Lew Rockwell Institute

For months before and after Donald Trump’s election win there was an army of naysayers crawling the internet claiming that he would “never follow through” on his promises and that deportations “were not going to happen”. Most of these people were leftists trying to sow the seeds of doubt. At least some claimed to be conservatives and were perhaps disenchanted with the inaction of Donald Trump’s first term in office. I know I was not expecting much back then.

In 2017 Trump’s cabinet confirmations took a decidedly swampy turn and his administration was overrun with Neo-Cons and banking elites. I criticized this outcome harshly at the time. However, I was willing to acknowledge a reasonable explanation – That Trump was being misled by advisers with ulterior motives. After all, every president has around 4000 positions to fill in their administration and most of them will defer that duty to their advisers.

Trump would go on to admit in multiple interviews that he had trusted his inner circle too much and made mistakes in choosing his cabinet. They had sabotaged his efforts.

His second term is so far a 180 degree flip from his first, and Trump’s shift in focus is evident. Like most liberty movement conservatives I’ll reserve judgment.  Trump’s presidency will likely be the most scrutinized in recent history, not only by his political opponents but by those who supported him.  We’ll be scrutinizing everything he does with primary attention on his policy efforts. “Will he take action?” is the question everyone is asking.

The answer has been a resounding “yes”. The illegal immigration issue is of course one of the most pressing crises of our era and I would consider Trump fulfilling his promise to counter the threat a bare minimum. He has to, or he loses his entire base of support and the country falls apart at the same time. Trump’s swift move to execute mass deportations is redeeming.

For decades conservatives and right leaning independents have been disillusioned with the Republican Party because of their incessant inaction. When leftists take power in government they waste no time exploiting every advantage – The only thing that stops them from total dominance is patriot culture and the fact that 50 million+ Americans are heavily armed. When the GOP takes power they change very little.

One factor that truly sets the Trump Administration apart from all other modern Republican Presidencies is the acknowledgment of the culture war. The leftists have been waging this war for at least 50 years and GOP leaders have mostly dismissed it as trivial compared to politics. It’s the reason why we came within a razor’s edge of total moral relativism and degeneracy under the Biden Administration. The left has been normalizing the hatred of basic American principles for generations.

Part of that effort has been the introduction of open borders ideology and mass illegal immigration. I consider this a kind of “final stage” of the leftist/globalist agenda – If you can demonize western culture to the point of self hatred, then people won’t care when you saturate the west with third-world migrants and put the final nail in the coffin.

Illegal aliens don’t want to assimilate, they want to pillage and if possible to conquer.  This is why you see hundreds of Mexican flags flying at every migrant protest march; they have no interest in becoming American, they only want access to American wealth.  They look at the US citizenry as rubes and easy targets for plunder.

There is also the danger of cultural replacement.  Many migrants from Latin American identify with the Marxist “La Raza” ideology, which asserts that America is “stolen land” that they have an ethnic claim to.  The globalists know this and use mass migration as a weapon, opening the gates and making it easy for the invasion to happen.  As we have seen in Europe and the UK, migrant hordes are like a mercenary army perfect for oppressing native citizens and preventing future rebellion against multicultural erasure.

The core of this process is to incentivize migrants with subsidies and jobs. And this lead me to the greater dilemma of the border crisis – Locking down the border is not so hard, but getting rid of the tens-of-millions of illegals that are already in the country is much more difficult.  Making sure they don’t come back is also a conundrum.

As we’ve seen in the first weeks of Trump’s presidency, establishment Democrats are intent on interfering with deportations in any way they can (all the future power of leftists requires forced immigration to the US from socialist leaning countries). By extension, leftist activists will seek to disrupt deportation efforts using civil unrest (when the weather warms up these goblins will come out in droves, bank on it).

On top of the internal sabotage, there are many foreign governments that will desperately try to obstruct the return of so many unwanted citizens. Keep in mind that the US is seen by these governments as a dumping ground for their refuse. America is a steam valve to release the pressure so that these countries can get rid of their criminals, revolutionaries and those in poverty.

Mexico, Columbia, Haiti and others continue to argue that they can’t take their own people back because it would lead to “societal catastrophe”. Why? Because these governments have been knowingly sweeping their problem children under the rug for years, and America is the rug.

At the current rate of deportations (around 1500 per day) we are looking at around 500,000 per year. At least 10 million illegals are projected to have entered the US under Biden’s watch, and that’s not counting the millions that were in the US previously. Estimates indicate that 16 million to 20 million illegals are living in America today. To expedite matters, illegals will have to be convinced to self deport.

There is evidence that this is happening to some extent. Border stations have seen an uptick in outgoing traffic into Mexico and border encounters have slowed (Texas has played a big part in the border slowdown with their Operation Lone Star). But how could the US pressure a majority of aliens to self deport and never come back?

Here are a few surefire methods…

Increased Penalties For Businesses That Hire Illegals

This is common sense, but a large part of mass immigration depends on access to the US jobs market. Our government has been turning a blind eye to low-wage migrant labor for a long time and usually, if caught, businesses will only be fined a few hundred dollars for each migrant they employ. The savings on wages make it worth the risk.

Federal fines should be increased greatly, changing the cost benefit ratio and making it less enticing for companies to gamble on illegal migrant labor. If companies stop hiring migrants then most aliens will leave the US overnight.

If an industry desperately needs foreign labor then they can hire people with work visas. The process could be streamlined for certain jobs, but there has to be PROOF that these industries cannot find American workers to fill those positions. Furthermore, migrants should not be allowed to work in the US for greatly reduced wages (this drives down wages for Americans). Companies should be required to pay the same wage they would normally pay an American citizen of equivalent skill and experience.

Permanently Cut All Government Welfare Subsidies For Asylum Seekers

A general cancellation of amnesty and “catch and release” policies might make this action a moot point, but under the Biden Administration most migrants had access to a list of welfare subsidies. These subsidies and various migrant programs are projected to cost American taxpayers over $150 billion dollars per year. This isn’t counting state and city expenditures on illegals (New York City alone spent over $5 billion on migrants in 2024).

Housing programs under HUD do not distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants and often migrants will receive preferential treatment by landlords because of guaranteed government payouts and tax incentives. This has helped to exacerbate the housing crisis in the US, driving up rent prices to extreme levels.

Shut Down NGOs Engaged In Supporting Illegal Immigration

The shut down of the USAID department is a good start in the battle against rogue NGOs, but there’s a lot more to be done.  Globalist NGOs are the worst perpetrators behind mass immigration movements and many use religious organizations as a front (the female Bishop who famously woke-lectured Trump at a church service held after his inauguration is coincidentally a recipient of NGO cash in exchange for helping illegal immigrants into the US).

