Aggregatore di feed

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.

Il manoscritto fornisce un grimaldello al lettore, una chiave di lettura semplificata, del mondo finanziario e non che sembra essere andato "fuori controllo" negli ultimi quattro anni in particolare. Questa è una storia di cartelli, a livello sovrastatale e sovranazionale, la cui pianificazione centrale ha raggiunto un punto in cui deve essere riformata radicalmente e questa riforma radicale non può avvenire senza una dose di dolore economico che potrebbe mettere a repentaglio la loro autorità. Da qui la risposta al Grande Default attraverso il Grande Reset. Questa è la storia di un coyote, che quando non riesce a sfamarsi all'esterno ricorre all'autofagocitazione. Lo stesso è accaduto ai membri del G7, dove i sei membri restanti hanno iniziato a fagocitare il settimo: gli Stati Uniti.

____________________________________________________________________________________

(Versione audio della traduzione disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/tether-in-soccorso-del-dipartimento)

Consiglio sempre di avere i piedi ben saldi a terra quando si investe in criptovalute. Dopo questa avvertenza, è importante riconoscere che le criptovalute sono un progresso incredibile nel modo in cui le persone conducono i propri commerci e dovrebbero essere abbracciate da tutti gli americani, dalla comunità imprenditoriale e dallo stato.

Un politico scettico nei confronti delle criptovalute è la senatrice Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). Di recente ha presentato un elenco di domande al Segretario del Tesoro designato, Scott Bessent, in vista della sua udienza di conferma davanti alla Commissione Finanze del Senato. La senatrice Warren sembra credere che un governo federale che detiene $36.000 miliardi in debito nazionale dovrebbe evitare un tipo di criptovaluta chiamata “stablecoin” a causa del rischio. La questione è una grande opportunità per istruire il popolo americano sui mercati delle criptovalute e comprendere meglio perché sono così popolari sia tra gli americani medi che tra i giganti degli investimenti.

Le stablecoin sono una categoria di criptovaluta che colma il divario tra innovazione e sicurezza.

Il prefisso “stable” si riferisce al fatto che queste criptovalute hanno un valore immutabile rispetto al dollaro.

Queste stablecoin sono coperte da riserve in valuta fiat, come il dollaro, e da una serie di altri titoli utilizzati come garanzia.

Una domanda che la senatrice Warren si pone è: se la società Tether diventasse un “detentore significativo di titoli del Tesoro americani” potrebbe “presentare rischi per la stabilità di tale mercato se [Tether] subisse una corsa agli sportelli”?

Le domande della Warren creano una buona opportunità di formazione su USDT, la stablecoin Tether, e sui vantaggi che comporta per l'egemonia del dollaro, facendo conservare a quest'ultimo il suo status di riserva mondiale e alimentando la domanda per i titoli statunitensi: tutte buone notizie per il mercato globale dei titoli del Tesoro americani.

Le domande della senatrice invitano anche a un dibattito aggiuntivo sulla necessità della nuova amministrazione Trump di collaborare con il Congresso per creare quadri normativi per le stablecoin e altre tecnologie blockchain a beneficio del popolo americano. Qualsiasi quadro normativo dovrebbe essere concepito in modo da non lasciare niente al caso e favorire un'espansione che incoraggi gli attori di mercato a innovare e a espandersi.

Il ruolo positivo di Tether nel panorama finanziario moderno è significativo. A causa del modo in cui USDT è strutturato e opera, è presumibilmente l'unica soluzione basata su blockchain che promuove il futuro del dollaro come valuta di riserva globale. È nell'interesse della sicurezza nazionale mantenere solvente il governo degli Stati Uniti ed è un modo per impedire a molti Paesi di abbandonare il dollaro come valuta di riserva.

In termini di mercato del debito statunitense, Tether è già un importante detentore di titoli del Tesoro americani, il 18° più grande in effetti, con oltre $102 miliardi. Lungi dal rappresentare una minaccia per il mercato del Tesoro americano, questa posizione dimostra il ruolo critico di Tether come fornitore di liquidità e gli consente una più ampia espansione e partecipazione all'economia americana.

E in termini di rischio di deposito, di cui la senatrice Warren sembra preoccuparsi, Tether, a differenza della maggior parte delle banche statunitensi, è sovracollaterizzato. Il valore totale in dollari delle riserve di Tether supera l'importo globale denominato in dollari delle stablecoin USDT emesse. Ciò garantisce che chiunque desideri “incassare” i propri USDT abbia riserve disponibili per supportare la transazione, sempre. Lo stesso non si può dire della vostra banca locale.

