Heading towards global war?

 

   By Reginald Johnson

            (Editors note:  As this article was being published, President Trump announced that the war on Iran would be over "soon." This is a bizarre statement. Just the day before, his war secretary Pete Hegseth said the war was "just beginning." On Saturday, Trump said ground troops could be sent to Iran. The administration doesn't seem to know what it is doing. If the war ends soon, that will be a good thing. But I'm very skeptical this will actually happen, because nothing that Trump says can be trusted. Remember this is the same president who ordered bombing attacks against Iran in the middle of what were supposed to be good faith negotiations with Iran over that country's nuclear development program. He did this twice, last year, and then again this year.) 

        As the Iran War ratchets up in intensity, there is fear the war could spark a global conflict with disastrous consequences.

       In the nine days since the United States and Israel launched their unprovoked attack on Iran, the war has already spilled over into many other countries in the region, with Iran hitting US bases and other targets in Bahrain, Kuwait, Dubai and Qatar. Israel has moved again into Lebanon, attacking the pro-Iranian group, Hezbollah.

   Missile attacks have also taken place against targets in Turkey and Azerbajan, with Israel blaming Iran. But the Iranians have denied responsibility and claim that Israel conducted "false flag" strikes trying to draw Turkey and Azerbajan into the war.

  In still more developments, Russia reportedly is providing Iran with intelligence on US targets in the region and US President Donald Trump is considering giving arms to the Kurds in Turkey, so they can invade Iran. Trump is also said to be weighing sending US ground troops to fight in Iran.

 Finally, as oil prices skyrocket due to shipping lanes being closed through the Strait of Hormuz, there are concerns about how China will respond to the situation. China gets 60 percent of its oil from Iran, and now that supply may be threatened with the strait closed.

    One of those who's deeply disturbed about the trend of events is Columbia Professor Jeffrey Sachs.

 "We are probably in the early days of World War III," said Sachs, a former UN official and a noted foreign policy critic. "The question is, whether it is contained."

   Speaking on a podcast with Prof. Glenn Diesen, Sachs said he's both concerned about the escalating trend of the war and also the irrational behavior of Trump.

  He described Trump as "mentally unhinged" and a "madman" determined to establish American hegemony around the world, despite the risks.

   Sachs said the world has seen madmen before who were bent on conquest, such as Napoleon and Hitler.

  But, Sachs said, "we've never had a circumstance like this in the nuclear age."

  "I would say the world is in a more dangerous situation than ever before. Period," he said. 

  Despite the gravity of the moment and Trump's reckless policy, Sachs said there are few in Washington, DC willing to call out Trump and demand that the war end before it is too late.

  "We're wondering, where, if any, are the grown-ups in the United States in positions of authority who will speak truthfully about this?" he said in another interview with Danny Haiphong.

    "I don't see almost any. There are a few voices in Congress, (Senator) Rand Paul is one of them, Congressman (Thomas) Massie is another...but there are very few others and this is what is alarming," Sachs said.

  Two other military/foreign policy experts, Ret. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson and former CIA analyst Larry Johnson said in interviews recently that due to economic pressures relating to the price of oil, and Israel's losses in the war, the Iran conflict would probably not last long. Both said that contrary to the glowing reports in the US media about US progress in the war, Israel was being hit hard by Iranian missiles and US bases have been badly damaged, too.

 Another concern for Israel is they are running out of interceptors to block incoming missiles.

Speaking on a podcast with Danny Haiphong, Wilkerson said his biggest worry is that Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu might resort to using a nuclear weapon if Israel is losing badly.

  "I have no doubt he'll use one," Wilkerson said. "That's really the problem."

Connecticut residents protest the US war on Iran

By Reginald Johnson

Recent days have seen protests pop up around Connecticut against the illegal attack by the United States and Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In Norwalk on Saturday, about 20 people attended a vigil against the war and an anti-war banner was hung over the I-95 bridge at Exit 16.

"We tried to stop this war. We we were unsuccessful. So now we're trying to stop this one as soon as we can," said John Miksad, one of the participants, in an interview with News 12.

Benjamin Wesley, who helped organize the vigil, said "Nobody wants this war but we have to be LOUD with our lawmakers and make it clear to them! The lives of our fellow American servicemen and citizens and Iranian servicemen and civilians hang in the balance."

Wesley said a big focus going forward should be on getting Congress to pass war powers resolutions which will require President Trump to obtain Congressional authorization before launching any further attacks on Iran.

Groups participating in the Norwalk protest were Veterans for Peace, Jewish Voice for Peace, World Beyond War. The Peace Pact and Democratic Socialists of Connecticut.

In New Haven, about 60 people rallied against the war on Sunday outside City Hall.

The ANSWER Coalition and the Party for Socialism and Liberation sponsored the demonstration, according to the New Haven Independent.

Trump: destroying international law

           By Reginald Johnson

    The distinguished economist and foreign policy analyst Prof. Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia says that President Trump is a "thug" who is flaunting both domestic and international law and creating a more dangerous world in the process.

      In an interview with Danny Haiphong following the US attack on Venezuela and abduction of that nation's leader Nicolas Maduro, Sachs said, "We have a thug who is President of the United States. He is threatening the lives of world leaders, kidnapping them, threatening the worst, threatening the president of Colombia, Gustavo Petro. This is thuggery."

Sachs said that  "we have international law to prevent human annihilation, to prevent the tragedy of international anarchy."

  But Trump is ignoring rules outlined in the UN Charter prohibiting threats against other countries, its leaders and attacks against other countries except in cases of self-defense.

 Sachs said the assault on Venezuela was "brazenly illegal" and a "grotesque violation of the UN Charter."

"Trump is ripping up the UN Charter. Obviously, he did not pay one iota of attention to it and in my view this extroardinarily dangerous," he said.

 In other comments on the Venezuela situation to the UN Security Council, Sachs, a former advisor to the Secretary-General, said it was imperative that the world body condemn the US attack on Venezuela, and threats against other countries.

  He urged the council to pass resolutions calling on the United States to "immediately cease and desist from all explicit and implicit threats or use of force against Venezuela," end the naval quarantine and withdraw all forces from in or near Venezuela.