These groups are very difficult to legally obstruct or punish for such actions. One thing Trump can do is take away the 501C3 tax exemption status of NGOs involved in encouraging mass immigration to the US; these efforts are entirely political in nature, which negates tax exemption. NGOs are also subject to lawsuits.

Ultimately the NGO problem needs to be addressed on a larger scale and as a country we need to examine the harm some of these organizations are doing. In many cases international NGO operations spend millions in foreign countries to entice migrants to cross the border, but they also run numerous programs to support migrants that are already in the US, mostly through litigation and interference with deportations.  Getting rid of them would go a long way in keeping illegals out of the country.

Cut Off Federal Funding To Sanctuary Cities

Trump has already threatened this response in light of Democrat resistance to deportations, but action may need to be taken sooner rather than later. The problem is that city governments often use federal dollars as a slush fund to fill the coffers of their migrant programs. Most cities do not have the funds to subsidize migrants on their own for very long, not without making extensive cuts to other parts of their budget.

Democrats claim cutting federal funding to sanctuary cities violates the underlying principle of the Tenth Amendment, which protects states and localities from federal overreach. This is a disingenuous argument – Cities are not entitled under the 10th Amendment to federal funds without restrictions or requirements. The Spending Clause, Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution has been widely recognized as providing the federal government with the legal authority to offer federal grant funds to states and localities that are contingent on the recipients engaging in, or refraining from, certain activities.

There are legal restriction on the federal government as well in terms of how they refuse funds, but generally speaking cities and states cannot use federal funds to support people breaking federal law. The Constitution also specifically gives the federal government broad powers over border enforcement. Cities and states are not allowed to harbor foreign threats in the US in violation of border law. Without federal funds cash will dry up quickly in sanctuary cities and migrants will leave on their own.

Use “Griefing” Deportations For Repeat Offenders

There’s an endless supply of migrants boasting on social media this past week that even if they are deported they will simply pop right back across the border with little effort.  Since border encounters have plummeted significantly, these claims might just be bluster.  That said, what should the US do about repeat offenders?

Putting them in jail for months or years would cost taxpayers more money than deportations would.  We could take away their future ability to gain citizenship, but this assumes that they care.  My suggestion?  What if we use a different method – what the kids call “griefing”.

In other words, we make the lives of repeat offenders as difficult as possible.  For example, why does border patrol keep transporting migrants to cities directly across the national line where they can easily come right back?  If a repeat illegal is captured, why not put them on a plane and drop them off as far away from the border as possible (Mexico is 3000 miles long) and let them figure out how to get home?  There’s also the option of slowing down their processing for weeks, making them wait in lockup instead of sending them back quickly.  Do this for a year and watch the the number of returning illegals drop to zero.

The Economic Time Table

In order to have a dramatic effect on price inflation in the US many millions of migrants will have to be removed in a short period of time. To save the housing market and cut product costs, demand has to be diminished and the fastest way to do that is boot out the people that shouldn’t be here. Deportations through ICE are a good start, but they are slow. Even with the expansion of agents and enforcement the only way to achieve visible results is to make self-deportation an imperative for illegals.

Most migrants will have to leave on their own. It saves the taxpayer a lot of money in deportation costs, it saves time on arrests and makes it easier for everyone to get on with the process of making America better for Americans.

Reprinted with permission from Alt-Market.us.

The post Why Mass Deportations Are Necessary and How To Keep Illegals From Coming Back appeared first on LewRockwell.

Israel is demolishing residential buildings in the West Bank, burning homes in Lebanon and constructing military facilities in Syria, all while continuing to kill civilians in Gaza.

This is what passes for peaceful times in the nonstop military operation known as Israel.

❖

My social media feeds are currently full of Democratic Party loyalists squealing with delight about Trump’s ethnic cleansing plans for Gaza, acting like this completely vindicates their apologia for the Biden-Harris administration’s genocidal atrocities in the months leading up to the election last November.

Nobody who’s saying “Haha you idiots should have voted for Kamala to protect the Palestinians” has ever supported the Palestinians. These are all the same people who spent last year telling everyone to shut up about Gaza and stop opposing an active genocide. They can get fucked.

They’re all like:

I bet all you stupid commies wish you’d supported Kamala now, huh? You could have had a president who merely wants to explode and incinerate Palestinians instead of ethnically cleansing them! But NO, you chose to stay home or vote for Jill Stein, so now you get mass expulsion instead of the sweet gentle embrace of nonstop military hellfire.

I bet you feel so dumb now. You could have had kinder, more polite mass atrocities. You could be sitting here feeling smug and correct like me, instead of sitting there feeling like a fool for insisting upon your ponies and unicorns pie-in-the-sky unrealistic fantasy of not supporting an active genocide. Now you have to sit there and watch them ethnically cleanse Gaza and cry, while I watch and masturbate.

Now you have to live with your decision you insolent, uppity peons. Soon you’ll be BEGGING for a chance to support an administration that spent 15 months turning Gaza into gravel, but it’s too late. Next election we’ll make you vote for a former IDF member who wants to nuke Iran, just to make sure you’ve learned your lesson. And then we’ll STILL spit on you.

Shame on you. Shame on you for failing to get on board the coconut train when you had a chance. You could have had a holocaust overseen by a competent and articulate woman of color. Now you get ethnic cleansing from an orange buffoon who tweets mean words. I hope you all get deported to the West Bank, and then I hope the West Bank gets obliterated — by a Democrat!

❖

An Australian sports journalist was just fired for retweeting factual information about Israel’s genocidal atrocities in Gaza. He was told it was because the sound of his voice was now making Jews in Melbourne “feel unsafe”. I am not joking. This actually happened.

❖

The same people who say the middle east is always at war because there’s something wrong with Arabs or Muslims will go ape shit if you suggest the west’s unparalleled atrocities and abuses over the last five centuries occurred because there’s something wrong with white people.

❖

For those who don’t know, Itamar Ben-Gvir is without exaggeration one of the most evil and destructive people in Israel. He is not meaningfully different from the officials of Nazi Germany, and the fact that he’s so pleased with Trump says very, very bad things. https://t.co/DsZ9Go1bMq

— Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) February 5, 2025

❖

I hear some people saying Trump has lost a lot of his base with his freakish position on Gaza, but that’s not true. Trumpers will overwhelmingly support him no matter how bad he is on Gaza or anything else. At most they’ll get mad for a day or two and then come back around when right wing pundits start amplifying some story about a drag queen driving an ice cream truck or whatever.

