Vince Dhimos answered a question at Quora.
WHY WOULD THE US BRIEF NATO ABOUT THE RUSSIAN BOUNTIES IF IT WERE A HOAX?
Vince Dhimos Editor-in-Chief at New Silk Strategies (2016–present)
Because by filing this unconfirmed report of an alleged Russian bounty offered for killing Americans in Afghanistan, the Democrats can gain propaganda benefits for the upcoming election by suggesting that Trump was in on this improbable plot. Notifying NATO is nonsense because the US controls NATO so that alliance would definitely already know about this rumour, and US media have already reported that the Pentagon can find no corroborating evidence that Russia paid the Taliban to kill Americans. Further, the killing of Americans is not consistent with the MO of the Russian Federation, which has never taken such drastic steps and always tries to stay away from direct skirmishes with the Americans – as they have done, for example, in Syria.
Narratives casting Russia in a bad light and pretending that the alleged bad things Russia is doing are facilitated by Trump are designed to garner votes from low information voters in November and that is the motive for this unconfirmed report from an unnamed source.
The fabrication of anti-Russian rumours was to be expected and various commentators in Russia warned it would happen in the run-up to the US November elections. They also warn of more to come simply due to these elections which the NYT, among others, hopes to throw to the Democrats.
When you consider this totally irrelevant propaganda plus the totally irrelevant blame game of Trump vs China, it is obvious that US politicians – both Republicans and Democrats – have no real platform and no strategy for dealing with the unpayable irresponsible debt and poor economic numbers and are trying to focus the public’s mind on side issues that do not affect their lives and interests.
This silly game points to the abject failure of Western government, which is necessarily focused on votes and not on solving real-world problems like the pandemic or the catastrophically failing economy, which in a sane and rational world would be tackled by a unified government with both parties pulling together. It’s not going to get better because this focus on side issues instead of the welfare of Americans and this bitter acrimony between the political parties is now an integral part of the US political process and there are no incentives to breaking with this slimy tradition.
In the long run, we can expect a big crack-up in the US Establishment, and the pandemic has been a catalyst for this.
But what if the bounty story is true you say?
Have we forgotten that it was the CIA — under Carter — that birthed the Taliban as a terrorist organization in a thoughtless attempt to weaken Russia’s influence in Afghanistan and the region? This reckless move led to the longest-lasting military quagmire in US history. And the CIA did exactly what the biased news agencies are now claiming the Russians have done but without a stitch of proof! The best solution by far would be to ally with the Russians in Afghanistan, but that would be politically impossible in our twisted Washington-dominated world. After all, NATO’s main raison d’être is to supposedly protect Europe from Russia, though that is nothing but a scam to extort billions of dollars from Europe in the form of membership fees and sales of US-made overpriced arms. Therefore, while any sane person would advocate for a US-Russia partnership, politics stands in the way and always will thanks to a sclerotic, permanent political culture of corruption (See here) and a 24/7 anti-Russian propaganda campaign in the collaborating msm that has unthinking Americans going right along with the charade.
Thus, the US is being its old hypocritical self, blaming Russia for supposedly doing exactly what we KNOW the CIA did under Carter. (Declassified documents demonstrate this).
Even if this highly unlikely rumour were true, it must be viewed in light of what the CIA did back then. The US has squandered trillions in Afghanistan and all because of a CIA plot that wound up creating a terrorist group that is now out of control. And yet people think of Carter as a peace maker!
The government that Russia was supporting in the Carter administration was a secular one, and that is a huge blessing in a Muslim country where so often human rights are trampled under Shariah law. But the US never sees the benefit of good government in third world countries. It is still trying to squash the democratically elected Assad government which for decades successfully maintained harmonious relationships among Shia, Sunnis, Christians and other minorities in Syria. A scheme that worked well until the Western-backed “moderate” jihadists wrought havoc with Syrian society. The US destroyed Saddam’s secular government in Iraq, where these groups all co-existed relatively peacefully and where terrorism was held under strict control. And now, in Libya, US Democrats in particular support the Serraj government in Tripoli, which turns a blind eye to black slavery and is supported by ISIS fighters imported by Turkey (as the Serraj government admitted to the Washington Post). There is a clear pattern here for anyone who wishes to see it:
For the US, secular governments in countries not aligned with the US are a threat and Islamist radical governments are desirable. Which makes no sense on its face because secular governments are closer to the US system of governance where no religion has the upper hand. This US strategy only makes sense if you see it as a reflection of politics, which focus on thwarting Russia no matter what it does and creating chaos in the Muslim world in accordance with the Oded Yinon plan (an Israeli plan that the US and Israel are jointly trying to implement, as explained here). (We had also shown here how the US-led West created ISIS).
So whether you choose to believe or reject the narrative of Russian bounties, that is, after all, only a side issue. The REAL issue is: do we want in Afghanistan the kind of secular government invariably promoted by Russia or the usual US-backed Islamist extremism?
Let’s not be side-tracked.
Aterword: I am occasionally criticised on Quora for being “too negative.” The odd thing is, the critics in question never even claim that my facts are incorrect (I provide a lot of links, as you know). Therefore, what these critics are really upset with, if they chose to admit it honestly, is not my negativism but the negative reality that we all face and with the fact that I so faithfully describe it without bias, obfuscation or distortions that make their favourite political party or ideology look good. Ultimately, their complaints and mine are the same. We can all only hope that the manipulators in Washington that are largely responsible for creating this sad twisted reality can someday be overcome once and for all – forced off their throne by the weight of their own illegitimacy. These days of pandemic are perhaps the only chance, and the perfect catalyst, for the change that US politics absolutely cannot provide but that the world desperately needs. And a perfect chance to reflect on it all, more honestly than we ever would have otherwise. Without the rah-rah-rah. Without the inane political slogans. Without the false patriotism. Without the Russia-done-it or the China-done-it rhetoric or the recrimination of the other party. But with a view to the harmony and unity that you can’t even hope to survive without. Let’s be honest for a change. Neither Trump nor Biden will give you unity. Neither of them even talk about unity and harmony in their silly pompous bombast. All they do is blast the other side, and the resulting impression is that Americans hate and distrust each other.
So who can restore unity and harmony in America and put an end to the enmity? You can, Dear American friend. Only you!
IF THE US WANTED CHINA TO LIE DOWN AND PLAY DEAD, THEY SHOULD HAVE STIPULATED THAT IN THE TRADE AGREEMENT
Vince Dhimos answered a question at Quora asked by a person indoctrinated by US propaganda. This querier thought that China owed the US more than the US had bargained for in its original trade agreement. The fact is, the agreement never stated that China would adopt the system of “Western democracy” and the “Western value” of bowing to the hegemon. But nonetheless, the West unjustifiably expected them to do this. And now that it is clear the Chinese aren’t about to meet unstated expectations, the US is unjustifiably blaming them.
QUORA: The US thought that by improving China's economy, they will have China as a new and democratic friend. If we see what is happening with Hong Kong today, and look through China history with centralized Kings, what is the lesson for the US?
Vince Dhimos Editor-in-Chief at New Silk Strategies (2016–present)
That is a very pollyannaish view of the US’s intentions when it granted China Most Favoured Nation status in 1979. The US’s main motive was a bit complicated but an important component of it was the hope that this new trade arrangement would help drive a wedge between China and Russia. Yet this unrealistic expectation was never spelled out in the trade agreement. For decades after the new economic arrangement with China, US policy makers and think tanks articulated this desire to separate the two powerful nations, and for decades, they hatched plot after childish plot to achieve this goal, believing implicitly in the infallibility of the Washington mini-minds and in the expectation that they could outwit the Kremlin and the CCP. For decades, they were wrong. It was not until Russia and China started holding joint naval drills, including notably a 3-way drill with Iran in the Gulf that the dim witted manipulators in Washington finally figured out that they had lost this childish geopolitical game. After all, none of the bilateral trade agreements contained any wording whereby China would drop its partnership with Russia and become a lackey of Washington! But now the elites who run the show in Washington suddenly are acting as if China broke its agreement. It most certainly did not! Yet millions of gullible Americans think it did.
There were a series of economic considerations as well. It was Nixon-Kissinger who dreamed up the idea of trade with China and went so far as to open the door to a political dialogue. Nixon had some major problems, such as the oil crisis, which he fixed with Saudi Arabia in 1975 by signing the secretive petrodollar agreement whereby the US agreed to use its armed forces to defend the Saudi royals (actually a brutal dictatorship) in exchange for their using only US dollars in their oil trade and keeping their reserves in dollars.
Then there was the 1973–1975 recession. Nixon must have had this crisis in mind when he — or in fact, probably Kissinger — came up with the scheme of using China to fight inflation through the purchase of cheap goods from that country. (His dream came true in the Carter administration).