Inoltre più di 400 milioni di persone ora usano USDT in tutto il mondo. Ciò riduce il rischio di concentrazione che deriva dall'avere pochissimi ma altamente concentrati detentori di debito statunitense (come, ad esempio, la Cina), il che, a sua volta, riduce al minimo il rischio di grandi eventi di svendita. Detenere USDT diminuisce il rischio nei mercati del debito statunitense a livello globale, perché per ogni argentino, turco o brasiliano che detiene USDT, Tether acquista l'equivalente in debito statunitense.

Tether serve a rafforzare il predominio del dollaro nei mercati mondiali. Nonostante le persistenti speculazioni globali sulla sua longevità come valuta di riserva mondiale, spinte in gran parte dall'emergere di conflitti geopolitici, interessi economici divergenti e il congelamento di asset denominati in dollari, Tether è impegnato a sostenerne l'impatto e la rilevanza nell'economia globale.

Tether ha dimostrato di non essere una minaccia, ma piuttosto un partner cruciale nel rafforzare il continuo predominio del dollaro a vantaggio sia del popolo americano che del sistema finanziario. A consolidare ulteriormente questo importante ruolo c'è la volontà di Tether di collaborare con le agenzie di polizia statunitensi e internazionali per fermare criminali noti e presunti malfattori.

Una volta confermato, Bessent dovrebbe usare questa comprensione per lavorare con gli scettici come la Senatrice Warren e i membri di entrambe le parti.

Insieme, possono creare le soluzioni normative e politiche necessarie per le tecnologie emergenti che andranno a vantaggio del popolo americano e preserveranno il predominio del dollaro in futuro.

[*] traduzione di Francesco Simoncelli: https://www.francescosimoncelli.com/

Supporta Francesco Simoncelli's Freedonia lasciando una “mancia” in satoshi di bitcoin scannerizzando il QR seguente.

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.

In his 2017 and 2025 inaugural addresses, President Donald Trump pledged to “Put America first.”

His 2017-2021 term, however, put Turkey and Turkish President Erdogan first. And his second term is looking even worse.

In Trump’s Turkish Problem (2022), I cautioned the would-be candidate to “ditch his Turkish investments, Turkish-tainted cronies, and Turkish fixation … in his and America’s best interests.”

Besides being nakedly corrupt and repressive, Turkey’s rogue regime has cozied up to Moscow and supported ISIS, al-Qaeda offshoot Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and other terrorist organizations.

Hardly a day goes by when Erdogan isn’t throwing a temper tantrum, concocting outlandish demands, or threatening NATO members.

Yet somehow Trump’s a “big fan” of Turkey’s president. Erdogan “does things the right way.”

Corruption, repression, incessant threats, and supporting terrorism are “the right way”?

I’m “very close to [Erdogan],” Trump once declared. Way too close, actually.

His flattery of Erdogan has been a national embarrassment and has accomplished nothing.

Unfortunately, Trump admits to liking “tough guy” foreign leaders. That is, unsavory autocrats such as Erdogan.

Erdogan’s “tough, but I get along with him. And maybe that’s a bad thing, but I think it’s a really good thing.” And you thought Pres. Biden was confused.

All American presidents and top European leaders have for decades let Turkey intimidate them. Consequently, they’ve needlessly kowtowed to Turkey. But Trump takes the cake.

How contrary to American interests — and humiliating — was Trump’s Turkish record in his first term?

And no, I’m not a Trump hater.

Trump’s Terrible Turkish Resumé, in Brief

• Trump’s Conflicts of Interest and Turkish Agents

Trump’s self-acknowledged “little conflict of interest” regarding Turkey isn’t little.

Istanbul’s Trump Towers/Mall naming rights, for instance, have yielded him $10+ million.

Mehmet Ali Yalcindag, Trump’s partner in that venture, chaired the Turkey-U.S. Business Council (TAIK).

Yalcindag brokered contacts between Berat Albayrak (Erdogan’s corruption-riddled son-in-law) and Jared Kushner (Trump’s son-in-law/Middle East adviser).

TAIK employed (2013-2020) DC’s Mercury Public Affairs as its registered Turkish agent. Mercury also hired Trump’s communications sage, Bryan Lanza, to represent Ankara.

Another Turkish agent: Ballard Partners, headed by top Trump fundraiser Brian Ballard. It maintains an Istanbul office.