❖

It’s so maddening hearing Trump administration officials wax compassionately about how devastated and uninhabitable Gaza has become like it’s been hit by a tragic natural disaster instead of an intentional demolition campaign that they all 100% supported the entire time.

White House national security advisor Mike Waltz was just on CBS saying, “I mean, you have literally nearly two million people living in a place that has thousands and thousands of unexploded ordinance and bombs. It’s in some places like a minefield. You have buildings that are collapsing and unsafe. You have no sewage, no running water. It has become completely unlivable with this war that Hamas started on October seventh.”

Waltz is a virulent warmonger who has supported all of Israel’s genocidal atrocities in Gaza since October 2023. Now that the agenda has moved on from destroying Gaza to ethnic cleansing it’s “Oh no, look, the place is dangerous and uninhabitable! What choice do we have but to permanently move all these poor unfortunate souls to refugee camps in the Sinai desert?”

The millisecond the agenda changed, the narrative shifted from “The IDF is the most moral army in the world! They’re taking extraordinary precautions to protect civilian life in their righteous war of defense!” to “Don’t you guys know nothing is left standing in Gaza and all its civilian infrastructure has been completely destroyed? The whole place is covered with unexploded bombs! You expect people to LIVE there?? What kind of monsters are you??”

The only reason they can get away with this is because there’s been a change in presidential administrations, so they get to act like they inherited a disaster that had nothing to do with them and they’re just responding to it the best they can. In reality the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian territories has always been an Israeli agenda for generations before October 7, and both Biden and Trump have always been fiendishly devoted to giving Israel everything it wants. If you stop fixating on the two-handed puppet show of American partisan politics and just look at the US-Israeli power structure as a whole, this just looks like an empire scorching a stretch of land that it wanted to grab and then telling the survivors to leave. And that’s exactly what this is.

It’s interesting how the US empire advances interests based on which presidents are best suited for the job. Trump would have had a much harder time doing what Biden did because all the “Trump is literally Hitler!” liberals would have made opposition to the Gaza holocaust much more mainstream. Biden would have had a much harder time doing what Trump is doing because his faction needs to pose as the law-abiding upholders of the rules-based international order; saying “Yeah we’re just gonna get those people out of there and own Gaza so we can make some nice real estate” wouldn’t have jibed with their schtick.

All the Democrats trying to say “See you should have voted Harris because Trump is way worse on Gaza!” and all the Republicans saying “What else can Trump do? He inherited an impossible problem from Biden!” are (at best) completely missing the point. Biden and Trump are just the names and faces on the operation; the operation itself is one unified movement toward the permanent seizure of Palestinian land. When powerful people get what they’ve always wanted, it’s seldom a lucky coincidence. It’s the result of deliberate, calculating actions taken in that direction. The faces placed in front of those actions are irrelevant.

__________________

My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Go here to find video versions of my articles. If you’d prefer to listen to audio of these articles, you can subscribe to them on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud or YouTube. Go here to buy paperback editions of my writings from month to month. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

The post The Nonstop Military Operation Known as Israel appeared first on LewRockwell.

Today, February 6, is when we are supposed to learn about President Trump’s “plan” for releasing CIA records relating to the assassination of President Kennedy, which the CIA has steadfastly and fiercely kept secret for more than 60 years — on grounds of protecting “national security” of course.

I remain doubtful that all of those decades-old records will be released, for the sample reason that I don’t believe that the CIA is going to permit Trump to disclose those records. I think it’s much more likely that the CIA will let Trump do what he did the last time he was president — release some records while keeping the rest secret. That would enable Trump to crow publicly about how he “released the JFK records” while the incriminating records continue to be kept secret.

After all, why didn’t Trump simply issue an order to the National Archives to immediately release all of the long-secret JFK-assassination-related records in its possession? Why didn’t he simply order the CIA to disclose all of its files on CIA officer George Joannides, who played a critically important role in the JFK saga? Why doesn’t he issue such orders today and just forget about coming up with a “plan” for releasing the records? What next? A committee to study the problem and come up with a report six months from now? (For more on Joannides, see FFF’s book Morley v. CIA: My Unfinished JFK Investigation by Jefferson Morley and Morley’s January 30, 2025, article “JFK Most Wanted: The Joannides File.)

In any event, if and when those long-secret records are ever released, one thing I can say with 100 percent certainty: They will not include any records documenting the CIA’s dealings with the famous Zapruder film, the film in which Dallas businessman Abraham Zapruder captured the JFK assassination. That’s because such records would have documented the CIA’s participation in the cover-up of the national-security establishment’s violent regime-change operation in Dallas on November 22, 1963,

I detail the CIA’s dealings with the Zapruder film in my book An Encounter with Evil: The Abraham Zapruder Story. The reason I consider this book so important is that it outlines the steps that the CIA secretly took on the very weekend of the assassination to produce an altered copy of the film, which became the extant “original” film that today rests in the National Archives and that we see on the Internet.

Why is that important? Because there is no innocent explanation for a fraudulent film, any more than there is innocent explanation for a fraudulent autopsy. A fraudulent film automatically means criminal culpability In the assassination itself. There is no way around it. (For details relating to the U.S. military’s fraudulent autopsy on JFK’s body at Bethesda National Military Hospital on the very evening of the assassination, see my book The Kennedy Autopsy.)

Ever since the day after the assassination, the official narrative has been that the Zapruder film was shipped to LIFE magazine in Chicago. As each decade passed since then, the CIA never made any effort to disavow that official narrative.

In the late 2000s, however, a man named Dino Brugioni came forward and disclosed that the official narrative was false. Who was Brugioni? He was the world’s most renowned photo analyst. Equally important, he worked for the CIA — for 35 years. At the time of the JFK assassination, he worked in the CIA’s National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC) in Washington D.C. He had helped analyze the photographs of Soviet missiles during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Among his books is Eyeball to Eyeball, a history of U.S. imagery intelligence. For a more detailed biographical sketch of Brugioni, see his Wikipedia page here.

In the late 2000s, Brugioni disclosed that on Saturday night, November 23, 1963— the day after the assassination — he and a CIA photographic team were summoned to NPIC, where two men identifying themselves as Secret Service agents delivered the original 8mm Zapruder film to Brugioni. The film was viewed on an 8mm projector. Brugioni and his team were asked to make “briefing boards” on which selected images from the film were to be displayed.

From a legal standpoint, Brugioni should not have been disclosing this episode, not even in the late 2000s. That’s because he had been told that it was a highly classified operation. Since Brugioni had never been released from his vow of secrecy, he had to know that conceivably he could be criminally prosecuted for disclosing that Saturday night operation. He obviously concluded that federal officials would’t dare to do so and decided to go ahead and disclose the truth.

