 is designed to defeat unsheltered and covered manpower, weapons and military equipment of the enemy at the forward edge of the battle area and to the regiment mission depth. The D-30 has been widely exported and used in wars around the world, notably in the Middle East, and particularly in the Iran-Iraq War.

President al-Assad in an interview by the German Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung after the previous chemical weapons attack:

Had they obtained a single strand of evidence that we had used chemical weapons, do you not think they would have made a song and dance about it to the whole world?, then where is the chain of custody that led them to a such result?

These allegations are ludicrous. The terrorist groups used chemical weapons in Aleppo; subsequently we sent an official letter to the United Nations requesting a formal investigation into the incident. Britain and France blocked this investigation because it would have proven the chemical attacks were carried out by terrorist groups and hence provided conclusive evidence that they (Britain and France) were lying. We invited them to investigate the incident, but instead they wanted the inspectors to have unconditional access to locations across Syria, parallel to what inspectors did in Iraq and delved into other unrelated issues. We are a sovereign state; we have an army and all matters considered classified will never be accessible neither to the UN, nor Britain, nor France. They will only be allowed access to investigate the incident that occurred in Aleppo.

Therefore, all the claims relating to the use of chemical weapons is an extension of the continuous American and Western fabrication of the actual situation in Syria. Its sole aim is to justify their policies to their public opinion and use the claim as a pretext for more military intervention and bloodshed in Syria.

Interviewer: The protests started in Syria peacefully before they turned into an armed struggle. Your critics claim that you could have dealt with the protests through political reforms, which makes you partly responsible for the destruction in Syria. What is your take on this?

President Assad: We started the reforms from the first days of the crisis and, perhaps even to your surprise, they were initiated years before the crisis. We issued a number of new legislations, lifted the emergency law and even changed the constitution through a referendum. This is a well-known fact to the West; yet what the West refuses to see is that from the first weeks of the protests we had policemen killed, so how could such protests have been peaceful? How could those who claim that the protests were peaceful explain the death of these policemen in the first week? Could the chants of protesters actually kill a policeman?

From the beginning of the crisis, we have always reiterated that there were armed militants infiltrating protesters and shooting at the police. On other occasions, these armed militants were in areas close to the protests and shot at both protesters and police forces to lead each side into-believing that they were shot at by the other. This was proven through investigations and confessions, which were publicised on a large scale in the media.

Monday, April 10, 2017

Saudi Arabia gas attacks Syrians (via its support of al-Nusra/Islamic State) and Syrians and Russians get the blame. How come?

Has Trump been "educated" (or "streamlined" into, if you prefer) by the very establishment he came to "clean up"?

How is it even possible that politicians from top nations now wants to go to war based on fake news? There's still no evidence whatsoever, yet firm "conclusions" are drawn.

From a winning formula

to a 'historical turning point' just before the gas attack and due Tomahawk throwing.

What could it be? Assad who got a shortcut in his brain - or a gas attack committed by the islamofascist Saudi dictator family via al-Nusra/Islamic State, for the purpose of getting the upper hand against Iran*?

* All the noise about Putin/Russia is created for the purpose of protecting the most dangerous dictatorship on Earth right now, the islamofascist Saudi steered part of the Arabian peninsula. And the only thing that limits the Saudi hegemony is Putin/Russia and its support of Iran.

Aircrafts in the sky dropping bombs + sarin on the ground = x.

1 x = Syrian aircrafts dropping sarin bombs?
2 x = Syrian aircrafts hitting sarin on the ground?
3 x = sarin delivered from the ground at the same time (e.g. by using ground launced grenades - as IS have loads of - see more further down)?

All of these will look the same. However, number one seems quite unlikely at a time when Assad was already winning both the muslim terrorists as well as a negotiation opening.

So why is Trump attacking Syria without knowing?

The only answer (no matter which x you choose) is the islamofascist Saudi dictator family - backed by Israel and the usual "Western" pack.


Klevius wrote:

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Were Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, US and UK accomplices to the gas attack/s in Syria?

Acknowledgement: Klevius is no fan of Assad. Not only because of the accusation of Syrian involvement in the February 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and support for muslim anti-Jewish terror groups etc, but also because of him being a muslim who happily and shamelessly, like most others, utilizes islam (the worst crime ever against humanity) for his agenda.

And those muslims who don't fit in either category need to face Erdogan, OIC and Human Rights violating Sharia - or admit they are no real muslims

Klevius comment: I for one cannot see the slightest space for political islam in a democratic society based on the belief in Human Rights. Can you?

Not taking responsibility for the evilness in one's ideology is pathetic. Klevius will elaborate on this in the next posting. In a way so most muslims should understand - if they dare to admit it.



Why do Western politicians support islamic terrorists? Is it because Western tax payers are ignorant and misinformed about what islam really is? But the truth is that the victims' bodies are all labeled 'political islam'!

Fly Qatar islamofascism while bowing towards the Saudis

When George W Bush in a week managed to topple Iraq's chemical weapons using dictator Saddam Hussein (whose Sarin victims were counted in tens of thousands) he was spat on by many. However, in Syria everything seems the opposite. The Sarin is used by the terrorists but Obama & Co are asked to topple Assad. How come?! The answer is simple: Saddam was Sunni and Assad is Shia.


The fact that launching indiscriminate biological attacks makes absolutely no sense militarily for Assad means it’s far more likely that such attacks are being staged by rebels – many of whom are being led by Al-Qaeda/Al-Nusra islamic terrorists – with support from the likes of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.

Gearóid Ó Colmáin, Global Research, May 30, 2013: According to a report in Turkey’s state media agency Zaman, agents from the Turkish General Directorate of Security (Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü) ceased 2 kg of sarin gas in the city of Adana in the early hours of yesterday morning. The chemical weapons were in the possession of Al Nusra terrorists believed to have been heading for Syria.

Sarin gas is a colourless, odorless substance which is extremely difficult to detect. The gas is banned under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention.

The EGM identified 12 members of the AL Nusra terrorist cell and also ceased fire arms and digital equipment. This is the second major official confirmation of the use of chemical weapons by

Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria after UN inspector Carla Del Ponte’s recent statement confirming the use of chemical weapons by the Western-backed terrorists in Syria.

The Turkish police are currently conducting further investigations into the operations of Al-Qaeda linked groups in Turkey.

This further confirmation that the Syrian ‘rebels’ are using chemical weapons while also using Turkey as a base of terrorist operations against Syria, could cause further domestic problems for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom Turkish opposition leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu has called the ‘chief of the terrorists’.

The Syrian National Coalition abroad has persisted in accusing the Syrian government of using chemical weapons. The Syrian National Coalition Head of Media Khaled Saleh told Al Jazeera on May 26th that Turkish authorities were certain about the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.

Saleh also claimed that he was in contact with several ‘brigades’ fighting in Syria. Perhaps, Mr. Saleh should be advised to consult the Turkish police now that one of his ‘brigades’ has been arrested in possession of chemical weapons.

Unsurprisingly, this Turkish report failed to make international headlines. From the beginning of the Syrian war, the international press agencies have attempted to portray the Al-Qaeda invasion of Syria as a ‘popular revolution’, which started out as a ‘peaceful protest’ against a ‘brutal regime’. The fact that there was never a modicum of evidence to support such claims has not hindered the avalanche of vituperation and demonization of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad and the Syrian Arab Republic.

France’s daily Le Monde published an ‘exclusive’ report on the 27th of May 2013 which claimed to have ‘proof’ that the Syrian government was using chemical weapons ‘against its own people’. However, the report simply relied on statements by ‘activists’ and ‘rebels’, who most serious commentators have described as unreliable sources of information.

