Wednesday, May 15, 2024

Unfurling Love from the Window


A banner and a name remind student protesters for whom they are fighting


On April 30, when Columbia University student protesters took over Hamilton Hall, they renamed it “Hind’s Hall,” dropping a large banner out the windows above the building’s entrance. This was a hall famously occupied by students in the 1968 protests against the Vietnam War and against Jim Crow racism in the United States. The students are risking suspension and expulsion, and a very real blacklist has already been generated against them, with Congress joining in to define criticism of genocide as a form of antisemitism that state universities and state-linked employers will not be allowed to tolerate.

I believe their love for Hind Rajab guides the movement so desperately needed to resist militarism. Hind was six years old when Israel used U.S.-supplied weapons to kill her.

If our civilization survives a looming ecological collapse that is helping to drive catastrophic nuclear brinkmanship, I hope future generations of students will study the “Hind’s Hall” occupation in the way that students of the civil rights movement have studied the Edmund Pettus Bridge and the story of Emmett Till. Hind’s story is tragically emblematic. Her cruel murder has befallen many thousands of children throughout the decades of Israel’s fight to maintain apartheid. Just in our young century, from September 2000 to September 2023, Israel’s B’tselem organization reports that 2,309 Palestinian minors were killed by Israelis and some 145 Israeli minors were killed by Palestinians, with these numbers excluding Palestinian children dead from deliberate immiseration via blockade or traumatized as hostages in prisons. We hear reports that thirty-eight Israeli children and some 14,000 Palestinian children have been murdered since October 7, deaths which can all be laid on the doorstep of the ethnostate project so lethally determined to keep one ethnicity in undemocratic governance.

No six-year-old poses any threat to anyone. Like the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children starved to death during the U.S. imposition of economic sanctions against Iraq, none of these children could be held accountable for the actions of their government or military.

Hind Rajab committed no crime, but she was made to watch her family die and wait for death surrounded by their corpses. When the ambulance crew asked safe passage to come rescue her, she was used as bait to kill them as well. Her story must be remembered and told over and over.

As Jeffrey St. Clair writes, Hind was a little girl who liked to dress up as a princess. She lived in the neighborhood of Tel al-Hawa, an area south of Gaza City.

“Hind Rajab was in her own city when the invaders in tanks came,” St. Clair notes. “What was left of it . . . Hind’s own kindergarten, from which she’d recently graduated, had been blown up, as had so many other schools, places of learning, places of shelter and places of safety in Gaza City.”

On January 29, when the Israelis ordered people to evacuate, her mother, Wissam Hamada, and an older sibling set off on foot. Hind joined her uncle, aunt, and three cousins who traveled in a black Kia automobile.

The uncle placed a call to a relative in Germany which initiated the family’s contact with the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS). After the initial connection with the PRCS switchboard, the car was targeted and hit, killing Hind’s uncle, her aunt, and two of her cousins.

Hind and her fifteen-year-old cousin, Layan, were the only survivors.

Switchboard operators handling the phone contact with Layan had immediately notified ambulance workers that the little girls needed to be rescued.

But it would have been suicidal for a rescue crew to enter the area without first working out coordinates with the Israeli military.

Similar to the World Central Kitchen workers killed on Monday, April 1, they waited hours for the coordinated rescue plan.

On the audio tape shared by the PRCS workers, Layan’s petrified voice can be heard. The tank is coming closer. She is so scared. A blast is heard and Layan no longer speaks. PRCS workers call back and Hind answers.

She pleads, “Please come and get me. I’m so scared.”

St. Clair writes, “The [PRCS] dispatched an ambulance crewed by two paramedics: Ahmed al-Madhoon and Youssef Zeino. As Ahmed and Youssef approached the Tel al-Hawa area, they reported to the Red Crescent dispatchers that the IDF was targeting them, and that snipers had pointed lasers at the ambulance. Then there was the sound of gunfire and an explosion. The line went silent.”

The tank-fired M830A1 missile remnant found nearby had been manufactured in the United States by a subsidiary of the Day and Zimmermann Corporation. Day and Zimmermann prides itself on having once received the U.S. National “Family Business of the Year” award—an Internet search for the award chiefly produces references to this company. The company states that it believes in civic and community service, with core values of safety and integrity; emphasizing their success as a team that hits its targets. But since last October, their business has been killing families like Hind’s.

Although Israel predictably insists that Layan and Hind, and the additional slain paramedics, were all lying with their final breaths and that no IDF tanks were present to attack them, Al Jazeera’s analysis of satellite images taken at midday on January 29 corroborates the victims’ accounts and puts at least three Israeli tanks just 270 meters (886 feet) from the family’s car, with their guns pointed at it.