In my opinion, it would be standard procedure for Brugioni’s boss, Arthur Lundahl, who had instructed Brugioni and his team to report to NPIC, to type up a report of what had happened that night. That’s normally the way government bureaucracies work. But that’s assuming that operations are legal, legitimate ones. Given that this particular operation involved a cover-up of the national-security establishment’s assassination of a U.S president, the standard procedure would have been to not put anything about either the assassination or the cover-up in writing.

One thing is for sure: Any records relating to the Zapruder film, including a written report of the Brugioni operation, would be considered an assassination-related record. Therefore, if such a record existed, the CIA was required to turn it over to the Assassination Records Review Board in the 1990s.

But no such record was turned over. Moreover, it is a virtual certainty that it is not among the still-secret assassination-related records being held by the National Archives because the CIA would have been required to show that releasing information about the Brugioni operation would have threatened “national security” and, therefore, required another 25 years of secrecy. There is no way that the ARRB would have bought that argument.

It gets better. On Sunday night, an entirely different CIA photographic team was summoned to NPIC, where a man identifying himself as a Secret Service agent named Bill Smith delivered what was represented to be the Zapruder film. He stated that he had just brought the film from Hawkeyeworks, a top-secret CIA photographic facility located in Kodak’s headquarters in Rochester, New York.

A CIA official at Hawkeyeworks told Brugioni that they could do “anything” at Hawkeyeworks. In other words, whatever Hollywood could do with film, the photographic experts at Hawkeyeworks could match. That  would have included producing a top quality altered copy of  a film using what was called an “optical printer.”

Once again, if everything was on the up and up, there would naturally have been a written report of the Zapruder film being delivered to Hawkeyeworks and detailing what the CIA did with the film at that facility. No such record has ever been released, including to the ARRB.

The same holds true for the Sunday night operation, where new briefing boards were prepared for images taken from the altered copy of the film, which became the new original.

It is worth mentioning that the Saturday night and Sunday night operations were tightly compartmentalized. That is, the Saturday night team never knew about the Sunday night operation and vice versa. In fact, when Brugioni learned about the Sunday night operation in the late 2000s, he was shocked to learn that that had been kept secret from him, especially since he was not only the second in command at NPIC, he was also serving as duty officer in charge at NPIC on the weekend of the assassination.

(Note: Even though Hawkeyeworks was secretly located in the research and development center at Kodak’s national headquarters in Rochester, there is no evidence that Kodak officials participated in the Zapruder film operation.)

How do we know that the Sunday night film was an altered copy of the original? Several reasons, which I detailed in my book An Encounter with Evil.

One reason is that the Sunday night copy was a 16mm film, as the CIA team on Sunday night confirmed. The Zapruder film was a 8mm film. It is impossible to convert a 8mm film into a 16mm film. Therefore, the 16mm film had to be a copy. Once it was slit down the middle, it became the new 8mm Zapruder film.

Another reason is that when Brugioni was shown the extant film after he disclosed the Saturday night operation in the late 2000s, he unequivocally stated that the film he saw on Saturday night was significantly different from the film he was now being shown.

Another reason is that using modern-day film technology, various film experts who have examined the extant film have demonstrated the altered nature of the film, as I detail more fully in my book.

It’s also worth noting that there was absolutely no reason to take the film to Hawkeyeworks, except to produce a top-quality altered copy of it.

Thus, even if Trump follows through with his vow to release all — repeat all — of the still-secret JFK-assassination-related records, it is a virtual certainty that such records will not include any reference to the CIA’s classified operations on the Zapruder film on the very weekend of the assassination. That’s because such records were never created or because they were later destroyed. It would have been much too dangerous — and very dumb — to disclose them.

One can purchase An Encounter with Evil: The Abraham Zapruder Story at Amazon.

Reprinted with permission from The Future of Freedom Foundation.

The post The Secret JFK Records: The CIA and the Zapruder Film appeared first on LewRockwell.

Let’s take it from the top: DEI was destroying Western values and the culture of meritocracy. The bigots of woke culture subverted our institutions yet claimed to occupy the moral high ground. A nation’s historic culture and values were thrown into the dustbin, while the sinister system abolished free speech. It was a systemic attack on our free society by so-called elites—in reality a nefarious bunch of lefties whose plan was to shut us all up. It was an Orwellian Big Brother all over again, except this time it was not fiction but fact.

The real scandal is that the media was in cahoots with the bad guys trying to do away with free speech. The Washington Post’s and the Los Angeles Times’ owners, Jeff Bezos and Dr. Soon Shiong, respectively, had to interfere and demand more fairness and objectivity just before the election. In fact, most of the journalists were in favor of DEI and tirelessly worked to keep sane voices quiet and off the TV screens. The abject awfulness of these people is due to their arrogant belief that they, not the public, know best. A recent horror that took place on that rainy and tight little island of Britain illustrates the problem.

“If this is justice, I’m a banana.”

Anyone not woke in Britain is more often than not—in fact almost always, including in conservative newspapers—referred to as hard right by the media. Hard right is now everyone who votes Conservative or Reform, at least where the BBC and most newspapers are concerned. No one can do anything about it because the left holds the reins where TV channels are concerned, and in any case, as I’ve said before, most journalists in Britain and America are lefties. Racial equity is big in Britain, so when a 17-year-old British-born black thug whose Rwandan parents had come over in the year 2000 had shown violent leanings and had purchased large knives delivered to his home by Amazon, no one did anything about it. The thug enjoyed what I call black immunity.

He turned into a vile murderer when he cold-bloodedly butchered three little white girls, all less than 10 years of age, while they were having a dancing and singing party in their school. He also knifed, wounded, and tried to murder a further bunch of little girls who survived his vile attacks. So what did the brave British government do? Officials did not immediately reveal the name of the killer because of his color, and a number of false claims circulated on social media. The misinformation helped fuel rioting throughout England.

False rumors that the murders had been committed by illegal migrants spread like wildfire. By the time the government and the fuzz decided to tell it like it was, towns and villages had been set alight by mostly white rioters who attacked hostels occupied by migrants. Axel Rudakubana, the vile murderer, was eventually arrested, tried, and given 52 years—not life, because he was a few short days younger than 18 years of age. In Britain criminals are let off after serving half their sentence, most times even just one-third. But the point of my story is that the state threw the book at the rioters, who may have thrown bricks and broken things but did not kill or injure anyone, and who had been almost led to riot by the state having refused to give information, leading to false conclusions by the rioters. The name-calling and abuse by the media were typical. How dare these whites take the law into their own hands? Ditto in America. One person, a pro-Trump woman, died invading Congress on January 6, but 1,500 were given stiff sentences, including a 22-year one for someone who wasn’t even there. During the Black Lives Matter riots in 2020, scores died and hundreds of businesses were burned to the ground, and no one spent a single night in jail. If this is justice, I’m a banana.