Le Monde’s report came just in time as the French government was pushing the European Union to lift the embargo on arms to the terrorists in Syria. The confirmation by previous articles in Le Monde that the opposition in Syria is in fact Al Qaeda, together with the reluctance of EU partners Germany, Austria, and other countries to openly back the terrorists, has isolated Paris and London, exposing the British and French governments as state sponsors of terrorism.

In January 2013, Russian television station RT published leaked documents from British corporation Britam Defense, which revealed a plan by Qatar to deliver chemical weapons to Homs in Syria, with the aid of Britam Defense. The British company was to provide Ukrainian personnel to act as Russian military advisors in order to implicate the Russian government in the crime. The email suggested that the Qataris were providing ‘enormous’ amounts of money for the plan and that it was approved by Washington. 

The Japhat Al-Nosra terrorist organization has not hidden its desire to gas the Alawite minority in Syria. A video was posted on U Tube on December 4th 2012 showing terrorists testing chemical weapons on rabbits, while vowing to exterminate Alawite Syrians in a similar fashion.

Iran’s Press TV also published a report which showed terrorists using chemical weapons.

As the Western-backed terrorists lose ground to government forces in Syria, the likelihood of further massacres committed by the terrorists and blamed on the Syrian government grows. However, as more and more reports contradict the official media narrative on the Syrian war, the voices of truth are acquiring critical mass, threatening to bring down once and for all NATO’s oppressive media empire.

Jabhat al-Nusra, Obama's & Co's terrorist ally against Syria

Many of Jabhat al-Nusra's members are Syrians who were part of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's Jihadist network fighting the American forces in Iraq. Many of these Syrians remained in Iraq after the withdrawal of American forces, but upon the outbreak of Syrian civil war in 2011, the Islamic State of Iraq sent the Syrian Jihadists and individual Iraqi experts in guerrilla warfare into Syria. A number of meetings were held between October 2011 and January 2012 in Rif Dimashq and Homs where the objectives of the group were determined.

The al-Nusra Front released its first public statement on 24 January 2012 in which they called for armed struggle against the Syrian government. The group claimed responsibility for the 2012 Aleppo bombings, the January 2012 al-Midan bombing, the March 2012 Damascus bombings the murder of journalist Mohammed al-Saeed and possibly the 10 May 2012 Damascus bombing.

Patrick Henningsen: Chemical weapon only miles away from the very hotel that the UN weapons inspector booked into only a few days ago. They see this as a distraction and if we look at the history of this particular region where the attack is set to take place it is very active with Al-Nusra Front and they also have been implicated in using make shifts chlorine bombs in Aleppo back in March, so there is a track record there.

RT: It is still clear why the fingers are being pointed at the Syrian government, because it is the government which has chemical weapons.

PH: All this at this point is innuendo. This is why the UN team is in Damascus to investigate these claims. Unfortunately Washington, London and Paris drew a red line in 2012. They said that if any side deploys chemical weapons then that would be a pretext for a military intervention either by NATO or some sort of coalition force backed by US resolution. Who benefits from a chemical attack in Syria? The opposition benefits. It is quite obvious that the government does not benefit. The opposition benefits because that would be the key to unlock the airstrikes and bombing campaign over Syria, a la Libya. The opposition would like a Libyan-style coalition with NATO in order to force the regime in power out of Damascus. They benefit from any report of chemical attack in Syria.

RT: Al-Arabiya puts the number of killed at more than 600 while other main stream media talk about just dozen of victims. Why is there such a difference?

PH: You have to consider the source. I believe Al-Arabiya has certain affiliations with certain Gulf states who might also have some interest in this particular conflict already so might see a more exaggerated report on different sides. But again, there is no independent verification, it is simply anecdotal and innuendo to this point. But the timing of it is very suspect.

William Engdahl: In the text of (Saudi) Al Arabiya's article we read that the “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said dozens of people were killed, including children, in fierce bombardment.” Now the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) has been the source of every news report negative against the Syrian Assad government since the war began in 2011. More curious about the humanitarian-sounding SOHR is the fact, as uncovered by investigative journalists, that it consists of a sole Syrian refugee who has lived in London for the past 13 years named Rami Abdul Rahman, a Syrian Sunni muslim who owns a clothing shop and is running a Twitter page from his home. Partly owing to a very friendly profile story on the BBC, he gained mainstream media credibility. He is anything but unbiased.

The other aspect of the suspicious reports is the “convenient” fact they coincide with the arrival two days earlier of an official UN weapons inspection team, allowed by the government, to investigate allegations of chemical weapons use in the Syrian war. It begs the most obvious question: What conceivably would Bashar al Assad stand to gain from using banned chemical weapons just at the time he has agreed to let a UN chemical weapons team into Syria? 

Sarin and its distribution

Paul from Allen Vanguard:

How long would it take Sarin to become harmless, or dissipate?  In general terms are we talking minutes, hours, weeks?

This is difficult to answer because of the variables that could exist but Sarin is a non-persistent and highly volatile liquid which disperses and vaporises rapidly dependent on conditions of temperature and air flow.  A single projectile of Sarin fired in a hot, sunny featureless environment during a windy day could feasibly take minutes to dissipate.  At the other end of the spectrum, a sustained bombardment/barrage in an urban area during a period of no wind and no sustained periods of sun would be more likely to create a scenario where pockets of exposed Sarin would last for days, unexposed Sarin could last for weeks and CW UXO could remain in the area for years.



Dan Kaszeta, a US Army Chemical Corps veteran:

Submuntions: A highly effective way of dissemination would be a munition that scattered bomblets or submunitions at some height, with the submunitions designed for ground impact detonation.  Other factors being equal (…but they often aren’t), submunitions are generally considered a more efficient method of dispensing Sarin. 

In Tokyo it had been intended initially to aerosolise but ended up being stabbed bags left to evaporate (which is pretty good due to the speed at which it evaporates).

 The canisters recovered from the scene of the attacks matched canisters also recovered from an attack reported in Sheikh Maqsoud in Aleppo, where there were again claims of them being dropped from a helicopter, with photographs showing the canister remains covered in white-grey powder. 
The same design of canister has also been filmed in a cache of weapons reportedly captured by the Syrian opposition from the Syrian military, and a journalist in Syria has shown the image of the canister to various armed group, many of which have claimed to have seen them in the possession of opposition fighters, claiming to have captured them from the Syrian army.
Another type of grenade, using an identical fuze, was also photographed in Syria, with the photographer being told it was a normal smoke grenade.

 The Russian government has claimed the Syrian opposition was responsible for the Khan al-Assal attack, with a DIY rocket delivering a payload of Sarin. 

What do you think would be involved in putting together a DIY chemical warhead for a DIY rocket?

Crude devices are not that hard. Removal of explosives or whatever payload had been carried, followed by introducing the agent. You would need protective gear and it wouldn’t be very safe doing the filling.
Accuracy would be lost (if a missile) and performance of rockets could be affected by different weight distribution. I don’t really want to go in to too much detail about the how, lest I give ideas or advice, but early CW munitions were very simple.

If you don’t really care where it goes then its achievable.

Considering the Russian government's claim that a DIY rocket was used  in the attack, what would be the most effective dispersal method once the rocket reached it's target? 

Air burst or base ejection were used by military munitions but require more complex fuses. If aimed at hard targets then you’d get a level of dispersal by simple impact, but if it hit the earth then the payload could just get driven in to the earth.