When rescuers were finally allowed to approach the remains of Hind and her family on February 10, the car was riddled with bullet holes likely coming from more than one direction.

Hind’s mother couldn’t go to the site until February 12.

On May 5, Israel raided the offices of Al Jazeera at the Ambassador Hotel in Jerusalem and moved to shut down the television network’s operations in Israel.

To remember Hind’s story is an act of resistance. Commemorating her short life builds resolve to confront profiteers who benefit from developing, manufacturing, storing, and selling the weapons that prolong wars—robbing children of their precious right to live.

Universities should, in theory, be places to learn things of importance, and we can learn from the students of Hind Hall to throw comfort and ambition out the window while keeping hold of love, as the students clung to that banner and to the name of Hind Rajab. We can learn to keep hold of our humanity. We learn by doing, as these students are learning to do, drawing wisdom from people like Phil Berrigan who famously said, “Don’t get tired!”

The list of Gaza solidarity encampments grows each day. Conscious of increasing famine in Gaza, students at Princeton University launched a water-only fast on May 4 as they continue to call for their University to divest from corporations selling weapons to Israel. The United Nations warns of a potential collapse of aid delivery to Palestinians with Israel’s May 7 closure of the two main crossings into Gaza. These crossings are critical entry points for food, medicine, and other supplies for Gaza’s 2.3 million people. The disruptions come at a time when officials say northern Gaza is experiencing a “full-blown famine.

With thousands of innocent lives in the balance, promoters of peace should take advantage of this crucial opportunity to follow the young people, learning alongside the students whose hunger for humanity reveals stunning courage.

 Hind Rajab (Image provided, family photo)

Palestinian Red Crescent Society ambulance crew (Photo Credit: PCRS)

• This article first appeared in The Progressive MagazineFacebook

Kathy Kelly (kathy.vcnv@gmail.com) is the board president of World BEYOND War (worldbeyondwar.org) and a co-coordinator of the Merchants of Death War Crimes Tribunal. (merchantsofdeath.org) Read other articles by Kathy.

 

Western Media Ignites War on China in Sports


Western accusations of doping by Chinese swimmers threaten to exacerbate China-US tensions, undermine the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) and seriously harm the upcoming Paris Olympics.

The controversy was ignited by investigation reports at the New York Times and  German TV broadcaster ARD.  These media outlets suggest there has been a cover-up of a mass doping incident among Chinese top swimmers with connivance of  the Chinese Anti Doping Agency (CHINADA) and complicity from the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA).  This story served as red meat to the hyper aggressive leader of the US Anti Doping Agency (USADA), Travis Tygart.  It has prompted western swimming competitors to loudly complain. For example, the NY Times reports that US team swimmer Paige Madden thinks medals from the Tokyo Olympics should be reallocated. “I feel that Team USA was cheated.”  British swimmer James Guy says, “Ban them all and never compete again.” What might be considered whining and poor sportsmanship is effectively being encouraged by western media.

The NY Times and ARD are the same two media that precipitated the accusations of “state sponsored doping” in Russia. It did enormous damage to thousands of Russian athletes and resulted in different levels of banning starting with the Rio Olympics in 2016.  Although widely accepted as “truth” in the West, the claims of widespread Russian doping were weak when evidence was required.  Most Russian athletes who challenged their banning were exonerated. The major accusers, the Stepanovs and Grigory Rodchenkov, were themselves guilty of doping and profiting from doping. Despite this, the banning has continued and escalated after the Russian intervention in Ukraine.  The accusations and banning were useful in propelling the “new cold war” and “new McCarthyism”.

NYT and ARD, and their anonymous informants, may be seeking to do something similar to China.  USADA has issued a response in which they say China may be engaging in “systematic doping” under a  “coordinated doping regime”. On May 6 USADA’s Tygart escalated his attacks. He implies the Paris Olympics will be a “train wreck” because of WADA complicity in China’s “cheating”. He hopes the US government will “step in and help lead and fix this.”  Surely a recipe for success.

What happened

On Jan 1  – 3 in 2021, the Chinese swim team was having a domestic swim meet. It was in the midst of covid lockdown.  As usual, the team was drug tested but this time a strange thing happened: many swimmers tested positive for a trace amount of the banned medication trimetazadine (TMZ).

The China Anti Doping Agency (CHINADA) investigated and reported the facts to the World Anti Doping Agency as required.  They found:

* 23 swimmers tested positive for a very small amount of trimetazadine (TMZ)

* the swimmers were from different regions of China with different coaches and trainers

* all 23 were staying at the same hotel eating in the same dining room

* none of the swimmers staying at a different hotel tested positive

* some of the swimmers tested positive one day, negative the next

* tests in the hotel kitchen showed the presence of  TMZ on the air vent and counters

CHINADA concluded the positive TMZ tests were from hotel food and the athletes were not at fault.