Read the Whole Article

The post Woke’s Gone Broke appeared first on LewRockwell.

Just a few short years ago, we all lived through the COVID-19 pandemic, including a huge number of shortages. What started out as the toilet paper shortage of 2020, soon spread to shortages of just about everything in the grocery store and many critical items in the pharmacy.

The long-term effects of the pandemic included shortages on major items, like cars and computers, which lasted a few years. We are just recently seeing car lots full again, as the automotive supply chain has filled with the necessary parts (especially electronic parts) necessary for manufacturers to build cars and trucks once again.

Granted, a lot of the early shortages in that disaster were because of panic buying. There was absolutely no reason for there to be a shortage on toilet paper; but that didn’t stop people from buying it. Once the supply started to get short, more and more people bought, trying to ensure that they’d have some if things got even worse.

The long-term shortages were actually more serious, caused primarily by changes in buying habits, which in turn were caused by the shutdowns. People who were working from home didn’t need to replace their cars, because they weren’t driving. They didn’t need to buy expensive wardrobes to impress everyone at work. Nor did they need to spend money eating at restaurants. On the other hand, many had to upgrade their home computers to work from and bigger television sets to while away their spare time.

Just as it appeared that we could forget about shortages, a new threat to the American supply chain loomed its ugly head. The International Longshoremen’s Association Union threatened a strike, then carried through on it, seeking higher wages and an end to the potential automation of ports. Thirty-six ports on the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico did shut down, briefly, as longshoremen walked off their jobs. This strike, which fortunately didn’t last more than a few days, had the potential of taking us back to the shortages we encountered during and after the pandemic.

Various prognosticators had already started spreading their message of doom, during the days leading up to the deadline and the few days of the strike itself. Had the longshoremen not come to agreement with the United States Marine Alliance, which represented the 36 ports affected by the strike, it could have gone on for weeks or even months. The head of the union had publicly declared that it was his intention to make the country suffer, if he didn’t get his way.

But the real message here isn’t about the differences of opinion between workers and management, or what a “fair wage” actually is; the real message is that at any point in time, we’re only one step away from disaster in our supply chain. Those longshoremen aren’t the only ones who could shut things down, making it hard for everyone.

According to some sources, all it would have taken would have been four weeks of those ports being shut down for entire industries to be closing their doors. The first week wouldn’t have been too bad. The second would have seen general shortages of all sorts of goods, with prices starting to rise. By the third week, stores will be rationing items, manufacturers will be slowing down, and some will furlough workers, until the supply chain should return to normal. But the fourth week is where things would really get bad, with small businesses being hit the hardest, just like during COVID. Shelves in the stores that are still open will be pretty bare, with the prices of goods making many things unaffordable to the average family.

That’s all the time it takes to put us back into the condition we were in after COVID. It has taken us a couple of years to recover from that, and in some ways, we still aren’t fully recovered. This second time around, if it had happened, would have been worse than the first, partially due to panic buying and partially due to the damage building upon previous damage.

Of course, this potential panic isn’t over yet. The agreement between the longshoremen and the ports is just a tentative agreement, put in place to end the strike. They don’t have a signed contract yet. So, there’s still a possibility that things could go south again.

Don’t be fooled; we haven’t fully returned to pre-pandemic times. There are a lot of things that have changed. The most obvious of these is the high inflation we’ve had for the last few years; thanks to all those trillion-dollar-plus bills that Congress passed. But our buying habits have changed as well, with people doing their grocery shopping online and picking up their orders at the curb. We’re also using much less cash, having gotten into the habit of paying everything with a plastic card.

Let’s Break Down Shortages a Bit More

There’s a tendency to think of shortages in the extreme. In other words, when we use the word “shortage,” people tend to think in terms of there not being any of those items available at all. We experienced that during COVID, especially things that we would normally buy in the grocery store.

But not all shortages are severe like that. The recent Hurricane Helene has turned out to be one of the deadliest hurricanes in history, being the deadliest since Hurricane Katrina in 2005. What didn’t look like it was going to be much of a hurricane, turned into a Cat 4 hurricane, with severe winds and huge amounts of inland flooding. The devastation in the Deep South is going to have a major impact on agriculture, creating shortages; specifically, cotton, pecans and peaches. All three of those come from areas which have been severely affected by the storm.

In this particular case, cotton is a short-term problem, which will affect the next year’s production of T-shirts, sheets, towels, Q-Tips and clothing in general. So, we can expect to see an increase in price for those items. Unless something happens to damage next year’s crop, things should be back to normal, but the prices won’t necessarily come back down.

While cotton is a much more important crop, the damage to peach and pecan trees is much more serious. Cotton plants can be grown in a few months, whereas those trees need several years to grow to the point where they are producing fruit and nuts. With miles of orchards having been uprooted, the farmers are going to have a rough go of it, trying to restore their farms.

That doesn’t mean there won’t be peaches or pecans, it just means that their price will rise. That’s the law of Supply and Demand in action. The wealthy will still be able to get as much as they want, as price isn’t a problem for them. Those of us in the middle class may make decisions to buy other food items, which are more affordable. We will still see peaches and pecans in our grocery stores; but many of us will likely just pass them by.

The people who will be most affected by those shortages, like all shortages, are the poor. They can’t afford to pay more for something, just because it is in short supply. Instead, they will adjust their buying habits, selecting other items which they can afford.

Read the Whole Article

The post Living Through Another Wave of Shortages appeared first on LewRockwell.

This post will be a little different, because I want to talk about something that will surely earn some hate mail. If you’re a mom with school-aged kids, and if you’re sick of being bossed around by out-of-control social engineers, this one is for you.

According to school calendars, it’s spring. It’s hard to tell when you look out the window; the trees outside my window are still bare. Yet, while nature still sleeps under late winter’s spell, our calendars are in full bloom. Unlike nature’s spring, though, this burst of new life isn’t so magical.

In case you’re out of the “school mom” phase, I’ll set the stage for my forthcoming rant. Stick with me, because a deeper truth is at stake.

Once school families have returned from their glorious summer or winter breaks, they always face a frightful vibe switch. The machinery cranks up, sets their calendars in motion, and reminds them who is really in charge. The excessive rest that families enjoyed must be reigned in and repurposed for communal priorities.