Syrian Rebels use D-30 Howitzers capable of distributing Sarin



The D-30 is a Russian-made 122 mm towed howitzer that first entered service in the 1960s with the Russian army. The D-30 is designed to defeat unsheltered and covered manpower, weapons and military equipment of the enemy at the forward edge of the battle area and to the regiment mission depth. The D-30 has been widely exported and used in wars around the world, notably in the Middle East, and particularly in the Iran-Iraq War.

President al-Assad in an interview by the German Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung after the previous chemical weapons attack:

Had they obtained a single strand of evidence that we had used chemical weapons, do you not think they would have made a song and dance about it to the whole world?, then where is the chain of custody that led them to a such result?

These allegations are ludicrous. The terrorist groups used chemical weapons in Aleppo; subsequently we sent an official letter to the United Nations requesting a formal investigation into the incident. Britain and France blocked this investigation because it would have proven the chemical attacks were carried out by terrorist groups and hence provided conclusive evidence that they (Britain and France) were lying. We invited them to investigate the incident, but instead they wanted the inspectors to have unconditional access to locations across Syria, parallel to what inspectors did in Iraq and delved into other unrelated issues. We are a sovereign state; we have an army and all matters considered classified will never be accessible neither to the UN, nor Britain, nor France. They will only be allowed access to investigate the incident that occurred in Aleppo.

Therefore, all the claims relating to the use of chemical weapons is an extension of the continuous American and Western fabrication of the actual situation in Syria. Its sole aim is to justify their policies to their public opinion and use the claim as a pretext for more military intervention and bloodshed in Syria.

Interviewer: The protests started in Syria peacefully before they turned into an armed struggle. Your critics claim that you could have dealt with the protests through political reforms, which makes you partly responsible for the destruction in Syria. What is your take on this?

President Assad: We started the reforms from the first days of the crisis and, perhaps even to your surprise, they were initiated years before the crisis. We issued a number of new legislations, lifted the emergency law and even changed the constitution through a referendum. This is a well-known fact to the West; yet what the West refuses to see is that from the first weeks of the protests we had policemen killed, so how could such protests have been peaceful? How could those who claim that the protests were peaceful explain the death of these policemen in the first week? Could the chants of protesters actually kill a policeman?

From the beginning of the crisis, we have always reiterated that there were armed militants infiltrating protesters and shooting at the police. On other occasions, these armed militants were in areas close to the protests and shot at both protesters and police forces to lead each side into-believing that they were shot at by the other. This was proven through investigations and confessions, which were publicised on a large scale in the media.

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

The Saudi dictator family is extremely likely responsible for the chemical attacks in Syria - yet their war criminal Hitler "prince" is welcomed and supported. How come?

Theresa May said she wouldn't hesitate to nuke innocent children and women - so why would she hesitate to prolong the suffering in Syria by extending the Saudi initiated war that was just about to end. And she loves Human Rights violating sharia and her "important ally" the islamofascist Saudi dictator.

Klevius: "Reform jihad" means terrorist attacks with a laughter and some "reform" plaster - such as letting some women the right to drive, and letting some people to visit "sharia free" zones.

And the world's worst fake news propaganda media BBC has been completely silent about the Alawites (Shia muslims) murdered, tortured, raped and kept in cages as protection for the Saudi supported Salafist Sunni muslim terrorists' mortar etc. basis. But BBC has a lot of air time used against Facebook - their main competitor they want to kill as they have already killed so many others who they feel threatens BBC's world media monopoly.

Jaysh al-Islam is a coalition of Islamist rebel units involved in the Syrian Civil War. Its primary base of operations has been the Damascus area, particularly the city of Douma and region of Eastern Ghouta. Jaysh al-Islam is the largest rebel faction in the area, as was Liwa al-Islam. The group was a part of the Islamic Front. The organization has rejected membership of the Free Syrian Army. The group along with Ahrar ash-Sham are among the main rebel groups supported by Saudi Arabia. It promotes an Islamic state under Sharia law.

Alleged use of chemical weapons by Saudi supported terrorists

On 7 April 2016, the Sheikh Maqsood neighborhood in Aleppo was shelled with mortars that may have contained chemical agents.[84] On 8 April, a spokesman for the rebel group said that “weapons not authorized for use in these types of confrontations” had been used against Kurdish militia and civilians in Aleppo. He stated that “One of our commanders has unlawfully used a type of weapon that is not included in our list”. He did not specify what substances were used but, according to Kurdish Red Crescent, the symptoms were consistent with the use of chlorine gas or other agents. Welat Memo, a physician with the Kurdish Red Crescent, said that the people affected are "vomiting and having difficulty in breathing."


Klevius wrote:

Monday, March 26, 2018

Who benefits most from recent attacks against Russia (and Corbyn's anti-semitism)? The islamofascist Saudi dictator family and its new Hitler.

Klevius analysis: Russia is the main obstacle for the islamofascist Saudi dictator family's take over of the whole of Mideast. And the war drums are on for the Saudi Hitler. 

How did UN and the West end up in the darkest of caves against those very Human Rights UN and the West had agreed on after the last Hitler?

Dear non-politician readers, how many of you think it's ok to go in bed with our main enemy? An enemy that has countless of times attacked us. An enemy that criminalizes the values we hold as our dearest. An enemy that ticks every box on evilness.


Klevius is utterly ashamed of being a "Westerner" today...

Tuesday, September 18, 2018

While the West betrays Human Rights and parts with the war crimes and terrorism committing islamofascist Saudi dictator family, China has now indirectly become the best* defender of Human Rights?

* China is now following the technological example of Japan (albeit ten times bigger) and serves the world with useful products and development - not destructive weapons sale/military aid, war mongering and attacks helping the islamofascist Saudi dictator family keeping/expanding power as US and UK do. When you hear BBC complaining about China not respecting Human Rights of Saudi backed muslim terrorists, while simultaneously "reporting" such "progress" as women in Saudi dictatorship being allowed to visit football matches (in sex segregated special sections).

Why is the West parting with the worst Human Rights abusers and war criminals while smearing China?!

The problem is islam - and its custodian, the islamofascist Saudi dictator family and the Saudi based and steered OIC.

Could bigotry and hypocrisy get any lower?

Google News today (Tulsi Gabbard inserted by Klevius):

Genocide and cooperation between Judaism and islam.

The origin of islam was plundering and raping booty jihad along Jewish slave trade routes. 

Here's an approximate map of Judaism just before the origin of islam.

And below an approximate map of the violent muslim colonization in the foot steps of the Jewish slave trade routes.

 The above maps could be almost identical if produced with same techniques. This is no coincident but due to the "mysterious" code (the Jews) that made Arab imperialism possible and historical analysis impossible ("mysterious") if not included.  

Except for Khazaria, Jews were more business orientated (mainly slave trade) than eager to waive swords compared to their copycats the Arab Bedouins. However, without wealthy and influential Jews leading the bloodthirsty and illiterate Bedouins (compare Ibn-Khaldun's description) and paving the way for the Arab looters (compare how the Jews used Turkic people in Khazaria in pretty much the same manner) the "Arab conquest" would have quickly dried out in the Arabian sand.

Islam is a late branch of Judaism. Jewish slave trade seamlessly continued and expanded under what came to be called islam. 

Today this schizophrenic ideological connection, which started with Mohammad's genocide of the Jews in Medina, still possesses the same characteristics, now on one hand muslim hate crimes against Jews and on the other hand cooperation, e.g. between the Jewish state of Israel and the islamofascist Saudi dictator family backed by the West.

United Nation mingles with and supports the worst of islamofascists. Why? Because UN, the supposed bastion of Human Rights has been hijacked by 57 islamofascism supporting member states (OIC).

It's reported that the White Helmets NGO has smuggled a large shipment of poisonous substances to Ahrar al-Sham warehouses in Idlib.