They reported the incident and investigation to the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) and the international swimming federation now known as World Aquatics (formerly FINA). Both organizations examined the facts and agreed with the findings.

Because the athletes were deemed to have no fault, the incident and names of the athletes were not publicized. WADA regulations indicate that there should be no publicity or naming of athletes deemed innocent and without an “Anti Doping Rule Violation” (ADRV).

How it has been reported

 Approximately a year later, in 2022,  anonymous sources reported this incident to the NY Times and ARD.  Since then, the two media outlets have done further investigation but kept the story secret until two weeks ago.

They suggest something shady happened back in early 2021. They suggest WADA may be complicit in covering up anti doping violations. They almost encourage western athletes to challenge the Chinese swimming accomplishments and be “angry”. On April 20 the story was “Top Chinese Swimmers Tested Positive for Banned Drug, Then Won Olympic Gold“. On April 21 the story was “‘Team USA Was Cheated’: Chinese Doping Case Exposes Rift in Swimming“. On April 22 the story was “Top Biden Official Calls for Inquiry Into Chinese Doping Case.”

These reports ignited a flood of other sensational and accusatory reports and editorials. The Guardian report is titled “Poison in the pool: why the latest Chinese doping row is proving so toxic.” Sports Yahoo says, “Extremely concerned Olympians will not let the Chinese doping allegations die.” The PBS News Hour had a video report titled, “Chinese doping ‘swept under the carpet’: US anti-doping chief says.” Sports Illustrated said the news may alter the distribution of medals from the 2021 Tokyo Olympics.

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation is looking into the situation.

The NY Times and ARD say they have been investigating this story for two years. The release appears timed to have maximum impact and possible damage, just months before the Paris Olympics.   

USADA accuses WADA  

The US Anti Doping Agency (USADA) is led by the hyper-aggressive Travis Tyler. He has used the reports to claim that WADA is complicit in a Chinese “cover-up”.  In a TV interview before a large national audience Tygart said, “China didn’t follow the rules. They effectively swept this under the carpet because they didn’t find a violation. They didn’t announce a violation. They didn’t disqualify the athletes from the event at which they tested positive. And this is absolutely mandatory under the world anti-doping code that all nations are required to follow.”

WADA has responded that Tygart’s comments seem “politically motivated”.  They say CHINADA followed the rules, investigated and reported as required.  They say China did NOT have to announce it to the world, or name the individual athletes for the very good reason that false accusations of doping can destroy a career. WADA regulations say the names of athletes should NOT be publicized until or unless it is confirmed they have an Anti Doping Rule Violation. 

WADA appoints independent investigator

WADA is the international organization charged with supervising global anti-doping in sports. With its headquarters in Canada and most of its leaders from NATO countries, it is a largely western organization.

They are highly sensitive to criticism from the West. It has pushed back against some of the most extreme criticism, for example from the USADA head. They have also appointed an independent investigator to review what happened in China and whether WADA was correct to accept the Chinese investigation and report.

WADA appointed Eric Cottier, the prosecutor general of a Swiss region. WADA headquarters are in Canada but the organization is registered in Switzerland. USADA has criticized the appointment suggesting that Cottier is not sufficiently “independent”.

Thoms Bach, head of the International Olympic Committee, has voiced support for WADA.

WADA has defended their actions in a press conference and fact sheet about the case.

The controversy may quiet down. But a lot of poison has been spread around. Encouraged by the NY Times and other media,  numerous western athletes now claim they feel “cheated” out of medals at the Tokyo Olympics since 5 medals were won by Chinese swimmers involved in the  TMZ “doping scandal”.

It is also possible the controversy will continue. Will the “Sports Czar” of the Biden Administration get involved? Will the FBI be designated to investigate?  These are now possible in the wake of the Rodchenkov Anti Doping Act which passed Congress in 2020.

Reader comments following articles indicate there is a wellspring of anti-China hostility encouraged by the accusations. The most popular comment on this article says, “When will democracies learn that authoritarian regimes play dirty, and should be viewed as suspect not deserving of good faith.”  Another says,”No one knows doping like China knows doping, China knows doping best.”  Another one says, “China cheats. Russia cheats. Just like the East Germans did before them. Their governments will meet the same fate as they did.”