For the next 4 decades, China did indeed help the US fight inflation this way, and the US knew full well that it was getting its agreed-upon quid pro quo and had no right to complain. But amidst China’s phenomenal growth and the US’s lacklustre economic figures, it eventually became politically fashionable to blame China for the arrangement that the US had signed on to, and the US public grew used to hearing politicians complain about how China cheated them somehow, even though China was doing only those things to which the US officials had agreed or at least tacitly accepted. For example, still with these goals of weakening Russia while maintaining a desired flow of inflation-fighting cheap imports, the US turned a blind eye to patent infringements and China’s habit of demanding shared intellectual property rights in exchange for US companies’ right to establish businesses in China. This was perfectly legal and the US companies got exactly what they bargained for. US officialdom also got what they bargained for but not what they secretly hoped for, namely, a wedge between China and Russia and a dependent manufacturing colony that would refrain from competing with US companies. It was a mirror image of the arrangement Britain had hoped for in the American colonies, with Britain lording it over a bunch of sweaty grimy labourers who relied on it for manufactured imports and refrained from doing its own manufacturing. The main difference between the American colonies and the Chinese “colony” is that China is too powerful to invade and fight. Hence the propaganda war.
Trump has managed to exploit the propaganda-induced groundswell of public opinion against China and has even gone so far as to blame the COVID pandemic, an Act of God, on the Chinese. I have shown at Quora why this accusation is not moral, ethical or in keeping with legal precepts and precedents: https://www.quora.com/Should-China-be-made-to-recompense/answer/Vince-Dhimos
The trade war is also not an economically viable method to deal with any country, including China, and now that the pandemic is here, China has been able to flex its economic muscle in its own independent way. It is the only industrialized country in the world that has shown a gain in GDP in pandemic-racked 2020, even as the US has lost a catastrophic 50% of its GDP so far, with much more woe lying ahead. Thus what Trump has done is politically expedient to garner votes among a low-information populace but has zero economic value. It is already blowing up in his face, which is why the rhetoric is escalating.
And that is the choice: between the Western way in which politicians only act to give an indoctrinated public what it thinks it needs and wants, and an elite with a perverted agenda, or the Eastern way of China and Russia in which politicians solve real-world problems and ignore politics but ultimately give the non-indoctrinated public what it really needs and wants. In the Western way, as polls consistently show, the public does not respect its politicians, whereas in the East the public gives high marks to those in charge because they give the people an increasingly better way of life. The fact is, you can’t have it both ways. Either you solve problems or you play political games. The West has chosen the kiddy games.
It is reaping the whirlwind.
Economists are warning that the rampant printing of unbacked dollars by the Fed — the last resort to deal with the overwhelming issues caused by the pandemic — is threatening the dollar itself, which may suffer a catastrophic loss of its value in 2021 and consequently be dethroned as the primary world reserve currency. Specifically, Stephen Roach, former Morgan Stanley top economist, predicted that the greenback will lose at least 30% of its value in 2021, while Shameer Goel, Deutsche Bank specialist for Asia, expects investors to lose interest in the USD and dollar-denominated securities, eventually dethroning it as the primary reserve currency. All of this thanks to the Fed's rampant use of the printing press.
And the US dollar was the US’s source of geopolitical power. No wonder US politicians are upset. But they won’t admit that they dug their own grave by creating mountains of debt and then recklessly printing trillions of unbacked dollars as the only available remedy. It has to be China’s fault, right?
As for Hong Kong, it is just another scapegoat for failed US politicians. I have said it all before:
At variance with received wisdom, only 17% of Hong Kongers polled are interested in a divorce with the PRC, as reported by Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2020/01/02/interesting-poll-shows-hong-kongers-not-exactly-against-china/#38b85f0b3b1a
Thus, the sleazy US political propagandists have led the low-information public to project their own (propaganda-induced) desires for Hong Kong onto the Hong Kongers, but the latter are not buying it. It's only happening in the overheated American fantasy. The Chinese have their own Chinese way of seeing things. And now the US Congress will try to punish the Chinese for being Chinese. But as I pointed out above, the Chinese never agreed to meet US expectations, just to comply with their trade agreement. Which they did. So it’s a little late to change the rules now.
And that is the whole essence of our problem. The US drafted the agreements, the Chinese signed on and complied. But the Chinese didn’t read the Americans’ minds and give them what they expected but had no right to expect.
HONG KONG CAN’T BE TAKEN OVER BY THE PRC, IT’S BEEN PART OF THE PRC SINCE 1997
Vince Dhimos answered a question at Quora by another querier badly smitten by the US propaganda machine. You see what they have done to this poor fellow. They have played with his mind, grotesquely twisting the objective truth, namely, that the US is up to its old colour revolution tricks again, this time deceiving Hong Kongers into believing that it is all Beijing’s fault that rioters are wrecking their city when in fact the PRC isn’t even involved. And now half the world believes this vicious lie and thinks Hong Kong needs to be saved by the US, the country that plunged it into chaos in the first place. This same scenario has played out for decades in different versions and colours. Yet much of the world has yet to see the wizard behind the curtain. They fall for it every time. The PRC knows it is in trouble no matter which way it turns, having fallen victim to another trap set by the crafty manipulators in Washington, but it has decided to step in to put an end to the violence no matter what.
Will the USA remain idle if China tries to swallow Hong Kong?
It’s not a matter of “swallowing” anything. Hong Kong is an autonomous region that BELONGS to the PRC but is independently governed by the locals. The PRC is NOT depriving HK of anything, it is trying to keep the US-backed hooligans from burning everything down and killing the cops. But Americans are so steeped in the anti-China and rah-rah USA propaganda they are exposed to 24/7 from their press and politicians that many of them have long lost the natural empathy that humans are born with.
It is a situation analogous to the current riots sweeping the US. Do you suppose the people living in the US areas that are being torched are happy to have their neighbourhoods destroyed? The very same thing applies to Hong Kong. People who live and work in Hong Kong are in danger from these US-sponsored thugs and their main concern now is to see this rioting stopped ASAP. The PRC is finally hearing their pleas for help and is about to step in. It was a tough decision because they know that the US is eager to do as much harm as it can to the Chinese economy and society and to topple a government that serves the people and not politics, as American politicians have done by catering to their billionaire cronies and putting the poor and middle class in a calamitous situation where half of Americans cannot afford health care. PRC officials have their foibles but they have not done this to their people.
Imagine if China sponsored criminals to come to your town and burn down shops and endanger the lives of people out on the street? You would be very unhappy with China for doing this. Yet the average American, who is devastated by the hooliganism sweeping his own nation thinks the Hong Kong people should be just thrilled to death that the US is backing criminals to ruin their lives and destroy their property and their environment. And the American government that sponsored this chaos is not doing a THING to protect the lives and property of the Hong Kong people whom they have put in this precarious situation with their regime change effort! Yet many indoctrinated Americans think Hong Kong should be grateful to the meddling bullying USA that is ruining their lives.
Let’s try to understand the misery the US is causing elsewhere and have some compassion on the ones America is injuring. It should be easier to understand their plight now that Americans are in the same situation with chaos swirling all around them. Americans could actually be thankful for this rare opportunity to see what it is like to suffer from the disasters the US is creating around the world for others. If Americans can eventually acquire just a smidgen of empathy through all the pain, there will be no more war, no more sanctions and no more regime change operations of the Hong Kong type. And America might just make a few friends again.
Vince Dhimos answered a scary question that is the product of the current US Establishment’s anti-China propaganda campaign. This question by a grassroots American highlights the extreme danger of conducting political campaigns aimed at creating extreme hatred of foreigners among the public. This year, while many have expected the Democrats to offer an alternative to Trump, such is not in the cards – Biden is promising to out-Trump Trump and be even tougher on China (as I pointed out here). Does he want a more-stupid trade war than we have seen so far? More-stupid anti-China rhetoric? Nuclear war? At any rate, it might be a good year to build a bomb shelter in the back yard. And I’m half-serious.
After threatening Hong Kong, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and the United States, is it time NATO comes together to destroy China?
Vince Dhimos Editor-in-Chief at New Silk Strategies (2016–present)
Hong Kong is threatened by the US, which, with its NGOs and even the US diplomatic mission in HK, supports the rioters, who throw Molotov cocktails at police and destroy millions of dollars’ worth of real estate, with Washington’s blessing. Note that these are NOT Beijing officials, they are officials of the local autonomous authorities. The damage to the city and the injuries and death of HK citizens are supported wholeheartedly by the US sicko Establishment and news media, who disseminate slanted news making it look as if Beijing is to blame for the Hong Kong unrest. It is a lie because it’s an autonomous region and no PRC officials are present there. (Ironically, the riots in the US today mirror the situation in Hong Kong, and the fact that the US, stolidly behind this chaos in Asia, is now being visited by the very same kind of chaos and destruction is an irony lost on the average American. If only community colleges offered thinking classes free of charge to the mentally needy!).