Trump even engaged Turkish designer Dorya Int’l to manufacture the “ultra-luxe” Trump Home® line.

• Trump’s Silence after Erdogan’s Capital Rampage

After his White House meeting on May 16, 2017, Erdogan ordered his bodyguards to attack peaceful protesters outside his ambassador’s residence.

The mostly American demonstrators were bloodied. A number were hospitalized, and a policeman was injured. Elsewhere in DC, Erdogan’s retinue pummeled several U.S. Secret Service officers.

Yet the administration permitted Erdogan and his thugs to immediately return to Turkey.

Though the U.S. House demanded prosecutions, only in August did the Department of Justice charge Erdogan’s bodyguards.

But the DOJ then shamelessly dropped the charges one day before Secretary of State Tillerson visited Ankara in 2018.

Silent throughout it all, Trump favored Erdogan’s long-lawless louts over peaceful Americans and the Secret Service.

Trump acted dishonorably and against America.

• Trump Jr.’s Turkey Trot

Following his father’s 2016 election, Donald Trump Jr. flew off to Turkey to hunt “wild goats.”

Yalcindag reportedly chaperoned him.

Scurrying off post-election to bag goats in a rogue, ISIS-supporting country exemplifies the Trump family’s Turkish blind spot.

• Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and Turkish Corruption

Ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani was a longtime Trump friend/surrogate and, in 2017, his cybersecurity adviser.

Giuliani worked at the Greenberg Traurig law firm from 2016 to 2018. It registered as a Turkish agent from 2017 to 2020.

In 2016, the DOJ indicted Reza Zarrab, a Turkish-Iranian gold dealer, for using Turkey’s Halkbank to violate U.S. sanctions against Iran. Halkbank — controlled by Erdogan — was/is a DOJ target too.

In 2017, Giuliani represented Zarrab in a meeting with Erdogan and pressured the DOJ to grant Erdogan’s wish to release Zarrab.

Trump solicited Sec. Tillerson to persuade the DOJ to scrap the Zarrab case. Tillerson refused.

The president also reportedly asked Attorney General Bill Barr to go easy on Halkbank.

Trump’s advocating for Zarrab/Halkbank, and allowing Giuliani to represent Zarrab while the DOJ was prosecuting him and Halkbank, were unethical.

The president put Turkey, not America, first.

• Trump Chooses Erdogan over U.S. Law and the Pentagon

Congress’ 2017 CAATSA law requires America to penalize those doing business with Russia’s defense industry. Having bought Russian S-400 missiles, Turkey’s been an obvious offender.

S-400s can spy on America’s F-35 jet technology. Consequently, the Pentagon had insisted on removing Turkey from the F-35 program.

Only in mid-2019, however, and after repeatedly making excuses for Erdogan, did Trump forbid Ankara from acquiring F-35s.

Moreover, he ignored CAATSA until late 2020 when he reluctantly penalized Turkey over its S-400s.

Choosing Erdogan over U.S. law and the Pentagon compromised American security.

America came in second, behind Turkey.

• National Security Advisor Michael Flynn‘s Turkish Escapades

Then-retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn advised Trump’s 2016 campaign and became Trump’s first National Security Advisor (NSA).

Flynn lasted just 22 days as NSA because he’d lied to VP Pence and the FBI about his conversations (December 2016) with Russian Ambassador Kislyak.

On July 15, 2016, Flynn publicly supported the attempted coup against Erdogan.

Yet, on November 8, 2016 (election day), Flynn publicly defended Erdogan by railing against alleged coup plotter Fethullah Gulen, the expatriate, Pennsylvania-based Turkish cleric.

The probable reason for Flynn’s U-turn?

In the summer/fall of 2016, the Flynn Intel Group was paid $530,000 by TAIK Chair Kamil Ekim Alptekin to support Turkish interests. Though Alptekin was indicted as a Turkish agent in 2018, charges were later withdrawn.

Flynn registered retroactively as a Turkish agent in March of 2017.

Did Trump tap Flynn as NSA because of the latter’s ties to Turkey, TAIK, and Alptekin? It seems likely.

Trump pardoned (my “Great Honor”) lying Turkish agent Mike Flynn in late 2020.

• Trump Endorsed Turkish Citizen Dr. Mehmet Oz for U.S. Senate

Dr. Mehmet Oz once hosted a popular TV show and holds dual Turkish-U.S. citizenship. He ran in Pennsylvania’s 2022 U.S. Senate GOP primary.