Ahrar al-Sham is an islamofascist muslim terrorist organization supported by the islamofascist Saudi dictator family - and UN.



Klevius wrote:

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

The Saudi dictator family is extremely likely responsible for the chemical attacks in Syria - yet their war criminal Hitler "prince" is welcomed and supported. How come?

Theresa May said she wouldn't hesitate to nuke innocent children and women - so why would she hesitate to prolong the suffering in Syria by extending the Saudi initiated war that was just about to end. And she loves Human Rights violating sharia and her "important ally" the islamofascist Saudi dictator.

Klevius: "Reform jihad" means terrorist attacks with a laughter and some "reform" plaster - such as letting some women the right to drive, and letting some people to visit "sharia free" zones.

And the world's worst fake news propaganda media BBC has been completely silent about the Alawites (Shia muslims) murdered, tortured, raped and kept in cages as protection for the Saudi supported Salafist Sunni muslim terrorists' mortar etc. basis. But BBC has a lot of air time used against Facebook - their main competitor they want to kill as they have already killed so many others who they feel threatens BBC's world media monopoly.

Jaysh al-Islam is a coalition of Islamist rebel units involved in the Syrian Civil War. Its primary base of operations has been the Damascus area, particularly the city of Douma and region of Eastern Ghouta. Jaysh al-Islam is the largest rebel faction in the area, as was Liwa al-Islam. The group was a part of the Islamic Front. The organization has rejected membership of the Free Syrian Army. The group along with Ahrar ash-Sham are among the main rebel groups supported by Saudi Arabia. It promotes an Islamic state under Sharia law.

Alleged use of chemical weapons by Saudi supported terrorists

On 7 April 2016, the Sheikh Maqsood neighborhood in Aleppo was shelled with mortars that may have contained chemical agents.[84] On 8 April, a spokesman for the rebel group said that “weapons not authorized for use in these types of confrontations” had been used against Kurdish militia and civilians in Aleppo. He stated that “One of our commanders has unlawfully used a type of weapon that is not included in our list”. He did not specify what substances were used but, according to Kurdish Red Crescent, the symptoms were consistent with the use of chlorine gas or other agents. Welat Memo, a physician with the Kurdish Red Crescent, said that the people affected are "vomiting and having difficulty in breathing."


Klevius wrote:

Monday, March 26, 2018

Who benefits most from recent attacks against Russia (and Corbyn's anti-semitism)? The islamofascist Saudi dictator family and its new Hitler.

Klevius analysis: Russia is the main obstacle for the islamofascist Saudi dictator family's take over of the whole of Mideast. And the war drums are on for the Saudi Hitler. 

How did UN and the West end up in the darkest of caves against those very Human Rights UN and the West had agreed on after the last Hitler?

Dear non-politician readers, how many of you think it's ok to go in bed with our main enemy? An enemy that has countless of times attacked us. An enemy that criminalizes the values we hold as our dearest. An enemy that ticks every box on evilness.


Klevius is utterly ashamed of being a "Westerner" today...


.

Thursday, September 12, 2013

BBC: "our* correspondent in Maaloula has seen statues in churches which were left undamaged". Klevius: Really!

* As BBC is extremely biased in favor of Sunni Saudi islamists in these matters, it would make no sense if their chosen correspondent wouldn't be equally biased.


Update: Voices from Maaloula

Maaloula's two famous monasteries were saved, but that two village churches, one Orthodox, the other Eastern-Rite Catholic, had been ransacked. The churches still existed -- kind of.

"On the inside, the icons, the holy books, everything had been desecrated. Not just ripped off the walls, but covered in urine," said Bishop Basil. Obviously, this must be seen as "real desecration -- by that wing of the Free Syrian Army."


Update: Islamist opposition uses land - land rockets in addition to sarin gas

Syrian security official confirmed Tuesday that the armed opposition militants have locally manufactured land - land rockets in addition to sarin gas, in the wake of the UN report on alleged use of chemical weapons in an attack on Damascus last month.

"I deny hundred percent the use of the Syrian army to the material," the Syrian official said in the first official reaction after the report.

"There is no justification to resort to this weapon because we are achieve victories on the ground," he stated, noting that "those who resort to this weapon is the defeated party who reached the point of suicide."

The source indicated that the Syrian army "is making progress in all areas, and operations are going according to the plan."

The official also underlined that "the terrorists manufacture land-land rockets locally, and that it is likely that they have put sarin gas in them", in reference to the a Ghota alleged attack in August 21.

"The terrorists know perfectly well how to install the material on missile warheads," the  Syrian official said, adding that they had "received training at the hands of U.S., British and French intelligence experts who are working with them on the ground."



Western, Saudi, Qatar etc sponsored violence in Syria

With Obama's & Co warmongering rhetoric against Syria, prominent Christian figures in Mideast have warned Christians about the extreme danger that islam and its Saudi supported Sunni muslims pose.

The leader of Lebanon’s Free Patriotic Movement, MP Michel Aoun accuses the West of encouraging the collective displacement of Christians by backing the Al-Qaeda affiliated Al-Nusra Front.

Possibly all the Christians living in Maaloula have now fled. Bloudan next?

Christian scholars and others accuse Washington and some European governments of plotting to displace them in exchange for oil and gas.

According to Greek Melkite Patriarch Gregory Laham III, witnesses told that when the rebels moved into Maaloula they threatened Christians with death unless they converted to islam.

Some Christians who fled wrote to the US Congress to alert them of the horror of the attack. They said that members of the Islamist Al-Nusra Front, looted "monasteries and churches, removing sacred images as they went on, ordering residents to convert to islam to save their life".

"I saw people wearing Al-Nusra headbands who started shooting at crosses," one resident said to the AFP news agency. One insurgent "put a pistol to the head of my neighbour and forced him to convert to islam by obliging him to repeat ‘there is no God but [Allah].' Afterwards they joked, ‘He's one of ours now'".

The muslim genocide of Christians, Jews etc in muslim Arab land

Kristen Chick (http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2013/0912/Across-Egypt-piles-of-ash-where-church-pews-once-stood-video): Minya's streets are now lined with burned-out hulks. Church interiors have been reduced to ash. The once-cheerful turquoise exterior of a Christian orphanage is now streaked black from the fire that gutted it. Destroyed wheelchairs sit outside a burned-out Jesuit center that worked with disabled people. Torched schools, shops, and monasteries lie in ruins. On one street, several Christian-owned shops are reduced to scorched rubble. Nearby, an untouched snack shop blares a song that proclaims “Egypt is Islamic.”

As the attacks happened, police did little or nothing to stop them.

For some Christians, the trouble didn't stop when the flames died down. A few days after their church was torched, a neighbor relayed an anonymous threat to Said Botros Attallah and his wife Sahar Atteya Saadallah: Pay 500 Egyptian pounds, or their house would be burned down – with them inside.

Samir Lamei Sakr, a lawyer who focuses on human rights, has already seen his home burned down in the village of Delja, in Minya province. He says there is no going back. He fled to Cairo with his immediate and extended family after mobs attacked their houses, and killed his cousin, dragging his body through the streets behind a vehicle, Mr. Sakr says.

Free Syrian Army muslim rebels and the muslim al-Nusra islamists (both supported by Obama, the Saudis, Qatar etc) have all the time been fighting together against Assad and his government forces. So also in Maaloula where Christians have been forced to flee after having been murdered, and intimidated (incl. forced conversion to islam) by muslims*.

* Yes, idiot! They were muslims, period. And this fact isn't altered by there being some so called "moderate" muslims in the world. On the contrary, this kind of islam excuse is the worst of bigoted hypocrisy. Eating the cake while still having it, i.e. Islam is what connects all muslims,dude!