 Sachs closed his remarks to the council with a sobering message: "The survival of humanity depends on whether the United Nations Charter remains a living instrument of international law or is allowed to wither into irrelevance. That is the choice before this council today."

  The Venezuelan representative to the UN, Samuel Moncada, condemned the US attack and also pleaded with the council to do something.

  "If the kidnapping of a Head of State, the bombing of a sovereign country and the open threat of further armed action are tolerated or downplayed, the message sent to the world is a devastating one --- namely, that the law is optional and that force is the true arbiter of international relations," he said.

 US Ambassador to the UN Michael Waltz, meanwhile, justified the US assault by characterizing it as a "law enforcement action" designed to remove a "narco-trafficker" who was involved in illegal activity harmful to the American people. About 100 Venezuelan and Cuban security forces died during the attack.

  "There is no war against Venezuela," he said.

Despite wide criticism by member countries of the US action, the council failed to take up any statement condemning the attack.

  In recent weeks, Trump has continued his pattern of threatening other countries. He's demanded that Denmark give up control of Greenland and turn it over to the US, saying that America needs Greenland for national security. Trump has indicated he would use military force if a "deal" is not reached.

 Most disturbingly, Trump continues to threaten Iran, saying that the government there is crushing a purported "democratic uprising" by the people and the US may have to take punitive military action. The US already bombed Iran last year, with Trump claiming the US needed to destroy that nation's alleged nuclear bombing-making facilities. Iran has denied making any nuclear weapons.

  It should be noted that last year's attack was illegal under the UN Charter, since Iran had not attacked the US and there was no threat of an imminent attack by Iran. Any renewed attack by the US would be similarly illegal.

  Sachs said "there is a high likelihood" of war with Iran in the near future.

 "If it happens," he said, "that would be vastly more dangerous than what's happening in the Americas, because that area is in the most explosive zone in the world and it is an area where the great powers can easily clash and where escalation --- even to nuclear war --- becomes possible."

Has World War III already started?

 

                           

      By Reginald Johnson

 

Foreign policy analyst Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson sees alarming parallels between what’s happening in the world today and the year 1914,  when World War I broke out.

Like Britain and France at that time who were desperately trying to hold onto their empires in the face of a rising German state, the United States is now trying to maintain its global hegemony as China surges as an economic and military power.

“Mark my word, we’re already in World War III. We are in the opening stages of World War III,” said Wilkerson.

 “And this war is going to be fought and it will be fought whether it starts in Southwest Asia, the Arctic or as the war continues in Ukraine and spreads, it will be fought in order to stop the same thing that Britain and France were trying to stop years and years ago ---the overtaking of the American empire by China and its other friends. That’s what we’re involved in today,” said Wilkerson.

 Then he added ominously, “The difference, the salient difference between today and then is, we have nuclear weapons.”

Col. Wilkerson was part of a discussion hosted by Danny Haiphong about President Trump’s recent moves on Ukraine and global tensions in general. Former CIA analyst Larry Johnson also took part.

Wilkerson once was Chief of Staff  to Secretary of State Colin Powell during the Bush administration.  Early on he supported the Iraq War but later became a critic.  In recent years he’s been a commentator on  foreign affairs, often criticizing Israel and US policy in the Middle East.

Wilkerson said the US is in a “very, very serious” situation globally and Americans need to get a grasp on it.

Both he and Johnson criticized Trump on his management of foreign policy.

“To have Trump in the chairman’s seat, so to speak, is an utter disaster,” Wilkerson said.

                                                                                                          

Trump reneges on promise, ups the ante in Ukraine

   Reginald Johnson

 In a policy change that potentially has grave implications for the world, Donald Trump has reversed course on Ukraine.

The Financial Times is reporting that sources familiar with a phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky last month indicated that Trump is now in favor of sending long-range offensive missiles to Ukraine and encouraged the Ukrainian leader to use them to hit targets deep inside Russia.

In an interview with the BBC, the author of the Financial Times report, Christopher Miller, recounted the conversation as he heard it from the sources.

 Trump asked Zelensky that if the US provided long-range missiles to Ukraine, “Can you hit Moscow? Can you hit St. Petersburg, too?”

Zelensky replied, “Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons.”

Trump said he supported the idea of sending the missiles so “Russia can feel the pain for its invasion” and also push them to the negotiating table.

 Trump’s comments backing the idea of sending long-range missiles to Ukraine to strike deep inside Russia represent a 360 degree shift in policy from what Trump had been saying throughout the 2024 presidential campaign and early in his administration this year following his reelection.

 Previously he said repeatedly that he wanted to settle the Ukraine war quickly and he had not indicated any willingness to send more lethal weaponry to Ukraine to perpetuate the conflict. Trump had criticized former President Joseph Biden for supporting Ukraine in its war against Russia and said the conflict never would’ve happened if he had been president.

Early this year after his inauguration, Trump promised to work out a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin on a peace deal. There have been several efforts to bring that about but there’s been no resolution. Trump had also refused to sign off on new weapons shipments being sent to Ukraine.

 But in recent weeks Trump has been vocally criticizing Putin saying that the Russian leader was not willing to settle on a peace agreement and had undermined the peace process by approving missile and drone strikes against Ukraine, including against the capital, Kiev.

On Monday, Trump had a long press conference at the White House sitting with the NATO general secretary in which he stated again that he was upset with Putin and was now prepared to send defensive Patriot missiles to Ukraine to protect that country against incoming Russian missile and drone attacks. He also announced that he would impose steep tariffs on Russia.

But he did not indicate during a press conference that he was prepared to send long-range missiles to Ukraine. Now the Financial Times report indicates that the president has adopted a position of being aggressive in the Ukraine war similar to the policy the Biden administration had taken, a policy which Trump and many conservative media voices had criticized. 

The shift by Trump is deeply troubling and his willingness to now send offensive weaponry to Ukraine puts the entire world at risk in the same way that Biden’s policy put the world at risk. The flip-flop by Trump exposes him (again) as an extremely dishonest person who apparently was simply playing politics during the 2024 campaign, trying to tap into antiwar sentiment among many voters.