Pushback  

There has been some pushback to the sensational anti-China accusations. For example, Denis Cotterell is a world class coach who has trained both  Australian and Chinese Olympic swimmers. He has spoken out strongly in support of the Chinese swimmers. He says, “I can see what they (the swimmers) go through. I see the measures… The suggestion that it’s systemic is so far from anything I have seen here the whole time. They are so adamant on having clean sport.”

An insightful article from an Australian academic sports authority and popular sports commentator suggests there are political forces at work: “WADA – like the United Nations and other organizations – finds itself in the cross hairs of the great power struggle of our time: a rising China and its challenge to US dominance.” 

Geopolitical Consequences

According to the “2024 Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community”, China is “challenging longstanding rules of the international system as well as U.S. primacy within it.” China’s positive “international image” is a challenge to U.S. leadership. By this logic, it is in the US interests to damage China’s international reputation and standing.

This raises the question: How did the TMZ get into the hotel kitchen and into the food being served to these Chinese athletes?

In February 2022, accusations of intentional doping were heaped on the Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva. A trace amount of trimetazadine (TMZ) was detected in a drug test taken seven weeks before the Beijing Olympics.  There are similarities to the Chinese case: same drug, same trace amount detected, same mystery as to how it was ingested.

Because she could not explain how it got there, Valieva was condemned in the West and ultimately had her international career destroyed. The Russian figure skating sweep was prevented and the Russian team lost their gold medals.  The controversy distracted and partially ruined the Beijing Olympics. The “intelligence community” undoubtedly considers this a success.

How did the TMZ get in the hotel kitchen in China?  Who are the “whistle blowers” who informed the New York Times and ARD and supplied the names of the athletes who tested positive for the trace amount of TMZ?

The anti doping crusade is being manipulated  by powerful forces with ignoble intentions.Facebook

Rick Sterling is an investigative journalist in the SF Bay Area. He can be reached at rsterling1@protonmail.comRead other articles by Rick.

 

Violate, Violations, and Violence

V against victory

No end to the twists and turns in the genocide of the Palestinian people. Violate the ground they possess, commit violations against the body they possess, and provoke them into violence. The coordination of using the “V” words to prevent victory applies to the suppression of those who fight for the sanctity of life, against oppression, and for the peace and comfort of everyone.

Images and reports of the campus protests against those assisting and abetting in the genocide of the Palestinian people did not show violence by the campus campers — no bloody faces, no prostrate corpses, no images of broken windows, no sticks and stones to break bones — not until police arrived to unsettle and beat the protestors, and counter-demonstrators violated their rest, committed violations against the barriers that politely separated them from the public, and impolitely provoked the protestors into countering the violence committed upon them.

Faulty strategy by the counter-protestors. Marches, congregations, and protests generally aren’t “big news” after the first day. Front-page news needs thrills, excitement, sensation. Front page news adores violence. The violence provoked by counter-protestors gave the campus protestors a space on the front page and an introduction to a wider audience.

Who are the protestors? They are dedicated people who want those who enable genocide to disinvest from their investment in the slaughter of innocents.

Who are the counter-protestors? They are unlawful people who defend Israel’s genocide.

Who should government and law favor and protect? In the hypocritical American democratic system, genocide is selective, those who seek the contemporary genocide are favored and those who combat the genocide are thwarted. The genocide of the Palestinian people, certified by United Nations (UN) Human Rights officials as genocide, is selected by US government officials as not genocide, not even to be regarded as a serious oppression of innocent people. One difference between UN Human Rights officials and US government officials — the former does not follow the Zionist agenda and the latter promotes it.

Rather than call in the National Guard to shoot up the campus, as was done at the 1970 Kent State protest, where the Ohio National Guard fired on students and ended the Vietnam War demonstrations, a propped-up Joe Biden read from a Zionist-prepared script.

Not a peaceful process and against the law… People have the right to get an education, the right to get a degree, the right to walk across the campus safely without fear of being attacked… No place for anti-Semitism or threats of violence against Jewish students, no place for islamophobia, no place for racism in America.

President Biden indirectly said, “We will allow the police and counter-demonstrators to forcibly remove those against the genocide and return the campuses to the control of the genocide perpetrators and those assisting in the genocide.” By changing the nature of the campus protests from being against genocide to harboring racism, the US president informed all citizens that we should disregard the genocide and bring contemporary genocidal maniacs and contemporary genocide victims together and this will do away with the racism that has caused the genocide. Biden should read the New York Times observations of the violence at UCLA, which shows all violence committed by counter-protestors while the police stand by and permit the violence. His attitude and the speed with which police have attempted to squash the campus protests has a comparison — student protest at Tiananmen Square.