Oz is liberal to moderate on abortion, gun control, and LGBTQ.

Oddly, though, Trump endorsed the carpet-bagging Oz over opponents Kathy Barnette (conservative) and Dave McCormick (moderate to conservative).

Trump had previously endorsed conservative Sean Parnell. When Parnell dropped out, Oz dropped in.

The American-born Oz served in the Turkish Armed Forces and voted in Turkey’s 2018 election.

Oz’s campaign disclosure omitted his New Jersey condominium, occupied by controversial Turkish nationalists.

Trump’s ex-Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, wanted Oz to explain the “scope and the depth of his relationship with the Turkish government.”

Oz, a favorite of Melania Trump, later lost to Democrat John Fetterman.

Did Trump endorse Oz because of their mutual reverence for Turkey?

• Trump Betrayed America’s Anti-ISIS Kurdish Partners

The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) remains an American partner after having sustained 11,000+ casualties fighting ISIS.

The SDF consists mainly of the Kurdish YPG. The rest are mixed, anti-ISIS Syrian militias.

Erdogan asserts that the YPG is affiliated with the Kurdish PKK, which the U.S. considers a terrorist organization. However, Turkey itself sponsors ISIS, HTS, and other terrorists.

On October 6, 2019, Trump alerted Erdogan that American troops were withdrawing from the SDF’s stronghold. Trump thereby greenlighted Turkey’s assault on SDF just days later.

Turkey killed hundreds of SDF fighters and displaced at least 160,000 civilians, including Christians. And hundreds of ISIS members escaped SDF prisons.

Yet Trump recently claimed, disingenuously, that he “saved a lot of lives.”

Voting 354 to 60, the U.S. House rebuked the administration and Ankara.

Trump rationalized betraying Kurds: “They didn’t help us in WWII [and] Normandy.”

The remark was over-the-top, historically ill-informed. Turks may have fed Trump that nonsense. Ankara, incidentally, was pro-Nazi during WWII.

Abandoning the SDF damaged America’s “credibility and reliability,” warned retired U.S. General Joseph Votel.

During Turkey’s attack, Trump dashed off an amateurish letter telling Erdogan to “work out a deal.” Wrote Trump to his top tough guy, “Don’t be a tough guy.”

The letter was widely mocked — an “embarrassment,” “joke,” “prank,” “bizarre,” “nutty” — even by Republicans.

Despite Erdogan’s invasion and 2017 DC thuggery, the White House hosted him in 2019. Erdogan insulted Trump by handing him back the letter.

No, Trump didn’t put Turkey first every time.

In 2018, he eventually forced the release of American Pastor Andrew Brunson, abused and imprisoned by Erdogan on phony charges.

But that happened only because conservative Evangelical Christians pressured Trump.

Read the Whole Article

The post Will President Trump Again Put Turkey — Not America — First? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Knowing Europe’s horrendous colonial history and today’s European Union’s (EU) ever-growing tyranny, there is little surprise in the EU’s facilitating slave trade in Northern Africa, mostly through Europe-NATO’s destruction of today’s chaotic Libya. The latter with the support of the then Obama Government. 

Imagine this: A coalition of humanitarian organizations has alleged that sub-Saharan African migrants in Tunisia are being apprehended and sold to Libyan traffickers, and that the process is facilitated by agreements with the European Union and Italy, according to a report released on Tuesday (28 January 2025). It claims they are detained by authorities, held in detention centers, and subsequently sold off for as little as $12 each. See this from RT for full article.

The report states, “State Trafficking: Expulsion and Sale of Migrants from Tunisia to Libya,” is based on the account of dozens of people from countries such as Cameroon, Chad, Sudan, Guinea, and Ivory Coast, who claim having been enslaved and shipped from Tunisia to Libya.

One migrant said, “They sold us to the Libyans. I really mean buying and selling, like for objects, they sold us like slaves.”

The report of the humanitarian organizations alleges the EU and Italy facilitate the Tunisian slave trade to prevent refugee boats from crossing the Med Sea to Europe. Italy apparently invested close to US$ 100 million in “training” Tunisian border guards, which resulted in 60% reduction of crossings from North Africa.

The study highlights the human rights violations, also indicating that women and children are sold at prices of up to US$ 90, for their potential as sex slaves. Likewise, sexual violence, torture and forced labor are pointed out.

This EU-enabling of “modern” 21st century slavery, trading humans from US$ 12 to US$ 90, is reminiscent of the European colonization and homicidal oppression for close to thousand years in Africa, South America and Asia – and ongoing as of this day, unspoken, unreported by the media.