 To the delight of many of his supporters during the campaign, Trump bragged about how he could settle the Ukraine war in short order, at one point saying that he could settle it with a phone call “in a half hour.” At no point during the campaign did he ever indicate that he would be willing to change his position and send more lethal weaponry to Ukraine to perpetuate the war.

Trump’s new and dangerous policy on Ukraine must be criticized widely by people on both the left and the right. It’s time for Democrats, in particular, to stop hemming and hawing about the Ukraine war and demand that it end. Hundreds of thousands, perhaps over a million people, have died. For what?

Trump’s remarks about “hitting Moscow” are provocative and undermine chances for peace.

  Those comments and a move to send more long-range missiles to Ukraine will be seen as an escalation of the war by Putin and Russian leaders.

  Donald Trump has just made the world a lot less safe.

Trump heats up war with Iran with disturbing posts

By Reginald Johnson

In another unhinged social media post today, President Trump said that "we" know where Ayatollah Khameni, the Supreme Leader of Iran is hiding, and "we could take him out now" but won't "for now." Trump demanded Iran surrender to avoid further death and destruction. Trump sounds like some mob boss plotting the death of his enemies.

 He also said in another post that "we" control the skies over Iran, making it abundantly clear the US is working closely with Israel on the attack against Iran. There's no pretense anymore that the US is not fully involved in the Iran war.

 The American people have to rise up and say NO to this war! This could turn into a catastrophic regional war, or even a world war, where millions would die.

 Though the horse is out of the barn, people should still back Sen. Tim Kaine's Senate resolution to block Trump from attacking Iran without Congressional approval. Call 202-224-3121 and demand your senators support the resolution.

At this stage, people better start demanding impeachment as well. Trump is acting recklessly and in violation of the Constitution in many ways.

 

 

Newtown protestors blast Trump cuts

  By Reginald Johnson

   

   NEWTOWN, CT --- Despite a chill in the air and light rain, hundreds of people showed up at a park here Saturday to protest the Trump administration’s possible cutbacks in federal services including Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security and legal attacks on the rights of immigrants and pro-Palestinian activists.

 The “Hands-off” rally was one of many held in Connecticut and around the country to demonstrate strong grassroots opposition to the reductions discussed by President Trump and his billionaire advisor Elon Musk and the administration’s fascistic policies on deportations and free speech rights.

  “I want to let you know that in Connecticut people are coming out by the thousands!”  Lt. Gov. Susan Bysiewicz shouted to the crowd. “In Middletown, I was at a march with 1000 people, in Guilford there was 700 people on Guilford Green, there was 1000 people on the New Haven Green and now we’re looking at here 500 plus people in Newtown strong!” she said, as people cheered.

   "People are saying “Hands off our rights, hands off our liberty, hands off our democracy, and hands off our wallets!” Bysiewicz said, adding “That’s why Donald Trump, while you’re out playing golf, in Newtown we’re standing up and speaking out about everything that’s right about our country.”

 Bysiewicz went on: “What’s really important is that the proposed federal cuts are aimed at decimating all of the programs that lifted people up and kept people out of poverty. That is Medicare, that is Medicaid and that is Social Security --- the things that help the most vulnerable people in our state. If you don’t know this, you need to, that in Connecticut nearly 1 million people out of  3 million plus residents, rely on Medicaid for their healthcare. So that’s our kids, that’s our elderly, those are the pregnant moms."

  Trump and officials in his administration insist that they plan no actual reduction in services in programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security but they are trying to root out “waste, fraud and abuse.”  Musk, who is heading the new "Department of Government Efficiency," or “DOGE,” maintains that the waste uncovered will secure hundreds of billions of dollars worth of savings, without reducing services.

 But people at the Newtown rally and other critics say Trump and Musk are lying and that cutbacks in services are definitely on the horizon and people will be hurt.

    

Rally-goers in Newtown express their feelings. (Reginald Johnson photo)

                                   

Some fear the rise of fascism under Trump. (Reginald Johnson photo)

                                 

          

             

 

Joe Biden the divider

   

By Reginald Johnson

Commentary

   Prior to last Thursday night’s speech by President Biden at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, entitled “A Battle for the Soul of America,”  administration officials promised that the address would be high-minded and non-political.

 Well, it was anything but that. In fact, Joe Biden delivered one of the most divisive and irresponsible speeches ever given by a President during an official address.

 Speaking in dark lighting with two Marines standing guard in the background, Biden lashed into Donald Trump and his supporters --- that’s about 75 million people ---and effectively called them enemies of the state.

“Too much of what’s happening in our country today is not normal,” Biden said. “Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent in extremism that threatens the very foundation of our republic.”

 Since most of the Republican Party are Trump supporters, Biden was calling Republicans traitors.

 Joe McCarthy couldn’t have done it better.

 Remember, this is the same Joe Biden who urged Americans during his Inaugural Address on Jan. 20, 2021 to “lower the temperature” and work with him to “unite” the country. What hypocrisy.

Instead of bringing the country together, Biden’s speech --- together with other recent comments where he called Trump supporters “semi-fascists” ----  deepens the polarization in our land, already severe.

For someone who voted for Biden, this is a deep disappointment.

It appears that Biden and the Democrats --- looking at low poll numbers heading into the 2022 congressional elections and probably weak prospects in terms of retaining the presidency in 2024 --- have decided to go all out with a vitriolic campaign demonizing the Republicans and the likely 2024 GOP nominee,  Donald Trump.

As pollster and political analyst Tom Bevan of Real Clear Politics said on Thursday night, the Democrats are going “scorched-earth.”

This approach is in no way uplifting and will not help to move our country forward.

Biden condemned the January 6, 2021 Capitol riots perpetrated by Trump supporters which caused a great amount of damage, a lot of injuries and clearly interrupted the electoral process from going forward as provided for in the Constitution. On this one, Biden is right.  The violent behavior of Trump supporters at that incident was a disgrace and the prosecution of people who were involved in that is entirely proper and I certainly favor a continuing and objective investigation of what happened that day.

 But the implication that since some Trump backers were involved in that sorry chapter and Republicans in general hold objectionable views, means all Trump supporters and Republicans represent a “unique threat” to American democracy is flat-out dishonest.