Taiwan is a victim of bad strategy on both sides. Realistically, this island cannot claim to host the government of the whole of mainland China. Jimmy Carter had the power to change this situation and forge a new political settlement that would have taken into account the situation between Taiwan and Beijing by acknowledging the separate existence of the PRC and Taipei governments and avoiding calling Taiwan the unrealistic name of Republic of China. Instead, he simply caved in to the PRC’s One-China policy and hence its demand to de-recognize the Republic of China since, as they reasoned, there can only be one China. All Carter would have had to do is recognize that an island state could not speak for all Chinese and declare that Taiwan was a separate but sovereign government and give it a name befitting its situation as an island state and not the government of China per se. He foolishly accepted the One-China concept of Beijing, according to which, supposedly, the Republic of China could not exist. But it didn’t have to be that way. There could have been a legitimate Chinese state on Taiwan and another on the mainland, provided Taiwan did not pretentiously claim all of the mainland as if had, absurdly, in the past. Bowing to Beijing, Carter chose instead to de-recognize Taiwan, and to this day we have an untenable distortion in world affairs that threatens Taiwan and world peace. In other words, there could be a US embassy in a state called Taiwan with the US acknowledging that Taiwan and the PRC are separate but sovereign. This would have resolved an enormous distortion that now might lead to war and keeps Asia on tenterhooks.
To put it succinctly: The US has de-recognized Taiwan based on the flawed One-China logic, ie, that there can be only one China and since Taiwan insists it represents all of China, it must be absorbed into the PRC. Of course, this One-China principle is nonsense. After all, since they speak French in Belgium (much of it anyway), France could absorb Belgium on that basis. But that would make no sense and neither does it make sense to let the PRC absorb Taiwan just because it embodies the Chinese culture and language. Unfortunately, the US has never taken that more reasonable position and made it clear to PRC that it does not accept the One-China principle. By de-recognizing Taiwan and pulling its embassy out of Taipei, it gave in to the PRC logic right from the start in 1979. On this basis, it is only reasonable for the PRC to expect the other shoe to drop and for Taiwan to be annexed. No wonder they’re claiming what the US practically admitted was theirs! And Carter is reputedly a peace maker?
Getting back to the misguided question I am attempting to answer, the idea of NATO destroying China is a childish but dangerous dream of US propaganda victims. Any attempt to invade China would lead to a nuclear war that would involve both China and Russia and leave the US and much of Asia in ruins. None of these states would ever be the same again and none would ever be “great” in the Trumpian sense. The world economy would also collapse.
Egyptian armed forces add Italian-made air defences.
It looks to me as if some countries, like India and Egypt, while buying large quantities of Russian arms, are diversifying their arms purchases in order to avoid getting in trouble with the Washington bully. Buying Russian arms is always susceptible to sanctions because the US thinks the whole world should ONLY buy American overpriced underperforming weapons. So smart countries like India and Egypt diversify, buying some arms from Western countries not under sanctions but buy the bulk of their weapons from Russia. This is a clever way to “sanction” the US by NOT buying US arms and buying European arms instead. This way they hope to avoid sanctions but do not succumb to US bullying – because the main reason for the sanctions is to force countries to buy American.
Israeli defence forces launch missiles strikes inside Syria
Israel is clearly acting as a proxy of the US. These missile strikes are very frequent, yet you almost can’t learn of them from the US press.
The other US proxy is Turkey.
So far, Russia is keeping Turkey at bay in Syria and Libya, but for political reasons, it is almost helpless to counter the Israeli aggression.
I suspect that if the US dollar is dethroned as the primary world reserve currency, thereby weakening the US both geopolitically and militarily, Russia will become somewhat more firm with Israel. Perhaps these dangerous strikes will stop.
Vince Dhimos answered a question at Quora.
WHAT KIND OF SANCTION WILL THE US GIVE TO CHINA WITH RESPECT TO THE CHINESE CYBER ATTACK ON US CORONA VIRUS RESEARCH
Editor-in-Chief at New Silk Strategies (2016–present)
This question makes an assumption based on a US government allegation without proof. Please read the below-linked CNN report critically, and you will note that NOWHERE in this report does the author mention any proof at all. The wording always contains the word “likely” but never does this report lead the reader to any conclusive evidence. In one case, the writer quotes an official saying “it would be crazy not to believe…” that the Chinese did not hack … etc.
US formally warns China is launching cyberattacks to steal coronavirus research
The government is not only making accusations, it is issuing formal official warnings to China. That is a very major step to be taking without any evidence whatsoever.
The same pattern can be observed in this VOA article:
Here we see that there are also other countries involved in the hacking of medical research. So why single out China? Because elections are coming up and the administration needs a scapegoat to show it is cracking down on cyber-crime. There’s not enough time to find out who the real hacker is, and China is the whipping boy du jour. So it would be crazy not to accuse China.
In a court of law, no judge would ever convict a suspect on the strength of a statement by a prosecutor alleging that the suspect “likely” committed a crime. Nor would any judge be moved by a statement such as “you would be crazy not to assume that the suspect committed the crime of which he is accused.” Sounds convincing to the uninitiated but does not take the accuser one step closer to the truth. The judge, after learning that there was no further proof, would immediately throw out the case and set the suspect free. The prosecutor must have evidence before he makes an allegation, and as soon as he says “likely” in his final pleading after presenting zero evidence, that means the suspect must be set free until such time as evidence is found and the case is reopened. The US is so used to making proofless accusations, and the public is so used to reading in the press about a “likely” circumstance or event that the poor news consumer is now conditioned to equate a “likely” crime or misdemeanor with a REAL crime or misdemeanor. This is in fact a total lack of professionalism on the part of the government, and a news service that reports such baseless allegations without explicitly warning the reader that there is no proof stated by the government, is equally guilty of misleading the public. It is this sort of shoddy reporting that leads to wars.
Remember, Folks, how the allegation that Saddam was using weapons of mass destruction led to a war that cost US tax payers trillions, killed millions of people, and ultimately led to the creation of ISIS. With our hasty conclusions and our juvenile need for an enemy, we are again following the Pied Piper down the road to the river and are eagerly waiting to jump right in!
So who’s to blame for the hacking attacks? Remember that the US has pulled out of WHO, an international agency with a mission to share information, not sequester it in secrecy. In a sane world, all nations would be sharing information freely because the whole world is at risk. But the US has led the rest of the world to make this a zero-sum game, with everyone competing instead of sharing, because for the Washington syndicate, preserving the current brand of predatory capitalism is more important than the welfare of the collective. This each-man-for-himself policy is one of the main reasons no cure or vaccine has yet been found. And the US is leading the chaos as usual. And blaming China as usual.
Vince Dhimos answered a question at Quora.
Why did Huawei's Meng Wanzhou lose the key decision in her extradition case?
Vince Dhimos, Editor-in-Chief at New Silk Strategies (2016–present)
First off, let’s be clear: Huawei and chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou did not commit a crime. The whole scam revolves around the allegation that the company tried to skirt sanctions against Iran. However, these sanctions are an illegitimate American contrivance and have no legitimacy beyond America’s borders. Neither the UN nor the world at large consider it illegal to do business with Iran and no country, including the US, has the right to declare trading or otherwise dealing with a third country illegal. The US in this case is illegitimately and – thanks to Washington’s accomplices in the msm – fraudulently usurping the power of the UN.
The whole affair is preposterous and disgraceful. The US is only acting on behalf of Israel to destroy Iran because a long time ago an Iranian official — or perhaps more than one — threatened to wipe Israel off the map if Israel attacked Iran. However, please note that American officials have done likewise, threatening countries to annihilate them for reasons only they understand. For example, Trump told Kim Jung Un “We will destroy your country.” But despite this clearly criminal, genocidal threat, no one claimed that the US was a criminal country that needed to be sanctioned. It is a blatant double standard and the US gets away with this sort of hypocrisy only because it has more power than its opponents, not because of any moral authority it may possess because it has none whatsoever.
America still has a lot of illegitimate power in the world, but ordinary citizens of other countries must stop allowing Washington to brainwash them into believing in the legitimacy of things that simply are not legitimate just because the US press creates a false aura of legitimacy around US actions. The sooner the world stops lending legitimacy to illegitimate actions, the sooner the criminal empire will collapse, and all good people everywhere must join together to make this happen.
Let me clarify: Since the US does not have the legitimate right to sanction anyone, Iran or anyone else, if a Chinese company did in fact lie to avoid these illegitimate sanctions, then that was not a crime. Quite the contrary, the US itself commits crimes every day when it uses sanctions to deny innocent civilians in other countries the right to obtain food and medicine. This is a crime against humanity and would be punished if it were not for the overwhelming power of the US and the craven cowardice of its allies. The only reason the US is able to skirt the law and internationally accepted principles of common decency with impunity is that it is a powerful institutional organized crime syndicate. Therefore it certainly does not have the right to arrest a person for lying to avoid punishment for an unjust law, and no other country has the right to arrest or extradite a person that this crime syndicate calls a “criminal.”
Consider an analogy. Suppose a terrorist kidnaps my daughter and in order to placate him and protect my daughter’s life, I promise him I will not call the police, but I do call the police. Ok, I lied. Should I be arrested for lying to a terrorist? Of course not! Nor should Huawei be tried for lying about its Iran ties, which are perfectly legitimate.
The US is an institutional terrorist that makes unjust extraterritorial laws, ie, laws that are illegitimate by definition, and a person who lies to avoid punishment by this illegitimate entity is not a criminal by any standard or definition. Except the definitions of the North American crime syndicate.
