offguardian--2020-05-20--The ‘Clean Break’ Doctrine

The ‘Clean Break’ Doctrine

In 1996 a task force , led by Richard Perle , produced a policy document titled A Clean Break : A New Strategy for Securing the Realm for Benjamin Netanyahu , who was then in his first term as Prime Minister of Israel , as a how-to manual on approaching regime change in the Middle East and for the destruction of the Oslo Accords .
• Ending Yasser Arafat ’ s and the Palestinian Authority ’ s political influence , by blaming them for acts of Palestinian terrorism • Inducing the United States to overthrow Saddam Hussein ’ s regime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Syria after Saddam ’ s regime is disposed of .
• Followed by military action against Iran , Saudi Arabia , and Egypt .
“ Clean Break ” was also in direct opposition to the Oslo Accords , to which Netanyahu was very much itching to obliterate .
The Oslo II Accord was signed just the year before , on September 28th 1995 , in Taba , Egypt .
During the Oslo Accord peace process , Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu accused Rabin ’ s government of being “ removed from Jewish tradition…and Jewish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other right-wing fundamentalist groups featured depictions of Rabin in a Nazi SS uniform or in the crosshairs of a gun .
In July 1995 , Netanyahu went so far as to lead a mock funeral procession for Rabin , featuring a coffin and hangman ’ s noose .
The Oslo Accords was the initiation of a process which was to lead to a peace treaty based on the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 , and at fulfilling the “ right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.
” If such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the United States backing , it would have prevented much of the mayhem that has occurred since .
However , the central person to ensuring this process , Yitzak Rabin , was assassinated just a month and a half after the signing of the Oslo II Accord , on November 4th , 1995 .
Netanyahu became prime minister of Israel seven months later .
“ Clean Break ” was produced the following year .
On November 6th , 2000 in the Israeli daily Ha ’ aretz , Israeli Justice Minister Yossi Beilin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Oslo peace accords , warned those Israelis who argued that it was impossible to make peace with the Palestinians : On Oct. 5 , 2003 , for the first time in 30 years , Israel launched bombing raids against Syria , targeting a purported “ Palestinian terrorist camp ” inside Syrian territory .
Washington stood by and did nothing to prevent further escalation .
“ Clean Break ” was officially launched in March 2003 with the war against Iraq , under the pretence of “ The War on Terror ” .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regime changes in the Middle East to fit the plans of the United Kingdom , the U.S. and Israel .
However , the affair is much more complicated than that with each player holding their own “ idea ” of what the “ plan ” is .
Before we can fully appreciate such a scope , we must first understand what was Sykes-Picot and how did it shape today ’ s world mayhem .
WWI was to officially start July 28th 1914 , almost immediately following the Balkan wars ( 1912-1913 ) which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Never one to miss an opportunity when smelling fresh blood , the British were very keen on acquiring what they saw as strategic territories for the taking under the justification of being in war-time , which in the language of geopolitics translates to “ the right to plunder anything one can get their hands on ” .
The brilliance of Britain ’ s plan to garner these new territories was not to fight the Ottoman Empire directly but rather , to invoke an internal rebellion from within .
These Arab territories would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ independence from the Ottoman Empire and that Britain would support them in this cause .
These Arab territories were thus led to believe that they were fighting for their own freedom when , in fact , they were fighting for British and secondarily French colonial interests .
In order for all Arab leaders to sign on to the idea of rebelling against the Ottoman Sultan , there needed to be a viable leader that was Arab , for they certainly would not agree to rebel at the behest of Britain .
Lord Kitchener @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be at the helm of this operation as Britain ’ s Minister of War .
Kitchener ’ s choice for Arab leadership was the scion of the Hashemite dynasty , Hussein ibn Ali , known as the Sherif of Mecca who ruled the region of Hejaz under the Ottoman Sultan .
Hardinge of the British India Office disagreed with this choice and wanted Wahhabite Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud instead , however , Lord Kitchener overruled this stating that their intelligence revealed that more Arabs would follow Hussein .
Since the Young Turk Revolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1908 , Hussein was very aware that his dynasty was in no way guaranteed and thus he was open to Britain ’ s invitation to crown him King of the Arab kingdom .