President Joe Biden (Wikimedia commons)

 The fact of the matter is that some Democrats and their allies in the administrative state have also worked in recent years to subvert  the democratic process. As facts now amply demonstrate, the charge made in 2016 and 2017 that Trump was somehow colluding with Russia and that Russia was aiding him in getting elected was based on lies and fabrications made up in large part by operatives in the Hillary Clinton campaign.

  Democratic allies in the Federal Bureau of Investigation then aided and abetted this phony campaign first by trying to thwart Trump’s election chances and then trying to undermine his presidency after the New York businessman beat Clinton in the 2016 election. This was a coup attempt.

  As we all know, the Mueller investigation, after spending some $40 million and turning over every rock, found out that the claims about Trump Russia collusion were baseless.

  A Department of Justice Inspector General’s report and other investigations showed that many FBI and DOJ officials acted illegally during this period, lying to investigators and signing false affidavits, among other things.

  We also now know from whistleblowers stepping forward that FBI operatives worked behind the scenes to downplay the seriousness of the Hunter Biden corruption investigation in 2020 and tried to make sure that the media would not publicize any information about Hunter Biden’s alleged wrongdoing prior to the 2020 election.

 Playing the Russia card again, FBI officials along with other intelligence leaders, spread the false claim that what was in the Hunter Biden laptop was “Russian disinformation.” According to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, FBI officials told Facebook officials that the negative information coming out of Biden’s laptop was likely from Russia and could not be trusted. As a result, Facebook and other media censored stories alleging illegal activity by Hunter Biden in his business dealings overseas --- and Joe Biden’s possible links to that corruption.

  The FBI suppression tactics clearly benefited Joe Biden in his presidential bid. Recent polls have shown that many Americans who voted for Biden now say that if they had known about the Hunter Biden laptop and what was in it prior to the election, they wouldn’t have voted for Joe Biden.

So this was clearly election interference and an attack on American democracy, perpetrated by Democrats and their allies in the intelligence community and media.

In in another case, Democrats and abortion rights activists launched an irresponsible campaign against a sacred institution in our government when they engaged in illegal protests outside the homes of Supreme Court justices prior to the decision on overturning Roe v. Wade. The protests, combined with the arrest of a man bent on killing Justice Kavanaugh, were intimidating and represented an attack on the work of the court.

The upshot of all this is that Democrats as well as Republicans have engaged in or condoned improper and undemocratic activities in the past. Neither side is pure.

As a friend of mine in Bridgeport would say, ‘there’s been shit on both sides.’

What we need in this country are leaders who can rise above the fray, not pander to their bases and not engage in the politics of demonization. It would be helpful as well, if the media would do the same.

It’s going to take all of us, or at least a good majority of us --- and that includes Republicans --- to really move this country forward. The nation is plagued by a number of serious crises related to the economy and how we spend our budget dollars. On that last point alone, do we want to spend billions and billions of dollars on pointless and destructive wars overseas, or spend them on addressing critical needs at home? I think there’s common ground there.

 But it’s going to take real leaders to find those areas of agreement, to nurture them and move forward.

Joe Biden, instead of sounding like a demagogue villifying an opposition group, would do well to follow the words he spoke at his Inauguration: “We can see each other not as adversaries but as neighbors. We can treat each other with dignity and respect. We can join forces, stop the shouting and lower the temperature. For without unity there is no peace, only bitterness and fury. No progress, only exhausting outrage. No nation, only a state of chaos… We must end this uncivil war that pits red against blue, rural versus urban, conservative versus liberal. We can do this if we open our souls instead of hardening our hearts. If we show a little tolerance and humility.”

 Amen.

 

 

 

 

 

Syria coverup: lying about chemical attacks

 

   

By Reginald Johnson

 

  For years, the United States government has been trying to overthrow the regime of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad --- claiming that Assad is a brutal human rights violator who uses chemical weapons against his own people.

   The US claims Assad has done this on a number of occasions, the most recent being April 2018 when the Syrian military allegedly poisoned people in the city of Douma with a gas attack, leaving 40-50 people dead.

  That purported attack was used to justify a missile strike on Syrian government sites ordered by former President Trump. Six people were killed in the bombing.

  Now however, the truth is beginning to emerge that the 2018 chemical attack in Douma was a lie.

   Several former investigators and a former top official with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons have come out and stated that a finding by the OPCW in 2019 which confirmed the chemical attack, was invalid.

  The former inspectors further stated that an interim report they authored determined that no such chemical attack had occurred, but that report was scuttled and the information and in it never made public. Key scientific findings were censored and the inspectors were removed from the probe.

 Documents which have been leaked to Wikileaks and to the Grayzone investigative news website, confirm what the whistleblowers stated, according to Aaron Mate, a writer with the Grayzone.

  “They show in great detail what was happening here and what a cover-up this was,” Mate said on the Tucker Carlson show on Fox TV March 12.

  Mate said there is a push on now to set the record straight. The former OPCW officials have demanded that the organization hold an open forum to discuss all the findings and determine the truth. So far however, OPCW management has refused to do that and in fact has publicly condemned the whistleblowers.

   Now, a group of distinguished authors, academics, antiwar activists and a former US presidential candidate have joined with the whistleblowers and a former top OPCW official to issue a “Statement of Concern” calling out the organization’s actions. Those signing the statement include Noam Chomsky, Daniel Ellsberg, author John Pilger, Ret. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson and former presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard.

  In the statement posted on the website for the Courage Foundation, which represents whistleblowers, the group criticized the OPCW management and demanded a transparent and open investigation of the April 2018 attack.

  “The issue at hand threatens to severely damage the reputation and credibility of the OPCW and undermine its vital role in the pursuit of peace and security,” the statement read. “It is simply not tenable for a scientific organization like the OPCW to refuse to respond openly to the criticisms and concerns of its own scientists whilst being associated with attempts to discredit and smear those scientists.”

   The statement on, “We believe that the interests of the OPCW are best served by the director general providing a transparent and neutral forum in which the concerns of all the investigators can be heard as well as ensuring that a fully objective and scientific investigation is completed.” 

 The United States has been militarily intervening in Syria over the past decade, first supplying arms to anti-Assad rebels and then introducing hundreds of American troops. During the intervention more than 400,000 Syrians have lost their lives.