Today, colonization happens largely veiled through financial exploitation and civil war-like conditions with child labor, mostly in Congo and Central Africa to mine western coveted high-priced minerals and rare earths, used in the production of chips and other electronic devices for cell phones, luxury gadgets and foremost, the weapon industry.

Slavehood, civil wars in Africa – killing to produce killing machines for profit, that was and apparently still is Europe today.

Just look at the French financial exploitation of her “former” West- and Central African colonies through the CFA franc (Communauté Financière Africaine – or African Financial Community). As in colonial times, the CFA franc is still guaranteed by the French Central Bank to the tune of 70% to 80%, making and keeping these 14 countries dependent on almost exclusive trade with France. West African French colonies are Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso, Benin, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Mauritania, and Niger; Central Africa: Central African Republic, Chad, Gabon, Cameroon, Republic of the Congo, and Equatorial Guinea.

It is estimated that if these 14 countries would be liberated from the CFA franc’s stranglehold, France might lose up to 20% to 30% of her GDP.

For the last five years or so, these countries are working on liberating themselves from French economic slavehood. It is not easy. These countries are largely rich in natural resources, gold, silver, uranium, hydrocarbons, and a plethora of highly sought minerals and rare earths.

When recent coup d’état in Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Gabon indicated a shift away from France, they were immediately courted by Washington, for replacing the Euro-dependency for a dollar dependency. The notorious Madame Victoria Nuland conspicuously visited in August 2023 Niger and Burkina Faso as she was “concerned” about recent military coups.

You may remember her for orchestrating the Maidan Coup in Kiev in February 2014, from which the current ongoing proxy war US-NATO-Ukraine against Russia emerged, leaving so far millions of deaths. In a phone conversation with then US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, she was recorded infamously saying f**k Europe, meaning if they don’t want to go along, we do it ourselves.

The enormous riches of Africa, plus corruption in their leadership, matched by western corruption, make real independence for the benefit of the people an enormous challenge.

When Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso, President from 1983-1987, attempted to free the former French colonies from the claws of the CFA franc, he was assassinated in 1987, a murder initiated by the French Government.

Later, when Muammar Gaddafi attempted to free Africa from western dependence and exploitation with a unified African market, including an African monetary system based on the Libyan Gold Dinar, he was brutally lynched in 2011 by French NATO troops – compliments of then French President Sarkozy with the help of Obama’s Foreign Secretary, Hillary Clinton. Remember her atrocious grinning, “We came, we saw, he died.”

Who could ever forget so much inhumanity? These are not humans, maybe not even monsters.

Until this day, Europe has not learned any lesson. Ironically, their cold-bloodedness is reflected in the EU’s utter subservience to Washington, converted more than ever into the self-styled empire, now, with President Trump at the rudder.

Europe’s lesson will and MUST come.

Slave trade with African immigrants, most of whose livelihoods have been destroyed because of hundreds of years of European colonialism and who are seeking now refuge in the lands of their very butchers, the closest they see as promising hope, these butchers must be judged by merciless Rules of Law, if not, certainly by the Laws of Nature. They never fail.

The original source of this article is Global Research.

The post European Union Facilitates Slave Trade in North Africa appeared first on LewRockwell.

This is a game-changer in the New Cold War since it’ll take the US’ rivalry with Russia and China to a qualitatively more dangerous level through the consequent hyper-militarization of space.

Trump signed an Executive Order to build an Iron Dome for America, which aims to defend the homeland “against ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles, and other next-generation aerial attacks.” It’ll also importantly include space-based monitoring and interception systems. Some of the latter will have “non-kinetic capabilities” too, likely referring to directed-energy weapons (DEWs), but it’s unclear whether they’ll be deployed on the ground and/or in space. Here are five takeaways from this monumental move:

———-

1. Strategic Stability Will Never Look The Same

Bush Jr.’s unilateral withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 prompted Russia to develop hypersonic technology so as to prevent the US from feeling comfortable enough with its missile defense shield that it one day plots a first strike after thinking that it could intercept Russia’s second one. Trump’s Iron Dome plans mean that there’s no going back to the era of mutual restrictions on missile defense, which was already dubious after what Bush Jr. did, thus worsening the Russian-US security dilemma.