Tiananmen Square

On April 22, 1989, the day of former CCP general secretary Hu Yaobang’s funeral, tens of thousands of students gathered in Tiananmen Square to mourn his death. From this assembly merged a petition for a meeting between student representatives and government officials to discuss government corruption and more freedom of assembly and speech for the masses. Three meetings were held between the demonstrators and government officials and no agreement was obtained. One of these was a nationally televised meeting between Prime Minister (PM) Li Peng and leaders of the students’ movement. I recall viewing the televised broadcast and remember student leaders were confusing and contradictory in their demands and Li Peng was confused at what he was hearing.

In a gesture of conciliation, PM Li Peng and Communist Party leader, Zhao Ziyang, went to Tiananmen Square and talked with hunger strikers. According to the official New China News Agency, Communist Party leader Zhao told the students, ”You have good intentions. You want our country to become better. The problems you have raised will eventually be resolved. But things are complicated, and there must be a process to resolve these problems.” Prime Minister Li Peng concluded that chaos in Beijing was spreading all over the country and demanded that the students refrain from further demonstrations.

For 44 days, up to one million students and citizens, some from Taiwan, occupied the Square and its surroundings, slept in tents, littered China’s most important Plaza with refuse and rubble, prevented tourists from exploring, and detoured Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev to “an obscure back entrance into China’s Great Hall of the People for what was planned as a solemn ceremony marking the first Sino-Soviet summit in three decades.” During that time, no police interfered within the Square, no protestor was arrested, and no violence occurred.

Several times, unarmed Chinese troops (PLA) tried to reach Tiananmen Square and convince the demonstrators to leave. From television reports of those days, which were before the Internet and are difficult to reestablish today, I remember unarmed Chinese soldiers in buses being attacked as they moved toward Tiananmen Square. The buses were set on fire with soldiers unable to evacuate; other unarmed soldiers were badly beaten. An infamous photo of an incinerated PLA soldier was an unpleasant image. Rather than publish the disturbing image I have given it a link.

On June 4, 1989, with martial law in effect and no other means to dislodge the crowd from Tiananmen Square, Chinese troops entered Beijing and fought their way to the Square. The rest is history, severely distorted by Western media, which claimed thousands were killed at Tiananmen Square when no students were killed in the Square. The few hundred fatalities were civilians on the avenue leading to Tiananmen Square, shot by PLA forces who retaliated against those who attacked them and blocked their passage, and soldiers killed by anti-government citizens.

Comparison of China’s (PRC) response to the Tiananmen Square protest and US response to campus protests reveals the hypocrisy of US democratic action.

  • Student protestors exercised freedom of assembly and camped out in China’s main square for 44 days. Chinese police did not interfere. US police arrived on US campuses only a few days after the protestors camped out on university grounds. Freedom of assembly is fruitless without a place to assemble. Where else can students assemble other than on their campus?
  • Top officials of the PRC met and dialogued with the students, one time at Tiananmen Square and three times in Beijing. No American government official met with any of the students. Without the voice receiving a response from those to whom the speech is directed, free speech is only a word. It is a voice in the wilderness when controlled media masks the expressions.
  • Student protestors at Tiananmen faulted their government’s domestic policies; they wanted more freedoms for themselves ─ a subjective petition. Student protestors at US campuses faulted their government’s foreign policy; they wanted their government not to assist in denying the ultimate freedom to a human being, the freedom to live ─ an objective petition
  • Tiananmen had other dissidents, who had grievances against the government and supported the students’ demands. Students may have disagreed on tactics but no counter-demonstrators or provocateurs appeared in the square. The Chinese respected the student demands and their right to protest. The US protests featured counter-demonstrators supporting a foreign government and eager to provoke. Elements of the US public did not respect the student demands and their right to protest. Videos show many of the counter-protesters wearing pro-Israel slogans on their clothing, playing Israel’s national anthem, and singing an Israeli song about the Israel Defense Forces’ campaign in Gaza. The media promoted a ridiculous assertion that Hamas influenced the students and did not publicize Israelis’ role in the counter-demonstrations.
  • The PLA performed brutally in its objective of clearing Tiananmen Square of all inhabitants. Considering martial law had been declared and resistance to their march to the square caused the casualties, the troops’ brutality was proportioned by the wounds inflicted upon them. In the US colleges, police were brutal and that brutality was not proportional to the wounds inflicted upon them.

Conclusion

Government and public response to the protests reveal much about the nation where the protests occur. The campus protests showed the courage of America’s new generation, the apathy of the US public, and the treachery of the US government ─ the downfall of America.