   Trump is not the last president to order a military strike against Syria. In February, President Biden ordered airstrikes on Syrian targets, killing 22 people. The administration said the airstrikes were made in retaliation for rocket attacks launched by Iranian-backed militias in Syria against US targets in Iraq.

  Mate said it is critical that the lie about the supposed chemical attack in Douma be exposed.

  “These lies can lead to war.  We know the consequences in Iraq of going to war with Iraq based on lies.” Mate said during his appearance on FOX.

  He added, “Even now today these allegations of chemical attacks in Syria are being used to justify the ongoing military occupation there and the sanctions that are destroying Syria, preventing the import of food and medicine, destroying Syria’s economy and preventing it from rebuilding. That is not good for Syrians and that is not good for Americans. It’s only good for warmongers in Washington.”

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

Biden the best choice

 

   ELECTION VIEWPOINT

By Reginald Johnson

 

 I have to admit that I have my problems with the Democrats and Joe Biden.

 I don’t like the fact that the party has been weak in opposing future wars and reducing the military budget. In fact, many Democrats have been vigorous supporters of huge military budgets, which siphon away vital resources from domestic needs.

 I also don’t like the fact that party leaders embraced the phony “Russia-gate” narrative, which held incorrectly that  President Trump was some kind of Russian agent. All the talk about Russia collusion served to undermine the potential for a more peaceful relationship between the US and Russia. 

 Additionally, I’m not happy that the party failed to condemn the violence that engulfed American cities this past summer, violence which was provoked in considerable part by left-wing groups.

 Finally, I’m troubled by the recent allegations of possible corruption and ethical wrongdoing by Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. These certainly need investigation.

   Having said all that, I’m casting my vote for Joe Biden over Donald Trump in tomorrow’s presidential election. The choice is very clear --- based on a number of critical issues.

 First and foremost is climate change. This is clearly an existential threat and we have to marshal all our resources to fight it. That means the United States must get back into the Paris Climate Accords and the nation must change our energy use ---- moving to renewable sources and getting away from fossil fuels. That means implementing the Green New Deal. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for vice president, support going back to the Paris Accords and moving to green energy conversion, even if Biden has equivocated recently on the issue of fracking. They’re headed in the right direction.

 By contrast, Trump has rejected the Paris Accords and wholeheartedly supports the continuation of fossil fuel use. This kind of position is simply unacceptable, given the gravity of global warming and its consequences, which include ever worsening forest fires, deadly heat waves and ever more violent hurricanes.

  Second is health issues. President Trump has badly fumbled management of the Covid-19 pandemic and has consistently sent the wrong signal to the American people about how serious this crisis is. He has pooh-poohed the Covid threat and that has probably cost many lives. Biden would clearly set a better tone on handling this crisis and move to set up a comprehensive testing program. He would likely push Congress more vigorously to come up with a badly needed stimulus package to help the American people, and not just corporations.

  Relatedly, Biden and Harris would shore up and likely improve the Affordable Care Act program. “Obama-care” as it is known, clearly has deficiencies, but it is certainly better than what the nation had before, which was nothing. Trump has proposed to eliminate “Obama-care” altogether and come up with what he says will be a new and better plan. But he has offered no details on exactly what this would be. This situation again is unacceptable. While the ultimate goal should be for the nation to move to Medicare-for-all, retaining Obama-care for now is clearly the best option over doing nothing.

     Finally, I think Biden would try to heal some of the divisions that now the beset our country and be much better on the issue of race. Trump has all too often stoked racial divisions and been divisive with his rhetoric. Biden is not perfect either on the issue of race, but he’ll be a lot better than Trump.

   One important point to remember is that while Biden is not the most progressive person in the world, he will likely be pushed towards more progressive policies by people who will likely have serious power in Congress, including Sen. Bernie Sanders and Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez.

 So, Biden-Harris is my choice tomorrow.

 And with that, I’m taking a break from writing for a while. 

 It’s off to the park to take a few fall walks and head back to the garden to harvest some late broccoli.

  Happy voting!

 

Progressive journalist quits over censorship

By Reginald Johnson 

      In the latest journalism travesty, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Glenn Greenwald has been forced out of the publication he co-founded because editors there were censoring his stories about possible corruption by Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.

  Greenwald, who started The Intercept in 2014 after he broke stories about unlawful surveillance of the American people by the National Security Agency, resigned from The Intercept after editors said they would not run any of his stories unless he removed all material critical of Joe Biden.

  The Intercept --- along with almost all of the mainstream and left media --- have blacked out all the revelations in stories done by the New York Post concerning apparent influence peddling and possible criminal wrongdoing in connection with payments by foreign nationals to Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son. Also blacked out has been a statement by a Hunter Biden business associate that contradicted claims by Joe Biden that he knew nothing of his son’s business ventures in countries including Ukraine and China.

 The FBI is reportedly investigating Hunter Biden for money laundering.

   Biden, who served as Vice President from 2009-2017 in the administration of Barack Obama, was in charge of foreign policy concerning Ukraine and China, when his son went into business in Ukraine.

  Biden, who is facing Donald Trump in Tuesday’s presidential election, has denied any wrongdoing related to his son’s business dealings and said the stories were part of a Republican “smear campaign.”

  That denial has satisfied most of the media, the same media who acted like sharks smelling blood every time a report surfaced in the past about possible nepotism or nefarious activities by Trump family members.

  Biden supporters and many in the media have instead labeled the Post stories as “Russian disinformation” --- based on statements by former CIA Director John Brennan and former NSA Directors James Clapper and Michael Hayden.

 In an interview on FOX with Tucker Carlson, Greenwald said he was shocked to see even The Intercept ran a story referencing the claims by the former intelligence chiefs about Russian disinformation, even though the officials admitted in their full statement they had no hard evidence of a Russian link.

  Greenwald said The Intercept was founded on the idea that the media must be skeptical about the claims of the intelligence community, in light of the revelations about illegal mass surveillance by the NSA brought forth by whistleblower Edward Snowden and reported by Greenwald.

  The investigative journalist said that in recent years an "unholy union" has come about between the media, the intelligence community, neo-cons, Silicon Valley (tech companies such as Google and Facebook). Democrats and Wall Street to advance a certain point of view and rule out independent voices. 