So why did Canada agree to extradite? Because Canada is a puppet of the US government. Canada had rushed to help with the bombing of hapless civilians in the Kosovo War, dropping 500,000 lb. of bombs for “humanitarian” reasons. 4,000 Europeans died. But Canada knows that if it defies the US, the US will impose sanctions on if or slap tariffs on Canadian imports. If Canada were a moral and just country with a bit of backbone, it would have stood up to the bully and accepted the consequences. Of course, the US not only can destroy another Western country, it is right now working to destroy Germany for continuing to cooperate with the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project to deliver Russian gas to Germany. Yet this project is perfectly legitimate and the US demand to suspend it amounts to extortion, which is a serious crime (look it up). The US is trying to destroy the economy of its ally by extorting it to abandon the perfectly legitimate business contract with Russia in order to benefit the US economy.
These sanctions on the pipeline were imposed illegitimately and illegally using a fraudulent claim (fraud too is a crime. Look it up). The excuse was that buying Russian gas in Europe threatens European “energy security.” But this is none of the US’s business. It has no right to dictate whom Europe buys its gas from or to define energy security for another country, and this is especially sleazy when it is clear that Trump just wants to force vastly overpriced US LNG down Germany’s throat! He is the criminal, not Meng Wanzhou, not Angela Merkel and not the sanctioned Allseas company that was forced – extorted – into suspending its work under contract. And therein resides another crime: extorting a party to a contract to breach the contract. In an international court with enough power, Trump would be charged with extortion and fraud for its illegitimate sanctions and kidnapping for holding Meng Wanzhou against her will, and the Canadian author authorities that extradited her would be in jail as well. But since the US is a powerful renegade and Canada is a cowardly puppet, nothing can be done at the moment. Justice is unavailable. But that can change.
Secondly, regardless of the pretext, the US has no jurisdiction over any European country. These sanctions – like all US-imposed sanctions – are a blatant and illegal encroachment on the sovereignty of another nation. Likewise, arresting a Chinese company official for not complying with an illegitimate US law regarding Iran is a blatant violation of China’s – and Iran’s – sovereignty, and Canada is co-liable for the outcome.
The main reason most Westerners accept the gross injustice done to Meng Wanzhou is that the US media and political class treat these unlawful actions on the part of the US as if they were legitimate, and Westerners have therefore been slowly indoctrinated into believing that the US is always legitimate when in reality, it rarely is. It has never legitimately invaded another country or imposed economic sanctions on foreign peoples. Every person killed by US bombs and bullets since WW II was a victim of actual murder by a state terrorist. It is high time the peoples of the world woke up and realized they are the victims of illegal extortion and fraud by an institutionalized crime syndicate acting under colour of law. If enough people wake up soon enough, the rest of the world can find peace and freedom.
Otherwise we all will remain captives to the Washington crime syndicate.
Danny King commented on your answer to: "Why did Huawei's Meng Wanzhou lose the key decision in her extradition case?"
Your example is excellent!
‘’Suppose a terrorist kidnaps my daughter and I promise him I will not call the police, but I do call the police. Ok, I lied. Should I be arrested for lying to a terrorist?”
30 SMOULDERING CITIES AND AN ECONOMIC APOCALYPSE: US WARS, REGIME CHANGE OPS AND SANCTIONS ARE COMING BACK TO HAUNT AMERICA
by Vince Dhimos
I pointed out here how eerily reminiscent the current lockdowns and economic collapse in the US are of the situation in countries that have long been starving under US-imposed sanctions, and how US citizens had generally ignored the pain and suffering their own government had inflicted on millions of innocent people throughout the world.
But then came the riots that burned 30 US cities. This is another boomerang. Washington had inflicted such riots on Kiev, wholeheartedly supporting, both morally and with propaganda, a violent and illegal overthrow of the legitimately elected government in Ukraine. Over 100 innocent people died as a result, and meanwhile the vile lying US media kept saying it was a peaceful revolt. The US is doing the exact same thing in Hong Kong in an attempt to induce the Hong Kong people to separate from the mainland – even though the uprising there is motivated largely by the actions of the Hong Kong government and police, elected by Hong Kongers themselves and not tied to Beijing. It is a total fraud on the part of the press. The economic damage is in the millions of dollars and innocent people are being injured, not by the police but by the rioters. And the US press and political class are cheering these thugs on, hoping in vain to prompt Hong Kongers to split from Beijing!
But now the US is seeing the same kind of out-of-control turmoil that it has for decades inflicted on the hapless citizens of other countries that the US chose to punish for disobeying the hegemon.
The irony was not lost on the mainland Chinese, who have been victims of grossly unfair accusations over the COVID-19 pandemic, with the psychopaths in Washington blaming an act of God (force majeure) on humans, something that has never happened before in all of human history, as I pointed out here.
US HANDLING OF UNREST IN CITIES HIGHLIGHTS HYPOCRISY OVER HONG KONG
The Hong Kong protests, based on vague excuses such as an extradition law project that was dropped, have been ongoing for months and the protesters, sponsored by US NGOs and wholeheartedly supported by the US diplomatic mission in HK, have been doing enormous damage to infrastructure and also injuring innocent bystanders and police, including attacking them with fire bombs, nearly killing their victims. Considering the small size of the region, the rioters’ damage is more serious than the damage done in the US turmoil. Now, US hypocrisy typically looks like a scene from a comedy skit – though it’s not funny. Remember that the US has condemned the HK police for arresting the violent protesters and firing tear gas at them. But, get this, the US has been even much rougher on its own citizens during the current rebellions than the Hong Kong police were with theirs, with American police firing paintballs at citizens peacefully seated on their own front porch. China has never done anything like that. According to a Bloomberg report, the Chinese are now chiding the US for its treatment of its own protesters.
“Chinese officials and state media needled the Trump administration over race-related protests and looting that have engulfed U.S. cities in recent days, after weathering criticism and threats from Washington over Beijing’s own moves to quell unrest in Hong Kong. [Actually, the Hong Kong police are not controlled by Beijing, so US criticism of the PRC for its actions is misplaced and intended to mislead. Further, the most recent poll shows that only 17% of Hong Kong citizens are interested in breaking away from Beijing, and of these only 8% strongly desire independence, while 9% are only somewhat interested in this. The US is clearly barking up the wrong tree. Vince Dhimos]
“Over the weekend, China’s foreign ministry and state media seized the opportunity to fire back at President Donald Trump. CNN reports that as protesters descended on Washington, Trump was briefly taken to an underground bunker at the White House for his safety.
“Chinese propaganda outlets played up scenes from the U.S. of violence, burning buildings, harsh police responses and protesters decrying government as part of a broader narrative that western democracies are regularly plagued by chaos and unrest that would never be permitted in the mainland.”
Pardon me, Bloomberg, but you can’t justifiably call Chinese news agencies “propaganda outlets” unless you also admit that the blatantly anti-Chinese, anti-Cuban, anti-Russian, anti-Iranian, anti-Venezuelan, anti-Syrian, pro-war, pro-sanctions, etc, US news agencies, including Bloomberg, are also very clearly propaganda outlets whose mission is to support US mischief. Your willingness to white wash your own sins highlights the irony of the way in which the plagues of sanctions and violent revolts wholeheartedly cheered on by the US news outlets and political class are coming back to visit the US in spades, with the US economy in ruins and 30 cities in ashes. And experts tell us another wave of the pandemic is due to arrive in September.
Might I point out that this looks a lot like cosmic justice. Indeed, there is no real-world cause-effect relationship between the US’s abuse of foreign countries and the current catastrophes suffered by US citizens. But it is undeniable that US citizens have never banded together to protest Washington’s inhumane treatment of people who never raised a finger to harm an American. They never protested on behalf of the Cubans, the Iranians, the Syrians, the Iraqis, the Russians, the Chinese, the Libyans and other victims of US sanctions, wars and regime change ops. If you believe in God, you can substitute “cosmic justice” with “the hand of God” if you wish. You can call it whatever you want but you can’t deny that it is happening and that America is no innocent party here deserving of the world’s pity.
Finally, there are no good guys or saviours in the US. It was the Democratic regime under Obama-Biden that turned Libya, the most prosperous country in Africa, into an ungovernable failed state at war with itself, with a government in Tripoli that tolerates human trafficking and slavery and is supported by ISIS and Al-Qaeda militias sent to the country by US-ally Turkey, whereas it is the Republican regime under Trump that trashed the world economy with its trade wars and anti-China propaganda campaign.
I showed in a previous edition that the US- and UN-recognized Government of National Accord (GNA) that sits in Tripoli has been chillingly tolerant of human rights abuses and has been supported militarily by ISIS and Al-Qaeda militias from Syria.