The encounter between the campus protestors and the counter-protestors at the UCLA campus tells the story. A protest against genocide can solicit questions, and maybe arguments, but no sane human being forcibly counters those who demonstrate against a genocide. A deceptive treachery of dismantling a most valid demonstration by considering it anti-Semitic because it prevented a few students from attending class is incredulous. Observing LA Police standing aside while counter-demonstrators representing a foreign nation, beat, intimidate, and provoke American youth indicates the US has no leadership; it is influenced by a foreign power.

The Zionists saw the WWII massacre of Jews as their most opportune moment ─ use the genocide to convince the world that Jews were not safe without their own nation. Anytime, anyone complains about Israel’s deceptions and oppressions, bring in media stooges to publicize the WWII genocide and use the opportunity to denigrate the complaint as anti-Semitic. The next step has the ADL raise an alarm of redundant and manipulated statistics showing a rapid growth in anti-Semitism ─ Jews are in trouble and need protection. Attention to Israeli Jews’ oppression of the Palestinians is sidetracked by attention to spurious anti-Semitism.

The hundreds murdered each day by Israeli Jews are considered less significant than the one or two Jewish persons who have received rude remarks from American youth. The deaths of the Palestinians, similar to the deaths of the WWII European Jews, have been perverted and used to reinforce the belief in a Zionist mission of helping well-educated, well-positioned, and well-established Jews escape spurious anti-Semitism. This hides the truth of the Zionist mission ─ seizing all Palestinian land and resources and expelling and murdering the Palestinian community.

As soon as the campus demonstrations started, the Zionists did what they always do, turned a negative into an opportunity. The demonstrations have been shadowed by false charges of a spontaneous hatred of Jews, the same Jews who are responsible for the genocide. The Jews who deserve animosity for their participation in the genocide are now the victims of those rallying against the genocide. Growing hatred of innocent Jews is now the topic.

The campus demonstrations have stirred the world but have been prevented from accomplishing their purpose of changing US foreign policy ─ stop aiding and abetting Israel in the genocide. Just the opposite, with false charges of massive “anti-Semitism” promoted by Israel’s stooges and invading the conscience of the Western world, Israel has its green light to commit genocide of the Palestinians.

I am against my country’s revolutionaries
Wounding a sheath of wheat

Against the child
Any child
Carrying a hand grenade

I am against my sister
Feeling the muscle of a gun
Against it all
And yet

What can a prophet do to a prophetess
When their eyes
Are mad to drink
The sight of the raiders’ hordes?

I am against boys becoming
Heroes at ten

Against the tree flowering Explosives
Against branches becoming scaffolds
Against the rose-beds turning to trenches
Against it all

And yet When fire cremates my friends My youth And country
How can I Stop a poem from becoming a gun?

“Opposition” by Rashid HussainFacebookTwitter

Dan Lieberman publishes commentaries on foreign policy, economics, and politics at substack.com.  He is author of the non-fiction books A Third Party Can Succeed in AmericaNot until They Were GoneThink Tanks of DCThe Artistry of a Dog, and a novel: The Victory (under a pen name, David L. McWellan). Read other articles by Dan.

Time to End the Proposed WHO Treaty Now

And if you want to cuddle a cow, please do so

A letter signed by every single Republican Senator demands that President Biden withdraw US support from the proposed Pandemic Treaty and IHR Amendments. The Senators call upon Biden to:

  1. Withdraw support for the current IHR amendments and pandemic treaty negotiations.
  2. Shift focus to comprehensive WHO reforms that address its persistent failures without expanding its authority.
  3. Should Biden ignore this advice, the Senators demand that President Biden submit any pandemic-related agreement to the Senate for its advice and consent.


The full letter with all of the signatures can be found here.

There was a House bill introduced (HR1425) titled: “No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act”. This bill would have established that any convention or agreement on pandemic-related issues reached by the World Health Assembly (WHA) shall be deemed to be a treaty requiring the advice and consent of the Senate.

Unfortunately, the bill was sent to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, which never voted on it. Near as I can tell, this has essentially killed that pending legislation. This is called a pocket-veto.

Congressman Michael McCaul is the chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee. If you wish to contact him to discover when HR 1425 will be voted on, so it can be released out of committee- please follow this link. To find your Congressional member to ask them to support HR1425, go here.

For a list of other House Foreign Affairs Committee members to ask them to support HR1425 getting out of committee, go here.

Senator Ron Johnson introduced Bill S.444 in March 2023, which is the companion to the above. The bill had 49 co-sponsors (all republicans). The Committee on Foreign Relations has also pocket-vetoed this bill, as it never left the committee. Also, consider reaching out to your senator or the committee to voice your concerns.

Please also reach out to both sides of the aisle. Even a single vote from “the other side” would make all the difference for passing HR1425 and S444.