 Part of the reason for that joining of forces is that the left, which used to criticize the CIA, now likes the intelligence community because the CIA and FBI promoted the Russia-Trump collusion investigation, which nearly drove Trump from office, Greenwald said. The collusion narrative fell on its face however, when Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation found no conspiracy had taken place between the Trump campaign and Russia in influencing the 2016 election. 

  That "union of power," Greenwald contended, fully backs the Democratic Party which is likely to take over the Senate and possibly the presidency on Tuesday.

   "That is a very alarming proposition because they are authoritarian, they believe in censorship, they believe in suppression of information that exposes them in any kind of critical light," Greenwald said.

  The media has behaved very unprofessionally in refusing to probe the Biden allegations. That failure, together with the mistakes the press made in not covering the Russia-collusion controversy more critically, has left the media as an institution in tatters.

 That has grave implications for our democracy, since a vigorous and objective press is vital for our system to work well.

 Glenn Greenwald has not sold out. In my book, he's a hero.

   

 

 

 

 

New York City: Catastrophe Looming

    

By Reginald Johnson

   

  

     NEW YORK --- The mayor of America's largest city is warning that unless hospitals in the city receive critically-needed medical supplies in the near future, people will die unnecessarily from the Coronavirus disease.

   Mayor Bill deBlasio told CNN Sunday the city has over 8,000 cases of COVID-19, a third of the total cases nationally and the “worst is yet to come.”

   But the federal government is not coming through with the level of assistance needed to deal with the crisis, he said.

  “We’re not getting shipments. We’re not getting the stuff we need,” deBlasio said. “If we don’t get more ventilators in the next 10 days,  people will die that don’t have to die.”

  Mayor deBlasio spoke as the nation continues to reel from the impact of the Coronavirus pandemic. Many cities and states are on a virtual lockdown, where non-essential businesses have been shut down and residents are being largely confined to their homes, as authorities try to stop the spread of the virus.

  Leaders from different areas of the country have been complaining that hospitals in their localities are facing shortages of key medical supplies and equipment to treat patients with COVID-19. And they’re demanding that the federal government do more.

  The most vocal critic has been deBlasio, who says that the Trump administration’s piecemeal efforts to deal with the pandemic are totally inadequate. The administration has encouraged various companies to ramp up production of needed supplies and then either donate or sell them to hospitals. Governors have also been authorized to use the National Guard where necessary to help out and the Army Corps of Engineers is being brought in some cases to build more temporary hospital beds.

    But the New York mayor said Trump has to go further and invoke the Defense Production Act, which will allow him to order private companies to go full speed on manufacturing vital supplies and equipment and get them to hospitals. The law will also enable the president to get the military involved in distribution and in providing medical personnel where needed.

  “If you don’t order companies to maximize production of ventilators, surgical masks and all the things that are desperately needed, and organize that, and prioritize where it's going to go, it won't happen in time," he said.

  Mayor deBlasio said that a "full-scale mobilization of the military is needed to deal with the greatest crisis domestically since the Great Depression."
  He added that invoking the Defense Production Act and mobilizing the military are steps that presidents in the past, Republican and Democrat, would have taken by now.
  "Eisenhower would have done it, Truman would have done it, John Kennedy would have done it. Come on!"
  US Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, agreed with deBlasio's view in another interview on CNN. She said officials from hospitals in her district are predicting shortages of ventilators and beds.
  She said Trump needs to invoke the Defense Production Act immediately. 
  "We cannot wait until people are really dying in large numbers to start production, especially of more sophisticated equipment like ventilators and beds," she said. 

  

Protesting a War with Iran

      By Reginald Johnson 

   NEW HAVEN  ---  Scores of protesters gathered here Sunday to condemn the US airstrike in Iraq which killed a top Iranian military official, an act which they said could touch off a catastrophic Middle East war.

   “Unless the people rise up and stop it, this war will engulf the whole region and quickly turn into a global conflict,” said a speaker from the anti-war group A.N.S.W.E.R, which sponsored the rally.

  “For all who believe in peace and for all those who want to avert another catastrophic war, now is the time to take action,” she said.

   The rally in New Haven was one of more than 70 protests around the country which took place over the weekend, following the assassination airstrike which killed Qaessem Soleimani after he arrived at Baghdad, Iraq airport. Soleimani was the head of Iran’s elite Quds military force and considered the second most powerful person in Iran.

   President Trump said that he ordered the airstrike after receiving intelligence which indicated that Soleimani was planning a number of deadly attacks on American forces in the Middle East. The American administration also blamed Soleimani for orchestrating the killing of hundreds of Americans in the past.

  But speakers at the rally questioned the intelligence and said that Trump and other officials are lying just the way Bush administration officials lied 16 years ago about Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction (which were never found) to provide a pretext for the invasion of Iraq. That invasion began a long and bloody war which led to the deaths of 5,000 Americans and upwards of 1 million Iraqis.

  “If he (Soleimani) was the kind of person they are claiming, he would’ve been taken out years ago,” said one speaker from A.N.S.W.E.R, which stands for Act Now to Stop War and End Racism.

   That speaker also said that the Iraq War cost hundreds of billions of dollars --- money diverted from funding social services and human needs back home.

   Another speaker who identified himself as an indigenous person, reminded people that the land where they were standing on was once land held by the Quinnipiac Indian tribe.  But the land was later taken away by European colonial governments.

  “Just like the Quinnipiac people, the people of Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, don’t have a say in how they are treated by this illegal, imperialist and immoral government.  This is what’s been happening for the last 527 years,” he said, referring to the landing of explorer Christopher Columbus in the Caribbean in 1492.  Columbus’s arrival began a wave of European immigration to North and South  America and in the process the systematic decimation of native peoples on the continents.

   The speaker went on, “There has not been a period in the history of this government when it hasn’t been attacking some country around the world. Whether it is in South America, Central America, the Middle East,  Asia, the Philippines,  Puerto Rico, Cuba... this government is criminal and what happened the other day was an act of war and a war crime.”

   He then led the crowd in a chant: “Trump says more war. We say no war!  Trump says more war. We say no war!”     