While contemplating the pic below, do consider the inevitable fact that islam (in any meaningful form) doesn't approve of our most basic universal Human Rights! That's the main pillar of the problem, dude!

So those muslims who don't fit in either category need to face Erdogan, OIC and Human Rights violating Sharia - or admit they are no real muslims.

Klevius comment: I for one cannot see the slightest space for political islam in a democratic society based on the belief in Human Rights. Can you?

What is it you should see behind the islamofascist smile? 1400 years of Koranic genocides and rapetivism?

Islam is an evil ideology, and this evilness is directly connected to its violent and totalitarian origin. And the sooner the world gets its facts right about islam (instead of the all time ongoing and misleading islam propaganda fueled by oil money, racism and sexism) the sooner islam induced criminality/atrocities will decrease in a world with already enough atrocities without islam.

Sunday, March 10, 2024

Peter Klevius warmonger analysis: Israel's seemingly genocide supporter, China hater and pro dollar freeloader US militaristic expansionist hegemony supporter Tom Tugendhat is a serious threat to peace, security and prosperity in UK - and elsewhere!

Tom Tugendhat, the wealthy Jew-ish aristocrat (and apparently not too smart) warmonger who became an MP with the votes from one of UK's tiniest and wealthiest constituencies, and by the help of his deep rooted military and financial connections, plus BBC's frenetic campaign for him (because he fits perfectly BBC's militaristic extremist Sinophobia disinformation agenda).

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa. 

Read Peter Klevius opposite reading and correction of Greenland data compared to researchers biased with climate hysteria.

Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct.

Does Tom Tugendhat unwittingly (hopefully just because of scarce understanding?!) constitute part of the core of Western (read 'dollar thieve US') evil today? 

Tom Tugendhat: I’d never really considered myself Jewish before I entered parliament in 2015. As a Catholic Brit with a French mother and English father the Austrian bit—our name—was a legacy of long ago. At a push, I would have said I was Jew-ish.

Tom Tugendhat: Britain has an opportunity to adapt to the new realities of global foreign affairs. The rise of India, Russia, China, and the Pacific alliance provide new channels of engagement with the world as well as opportunities to promote democracy and liberty (sic*) on a global scale not seen since the height of the British Empire. The problem is that we’re not taking the opportunity presented to us. What it will require is strong national leadership, a clear sense of national purpose, and a reaffirmed commitment to the international rules based order ("rules" forced on the world by dollar embezzler US now desperate dictatorship - Peter Klevius comment). 

* A much bigger share of people in meritocratic China suppoorts the government than does any Western country, and especially not US and UK - not to mnention on how a tiny "democratic" basis Tom Tugendhat slipped into the parliament, and when there then heavily inflated with evil sub-political etc. forces. 

Warmonger Tom Tugendhat was born in Westminster, London, the son of Sir Michael Tugendhat, a High Court judge and his French-born wife Blandine de Loisne. He is a nephew of Lord Tugendhat, a businessman, former Vice President of the European Commission and Conservative Party politician.

He was educated at St Paul's School, London, an all-boys private school, before studying theology at the University of Bristol. Tugendhat then did a Master's degree course in Islamic studies at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, and learning Arabic in Yemen. Following university, he briefly served as a journalist at the Lebanese newspaper The Daily Star.

Tugendhat was elected as the Member of Parliament for Tonbridge and Malling, a safe Conservative seat in Kent, at the 2015 general election. In 2013, Tugendhat was selected as the Conservative Party candidate for Tonbridge and Malling in an open primary. At the 2015 general election, Tugendhat was elected as MP for Tonbridge and Malling, winning with 59% of the few votes.

Tugendhat voted against Brexit, supporting continued membership of the European Union in the 2016 referendum. He voted in favour of the withdrawal agreement negotiated by Theresa May's government on each of the three occasions it was put to a vote.

At the snap 2017 general election, Tugendhat was re-elected but seeing his majority decrease.

On 12 July 2017, Tugendhat was elected chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, becoming the youngest person to hold the post. After the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury by a nerve agent, Tugendhat said the attack was "if not an act of war (...) certainly a warlike act by the Russian Federation".

Peter Klevius: So what was dollar embezzler (since 1971-) US murdering of Iran's presidential candidate?!

In February 2018, Tugendhat praised Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman: "He is rightly showing a vision for Saudi Arabia that sees her taking her place as a player in the global economy and I think that is incredibly positive, not just for Saudi Arabia, but for the world."

Peter Klevius: So the Saudi dictator family's spread of Salafist terror on the  street of UK and around the wprld didn't bother you - but China's peaceful and infrastructure building BRI technological success is somthing you consider the biggest threat! 

Under Tugendhat's chairmanship the Foreign Affairs Committee focused on British foreign policy priorities after Brexit, such as "the implications" of China's growing role in the international system.

Peter Klevius: Can I hear Uncle Sam's master voice behind this mouse squeak?!

At the 2019 general election, Tugendhat was again re-elected.

In January 2022, he stated he would consider running for the office of Prime Minister if Boris Johnson stood down. So BBC took Boris down so to pave the way. 

Tom Tugendhat suggested expelling all Russian citizens from the UK.

On 6 September 2022, he was appointed Minister of State for Security in the Home Office as part of Liz Truss's cabinet.[

Peter Klevius: An equally clever move by China hater Truss as her "plan" for UK economy.

He was retained in this role by the Sunak government.

Peter Klevius: Probably to satisfy the warmonger extremists in the party who questioned weather Sunak was enough Sinophobic.

In this role he continued taking a hawkish position on the People's Republic of China and, equally, the PRC has maintained travel bans against him. On the order by dollar freeloader (since 1971-) US Tugendhat commissioned the National Cyber Security Centre to investigate ways that TikTok may compromise UK's national security.

Tugendhat also, again on suggestion by UK's master Sam, decided to join official talks with a government minister of Taiwan, breaking convention, in June 2023, on the topic of mutual "security interests".

Peter Klevius: Read 'US wish to weaken China!

On 29 May 2018, Tugendhat set out his own views on UK foreign policy in a speech at the Royal United Services Institute. He advocated giving the FCO greater powers to determine overall foreign policy strategy.

Peter Klevius: The Foreign, Commonwealth Office is "promoting British interests worldwide" (sic). Doesn't every country want to "promote its interests" worldwide - and does it via diplomacy and a foreign office?! Should China also have a (much more deserved) "Chinese common wealth" worldwide?! The idea is of course a copy of dollar embezzler (since 1971-) US "American interest". But China isn't even allowed to have peaceful and deeply important philosophical teachings by Confucius (551 – c. 479 BCE)

in the same universities where Saudi sponsored Human Rights violating sharia is accepted.

In a recorded conversation with American politician Mike Gallagher, Tugendhat gave an off-the-cuff outline of his foreign policy outlook as "trying to defend the world in which the values that matter to the people of Kent, prosper. 

In April 2020, Tugendhat founded the "China Research Group" alongside fellow Conservative MP Neil O'Brien. 

Peter Klevius: The only appropriate name wold be China hate group!

The group was formed to gain a "better understanding of China's economic ambitions and global role". This is to include Huawei's role in the UK's 5G network (see: Concerns over Chinese involvement in 5G wireless networks), China's "COVID-19 disinformation campaign", and its foreign policy, in particular its relations with poorer regions of the world.

Peter Klevius: This was all on order by US and led to Boris Johnson having to get rid of his beloved Huawei phome!

Tugendhat is considered to be a China hawk in the House of Commons, alongside Bob Seely and Sir Iain Duncan Smith.