There’s no way you can spin the report from Al-Masdar below into good news. But if you would like to see Libya restored to its former prosperity and free from terror, then you may nurture a spark of hope that the troops of Khalifa Haftar will somehow manage to take back their territory lost to the Turks who dream of restoring the caliphate. The only glimmer of hope is the remote possibility that Egypt might enter the conflict. Egyptian president Al-Sisi, himself a military man, has warned Turkey that he will not tolerate terrorists at the Egyptian border. Perhaps if this threat emerges, he will be forced to act. Otherwise, the Turks have the upper hand in Libya, and neither Russia nor the US seem interested in entering the conflict. After all, Putin has a sort of odd-couple alliance with Erdoğan in Syria and the latter buys Russian made arms, so Russia’s hands are more-or-less tied.
We all have Barack Obama to thank for the murder of Ghaddafi and the subsequent chaos that led to this deplorable situation in Libya. On the other hand, Trump recognized the government of Faez Sarraj in Tripoli. Without this recognition by the US, we would probably not be talking about this conflict.
Turkish-backed Libyan forces achieve major victory by retaking all of Tripoli
By News Desk -2020-06-04
BEIRUT, LEBANON (3:45 P.M.) – The Turkish-backed Government of National Accord (GNA) announced on Thursday, its control of all administrative borders of the capital, Tripoli, including Tripoli International Airport.
The spokesman for the forces of the Government of National Accord, Colonel Mohammad Qanunu, said in a statement today, that the forces of their forces have taken control of all the administrative borders of the capital.
The official Twitter page for the GNA’s operationpublished a tweet by Colonel Salah Al-Namroush, Undersecretary of the Ministry of Defense in the Al-Wefaq government, in which he said:
“Our forces continued their progress this morning and chased the terrorist militias and expelled them from the walls of Greater Tripoli, and the retreat of a number those from the airport to Bani Walid, southeast of Tripoli.”
The GNA announced yesterday its control of the Tripoli International Airport and “chasing remnants” of the Libyan National Army (GNA) forces towards Qasr bin Ghashir, and confirmed its control over the areas of Ain Zara and Wadi Al-Rabeeh during its operations in the region.
In turn, the spokesman for the United Nations Secretary-General, Stefan Diogaric, announced yesterday that the Libyan-Military Committee in the form of “5 + 5” has resumed its work.
Diogaric told a news conference that “the JMC in (5 + 5) resumed its work today (yesterday) Wednesday – there was a meeting chaired by the UN Special Envoy to Libya, Stephanie Williams. This meeting was of course via video technology.”
Diogaric added: “A similar meeting with the delegation of the Government of National Accord is expected in the coming days. Negotiations will continue on the agreement on the ceasefire and related arrangements.”
In the following you will find our translation of an article from RIA Novosti with this introduction and notes [in brackets] by Vince Dhimos.
Ivan Danilov mentions three “marker events” in recent US history that symbolize the loss of US hegemonic power, ie:
1) The rebellion that has seen 30 US cities burning, as well as the vandalising of businesses and public property, such as St. Patrick’s Cathedral in NY, and injuries to police, in response to what is perceived as systemic racism.
2) Elon Musk’s privatised space venture that takes a step away from space projects sponsored by the state enterprise NASA.
3) The US’s pull-out from the WHO, which Danilov reminds us was not followed by a similar walkout by any of its allies – leaving the US alone on the stage. Though Danilov doesn’t mention it, the irony of this is that in staging this walkout, Washington was hoping to isolate China and instead isolated itself.
In the past, Donald Trump was the owner of companies whose employees were obliged to bend to his will or else. This was evidenced in his TV show The Apprentice, where Trump became famous for the line “you’re fired.” This set the stage for his big appearance on the world stage, where he thought he could behave similarly with impunity. He is learning that in geopolitics, things don’t work like this. You especially can’t treat your allies the same as your enemies, because, unlike in a business, where you can hire whomever you want, in the world, you can’t just simply fire an Angela Merkel or a Hassan Rouhani. You can tweet whatever powerful statement you want to impress your audience, but the next day your opponents are still there and you are no further ahead than when you started. Except that now they are more angry than ever.
The decline of US power starts with the abuse thereof.
International isolation: China squeezed Trump out of WHO
June 1, 2020 with
World hegemony does not disappear in a day and does not turn into a pumpkin, like a fairytale carriage, in an instant. Great empires – and the United States is, of course, the great empire of our time – degrade slowly, at a rate more characteristic of a glacier’s travel than a sprint. But this movement leaves markers, ie, symbolic events that are unmistakable and which clearly indicate the trajectory along which a specific “titanic empire” sails towards its personal iceberg in the form of a historical catastrophe.
The last few days happen to have provided us with just three marker events for assessing the historical trajectory of the country, which claims to maintain the status of world hegemon. On the one hand, 30 US cities are already on fire. Police stations are on fire, there are first victims among police officers, countless shops, gas stations, and symbols such as St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York have been subjected to acts of vandalism of varying severity. The audience of the American segment of social networks is increasingly using the phrase "civil war," with some of the society and politicians obviously supporting the rioters, and some supporting the security forces, who are being required to use violence more actively.
On the other hand, the American media community (and its metastases operating under the guise of Russian media) rapidly celebrated the "historic launch" of Elon Musk’s missile, describing it as a triumph of private space exploration and high-tech American technology. The launch was indeed historic, but rather in the sense that a private company with state money was able to repeat what the United States calmly, routinely and serially did several decades ago. But PR technologies have really taken a big step forward.
Against the background of these events, another symbol of the degradation of American power slightly faded: Donald Trump decided to actually pull the United States out of the World Health Organization, which was a logical continuation of a long conflict with the WHO leadership in the context of the coronavirus epidemic.
The history of this confrontation is melodramatic and sometimes even comic in nature. Foreign Policy magazine reminds readers of one of the highlights of this conflict.
"Trump ordered the U.S. intelligence community to formally investigate WHO and its relationship with China amid allegations made by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (who claimed that) the virus (which Pompeo calls "Wuhan") was either created or "leaked from" the fourth-level biosafety laboratory, located in that Chinese city and is equipped to work with the most dangerous pathogens. This statement, which Pompeo repeated many times, was largely refuted by the office of the director of the [US] national intelligence community, who stated that "(the community) agrees with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not artificial or genetically modified." [The author did not dare mention that both the Russian and the Chinese media have reported on the theory that the virus may have originated in the US lab of Ft. Detrick and may then have been carried by US service people to the international military games in Wuhan. Neither the Russians nor the Chinese officially refute this theory but they are soft-pedaling it to avoid potential blow-back from the US].
According to Foreign Policy, Trump has made a "scapegoat" out of WHO and "Americans will suffer" because of this.
In this case, it doesn’t matter at all whether the US president is right in his assessment of the origin of the virus and the effectiveness of WHO's actions in the context of the pandemic. What is important is this: if we consider the situation solely from the point of view of diplomacy and geopolitics, then we have a picture of Washington's incredible humiliation. Let’s call it by its proper name: official Washington was unable to “bend” an international organization that is by no means the most influential one and could not get it to support the narrative that official Washington needed to solve very important geopolitical tasks in the key “Chinese” direction. Five years ago this was an absolutely unthinkable situation. And it was impossible to imagine that the clash between the United States and WHO would not end in the surrender of the WHO leadership (with mea culpas from the WHO leadership live on CNN), and the United States leaving the organization.
Since ancient times, the army that was left standing on the battlefield after the end of the battle itself was considered the winner of the battle. There were exceptions to this principle, but they basically just confirmed the rule – but in this case, the Americans have left the (albeit diplomatic) field (taking part of the WHO funding) with them. Slamming the door is a respectable tactic, but obviously not for a country claiming global hegemony. Slamming the door alone even more so. Following the United States, American allies did not leave WHO, and the State Department is not currently creating a parallel or alternative structure that could take over some of the functions, capabilities and authority of the organization that Washington has left. This is symbolic. And this indicates that the question of which power on the planet is in a position of actual isolation is open, and an honest answer to it may turn out to be very unexpected.
The attempt (quite logical given that Trump is a businessman in his “first profession”) to take revenge on WHO functionaries by depriving the organization of American funding also shows how the current presidential administration is overestimating its economic influence and diplomatic capabilities.
The British state television company BBC points to the reaction of the EU leadership.
“The EU called on (Trump) to reconsider this decision, while the German Minister of Health called it “a disappointing blow to international health care.” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Diplomacy Director Josep Borrell pointed out: “In the face of this global threat, the time has come to expand collaboration and joint solutions. And to void actions that weaken international results. We urge the United States to reconsider its announced decision. "German Health Minister Jens Spahn called this setback ‘disappointing,’ though acknowledging that WHO is ‘in need of reform.” “The EU should take the lead and participate financially,” he said.”
Even before the United States left the organization, China indicated a desire to allocate two billion dollars for international assistance to combat the pandemic, and it is logical to assume that Beijing may well participate in financing WHO instead of Washington, if only for reasons of image and expanding its own soft power.
It is this approach that is likely to dominate the geopolitics of the future. As the American grip loosens, key elements of the "infrastructure" of international diplomatic, trade, economic, cultural and even scientific relations will be "privatized" by other countries that will find ways to use these elements to their advantage. While ordinary Americans are fascinated by the missiles flying above them and the cities burning around them, the international “struggle for the American inheritance” is gaining momentum.