    

   

  

  

  

Protestors to Trump: Hands Off Venezuela!

      

 By Reginald Johnson

    

   NEW HAVEN ---- As tensions mount between the United States and Venezuela and a military conflict grows more likely, people rallied around the country last Saturday to  protest President Trump’s threats against the Latin American country.

    One of those rallies took place in New Haven, where about 25 people gathered in chilly temperatures at the corner of Church and Elm streets downtown to protest US policy and demand that their elected representatives stand and be counted.

  Pres. Trump said in response to a question about  possible US military intervention that “all options are on the table” for the United States to achieve its goal of replacing the government of President Nicholas Maduro and install the pro-American Juan Guaido.            .

   Several speakers said that the US needs to keep its hands off Venezuela and respect its sovereignty. They charged that the main reason that the US wants Maduro to step down is because the US wants a more pliable government in Caracas so US corporations can gain control of Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.

   “What is the problem with Venezuela?  It’s just that they decided to be independent from the United States and that is the only thing they are guilty of,” said John Lugo, of Unidad Latina en Accion in Connecticut.

 Lugo also said that “The money that is being spent on Venezuela by the US is money that could be used in this country --- we have a homeless crisis, we have a food crisis in the United States and yet we keep invading and destabilizing countries like Venezuela.”

   Jim Pandaru, a Vietnam veteran, said his experience taught him how wrong war is. “Venezuela.  What’s it going to be tomorrow? Iran? …. We have to stop this madness.”

  Henry Lowendorf, co-chair of the Greater New Haven Peace Council, which sponsored the rally, asked people to sign a petition demanding that US Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-3,  speak out against Trump’s harrassment of Venezuela  and support and co-sponsor legislation which would block the US from using its military in that country.

  “We are asking her to speak out because she has been silent as most representatives in Congress have been about Trump’s threats to invade  Venezuela; she has been silent about the deadly sanctions against Venezuela; and she has been silent about the coup,” he said.

  Lowendorf also suggested that people who live in other districts in Connecticut get their congress members to support the legislation, which has been introduced  by U.S. Rep. David Cicilline, a Democrat from Rhode Island.

   At the end of the speeches, the group marched over to DeLauro’s office at 59 Elm Street, chanting  “Stop the War on Venezuela!” Stop the War on Venezuela!”

   DeLauro’s office was closed, but the group said they will be back and present the petitions on Monday.

    Lowendorf said he worries that the United States will create some incident to serve as a justification for intervening in Venezuela.

   “They’re trying to provoke something they can use,” he said.

Protesting the Coup in Venezuela

  By Reginald Johnson

    NEW HAVEN --- Members of the Greater New Haven Peace Council showed up in frigid weather outside City Hall on Friday to pass out leaflets urging people to oppose the Trump administration’s coup attempt in Venezuela.

     Claiming that Venezuelan leader Nicholas Maduro is running an undemocratic failed state, administration officials are demanding that Maduro step down and be replaced by a man backed by the United States, Juan Guaido.

   On Wednesday, President Donald Trump said that “all options are on the table” --- implying that if Maduro is not willing to step down, the United States would consider using military force to get rid of him.

   Peace Council member Jim Pandaru said people are tired of America trying to force regime change around the world, often using force to achieve its ends. He cited Iraq and Libya as recent examples.

   “ I’m here to draw attention to another American misadventure overseas, getting involved and continuing endless wars.  Everybody is almost taking war as a given, as a natural thing just like getting dressed in the morning. This madness has to stop,” said Pandaru, a Vietnam veteran and member of Veterans for Peace.

Jim Pandaru of the Greater New Haven Peace Council protesting US-orchestrated coup in Venezuela.

    Pandaru said the administration is lying by saying that they want to replace Maduro in order to bring more democracy and freedom to the Venezuelan people. “Venezuela is sitting on top of one of the greatest oil reserves in the world and we just want to get our hands on it,” he said.

    Peace Council members urged people to call their elected representatives in Congress to demand that the United States stay out of Venezuela and stop interfering in the affairs of other countries. The congressional switchboard is 202- 224-3121.  The White House number is 202-456-1111.

Losing Focus

                                                    

 By Reginald Johnson      

  It’s a shame that the important news coming out of the summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump about the US and Russia beginning to patch up their relationship and avoid nuclear catastrophe has been buried amid the furor over Trump’s comment doubting whether Russia was responsible for meddling in the 2016 election.

  After years of a declining relationship between Russia and the United States the leaders of the two countries met in Helsinki and had what they both said were constructive talks dealing with nuclear nonproliferation and other key geopolitical issues.

   Speaking at a press conference following the summit, Putin said that the talks had been “very successful and very useful.”

   He added, “The difficulties and tensions between the two countries do not have any objective grounds. The Cold War is over. The times of ideological confrontation are in the past and the situation in the world is drastically changed.”

   Putin continued that only by the US and Russia “standing together” can the world overcome issues of nuclear proliferation and regional conflicts.

   Trump said that the leaders had a “deeply open and productive dialogue and it went very well.”

  The president added, “The disagreements between our two countries are well known and President Putin and I discussed them at length today,” Trump said. “If we’re going to solve many of the problems we face in the world then we’re going to have to find ways to cooperate in pursuit of shared interests.”

  Together the US and Russia hold 90% of all the nuclear weapons in the world. According to the American Federation of Scientists, the United States has 4000 nuclear warheads and the Russian Federation has 4300.

  A nuclear conflict between Russia and the United States, should it ever break out, would be the ultimate catastrophe. There would be no winner. For those who might escape the immediate effects of a nuclear attack, they wouldn’t live long due to massive radiation fallout and nuclear winter. All life on the planet would be effectively ended.

  Negotiations between the US and Russia are imperative to avoid a potential Armageddon.

Hiroshima, Japan in August, 1945 after US dropped an atomic bomb. Today's nuclear warheads are far more powerful. (Photo- metro.co.UK)

  
Donald Trump did the right thing by going to Helsinki and meeting Putin. He followed in the footsteps of many presidents before him who have met with Russian leaders to work out agreements on arms control and conflict resolution.

   By the accounts of the two leaders, the summit went well and was a step towards improving US Russian relations and avoiding catastrophic conflict.