Tugendhat is a strong supporter of Israel. He condemned the United Nations Security Council for its official criticism of Israel's building settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories. In January 2017, he wrote that the Israeli–Palestinian conflict "doesn't matter" to the protestors of the Arab Spring, and concluded that "Why was Israel-Palestine more pressing than other disputed territories such as Western Sahara, Kashmir or Tibet? It isn't.

Tugendhat was a participant at the 30 May–2 June 2019 Bilderberg Meeting in Montreux, Switzerland, and the 2-5 June 2022 Bilderberg meeting in Washington, D.C.

In the wake of the Fall of Kabul in August 2021, Tugendhat described the event in The Times as Britain's "biggest foreign policy disaster since Suez". 

Peter Klevius: So why is he so eager creating new such disasters?!

Tugendhat holds dual British and French citizenship. His wife Anissia is a French judge and senior civil servant.

Peter Klevius: Yhat means he could be deported on the grounds that his actions aren't conducive to the public good of UK. Unless, of course, he deletes his foreign citizenship.

Tugendhat is a Roman Catholic who identifies with Jewish people. His paternal grandfather was an Austrian Jewish emigrant, from Vienna, who converted to Roman Catholicism. Following the December 2019 general election, Tugendhat criticised the antisemitism he had faced during the campaign: "It was a campaign that wasn't always as clean as previous ones. For the first time I faced antisemitism, which I found particularly offensive and very surprising for a community like this and frankly rather distasteful. It's very un-Tonbridge, it's very un-Kent and it's very un-British.

Peter Klevius: I thought it was very "British" to abuse religious tensions by supporting "British interests" no matter which side it hurts - while keeping babbling about "tolerance", anti-semitism and "islamophobia". Monotheist religion is the cancer of Mideast and the West. The extremist variants murder and terrorize each other, but when pressed, always stick together against the free world based on (negative) Human Rights! 

On 17 November 2022 at Westminster Magistrates' Court, Tugendhat was banned from driving for six months after he was caught driving with his mobile phone in his hand on 14 April 2022. He received six points on his licence for the offence, in addition to six he already had for two previous driving offences. He was also ordered to pay a £1,000 fine, a surcharge of £100 and costs of £110. In a written guilty plea, Tugendhat said he was holding the phone but not using it and had later taken a driving course.

Peter Klevius: Why wasn't he deported because of repeated and extremely dangerous behavior?! After all, even a minor crime can be enough to deport a dual citizen. Peter Klevius has only once (when he was young) made a traffic violation - and that was only because the garage which should have replaced both front shock absorbers but only changed one without telling, which caused the car to go in the terrain in a sandy curve (but with no one else involved except Peter and his daughter in the car). After taht Peter Klevius drove without any flaws for decades on slippery dark roads and city traffic without doing any such stupid things as Tugendhat. Peter Klevius bought his first mobile 1991 and also had it hanging by the steering wheel but never using it while driving, because Peter Klevius IQ 200+ has made him an extreme coward because he imagines all kinds of threats to safety most people don't.

 

Why be an abused "ally" to a desperate and therefore dangerous Devil (US criminal fight to keep its stolen dollar hegemony - to whatever price) instead of supporting peace and prosperity?!

US Hegemony and Its Perils

February 2023

Contents

Introduction

I. Political Hegemony—Throwing Its Weight Around

II. Military Hegemony—Wanton Use of Force 

III. Economic Hegemony—Looting and Exploitation

IV. Technological Hegemony—Monopoly and Suppression

V. Cultural Hegemony—Spreading False Narratives

Conclusion


Introduction

Since becoming the world's most powerful country after the two world wars and the Cold War, the United States has acted more boldly to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, pursue, maintain and abuse hegemony, advance subversion and infiltration, and willfully wage wars, bringing harm to the international community.

The United States has developed a hegemonic playbook to stage "color revolutions," instigate regional disputes, and even directly launch wars under the guise of promoting democracy, freedom and human rights. Clinging to the Cold War mentality, the United States has ramped up bloc politics and stoked conflict and confrontation. It has overstretched the concept of national security, abused export controls and forced unilateral sanctions upon others. It has taken a selective approach to international law and rules, utilizing or discarding them as it sees fit, and has sought to impose rules that serve its own interests in the name of upholding a "rules-based international order."

This report, by presenting the relevant facts, seeks to expose the U.S. abuse of hegemony in the political, military, economic, financial, technological and cultural fields, and to draw greater international attention to the perils of the U.S. practices to world peace and stability and the well-being of all peoples.

I. Political Hegemony -- Throwing Its Weight Around

The United States has long been attempting to mold other countries and the world order with its own values and political system in the name of promoting democracy and human rights.

◆ Instances of U.S. interference in other countries' internal affairs abound. In the name of "promoting democracy," the United States practiced a "Neo-Monroe Doctrine" in Latin America, instigated "color revolutions" in Eurasia, and orchestrated the "Arab Spring" in West Asia and North Africa, bringing chaos and disaster to many countries.

In 1823, the United States announced the Monroe Doctrine. While touting an "America for the Americans," what it truly wanted was an "America for the United States."

Since then, the policies of successive U.S. governments toward Latin America and the Caribbean Region have been riddled with political interference, military intervention and regime subversion. From its 61-year hostility toward and blockade of Cuba to its overthrow of the Allende government of Chile, U.S. policy on this region has been built on one maxim-those who submit will prosper; those who resist shall perish.

The year 2003 marked the beginning of a succession of "color revolutions" -- the "Rose Revolution" in Georgia, the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine and the "Tulip Revolution" in Kyrgyzstan. The U.S. Department of State openly admitted playing a "central role" in these "regime changes." The United States also interfered in the internal affairs of the Philippines, ousting President Ferdinand Marcos Sr. in 1986 and President Joseph Estrada in 2001 through the so-called "People Power Revolutions."

In January 2023, former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo released his new book Never Give an Inch: Fighting for the America I Love. He revealed in it that the United States had plotted to intervene in Venezuela. The plan was to force the Maduro government to reach an agreement with the opposition, deprive Venezuela of its ability to sell oil and gold for foreign exchange, exert high pressure on its economy, and influence the 2018 presidential election.

◆ The U.S. exercises double standards on international rules. Placing its self-interest first, the United States has walked away from international treaties and organizations, and put its domestic law above international law. In April 2017, the Trump administration announced that it would cut off all U.S. funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) with the excuse that the organization "supports, or participates in the management of a programme of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization." The United States quit UNESCO twice in 1984 and 2017. In 2017, it announced leaving the Paris Agreement on climate change. In 2018, it announced its exit from the UN Human Rights Council, citing the organization's "bias" against Israel and failure to protect human rights effectively. In 2019, the United States announced its withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty to seek unfettered development of advanced weapons. In 2020, it announced pulling out of the Treaty on Open Skies.

The United States has also been a stumbling block to biological arms control by opposing negotiations on a verification protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) and impeding international verification of countries' activities relating to biological weapons. As the only country in possession of a chemical weapons stockpile, the United States has repeatedly delayed the destruction of chemical weapons and remained reluctant in fulfilling its obligations. It has become the biggest obstacle to realizing "a world free of chemical weapons."

◆ The United States is piecing together small blocs through its alliance system. It has been forcing an "Indo-Pacific Strategy" onto the Asia-Pacific region, assembling exclusive clubs like the Five Eyes, the Quad and AUKUS, and forcing regional countries to take sides. Such practices are essentially meant to create division in the region, stoke confrontation and undermine peace.