Vince Dhimos answered a question at Quora.
WOULD DONALD TRUMP OR BARACK OBAMA DO A GOOD JOB IF THEY COULD LEAD CHINA?
There is no US politician who is competent to lead China. US politicians do not lead. Unlike Chinese presidents, they have no intention of keeping their people secure or prosperous. They serve the billionaire class and make the poor poorer while provoking wars with nations all over the world on the flimsiest of pretexts. They look for instructions and signals from a certain number of powerful groups, including other political institutions, the military, arms manufacturers, the Israel lobby AIPAC (I have listed the groups that control the US from the shadows: https://www.quora.com/Is-China-a-bigger-threat-to-the-western-democracy-than-Russia/answer/Vince-Dhimos), and from the grassroots, which to a large extent mirror these elites in their attitudes and thinking – most of which is fantasy-based. For example, Americans have been indoctrinated to believe that certain world leaders are not worthy of their power and should be taken down either militarily or by regime-change actions. A chilling percentage of Americans, hearing these fairy tales, believe that countries far away who bear them no ill will whatsoever are mortal enemies of either America or Israel and, based on their cult-like belief in “Christian” Zionism, they want enormous amounts of free money and free weapons to be sent to Israel to kill Palestinians and Iranians, who are supposedly inherent enemies of freedom-loving and peace-loving peoples everywhere, without any need for proof of this factoid. The Chinese, by contrast, know that their only enemies are US-aligned Western countries that seek to destroy their economy, and these enemies are not imaginary. The anti-China smears are emblazoned 24/7 in the headlines of virtually every US media outlet.
Because of these severe impediments, no US politician can possibly focus sufficiently to solve the problems facing the people, notably economic problems. Their focus is strictly political, not reality based. They seek only votes, not peace or welfare for the people, although it must be said that Obama did manage to hammer out a deal with Iran that made the world safer for as long as it lasted. But on the other hand, his administration destroyed Libya and made a failed state out of Ukraine.
Chinese leaders, since they don’t have to jump through the hoops of Western-style “democracy,” can focus on actually solving problems. That is very ironic and may sound subversive to most Westerners but it is true.
Consider this: if US “leaders,” notably presidents, were free to solve real problems and had the ability to do so, the US would not have been at war almost constantly since WW II and it would not have accrued a debt significantly bigger than its annual GDP. Nor would the Federal Reserve be forced to print unbacked dollars in the trillions to pull out of the unwieldy debts – with each printing spree (quantitative easing) being labelled as a temporary measure, though this scheme is now a permanent fixture of US policy.
Thus there is something tragically, fatally wrong with the US political sphere and no politician who has successfully bowed to the wishes of the shadow government while managing to stay in sync with the grassroots enough to garner sufficient votes could ever deal with a reality-based job requiring actual economic skills and the diplomatic skills needed to avoid wars and keep the peace. In other words, requiring common sense and the intelligence of a higher mammal.
US presidents are not supposed to keep the peace and none has. Even Carter, a purported peace president, at the advice of Zbigniew Bzezinski, allowed his CIA to foment rebellion against the Russian-backed secular government in Afghanistan, which led to the ouster of Soviet troops but also to the strengthening of the Taliban, which has been a thorn in the Pentagon’s side since then. The Russians have always promoted secular governments in the Muslim world, but the US has preferred Islamists who solve legal problems by lopping off limbs and heads.
Obama, for instance, claimed to be fighting a war with terror, and though his air force possessed a large enough fleet of A-10 “Warthogs” and other fighter-bombers, during his “War on Terror,” we saw videos of ISIS terrorists in white Toyota trucks with machine guns mounted on their beds, driving merrily across a desert in broad daylight with no planes on their tail. Clearly, there was no attempt to stop these ISIS fanatics. At that point it was clear to thinking people that Obama was not even remotely waging a war on terror, unless you considered Assad’s army a bunch of terrorists — and in fact, that is how the US government saw it. (I have shown that ISIS was a creation of the US and its satellites: https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-sources-for-American-involvement-in-the-Middle-East-since-9-11-It-s-for-a-paper/answer/Vince-Dhimos). Thus the US president’s job is to pretend, for the sake of the press corps and the gullible grassroots, that the US was actually fighting terrorists when in fact it was striving to remake the Middle East in its own funhouse-mirror image. This kind of president would be completely out of place in either China or Russia, where real leaders do real jobs and there is no pretence – they clearly want to make their countries prosperous and are doing all it takes to accomplish that. It takes a special breed of leader to survive in the US environment of constant deception and treachery and that breed has no place in the Chinese hierarchy.
So what about Trump? Despite his promises, he is arguably less peace-like than Obama, having senselessly torn up the Iran deal, except that in this day and age, the US is up against Russia, which so far has blocked all Trump’s major intended conflicts, such as the would-be invasions of Venezuela and Iran. But the president is a master of smoke and mirrors, threatening to invade Iran and Venezuela, appointing an interim “president” in the latter, and really doing nothing substantial on the ground other than stupidly murdering an Iranian folk hero who is dear to both Iraqis and Iranians alike, all supposedly to defend the US people, who clearly were not in danger, but in a bid for re-election. Meanwhile, this amateurish heinous murder induced the Iraqi parliament to oust the US troops from their country.
Like Obama, he is all politics.
China and Russia have no use for such phony politicians and the people would never elect such a store front mannequin in the first place. If a Chinese politician started to behave like most recent US presidents, he would spend his life behind bars.
Thus it is absurd to even ask such a question as the one I am attempting to answer.
Xi is not remotely like a Western style politician. His life and policies require special treatment and I have provided some detail at Quora: https://www.quora.com/Why-are-African-countries-better-off-under-the-influence-of-the-USA-the-UK-and-France-than-under-China/answer/Vince-Dhimos
No US president could ever hold a candle to this man. Yet the US powers that be want Americans to hate and distrust him, and, sadly, their propaganda is having its usual mesmerizing effect.
Xi Jinping is, to say the least, an effective agent of a government who leads a real-world economy with the biggest and most efficient manufacturing force in the world by far. And he is not only competent to direct the economy but also has an army of experts by his side. Like his Russian colleagues, he has real experts in his cabinet, not the kind of US advisers who are chosen for name recognition. If you do a Google search for Chinese cabinet members, you will find departments staffed by experts with higher degrees in their areas of competence. Wang Yi, for example, the foreign minister, studied international relations and the Japanese language, in which he is fluent. In the US, by contrast, you will find not a single degree in international relations among the secretaries of state and ambassadors in the current administration. The US government is run almost exclusively by amateurs, ie, career politicians with scant skills in the performance of real world tasks. Trump was a successful business man but knows less than nothing about international relations or macroeconomics. He doesn’t need them. He is not expected to solve problems but only to create problems in such a way that he looks like he is solving them, at least to the extent needed to garner votes for himself and his party. That is all the GOP elites expect of him.
As for Obama, he was a polished orator and had degrees related to political science and economics. Good enough. However, his choice of secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, had no training related to international relations. And while the Obama administration worked to solve the problem of the Great Recession, his approach was simply to allow the Fed to issue unbacked dollars in a scheme known as quantitative easing, which has since given the US a ballooning out of control debt that many economists worry will someday cause the economy to slide and the dollar to lose its hegemony. One of the main problems is that this money created out of thin air has been lent to banks that were badly managed and should have been allowed to fail. This in turn created a culture in which badly managed or failing businesses also were given easy money by the Fed to buy back their own stocks, while the government bought its own Treasury bonds. It is a racket. By granting badly managed businesses easy money, the businesses that should have failed were never properly purged and weigh heavily on the economy. In China, by contrast, failing businesses are allowed to go bankrupt, thus purging the economy of these and allowing new better-run businesses to start up. Further, both Obama and Trump allowed Congress to spend exorbitant amounts of cash on weapons the US absolutely does not need.
US presidents sit idly by as the sleazy politicians in Congress and Senate vote exorbitant wads of cash to their cronies in the arms industry to sell arms of which only a tenth would be plenty to keep America safe. And these crooked pols and the presidents that support their racket concoct absurd hysterical tales alleging that Russia and China are about to take over the world and must be contained or stopped with all available measures, including trillions of dollars’ worth of weapons like the extravagantly priced and overrated F-35, which is supposed to be invisible to radar but shows up plainly on Russian radar, and is out-performed by the Russian Su-35, which flies 25% faster, is invisible to radar and has a significantly longer range. I have posted about the arms procurement scam at Quora: https://www.quora.com/Vladimir-Putin-continuously-tells-or-conveys-to-the-Russian-people-that-he-wants-to-challenge-America-militarily-Do-Russians-think-they-can-win-such-confrontation/answer/Vince-Dhimos.
All this Potemkin village weaponry has cost the taxpayer and Fed printing press unimaginable gobs of money that threaten to diminish the trust that investors have had in the US dollar and US Treasuries.
This is particularly critical during the current pandemic. We shall soon learn the ultimate fate of quantitative easing and unlimited debt.