   But that important  news was all lost amid the furor --- really hysteria --- over an inept comment Trump made during the press conference when he was responding to a question about who was responsible for the alleged hacking  of Democratic Party emails during the 2016 election campaign.

   Trump said he wasn’t sure whether the US intelligence agencies were correct in their assessment that the Russians were responsible for the hacking, and not someone else. He seemed to indicate that he believed Putin’s firm denial that the Russian government had any role.

   Immediately, there was an avalanche of criticism. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle and many in the media blasted Trump for appearing to take sides with the Russians over the word of US intelligence.

   A number of Democratic politicians as well as some media pundits went so far as to call Trump’s performance “treasonous.”

   Former CIA Director John  Brennan said Trump’s performance “rises to and exceeds the threshold for high crimes and misdemeanors,” which under the Constitution justifies impeachment. “It was nothing short of treasonous,” he said.

  US Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn, said that the United States was now facing “a 9/11 type emergency” due to Trump’s performance at the summit.

   In truth, much of the criticism and comments about “treason” were way over the top and in the case of members of the media, totally unprofessional.

  There is no question President Trump said a really dumb thing. But it was more a political blunder than a factual misstatement.

   In point of fact, Trump has every reason to doubt the accuracy of the claims about Russian hacking and election meddling. To this date, nothing --- nothing --- has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Russians were behind the much-talked about hacking of Democratic National Committee emails in 2016.

   The main foundation for claims of Russian hacking came out of an Intelligence Community Assessment in early 2017 which blamed the Kremlin for directing the theft of the emails and then turning over the information to WikiLeaks for publication. The revelations about Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, such as the effort by the DNC to undermine the candidacy of Bernie Sanders, was damaging to the Clinton campaign and helped Trump in the polls.

   The ICA, as it is known, authorized by then Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, used a “handpicked group” of analysts from the big three intelligence agencies, namely the CIA, FBI and NSA, to investigate the hacking claim. The ICA did not represent , as was erroneously reported at the time, a community-wide assessment by all 17 intelligence agencies.

   The assessment drew on the findings of an investigation by a private firm, CrowdStrike. The FBI itself did not do its own investigation of the hacking, after DNC officials first reported there had been an intrusion, as the agency was denied access to the email server by the DNC. Even though the agency clearly had the power to subpoena the email server, as this was a national security case, the FBI decided not to do so. Instead it agreed with the Democrats to let CrowdStrike do the inquiry.

 CrowdStrike’s founder is both friendly with the Democrats and also a member of the anti-Russian, neocon Atlantic Council.

  The CrowdStrike findings, which maintain that the email metadata showed evidence of hacking by Russian operatives, has been strongly disputed by cyber experts such as John McAfee and former intelligence officials from the NSA, FBI and CIA.   

  Critics of the report contend that instead of the emails being hacked,  there was actually a download of email information by a disgruntled Bernie Sanders supporter on the DNC staff who then turned over the information to WikiLeaks.

   It is disturbing that the email download scenario never got any attention from the FBI.

   Even the ICA report does not claim to be definitive in showing that the Russians committed hacking.

  “Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information which is often incomplete or fragmentary as well as logic argumentation and precedents,” the report said.

 The recent indictment of 12 Russian military officials for their role in the hacking case also does not constitute firm evidence of Russian intrusion in the US election since these are allegations and have not been aired before a jury. There’s been no conviction. It also should be noted that the indictment document relies again in part on the disputed CrowdStrike findings.

   It is very dismaying that so many politicians and media types alike are waving the indictment around as if it’s final proof of Russian guilt. I saw Shepard Smith on Fox News the other day doing that, saying that Trump was wrong to express misgivings about who was responsible for the hacking because we now have "proof" of Russian involvement due to the indictment.

   Come on Mr. Smith, go back to the dictionary and find out what an indictment is.

  President Trump has every right to be skeptical about the intelligence community findings, due to the flawed ICA, together with the mounting evidence coming from a recent inspector general’s report and congressional testimony showing that FBI officials carried a heavy political bias against Donald Trump as they conducted their investigation of both the possible Russian hacking and collusion between the Trump campaign in Russia.

  It’s well known that both Clapper and Brennan disliked Trump and played a key role in drumming up support for an investigation of collusion which led to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. This has all been part of an effort to drive Trump from the presidency, either through impeachment or resignation. Pro-war neo cons and major press outlets have backed this campaign.

   So far, Mueller has not been able to charge anyone connected with Trump for conspiring with the Russians to influence the election.

   Politically, Trump made a very stupid mistake in openly questioning the intelligence agencies.  And he paid a dear price.

   Needless to say, the hyper controversy about Trump’s comment has totally overshadowed the much more significant development coming out of the summit, which is that nuclear-armed United States and nuclear-armed Russia have begun to start working cooperatively again on the issue of proliferation and resolving regional conflicts.

   This effort should be supported widely and not undermined by the continued blather about Trump-Russia collusion and Russian hacking.

  Endless repetition of unproven claims about collusion and mindless vilification of Russia just serves to impede the peace process and make the possibility of a catastrophic war more likely.

   It’s too bad many progressives and members of the Democratic Party have endorsed the Russia-gate narrative. But it’s time to change focus. Russia-gate is a waste of time and a distraction from dealing with the more central issues important to this country.

 There are plenty of very potent political issues upon which to wage a campaign to elect somebody better than Trump. Russia-gate is not one of them. A determined campaign centered around Medicare-for-all, establishing an equitable tax system, and slashing the bloated defense budget to provide money for education, new infrastructure and job training might well elect someone good.

   However flawed Donald Trump is as a president on a wide range of issues, he’s doing the right thing to try to broker better relations with the Russian Federation. The stakes are too high not to make the effort.

   Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at NYU and one of the leading scholars on Russia, told Tucker Carlson of Fox News this past week that he was stunned by what he called the “mob violence” atmosphere in the reaction to Trump’s comments at the summit press conference.

   Warning that relations between the US and Russia had hit a dangerous new low, Cohen said it’s imperative to get a better relationship going.

   He offered this question and comment: “Do you prefer to try to impeach Trump to trying to avoid war with nuclear Russia? That’s the bottom line. That’s where we’re at today.”