In the WHO’s 75-year history, only been one legally binding treaty has been agreed upon, and that was a tobacco control treaty in 2003. There is very little precedence for this treaty, and it is time to end WHO’s power grab now.


On a completely different topic.

You can’t make this stuff up.

Reuters: Paying farmers to snuggle up with half-ton heifers is all the rage in the United States thanks to social media. For visitors, cuddling dairy or beef cattle can be therapeutic, or simply an adventure for city dwellers looking for good old country fun.

But this practice of opening the barn door to the public is facing a new risk, as the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed bird flu in dairy herds in nine states.

FYI – anyone who is “cow cuddling” as a hobby or for kicks and giggles, please be aware the government is feeding you more disinformation. It is extremely hard to get bird flu from hugging or working with cattle. This is fear porn. Most likely this fear porn is to create a need for an mRNA influenza vaccine coming to a Walmart near you…

In the meantime, out of 330 million people in the USA – there has only been ONE non-lethal case of bovine H5N1 (avian influenza)- only one human case has been linked to this outbreak in dairy cows, which was reported by Texas on April 1, 2024. It is extremely hard for humans to contract H5N1. End of story.Facebook

Robert W Malone MD, MS is president of the Malone Institute whose mission is to bring back integrity to the biological sciences and medicine. The Malone Institute supports and conducts research, education, and informational activities. Contact: info@maloneinstitute.orgRead other articles by Robert, or visit Robert's website.

 

The Plot to Kill JFK


A review of The JFK Assassination Chokeholds That Inescapably Prove There Was A Conspiracy

During my many years of teaching at different universities, nearly all my colleagues insisted that Lee Harvey Oswald alone assassinated President Kennedy, even while the general public questioned such a conclusion.  This disparity between gown and town always amused and informed me that something in the “higher education” world was low indeed.  Despite the fact that we agreed on many political matters, my academic colleagues laughed at all my writing and courses that presented overwhelming evidence that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK, led by the Central Intelligence Agency.  They reveled in their certitude, good humored as it was, but refused to research the matter.  They were smug.

Here is an excellent book that, if they would read it with open minds, would, as its subtitle says – inescapably prove that there was a conspiracy – and if Jack Ruby had not killed Oswald and he had been given a fair trial, Oswald would have been acquitted.  Written by James DiEugenio, Paul Bleau, Matt Crumpton, Andrew Iler, and Mark Adamczyk, The JFK Assassination Chokeholds lives up to its claim and then some.

For most readers of the general public, the amount of information it contains that proves the official version of the assassination is clearly false may be overwhelming, but for anyone with any scholarly pretensions or who has a particular interest in the JFK assassination, this book is essential.  It will last a long time as a key historical document.  For the general reader, one or two chapters should suffice to convince them that the authors have emphatically proven their points.  And to grasp these points and fully realize that President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by elements of his own government led by the CIA and that the mass media were accessories after the fact to this terrible crime – to let this really sink in – well, nothing is more important in understanding what is going on today.

The five authors, two prominent JFK researchers (most notably Jim DiEugenio) and three attorneys, combine forces to create a volume backed by 700 references that provides ten different arguments, or chokeholds, that prove “1. There was a conspiracy in the murder of JFK, and 2. That the chokehold issues provide more than a reasonable doubt that would have made it impossible to convict Lee Harvey Oswald in a criminal trial.”

By chokeholds they mean a body of evidence that leads to an indisputable conclusion since their lists of evidence are so powerful.  Additionally, they further their arguments through the concept of consilience: “That even if one element cannot prove a fact on its own, the concordance of evidence from unrelated sources converges on a conclusion.”

From beginning to end, through each of the ten chapters in between, they build and build and build their case so powerfully, not through conjecture but with solid confirmed evidence, that by the time one is finished reading, it is impossible to not realize that the assassination of the president was a government hit job and that Oswald was exactly what he said – “a patsy.”  If like me, you need no convincing and believe that engaging in pseudo-debates about the assassination only plays into the hands of the killers – as if to say we don’t yet know the truth – you still should read this excellent book with admiration for the authors’ thoroughness and unique method of argumentation.

The evidence presented throughout has been accumulated for 60 years, not just by official government investigations but by independent researchers, accelerated greatly due to Oliver Stone’s brilliant 1991 film, JFK, that forced the U.S. government to pass the 1992 JFK Assassination Records Collection Act and then in 1994 the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) that resulted in the declassification of tens of thousands of documents.