A juggernaut of emails, announcements, and meetings is thus unleashed by an army of principals, teachers, PTA reps and team moms. And each year, everyone pretends to be surprised by this; “Fall is so busy!” Spring is always so crazy!” Nobody—not even the staff PhD—has any idea how to slow it; and despite frazzled minds and fractured spirits, nobody really wants to. It’s all part of the “fun” of spring.

Joining a middle school sports team? You can expect two emails, three signups, two team parents, and a parent meeting—and that’s all before the first baseball is thrown. The pressure increases for high school sports: you will do all the middle school stuff, but you must also work the concession stand. In either situation, you’ll need volunteers for the team party—and can you host?

As an aside, all these communications must occur on platforms other than email, which isn’t cool and “sexy” anymore. Using multiple layers of password-laden apps is preferred now. Part of the mothering day is spent checking a matrix of apps or digging through old messages to find out what time the bus returns to campus.

The unwritten rule here is simple: If you’re a parent whose child will participate in a school-sponsored sport, you must agree to clear your calendar and dedicate your life—with its flagging, perimenopausal energies—to the sports team. Your child is a Wildcat, or an Eagle, or a Knight—and now so are you. This is also true of travel sports, where parents must make the team their entire identity. Either way, such parents must spend late nights out, weekends away, wear team gear, and lose brain cells at group lunches and team dinners. One must never, never risk time alone.

But wait—there’s more. I’m now going to take aim at a sacred cow—and this will surely qualify me as borderline evil.

Long ago, someone decided that it was the job of school moms to run candy shacks for those who want to watch a two-hour football game. Fair enough—it’s a great way to raise money and keep bored siblings entertained. They served Skittles, Cokes, and hot dogs. Fast forward a few years, though, and now every sport is in on the game: soccer, track, lacrosse, you name it— they all require concession sales and, of course, a team of “volunteers”. The menu has expanded, too.

Why am I grousing about this beloved and uncontroversial tradition? Number one, the food is garbage, completely at odds with all the “healthy habits” we’re supposedly encouraging. Number two, most concession stands turn into lively roach motels once the last volunteer shuts out the light. These roaches boast sizes that would wilt the knees of the football coach; but go ahead, take your chances eating with those plastic spoons.

Most importantly, though, mothers are continually pressed to spend their guilty “free” hours running these stands. To enjoy a game guilt-free, you must first make the blood sacrifice of a signup; only then can you sit and enjoy watching your child play. Driving, buying uniforms, paying fees—none of that counts anymore. You have only been declared righteous by the team mom because your name is written down in the sacred book of Sign Up Genius.

I can already imagine some irate responses. “Wow, this is so harsh! Think of all the fun her kids have likely enjoyed through other moms’ sacrifices—all the pizza slices, goody bags, matching tee shirts. Doesn’t she enjoy community? Doesn’t she like serving others? It takes a village!”

That’s okay. I don’t mind being a contrarian now and then, and here’s why: most moms are afraid to utter these obvious truths, so they continue to push themselves and their families to their limits. Someone must therefore speak for harried victims of the social gods and their endless entanglements. Those with minds full of team spirit and school parties have devoured every else’s free time—hours that might have been spent in productivity or quiet refreshment.

Granted, some moms enjoy these village gigs, and if so, they are free to donate their time to serve others this way. In fact, this is a natural and logical overflow of multi-tasking, people-loving talent. (Looking at you, team moms!). Don’t misunderstand me: I’m not here to restrict non-compulsory efforts. I love sports, too, and we need friendship. All moms should feel free to bless others through their varied gifs and passions. People excel in a diversity of strengths—including things like running concession stands.

Here’s the reality, though: Many “busy” volunteer moms are already drowning in multiple children, piles of housework, a part-time job, aging parents, and even church commitments. Their quiet times are scattered at best. Their minds are frazzled, their homes are disordered, their husbands are stressed, and their kids need attention. All of these things rank well ahead of “the village,” despite the popularity of such talk among moms.

Read the Whole Article

The post Not That Kind of Mom appeared first on LewRockwell.

It would be fair to call President Trump as obsessed with tariffs. Import tariffs on every country that does not conform to his foreign policy ideas is the “rules-based order” converted into the “Trump-based order.”

Punishment by imposing tariffs is an ill-advised obsession of Donald Trump’s. He played this card already during his first Administration (2016-2020), and it was in most places, especially in China, ineffective and just hot air propaganda. First, because China had already then and even more today, developed other markets in Asia, foremost with the ASEAN countries and later with the Global South; and second, because the US depends more on imports of Chinese goods, than China depends on exports to the US. Hence, the enormous trade imbalance in favor of China.

In the course of a ten-year negotiation, China and Indonesia initiated the world’s largest Free Trade Agreement, based on the ASEAN association, the so called Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), comprising 15 countries (Australia, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam), accounting for nearly 30% of the world’s population and 30% (US$ 30 trillion – 2024 est.) of global GDP. The RCEP is the largest trade block in history. It became effective on 1 January 2022.

Trump hopes to reduce the US-China trade disequilibrium by imposing tariffs on Chinese-made imports. What he does is putting a stick in the wheels of US industries depending on imports from China, thereby slowing the US economy; and US consumer goods becoming more expensive, contributing to US inflation, the very affliction he promised during his campaign to fight as number One Priority.

On a political level, imposing tariffs on countries he does not agree with is outright blackmail. Will Trump blackmail Canada into becoming the 51st State of the United States by his announced 25% tariffs for Canadian goods?

In Mexico, under another 25% tariff threat, President Claudia Sheinbaum promised to deploy 10,000 national guard members to 18 cities along the US-Mexico border as part of a deal to delay US tariffs. The Mexican National Guard has been created only a few years ago. They are unarmed and have so far little experience. They are operating under the Mexican military and are supposed to “prevent drug trafficking from Mexico to the United States, particularly fentanyl.”

Along with the understaffed Mexican military, they will also be confronted with the task to stop illegal immigration to the US. See this from the NYT.

The question arises as to what extent do these tariff impositions by President Trump contradict or violate the terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the US, Canada, and Mexico, signed in 1993, by then President Clinton? And let us remember, NAFTA was designed to benefit first and foremost the United States, resulting then in a strong critique, particularly by Mexico.

During his campaign, Trump promised he would take the Panama Canal back. The French started building the Canal in 1881 but ultimately failed. The project was taken over in 1904 by the United States and finished in 1914. Under a US agreement with Panama, the Canal was turned over to sovereign Panama on 31 December 1999.