Ron Unz knows a lot about US censorship.
Since social media sites are often monopolies, if US courts were doing their job, they might evoke the anti-trust laws. For example, according to Investopedia
Refusal to Deal: Like any other company, monopolies can choose who they wish to conduct business with. However, if they use their market dominance to prevent competition, this can be considered a violation of antitrust laws.
By pulling the web site of a consumer, Facebook is refusing to deal with that person, and is using itrs market dominance to prevent competition of ideas. It doesn't matter that the consumer is paying or not because there is an assumption that all shall be treated equally and that is obviously not the case at all.
A court in a truly democratic country would accept Ron Unz's case and put a quick stop to this.
The trouble is, the courts are all part of the Establishment (I don't use the term "Deep State" because it has been co-opted by the Trump camp to mean only that part of the Establishment that opposes Trump, which is laughable) and it would be impossible in our hopelessly corrupt system to apply this law even though it is quite applicable to the case of internet users who dissent from the going narrative and are rudely and unceremoniously censored.
Ron was bound to run afoul of this cabal eventually because one of the forbidden ideas is that the US may have developed the COVID-19 strain in a military laboratory and introduced it into the population of both China and Iran. Even if this were an absurd idea, Ron finds many coincidences that are too unikely to be just coincidences and his arguments are cogent and air tight. All the more reason to cast him into outer darkness.
I have some experience with this kind of censorship as well. There are two third rails of opinion on social media that I have run afoul of on various occasions:
Criticism of Israel and defence of Palestinans
Theories of US involvement in the origin of COVID-19.
In most cases, where I have crossed these invisible red lines of the US dictatorship, I have had my opinion pieces removed, with no comment from the censor, no explanaton and of course, no apology. A Soviet dissident magically transported to our time in the US would demand to be returned to "freedom" in Russia.
As I have said on many occasions, anyone who thinks of America as a democracy or the US as the "Land of the Free" is terminally naive. And sadly, most Americans do think this way and they are very much part of the problem.
THE AMERICAN DEEP STATE STRIKES BACK
What Google and Facebook Are Hiding, by Ron Unz
The American Deep State Strikes Back
After several months of record-breaking traffic our alternative media webzine suffered a sharp blow when it was suddenly purged by Facebook at the end of April. Not only was our rudimentary Facebook page eliminated, but all subsequent attempts by readers to post our articles to the world’s largest social network produced an error message describing the content as “abusive.” Our entire website had been banned.
Facebook publishes a monthly report cataloging its actions to eliminate “improper content,” and although our publication was probably one of the largest and most popular ever so proscribed, the explanation provided was remarkably cursory, with our name mentioned in only two scattered sentences across the 47 page document.
Our investigation linked this network to VDARE, a website known for posting anti-immigration content, and individuals associated with a similar website The Unz Review.
Although the people behind this operation attempted to conceal their coordination, our investigation linked this network to VDARE, a website known for posting anti-immigration content, and to individuals associated with a similar website The Unz Review.
As I’ve previously discussed, characterizing our alternative media publication as an “anti-immigration” website “similar” to VDare seemed utterly bizarre considering that only about 0.2% of our 2020 content was republished from that source and many months had elapsed since we had last featured a piece on immigration. So I strongly suspected that the claim merely served as an excuse.
I don’t use Facebook or other social networks myself, and noticed little reduction in our daily traffic following that purge, which seemed to underscore our lack of reliance upon social media. But a week later, this abruptly changed, and our regular daily readership dropped by a significant 15-20%, hardly a crippling blow but quite distressing, setting us back many months of previous growth.
This puzzled me. Why would the Facebook ban have had such limited initial impact but then suddenly become so much more serious? Eventually I discovered that a second even more powerful Internet giant had also banned us, which explained the sharp drop. Our entire website and all its many millions of pages of serious content had been silently deranked by Google, thus eliminating nearly all our incoming traffic from search results. A few quick checks confirmed this unfortunate situation, best illustrated by a particularly striking example.
Just over a decade ago, I had published an important article entitled The Myth of Hispanic Crime, and for ten years it had always placed extremely high in Google searches, generally being ranked #2 across the 52,000,000 results for “Hispanic crime” and also #2 among the 139,000,000 results for “Latino crime.” The impact of my analysis on the heated public debate had also been quite considerable, and a few years ago a leading academic specialist even asked me to blurb his book on that subject. But my article had now vanished from all such Google searches.
Although Google holds an overwhelming monopoly for web searches across the Western world, comparable products using similar technology such as Bing and DuckDuckGo do exist, and these still list my article near the top of their results, with Bing ranking it at #2 for “Hispanic crime” and “Latino crime,” while DuckDuckGo places it #4 in each. But no one would ever find it using Google.
The other pages of our website have been similarly blacklisted, effectively eliminated from all web searches courtesy of Google’s information monopoly. This even included the periodical content library that I had built during the 2000s, containing the near-complete archives of hundreds of America’s most influential publications of the last 150 years. Millions of these important articles are available nowhere else, and their disappearance represents a tremendous loss to academic scholarship.
Google still does contains all these pages, and if the additional specifier “unz” is added to the search, the results come up, but for anyone not knowing where to look, our entire website and all its content has completely disappeared. This explained our sudden 15-20% reduction in regular traffic.
Internet law is obviously quite murky, but it seems a great shame if Google has decided to use its software monopoly to severely manipulate search results and deliberately hide important information. The notion of Google “disappearing” an entire website and all its material is surely fraught with peril. Should Google’s executives be allowed to “disappear” whichever politicians or candidates they dislike? Should wealthy individuals or powerful groups be able to pay or lobby Google to have their critics removed from all search results?
During 2018 Google employees themselves took a very strong public stance on exactly these issues, protesting their own company’s willingness to produce a “censored” version of their search engine for use in China, a controversy that reached the national headlines, and soon forced executives to abandon the project. But although Google censorship of content within China still remains an inflammatory topic, Google censorship of American content has now apparently become so routine and accepted that it took me more than a week to discover that our entire website had been thrown down the Orwellian “memory hole.”
I’d always taken great pride in having my Hispanic Crime article spend a decade ranked #2 among nearly 200,000,000 Google results for that important topic, and was dismayed that Google “disappeared” it. But in fairness, I’d have to admit that individuals who make themselves disagreeable to ruling political elites sometimes suffer far worse retaliation. For example, my Saturday morning newspapers carried the latest developments in the unfortunate story of Jamal Khashoggi, the dissenting Saudi journalist whose critical writings in the Washington Post so irritated his government that they had him killed and his body dismembered with a bone-saw. Compared to that, having my articles deranked by Google hardly seems a major complaint.
For years our website has published a great deal of extremely controversial material, and many readers are probably much more surprised that Google and Facebook took so long to purge us rather than they finally did so.
Consider, for example, my own American Pravda series, which together with related articles totals 280,000 words and has drawn about 3 million pageviews, while attracting over 25,000 comments containing another 3.5 million words. Many of these articles candidly address some of the most controversial aspects of the JFK Assassination, the 9/11 Attacks, and the history of World War II, topics so touchy that a couple of years ago the redoubtable Israel Shamir described me as the “Kamikazi from California,” and suggested along with numerous other observers that our website might soon be annihilated as a consequence. But aside from a rather lackluster rebuke from the usually ferocious ADL, absolutely nothing untoward happened.
Yet now we have been almost simultaneously banned by both Google and Facebook, America’s leading gatekeepers to the Internet, such concerted action hardly seems likely to have been coincidental, especially coming as it did after years of apparent equanimity. So what had prompted this sudden purge?
I think the obvious answer was my most recent American Pravda installment, which attracted more early readership and social media interest than anything I had previously written, and which appeared just eight days before Facebook’s ban.
My article noted some important facts that are less widely known that they should be, and are quite embarrassing both to our own government and its overly subservient mainstream journalists.
For decades, the American media has regularly denounced the Chinese government for its notorious 1989 slaughter of the student protesters at Tiananmen and shamed its leadership for continuing to flatly deny that historical reality, with China’s demands for censorship of the massacre being a leading source of conflict with Google. However, I pointed out that more than twenty years ago the former Beijing bureau chief of the Washington Post, who had personally covered the events, published a long article in our most prestigious journalism review admitting that the infamous “Tiananmen Square Massacre” had never actually happened, and was just a concoction of incompetent journalists and dishonest propagandists. Yet for decades the promotion of that debunked hoax by our elite media has continued unabated.
As another example, I noted that back in 1999 our warplanes had bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, killing or wounding dozens of Chinese diplomats. At the time, our media uniformly reported the attack as a tragic accident, while ridiculing China’s government for alleging otherwise. However, just a few months later, many of the leading newspapers in Britain and the rest of the world revealed that the bombing had indeed been deliberate, quoting numerous NATO intelligence sources to that effect. But since the American media completely boycotted this major international story, very few Americans have ever discovered that the Chinese had been telling the truth all along and our own government lying.