If a reader just read Chapter 7, “The Evidentiary Mess of the Twentieth Century,” by James DiEugenio, a chapter of just 16 pages but supported by 47 footnotes about the medical evidence and the official autopsy, one would immediately realize that only government officials were capable of patching up the back of Kennedy’s head wound to make it appear intact and forging photos to conceal the massive cavity caused by a bullet from the front.  That conspiracy about the larger conspiracy is all a reasonable person needs to know to prove the assassination was a government operation from beginning to end, and that Oswald did not kill John Kennedy.

But the book contains chapter after chapter like that one.

Chapter 1  – “ The Official Record Impeaches the Warren Commission” – by JFK researcher Paul Bleau opens the book with a thorough review of all the official investigations that demolishes any remaining pretense that even government officials believe the Warren Commission’s fictions.  He writes after reviewing them:

The overwhelming consensus that there were serious flaws with the Warren Commission conclusions and that there was a likely conspiracy does not come from independent authors who are trying to sell books. It comes from written reports of subsequent investigations and the statements of a very significant cross-section of over 90 insiders that participated in the investigations including the Warren Commission: Senators (some Republican, some Democrats), legal counsel, staff members, attorneys, researchers, medical personnel, autopsy physicians, historians, archivists, investigators, jury members, FBI, DPD and Louisiana State law enforcement agents. These include some of the highest-ranking members of the Warren Commission, Church and HSCA committees and the ARRB.

Bleau follows this up in Chapter 2, “Oswald’s Intelligence Connections: He Was No Lone Nut,” with a wealth of details showing that Oswald, a Marine trained in the Russian language and U2 spy plane technology, was a false defector to the Soviet Union as part of a CIA program; that his last attempted call from the Dallas jail was to a former Special Agent in U.S. Army Counterintelligence; that he had contacts with 64 plausible or definite intelligence assets such as David Ferrie, Guy Bannister, George de Mohrenschildt, David Atlee Philips, et al.  The evidence presented completely debunks the lone nut propaganda proffered by the Warren Commission and all its media accomplices such as The New York TimesCBS, Life magazine, etc.

In addition to the work of JFK researchers DiEugenio and Bleau, the attorney authors – Crumpton, Ller, and Adamczyk – contribute in ways that focus on legal arguments that would clearly lead to an acquittal for Oswald if he ever had been given a real trial.  They make clear that Oswald had to be killed by Jack Ruby who was “on a mission” for the government conspirators to prevent that from happening.  It is, as far as I know, the only book that offers that ingenious legal angle on the assassination.

Matt Crumpton writes about all the times Oswald was impersonated when he was elsewhere, for which there is vast evidence, and which would never have happened if he were a lone crazy assassin.  Crumpton’s tale about Ralph Yates and his testimony about the impersonator of Oswald with the “curtain rods” and his treatment by the FBI which led to his abuse with 40 shock treatments will make your blood boil.  Crumpton writes:

Ralph Yates is where the analysis of the case really starts to diverge between the conspiracy researchers and lone gunman researchers. For people who are suspicious of Oswald acting alone, the Yates story is a showstopper. The Feds committed this man to a mental institution without due process all because he told what was an inconvenient truth.

It is elementary, My Dear Watson, that if Oswald was being impersonated many times and there were double Oswalds, even “seven separate claims” when the real Oswald was in the Soviet Union, then there was a sophisticated conspiracy run by others using Oswald.  Crumpton writes:

There is no plausible reason why a lone gunman would be impersonated so many times. The frequency of these instances clearly increased in the days, weeks and months before the assassination, and also on the day of the assassination, which clearly shows a designed plot to lay the blame on Oswald within hours of the assassination.

The JFK Assassination Chokeholds covers other key matters: why Oswald could not have been on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository when the shots were fired, how the single bullet claim is absurd, the official lies about Jack Ruby and why he killed Oswald, the prior plots to kill JFK, the overwhelming evidence for a frontal shot, Presidents Trump and Biden’s continuing refusal to abide by the JFK Records Act and release all the files, and the media’s ongoing complicity in the coverup, etc.

It is so comprehensive and thoroughly convincing in its evidence and logic that anyone reading it – unless they were dishonest and in bad faith – would have to admit that these chokeholds should silence once and for all anyone claiming that Oswald was a lone nut who assassinated President Kennedy.

Ironically, the evidence and argument of this excellent volume actually refute its concluding sentence:

This is why this case cries out for a new investigation.

While the book is terrific, I must say I do not agree that we need a new investigation.  The facts have long been clear: President Kennedy was assassinated by the U.S. National Security State led by the CIA.  What we need to do is draw the implications from that fact.  They are profound.



Edward Curtin writes and his work appears widely. He is the author of Seeking Truth in a Country of Lies. Read other articles by Edward, or visit Edward's website.