There is no legal basis for interference by any country in the sovereign domain of Panama. Nevertheless, self-styled Emperor Trump said he wants to take the Canal back. He says it is managed by China. True. Panama, a sovereign country, has the right to grant a management contract for the canal, basically the two ports on the Caribbean and the Pacific side, to whomever Panama chooses.

China has a worldwide reputation for first class port management. One brilliant example is the Athens harbor of Piraeus. Another one is the recently inaugurated (November 2024), China-built, and managed merchant port of Chancay, Peru, arguably the largest on the South American Pacific Coast. To the chagrin of Donald Trump’s, it will most likely pool exports to Asia and the US West Coast, as well as imports of most South American nations.

President Trump has already anticipated high tariffs – 25% for all exports from Chancay to the US. In Peru, a vassal state of Washington, he may get away with it. And if so, not only killing economic benefits of the port for Peru, but also for those South American countries who were planning to use it.

That Mr. Trump does not like his economic competitor, China, is an open secret. To make his point stronger, he just added a lie that China charges US vessels higher tariffs for crossing the Panama Canal. This would be totally against the Canal management agreement of “neutrality” and would certainly not have survived unnoticed for a quarter century.

However, the lie may sell with the insouciant American people. Why would China do that? And no other US Administration since 2000 has noticed it?

When Trump first announced the threat of taking back the Canal, Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino resolutely said no way.

On 2 February 2025, Trump’s Foreign Secretary Marco Rubio met with Panama’s President Mulino in Panama using Trump’s reasoning for US “national security”, that the current position of influence and control of the Chinese Communist Party over the Panama Canal area is a threat to the canal and represents a violation of the Treaty Concerning the Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal.

Secretary Rubio added that this status quo is unacceptable and that absent immediate changes, it would require the United States to take measures necessary to protect its rights under the Treaty.

The Canal is managed by a Hong Kong-based subsidiary of CK Hutchison Holdings which won the bidding process in 1997. Obviously, the company has not posed any threat to US national security during the last 25 years. Immediately after Secretary Rubio’s visit, Panama’s President Mulino had a change of mind and said he would not renew the contract with the Chinese port management company.

That was not enough for Emperor Trump, who wanted Mulino to immediately revoke the contract. Apparently Mulino was sufficiently pressured, coerced, or threatened – it is called blackmailed – that he agreed. He also said he would not renew Panama’s membership in the Chinese “Belt and Road” worldwide infrastructure program. Mulino also agreed to grant US military vessels free passage through the Canal.

Was the coercion just insane tariffs – or worse?

The contract revoking might open Panama to international arbitration on the basis that the move was a politically motivated expropriation. In addition, free passage for US military vessels could face further legal jeopardy, as this would amount to preferential treatment and be a clear violation of the canal’s commitment to neutrality.

*

President Trump’s reinstating of the Monroe Doctrine on Latin America seems clear, converting Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) again to Washington’s backyard. This will displease certainly many of the hitherto Latin American US allies.

The Monroe Doctrine was articulated in President James Monroe’s seventh annual message to Congress on December 2, 1823. The European powers, according to Monroe, were obligated to respect the Western Hemisphere as the United States’ sphere of interest. At that time, more than 200 years ago, nobody thought of China.

So, China is de facto not part of the doctrine. However, Trump takes the liberty to expand the Monroe Doctrine – which, never had an international legal base – throughout the world, including China and Russia.

Will the new US Emperor Trump bully enforcement of the Monroe doctrine throughout Latin America with tariff blackmail? It is not impossible. At present LAC countries depend from 30% (Argentina) to 80% (Mexico) on trade with the United States. On average, LAC countries trade with the US may be close to 50% – making the US by far the largest single trading partner of LAC.

This percentage had hardly changed in the last 20 years when US governments had other priorities than enforcing the Monroe doctrine. This would have been the time for LAC countries to diversify their economies to escape the dollar pressure. They missed it. By neglect or false trust in their northern partner?

Compare this to Russia and China which realized latest with the western-instigated Maidan (Kiev) Coup in February 2014, that western belligerence was not about to ease within short. So, they reoriented their market economy towards Asia and the Global South. Today, Trump tariffs on Chinese goods are Trump propaganda stints, doing more harm at home in the US than to China.

LAC countries might be well advised to concentrate their economy on LAC-internal markets and on Asia. Though, this does not happen overnight, it is never too late, but high time to start their move towards economic, financial, and political independence.

The original source of this article is Global Research.

The post President Trump’s Obsession With Tariffs. Economic Ruse or Political Blackmail? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Tim McGraw:

Just what Ireland needs: another million immigrants from the Muslim world. Ireland doesn’t have the housing and infrastructure to even support its own population.

But, yeah, I’m sure the Palestinians will fit right in. They can work with the IRA.

Irish Times.

The post Israel Defense Minister Israel Katz, Says that Ireland, Spain, and Norway “Legally Obligated” to Take In Palestinians appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Tim McGraw:

Hi Lew,

Has anyone asked Hamas and the Palestinians what they think of Trump’s plan to rebuild Gaza? I’m sure Hamas would like the unexploded ordnance removed and the cleaning up of the rubble. But then what?

Miriam Adelson is riding Trump hard. Giddy-Yap! Miriam is yelling at Trump. The Israelis, her fellow countrymen, want Gaza. (That would make a great cartoon. Miriam Adelson riding on Trump’s back with the bit between Trump’s teeth. 100 million dollars would be hanging in front of Trump’s nose. (Miriam Adelson gave Trump $100 million for his campaign.))

Trump may be playing some kind of Gaza Ploy. No one in the Middle East wants more Palestinians in their country. Especially Gazans who were just bombed out of their homes. These folks aren’t happy.

Trump says to Miriam, “Miriam, I tried. None of the Arab countries want the Gazans. Even the Irish don’t want them. I did my best.” Miriam puts her hand to her chest. “But all that money, Donald. All that money we could make!”

Then, Trump cancels all aid to the Middle East and focuses on the USA and the Western Hemisphere.

I can dream, can’t I?

The post The Gaza Ploy appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Declassified UK

The post How Britain supported Zionism and prevented Palestinian freedom appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

The Times of Israel

The post Footage apparently shows settler extremists vandalizing Palestinian hamlet in West Bank appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks , John Frahm.

The American Conservative

The post Not My MAGAza appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm. 

The American Conservative

The post The People’s Choice: Why DOGE Needs Ron Paul appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm.

Gateway Pundit

The post Liz Cheney Lashes Out After Elon Musk Exposes Her USAID Ties appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

The Times of Israel

The post Report: Jared Kushner behind Trump’s plan to take over Gaza appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, David Martin.