Although these historical items were noteworthy, they merely set the stage for a far more explosive analysis. The bulk of my 7,400 word article presented the very considerable circumstantial evidence that our current Coronavirus national disaster was entirely self-inflicted, being the unintended blowback from an extremely reckless American biowarfare attack against China (and Iran), presumably organized by the Deep State Neocons or other rogue elements in our national security establishment.
This ongoing disease epidemic has already killed 100,000 Americans and wrecked our economy, so we can easily understand why the guilty parties would do all they could to prevent this information from getting into general circulation, pressuring Google and Facebook to suppress the crucial evidence. Since my long article has now been banned by America’s Internet giants, I’ll repeat some of the most important excerpts:
As the coronavirus gradually began to spread beyond China’s own borders, another development occurred that greatly multiplied my suspicions. Most of these early cases had occurred exactly where one might expect, among the East Asian countries bordering China. But by late February Iran had become the second epicenter of the global outbreak. Even more surprisingly, its political elites had been especially hard-hit, with a full 10% of the entire Iranian parliament soon infected and at least a dozen of its officials and politicians dying of the disease, including some who were quite senior. Indeed, Neocon activists on Twitter began gleefully noting that their hatred Iranian enemies were now dropping like flies.
Let us consider the implications of these facts. Across the entire world the only political elites that have yet suffered any significant human losses have been those of Iran, and they died at a very early stage, before significant outbreaks had even occurred almost anywhere else in the world outside China. Thus, we have America assassinating Iran’s top military commander on Jan. 2nd and then just a few weeks later large portions of the Iranian ruling elites became infected by a mysterious and deadly new virus, with many of them soon dying as a consequence. Could any rational individual possibly regard this as a mere coincidence?
* * *
For obvious reasons, the Trump Administration has become very eager to emphasize the early missteps and delays in the Chinese reaction to the viral outbreak in Wuhan, and has presumably encouraged our media outlets to direct their focus in that direction.
As an example of this, the Associated Press Investigative Unit recently published a rather detailed analysis of those early events purportedly based upon confidential Chinese documents. Provocatively entitled “China Didn’t Warn Public of Likely Pandemic for 6 Key Days”, the piece was widely distributed, running in abridged formin the NYT and elsewhere. According to this reconstruction, the Chinese government first became aware of the seriousness of this public health crisis on Jan. 14th, but delayed taking any major action until Jan. 20th, a period of time during which the number of infections greatly multiplied.
Last month, a team of five WSJ reporters produced a very detailed and thorough 4,400 word analysis of the same period, and the NYT has published a helpful timeline of those early events as well. Although there may be some differences of emphasis or minor disagreements, all these American media sources agree that Chinese officials first became aware of the serious viral outbreak in Wuhan in early to mid-January, with the first known death occurring on Jan. 11th, and finally implemented major new public health measures later that same month. No one has apparently disputed these basic facts.
But with the horrific consequences of our own later governmental inaction being obvious, elements within our intelligence agencies have sought to demonstrate that they were not the ones asleep at the switch. Earlier this month, an ABC News story cited four separate government sources to reveal that as far back as late November, a special medical intelligence unit within our Defense Intelligence Agency had produced a report warning that an out-of-control disease epidemic was occurring in the Wuhan area of China, and widely distributed that document throughout the top ranks of our government, warning that steps should be taken to protect US forces based in Asia. After the story aired, a Pentagon spokesman officially denied the existence of that November report, while various other top level government and intelligence officials refused to comment. But a few days later, Israeli television mentioned that in November American intelligence had indeed shared such a report on the Wuhan disease outbreak with its NATO and Israeli allies, thus seeming to independently confirm the complete accuracy of the original ABC News story and its several government sources.
It therefore appears that elements of the Defense Intelligence Agency were aware of the deadly viral outbreak in Wuhan more than a month before any officials in the Chinese government itself. Unless our intelligence agencies have pioneered the technology of precognition, I think this may have happened for the same reason that arsonists have the earliest knowledge of future fires.
Although criticism of the mainstream media has been the central theme of my American Pravda series, I always spend at least a couple of hours every morning carefully reading our leading newspapers, which I regard as unmatched sources of important information so long as their articles are treated with proper caution and rigor. Consider that most of the crucial evidence suggesting an American biowarfare attack was hidden in plain sight in such eminently respectable news sources as the NYT, the WSJ, and ABC News.
As our global confrontation with China has grown hotter, my morning New York Times has continued to provide invaluable information for anyone willing to read it carefully.
For example, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo probably ranks as the most prominent Deep State Neocon in the Trump Administration, and is a leading architect of our confrontation with China. Last week he broke quarantine to take a trip to Israel and hold important talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as reported in a 1,600 word NYT article. Although the majority of their discussion concerned American support for the proposed annexation of the Palestinian West Bank, a serious disagreement arose concerning Israel’s growing economic ties with China, with the piece noting that the Jewish State had “antagonized” Washington by allowing Chinese companies to make major infrastructure investments, some of them in sensitive locations. According to the three Times journalists, Netanyahu firmly stood his ground, determined to “push back” against Pompeo’s repeated warnings and refused to reconsider his government’s China policy.
But just a couple of days later, the Times then reported that Du Wei, the Chinese ambassador to Israel, age 57, had been found dead at his home, having suddenly fallen victim to “unspecified health problems.” The piece emphasized that he had become a leading public critic of America’s current policies toward China, and the juxtaposition of these two consecutive NYT articles raised all sorts of obvious questions in my mind.
According to standard mortality tables, an American male age 57 has less than a 1% chance of dying in a particular year, and given the similarity in overall life expectancy, the same must surely true of Chinese males. Recently appointed Chinese ambassadors are likely to be in reasonably good health rather than suffering the last stages of terminal cancer, but such causes together with obvious, visible injuries account for more than half of all fatalities at around that age. Thus, the likelihood that the 57-year-old Chinese diplomat died naturally within that two day window was probably far less than 1 in 50,000. Lightning does sometimes strike under the most unlikely of circumstances, but not very often; and I think that the unexplained deaths of ambassadors during international confrontations probably fall into the same category.
Thus, it seems exceptionally unlikely that the sudden demise of Ambassador Du was not somehow directly connected with the heated dispute between Pompeo and Netanyahu over Israel’s China ties that had occurred just two days earlier. The exact details and circumstances are entirely obscure, and we can merely speculate. But since speculation has not yet been outlawed by government edict, an interesting possibility comes to mind.
In sharp contrast to the elected leaders of America’s vassal-states throughout Europe and Asia, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu hardly regards himself as beholden to the American government. He is a powerful, arrogant individual who remembers the endless standing ovations that he enjoyed when he addressed our own House and Senate, receiving the sort of bipartisan public adulation that would be unimaginable for a Donald Trump, who remains deeply unpopular with half our Congress and nation. So faced with demands by a Trump envoy that he sacrifice his own nation’s interests by cancelling important Chinese economic projects, he apparently disregarded Pompeo’s warnings and told him to get lost.
The classic 1972 film The Godfather ranks #2 in the IMDb Movie Database, and one of its most famous scenes concerns a conflict between a powerful and arrogant Hollywood film mogul and a visiting representative of the Corleone family. When the polite requests of the latter are casually disregarded, the movie tycoon awakens to discover the bloody head of his prized race-horse in his own bed, thereby demonstrating the serious nature of the warning he had received and indicating that it should not be disregarded. Pompeo had recently served as CIA Director, and I suspect he called in a few favors with elements of the Israeli Mossad and had them take lethal steps to convince Netanyahu that our demands that he reassess his ties with China were of a serious nature, not to be treated lightly. I strongly suspect that the controversial Chinese-Israeli economic ventures will soon be curtailed or abandoned.
I had never heard of the unfortunate Chinese ambassador prior to his sudden demise, and under normal circumstances any such notions of American foul play might be dismissed as absurd. But consider that just a few months earlier, we had publicly assassinated a top Iranian leader after he was lured to Baghdad for peace negotiations, an act vastly more weighty than the plausible deniability of a middle-aged diplomat being found dead in his own home of unknown causes.
A few days later, my Wall Street Journal carried an article entitled China’s ‘Wolf Warrior’ Diplomats Are to Fight, beginning on the front page and running 2,200 words, by far the longest piece appearing in that day’s edition. Yet although the late Ambassador Du had been in the forefront of this ongoing Chinese campaign to challenge American influence, both in Israel and during his previous posting to Ukraine, and the sudden death of this particular “wolf warrior diplomat” was surely known to the journalists, his name appeared nowhere in the text, leading me to wonder whether it had been deliberately excised to avoid raising obvious suspicions in the WSJ readership.
For hundreds of years since the Treaty of Westphalia, the lives of diplomats have been almost always treated as sacrosanct, and a typical response to breaking such international conventions might be tit-for-tat retaliation. China’s leadership tends to be remarkably pragmatic, and recognizes that its national strength is rapidly growing even as our own society decays and declines, so perhaps they will forego any such reaction, at least for the time being. But if any American diplomats or other ranking officials begin to suffer strange fatalities, the explanation may be less than mysterious, though Google and Facebook will certainly do their best to keep it so.