◆ The U.S. arbitrarily passes judgment on democracy in other countries, and fabricates a false narrative of "democracy versus authoritarianism" to incite estrangement, division, rivalry and confrontation. In December 2021, the United States hosted the first "Summit for Democracy," which drew criticism and opposition from many countries for making a mockery of the spirit of democracy and dividing the world. In March 2023, the United States will host another "Summit for Democracy," which remains unwelcome and will again find no support.

II. Military Hegemony -- Wanton Use of Force

The history of the United States is characterized by violence and expansion. Since it gained independence in 1776, the United States has constantly sought expansion by force: it slaughtered Indians, invaded Canada, waged a war against Mexico, instigated the American-Spanish War, and annexed Hawaii. After World War II, the wars either provoked or launched by the United States included the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the War in Afghanistan, the Iraq War, the Libyan War and the Syrian War, abusing its military hegemony to pave the way for expansionist objectives. In recent years, the U.S. average annual military budget has exceeded 700 billion U.S. dollars, accounting for 40 percent of the world's total, more than the 15 countries behind it combined. The United States has about 800 overseas military bases, with 173,000 troops deployed in 159 countries.

According to the book America Invades: How We've Invaded or been Militarily Involved with almost Every Country on Earth, the United States has fought or been militarily involved with almost all the 190-odd countries recognized by the United Nations with only three exceptions. The three countries were "spared" because the United States did not find them on the map.

◆ As former U.S. President Jimmy Carter put it, the United States is undoubtedly the most warlike nation in the history of the world. According to a Tufts University report, "Introducing the Military Intervention Project: A new Dataset on U.S. Military Interventions, 1776-2019," the United States undertook nearly 400 military interventions globally between those years, 34 percent of which were in Latin America and the Caribbean, 23 percent in East Asia and the Pacific, 14 percent in the Middle East and North Africa, and 13 percent in Europe. Currently, its military intervention in the Middle East and North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa is on the rise.

Alex Lo, a South China Morning Post columnist, pointed out that the United States has rarely distinguished between diplomacy and war since its founding. It overthrew democratically elected governments in many developing countries in the 20th century and immediately replaced them with pro-American puppet regimes. Today, in Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan and Yemen, the United States is repeating its old tactics of waging proxy, low-intensity, and drone wars.

◆ U.S. military hegemony has caused humanitarian tragedies. Since 2001, the wars and military operations launched by the United States in the name of fighting terrorism have claimed over 900,000 lives with some 335,000 of them civilians, injured millions and displaced tens of millions. The 2003 Iraq War resulted in some 200,000 to 250,000 civilian deaths, including over 16,000 directly killed by the U.S. military, and left more than a million homeless.

The United States has created 37 million refugees around the world. Since 2012, the number of Syrian refugees alone has increased tenfold. Between 2016 and 2019, 33,584 civilian deaths were documented in the Syrian fightings, including 3,833 killed by U.S.-led coalition bombings, half of them women and children. The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) reported on 9 November 2018 that the air strikes launched by U.S. forces on Raqqa alone killed 1,600 Syrian civilians.

The two-decades-long war in Afghanistan devastated the country. A total of 47,000 Afghan civilians and 66,000 to 69,000 Afghan soldiers and police officers unrelated to the September 11 attacks were killed in U.S. military operations, and more than 10 million people were displaced. The war in Afghanistan destroyed the foundation of economic development there and plunged the Afghan people into destitution. After the "Kabul debacle" in 2021, the United States announced that it would freeze some 9.5 billion dollars in assets belonging to the Afghan central bank, a move considered as "pure looting."

In September 2022, Turkish Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu commented at a rally that the United States has waged a proxy war in Syria, turned Afghanistan into an opium field and heroin factory, thrown Pakistan into turmoil, and left Libya in incessant civil unrest. The United States does whatever it takes to rob and enslave the people of any country with underground resources.

The United States has also adopted appalling methods in war. During the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the War in Afghanistan and the Iraq War, the United States used massive quantities of chemical and biological weapons as well as cluster bombs, fuel-air bombs, graphite bombs and depleted uranium bombs, causing enormous damage on civilian facilities, countless civilian casualties and lasting environmental pollution.

III. Economic Hegemony -- Looting and Exploitation

After World War II, the United States led efforts to set up the Bretton Woods System, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which, together with the Marshall Plan, formed the international monetary system centered around the U.S. dollar. In addition, the United States has also established institutional hegemony in the international economic and financial sector by manipulating the weighted voting systems, rules and arrangements of international organizations including "approval by 85 percent majority," and its domestic trade laws and regulations. By taking advantage of the dollar's status as the major international reserve currency, the United States is basically collecting "seigniorage" from around the world; and using its control over international organizations, it coerces other countries into serving America's political and economic strategy.

◆ The United States exploits the world's wealth with the help of "seigniorage." It costs only about 17 cents to produce a 100 dollar bill, but other countries had to pony up 100 dollar of actual goods in order to obtain one. It was pointed out more than half a century ago, that the United States enjoyed exorbitant privilege and deficit without tears created by its dollar, and used the worthless paper note to plunder the resources and factories of other nations.

◆ The hegemony of U.S. dollar is the main source of instability and uncertainty in the world economy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States abused its global financial hegemony and injected trillions of dollars into the global market, leaving other countries, especially emerging economies, to pay the price. In 2022, the Fed ended its ultra-easy monetary policy and turned to aggressive interest rate hike, causing turmoil in the international financial market and substantial depreciation of other currencies such as the Euro, many of which dropped to a 20-year low. As a result, a large number of developing countries were challenged by high inflation, currency depreciation and capital outflows. This was exactly what Nixon's secretary of the treasury John Connally once remarked, with self-satisfaction yet sharp precision, that "the dollar is our currency, but it is your problem."

◆ With its control over international economic and financial organizations, the United States imposes additional conditions to their assistance to other countries. In order to reduce obstacles to U.S. capital inflow and speculation, the recipient countries are required to advance financial liberalization and open up financial markets so that their economic policies would fall in line with America's strategy. According to the Review of International Political Economy, along with the 1,550 debt relief programs extended by the IMF to its 131 member countries from 1985 to 2014, as many as 55,465 additional political conditions had been attached.

◆ The United States willfully suppresses its opponents with economic coercion. In the 1980s, to eliminate the economic threat posed by Japan, and to control and use the latter in service of America's strategic goal of confronting the Soviet Union and dominating the world, the United States leveraged its hegemonic financial power against Japan, and concluded the Plaza Accord. As a result, Yen was pushed up, and Japan was pressed to open up its financial market and reform its financial system. The Plaza Accord dealt a heavy blow to the growth momentum of the Japanese economy, leaving Japan to what was later called "three lost decades."

◆ America's economic and financial hegemony has become a geopolitical weapon. Doubling down on unilateral sanctions and "long-arm jurisdiction," the United States has enacted such domestic laws as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, and the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, and introduced a series of executive orders to sanction specific countries, organizations or individuals. Statistics show that U.S. sanctions against foreign entities increased by 933 percent from 2000 to 2021. The Trump administration alone has imposed more than 3,900 sanctions, which means three sanctions per day. So far, the United States had or has imposed economic sanctions on nearly 40 countries across the world, including Cuba, China, Russia, the DPRK, Iran and Venezuela, affecting nearly half of the world's population. "The United States of America" has turned itself into "the United States of Sanctions." And "long-arm jurisdiction" has been reduced to nothing but a tool for the United States to use its means of state power to suppress economic competitors and interfere in normal international business. This is a serious departure from the principles of liberal market economy that the United States has long boasted.

IV. Technological Hegemony -- Monopoly and Suppression

The United States seeks to deter other countries' scientific, technological and economic development by wielding monopoly power, suppression measures and technology restrictions in high-tech fields.