The post Ethnic Cleansing appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

Reuters

The post Trump’s Gaza ‘Riviera’ echoes Kushner waterfront property dreams appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post Is There Any Media That USAID Did NOT Fund? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, David Martin.

George Galloway interviews Col. Douglas Macgregor

The post Daft and Dangerous Donald appeared first on LewRockwell.

Introductory Note by Michel Chossudovsky 

At no point since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945, has humanity been closer to the unthinkable – a nuclear holocaust which could potentially spread in terms of radioactive fallout Worldwide .

All the safeguards of the Cold War era, which categorized the nuclear bomb as “a weapon of last resort”, have been scrapped. “Offensive” military actions using nuclear warheads are now described as acts of “self-defense”. 

The  August 6-8 2003 “Privatization of Nuclear’ War secret meeting was held behind closed doors at Strategic Command Headquarters at the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.

It was conducive to a $1.3 trillion dollar nuclear weapons program initiated under the Obama administration, which is slated to increase to 2 trillion dollars by 2030.

Hiroshima Day, August 6, 2024

Towards a World War III Scenario: The Privatization of Nuclear War

August 7, 2011.

Introduction

At no point since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945, has humanity been closer to the unthinkable – a nuclear holocaust which could potentially spread in terms of radioactive fallout over a large part of the Middle East.

All the safeguards of the Cold War era, which categorized the nuclear bomb as “a weapon of last resort”, have been scrapped. “Offensive” military actions using nuclear warheads are now described as acts of “self-defense”.

The casualties from the direct effects of blast, radioactivity, and fires resulting from the massive use of nuclear weapons by the superpowers [of the Cold War era] would be so catastrophic that we avoided such a tragedy for the first four decades after the invention of nuclear weapons.1

During the Cold War, the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) prevailed, namely that the use of nuclear weapons against the Soviet Union would result in “the destruction of both the attacker and the defender”.

In the post Cold war era, US nuclear doctrine was redefined. The dangers of nuclear weapons have been obfuscated.

Video. The Privatization of Nuclear War. James Corbett Interviews Michel Chossudovsky 

Tactical nuclear weapons are identical to the strategic nuclear bombs. The only thing that differentiates these two categories of nuclear bombs are:

1) their delivery system;
2) their explosive yield (measured in mass of trinitrotoluene (TNT), in kilotons or megatons.

The tactical nuclear weapon or low yield mini-nuke is described as a small nuclear bomb, delivered in the same way as the earth penetrating bunker buster bombs.

While the technology is fundamentally different, tactical nuclear weapons, in terms of in-theater delivery systems are comparable to the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.

The Pentagon’s 2001 Nuclear Posture Review envisaged so-called “contingency plans” for an offensive “first strike use” of nuclear weapons, not only against “axis of evil” countries (including Iran and North Korea) but also against Russia and China.2

The adoption of the NPR by the US Congress in late 2002 provided a green light for carrying out the Pentagon’s pre-emptive nuclear war doctrine, both in terms of military planning as well as defense procurement and production. Congress not only rolled back its prohibition on low yield nuclear weapons, it also provided funding “to pursue work on so-called mini-nukes”.

The financing was allocated to bunker buster (earth penetrator) tactical nuclear weapons as well as to the development of new nuclear weapons.3

Hiroshima Day 2003: Secret Meeting at Strategic Command Headquarters

On August 6, 2003, on Hiroshima Day, [twenty two years ago] commemorating when the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima (August 6 1945), a secret meeting was held behind closed doors at Strategic Command Headquarters at the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.

Senior executives from the nuclear industry and the military industrial complex were in attendance. This mingling of defense contractors, scientists and policy-makers was not intended to commemorate Hiroshima.

The meeting was intended to set the stage for the development of a new generation of “smaller”, “safer” and “more usable” nuclear weapons, to be used in the “in-theater nuclear wars” of the 21st Century.

In a cruel irony, the participants to this secret meeting, which excluded members of Congress, arrived on the anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing and departed on the anniversary of the attack on Nagasaki.

More than 150 military contractors, scientists from the weapons labs, and other government officials gathered at the headquarters of the US Strategic Command in Omaha, Nebraska to plot and plan for the possibility of “full-scale nuclear war”, calling for the production of a new generation of nuclear weapons – more “usable” so-called “mini-nukes” and earth penetrating “bunker busters” armed with atomic warheads.4

According to a leaked draft of the agenda, the secret meeting included discussions on “mini-nukes” and “bunker-buster” bombs with nuclear war heads “for possible use against rogue states”:

We need to change our nuclear strategy from the Cold War to one that can deal with emerging threats… The meeting will give some thought to how we guarantee the efficacy of the (nuclear) stockpile.5

The Privatization of Nuclear War: US Military Contractors Set the Stage

The post 9/11 nuclear weapons doctrine was in the making, with America’s major defense contractors directly involved in the decision-making process.

The Hiroshima Day 2003 meetings had set the stage for the “privatization of nuclear war”. Corporations not only reap multibillion-dollar profits from the production of nuclear bombs, they also have a direct voice in setting the agenda regarding the use and deployment of nuclear weapons.

The nuclear weapons industry, which includes the production of nuclear devices as well as the missile delivery systems, etc., is controlled by a handful of defense contractors with Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Northrop Grunman, Raytheon and Boeing in the lead.

It is worth noting that barely a week prior to the historic August 6, 2003 meeting, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) disbanded its advisory committee which provided an “independent oversight” on the US nuclear arsenal, including the testing and/or use of new nuclear devices.6

The above text is an excerpt from Michel Chossudovsky’s Towards a World War Three Scenario, The Dangers of Nuclear War.

please note: at the moment, this book is only available in PDF format

Financing the Culture of War

There are more than 5000 US nuclear weapons deployed. And now the US is committed to developing a generation of “more usable” low yield tactical nuclear weapons (bunker buster bombs) which are “harmless to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground”.

“Blowing up the Planet” on a first strike basis as a instrument of peace and global security.

Those who decide on the use of nuclear weapons believe their own lies.

And what the US public does not know that is that on September 15, 1945, confirmed by declassified documents, the Truman administration released a secret plan to bomb 66 Soviet cities with 204 atomic bombs, at a time when the US and the Soviet Union were allies.

And those who dare to say that the use of nuclear weapons threatens the future of humanity are branded as “conspiracy theorists”.

The original source of this article is Rumble.com.

The post Towards a WW III Scenario. The Privatization of Nuclear War. appeared first on LewRockwell.