2. The US Just Sped Up The Second Space Race

The second Space Race has already been underway since Trump created the Space Force in 2019, but his latest Executive Order sped it up by compelling Russia and China to further prioritize their space-based defense plans, which will inevitably result in the hyper-militarization of space. There’s no way that those two won’t suit through the deployment of their own defensive systems there that could also disguise offensive weapons just like the US might secretly be plotting to do under this pretext.

3. “Rods From God” Are The Next Superweapon

Whichever country is the first to position itself to carry out kinetic bombardments against others, which refers to dropping space-based projectiles onto their opponent, will obtain dominance. These weapons are popularly known as “rods from God” and are poised to become the next superweapon since they might be impossible to intercept and can promptly strike opponents due to menacingly orbiting above their targets or in close enough proximity to them at all times. This makes them a military game-changer.

4. This Is An Unprecedented Power Play By The US

The preceding points prove that Trump’s Iron Dome plans are an unprecedented power play against Russia and China. The unofficial “rods from God” offensive element raises the chances that the US can destroy their land-based second-strike capability in a first strike while the official missile defense one is meant to neutralize their remaining (submarine-based) capabilities. The combined effect is intended to place them in positions of nuclear blackmail from which concessions can then be perpetually extracted.

5. Space-Based Arms Control Should Be A Priority

Russia and China will work to counteract the US’ aforesaid power play and then unveil their own such systems so as to try to place it in the same position of nuclear blackmail that it wants to place them. This is a dangerous dynamic since one of these three might feel like time is running out before they’re placed in such a position and that they must thus launch a first strike without delay. The only way to reduce this risk is through a space-based arms control pact with credible monitoring and enforcement mechanisms.

———-

Trump’s plans to build an Iron Dome for America are a game-changer in the New Cold War since they’ll take the US’ rivalry with Russia and China to a qualitatively more dangerous level. The consequent hyper-militarization of space that’ll occur as a result of him wanting to deploy interceptors there, which could disguise offensive arms like “rods from God”, spikes the risk of war by miscalculation. A space-based arms control pact between them is unlikely anytime soon, but it’s the only way to reduce this risk.

This originally appeared on Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

The post Five Takeaways From Trump’s Plans To Build an Iron Dome for America appeared first on LewRockwell.

Dozens of employees at the US Department of Education were placed on paid leave after refusing to adhere to President Trump’s executive order banning DEI programs in the federal government, according to AP, citing a labor union that represents the employees.

At least 55 Education Department employees received an email Friday notifying them that they were being placed on paid leave effective immediately, pursuant to Trump’s executive order. Those placed on leave have lost access to their government email accounts and were told not to report to the office. While the exact reasons for the paid leave are unknown, most of the affected workers appear to have taken a voluntary diversity training seminar offered by the department.

Expelling the DOE?

Meanwhile, according to the Wall Street Journal, Trump administration officials are weighing an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education – with DOGE head Elon Musk leading the charge as part of his mission to shrink federal agencies and shrink the government.

The officials have discussed an executive order that would shut down all functions of the agency that aren’t written explicitly into statute or move certain functions to other departments, according to people familiar with the matter. The order would call for developing a legislative proposal to abolish the department, the people said. Trump’s advisers are debating the specifics of the order and the timing, the people said. -WSJ

Trump’s team is reportedly hashing out when and how to pull the trigger, with some advisors urging patience until Education Secretary nominee Linda McMahon gets through her Senate confirmation – with the White House’s recent freeze on federal assistance causing headaches for other nominations, officials are treading carefully.

According to the report, DOGE employees have been working out of the department’s headquarters in Washington

While Trump may be able to pare down the Department of Education, completely abolishing it would require an act of Congress – so no chance that will happen anytime soon. During his first term, Trump unsuccessfully tried to merge the departments of education and labor.

Last week Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) introduced a bill to abolish the Education Department by 2026, arguing that “Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development,” adding “States and local communities are best positioned to shape curricula that meet the needs of their students.”

Trump’s aides could replicate the approach they used to disassemble the core functions of the U.S. Agency for International Development. In recent days, Musk’s representatives have gained access to sensitive documents at the agency, shut down its website, deactivated email addresses and told employees not to come to the office. -WSJ

The Department of Education was created in 1979 under former President Jimmy Carter, after urging by the country’s largest teachers union, the National Education Association. Key activities include providing grants for low-income students, administering the federal student-loan program, and regulating how schools serve students with disabilities.

Reprinted with permission from Zero Hedge.

The post Trump Suspends Dozens in Education Department as DOGE Devises Plan To Dismantle Agency appeared first on LewRockwell.