◆ The United States monopolizes intellectual property in the name of protection. Taking advantage of the weak position of other countries, especially developing ones, on intellectual property rights and the institutional vacancy in relevant fields, the United States reaps excessive profits through monopoly. In 1994, the United States pushed forward the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), forcing the Americanized process and standards in intellectual property protection in an attempt to solidify its monopoly on technology.

In the 1980s, to contain the development of Japan's semiconductor industry, the United States launched the "301" investigation, built bargaining power in bilateral negotiations through multilateral agreements, threatened to label Japan as conducting unfair trade, and imposed retaliatory tariffs, forcing Japan to sign the U.S.-Japan Semiconductor Agreement. As a result, Japanese semiconductor enterprises were almost completely driven out of global competition, and their market share dropped from 50 percent to 10 percent. Meanwhile, with the support of the U.S. government, a large number of U.S. semiconductor enterprises took the opportunity and grabbed larger market share.

◆ The United States politicizes, weaponizes technological issues and uses them as ideological tools. Overstretching the concept of national security, the United States mobilized state power to suppress and sanction Chinese company Huawei, restricted the entry of Huawei products into the U.S. market, cut off its supply of chips and operating systems, and coerced other countries to ban Huawei from undertaking local 5G network construction. It even talked Canada into unwarrantedly detaining Huawei's CFO Meng Wanzhou for nearly three years.

The United States has fabricated a slew of excuses to clamp down on China's high-tech enterprises with global competitiveness, and has put more than 1,000 Chinese enterprises on sanction lists. In addition, the United States has also imposed controls on biotechnology, artificial intelligence and other high-end technologies, reinforced export restrictions, tightened investment screening, suppressed Chinese social media apps such as TikTok and WeChat, and lobbied the Netherlands and Japan to restrict exports of chips and related equipment or technology to China.

The United States has also practiced double standards in its policy on China-related technological professionals. To sideline and suppress Chinese researchers, since June 2018, visa validity has been shortened for Chinese students majoring in certain high-tech-related disciplines, repeated cases have occurred where Chinese scholars and students going to the United States for exchange programs and study were unjustifiably denied and harassed, and large-scale investigation on Chinese scholars working in the United States was carried out.

◆ The United States solidifies its technological monopoly in the name of protecting democracy. By building small blocs on technology such as the "chips alliance" and "clean network," the United States has put "democracy" and "human rights" labels on high-technology, and turned technological issues into political and ideological issues, so as to fabricate excuses for its technological blockade against other countries. In May 2019, the United States enlisted 32 countries to the Prague 5G Security Conference in the Czech Republic and issued the Prague Proposal in an attempt to exclude China's 5G products. In April 2020, then U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the "5G clean path," a plan designed to build technological alliance in the 5G field with partners bonded by their shared ideology on democracy and the need to protect "cyber security." The measures, in essence, are the U.S. attempts to maintain its technological hegemony through technological alliances.

◆ The United States abuses its technological hegemony by carrying out cyber attacks and eavesdropping. The United States has long been notorious as an "empire of hackers," blamed for its rampant acts of cyber theft around the world. It has all kinds of means to enforce pervasive cyber attacks and surveillance, including using analog base station signals to access mobile phones for data theft, manipulating mobile apps, infiltrating cloud servers, and stealing through undersea cables. The list goes on.

U.S. surveillance is indiscriminate. All can be targets of its surveillance, be they rivals or allies, even leaders of allied countries such as former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and several French Presidents. Cyber surveillance and attacks launched by the United States such as "Prism," "Dirtbox," "Irritant Horn" and "Telescreen Operation" are all proof that the United States is closely monitoring its allies and partners. Such eavesdropping on allies and partners has already caused worldwide outrage. Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, a website that has exposed U.S. surveillance programs, said that "do not expect a global surveillance superpower to act with honor or respect. There is only one rule: there are no rules."

V. Cultural Hegemony -- Spreading False Narratives

The global expansion of American culture is an important part of its external strategy. The United States has often used cultural tools to strengthen and maintain its hegemony in the world.

◆ The United States embeds American values in its products such as movies. American values and lifestyle are a tied product to its movies and TV shows, publications, media content, and programs by the government-funded non-profit cultural institutions. It thus shapes a cultural and public opinion space in which American culture reigns and maintains cultural hegemony. In his article The Americanization of the World, John Yemma, an American scholar, exposed the real weapons in U.S. cultural expansion: the Hollywood, the image design factories on Madison Avenue and the production lines of Mattel Company and Coca-Cola.

There are various vehicles the United States uses to keep its cultural hegemony. American movies are the most used; they now occupy more than 70 percent of the world's market share. The United States skilfully exploits its cultural diversity to appeal to various ethnicities. When Hollywood movies descend on the world, they scream the American values tied to them.

◆ American cultural hegemony not only shows itself in "direct intervention," but also in "media infiltration" and as "a trumpet for the world." U.S.-dominated Western media has a particularly important role in shaping global public opinion in favor of U.S. meddling in the internal affairs of other countries.

The U.S. government strictly censors all social media companies and demands their obedience. Twitter CEO Elon Musk admitted on 27 December 2022 that all social media platforms work with the U.S. government to censor content, reported Fox Business Network. Public opinion in the United States is subject to government intervention to restrict all unfavorable remarks. Google often makes pages disappear.

U.S. Department of Defense manipulates social media. In December 2022, The Intercept, an independent U.S. investigative website, revealed that in July 2017, U.S. Central Command official Nathaniel Kahler instructed Twitter's public policy team to augment the presence of 52 Arabic-language accounts on a list he sent, six of which were to be given priority. One of the six was dedicated to justifying U.S. drone attacks in Yemen, such as by claiming that the attacks were precise and killed only terrorists, not civilians. Following Kahler's directive, Twitter put those Arabic-language accounts on a "white list" to amplify certain messages.

◆The United States practices double standards on the freedom of the press. It brutally suppresses and silences media of other countries by various means. The United States and Europe bar mainstream Russian media such as Russia Today and the Sputnik from their countries. Platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube openly restrict official accounts of Russia. Netflix, Apple and Google have removed Russian channels and applications from their services and app stores. Unprecedented draconian censorship is imposed on Russia-related contents.

◆The United States abuses its cultural hegemony to instigate "peaceful evolution" in socialist countries. It sets up news media and cultural outfits targeting socialist countries. It pours staggering amounts of public funds into radio and TV networks to support their ideological infiltration, and these mouthpieces bombard socialist countries in dozens of languages with inflammatory propaganda day and night.

The United States uses misinformation as a spear to attack other countries, and has built an industrial chain around it: there are groups and individuals making up stories, and peddling them worldwide to mislead public opinion with the support of nearly limitless financial resources.

Conclusion

While a just cause wins its champion wide support, an unjust one condemns its pursuer to be an outcast. The hegemonic, domineering, and bullying practices of using strength to intimidate the weak, taking from others by force and subterfuge, and playing zero-sum games are exerting grave harm. The historical trends of peace, development, cooperation, and mutual benefit are unstoppable. The United States has been overriding truth with its power and trampling justice to serve self-interest. These unilateral, egoistic and regressive hegemonic practices have drawn growing, intense criticism and opposition from the international community.

Countries need to respect each other and treat each other as equals. Big countries should behave in a manner befitting their status and take the lead in pursuing a new model of state-to-state relations featuring dialogue and partnership, not confrontation or alliance. China opposes all forms of hegemonism and power politics, and rejects interference in other countries' internal affairs. The United States must conduct serious soul-searching. It must critically examine what it has done, let go of its arrogance and prejudice, and quit its hegemonic, domineering and bullying practices.