Kitchener wrote to one of Hussein ’ s sons , Abdallah , as reassurance of Britain ’ s support : Sir Henry McMahon who was the British High Commissioner to Egypt , would have several correspondences with Sherif Hussein between July 1915 to March 1916 to convince Hussein to lead the rebellion for the “ independence ” of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ private letter to India ’ s Viceroy Charles Hardinge sent on December 4th , 1915 , McMahon expressed a rather different view of what the future of Arabia would be , contrary to what he had led Sherif Hussein to believe : Such a view meant that Arabia would be subject to Britain ’ s heavy-handed “ advising ” in all its affairs , whether it sought it or not .
In the meantime , Sherif Hussein was receiving dispatches issued by the British Cairo office to the effect that the Arabs of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iraq ) would be given independence guaranteed by Britain , if they rose up against the Ottoman Empire .
The French were understandably suspicious of Britain ’ s plans for these Arab territories .
The French viewed Palestine , Lebanon and Syria as intrinsically belonging to France , based on French conquests during the Crusades and their “ protection ” of the Catholic populations in the region .
Hussein was adamant that Beirut and Aleppo were to be given independence and completely rejected French presence in Arabia .
Britain was also not content @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they demanded as their “ intrinsic ” colonial rights .
Francois Georges Picot was sent to negotiate with the British on November 23rd , 1915 .
He was chosen for this role due to his policy outlook of the “ Syrian party ” in France , which asserted that Syria and Palestine ( which they considered a single country ) were French property , for historical , economic , and cultural reasons .
Approximately six months later , the top secret terms of the agreement were signed on May 16th , 1916 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ carving up ’ of these Arab territories , to be the new jewels of Britain and France .
Notice Palestine is marked as an international zone in yellow .
Palestine was recognised as something neither country was willing to forfeit to the other .
And thus , according to the gentlemen ’ s etiquette , meant that one would simply have to take it while the other wasn ’ t looking , which is exactly what happened .
In 1916 , Sir Mark Sykes created the Arab Bureau whose headquarters would be in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ British rule ) , as a branch of British Intelligence and under the direction of Lord Kitchener .
Among the notable members of the Arab Bureau was T.E .
Lawrence , better known as “ Lawrence of Arabia ” .
The raison d ’ être of the Arab Bureau was to exact British control over Arabia via British Egypt .
The Arab revolt , led under the façade of King Hussein , was launched in Hejaz in early June 1916 , however , the hundreds of thousands of Arabs the British were expecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ join the revolt…did not show up .
Instead , British aircraft and ships were deployed , along with Muslim troops from British Egypt and elsewhere in the Empire .
As the revolt continued to show its weaknesses and lack of support by the Arabs themselves , to such a point that Britain was starting to despair of its success , T.E .
Lawrence ( who was known as “ the man with the gold ” ) , organised a confederation of Bedouin tribal chiefs to fight alongside the British forces in the Palestine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ War Minister Lloyd George ordered troops from British Egypt to invade Palestine , expressing his wish to General Allenby that Jerusalem be taken by Christmas .
Obligingly , on December 11th 1917 , Allenby walked into Jerusalem through the Jaffa Gate and declared martial law over the city ( see picture ) .
Allenby explained to Picot , that Jerusalem would remain under British military administration , for some time .
The British India Office invaded Mesopotamia and took Baghdad on March 11th , 1917 .
The southern province of Basra , largely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ British , while the ancient capital of Baghdad was to be under some form of British protectorate .
After the British conquests of Palestine and Mesopotamia , Syria would be taken by September 1918 by British led forces and Damascus would ultimately , after a bit of squabbling , be left under French control or “ advisory ” .
The final settlement for allocation of territories was established in 1920 with the Treaty of Sevres which stipulated that Syria and Lebanon were to go to France , and that Mesopotamia ( Iraq ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Arabia ( Hejaz ) being officially “ independent ” but ruled by British puppet monarchs .
Britain was also granted continued influence over Egypt , Cyprus and the Persian Gulf coast .
Faisal , the son of Hussein ibn Ali and who had been under the “ tutelage ” of T.E .
Lawrence this whole time , was proclaimed King of Iraq , after his failed attempt as King over Greater Syria before the French chased him out with their military , recognising that he represented British interests .
As for Persia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their control through the infamous Anglo-Persian Agreement of 1919 , with Ahmed Shah .
In 1926 the Mosul Treaty was signed where Iraq got nominal control over the oil region and the interests were divvied up among British ( 52.5 % ) , French ( 21.25 % ) and American ( 21.25 % ) oil companies .
As far as central Arabia was concerned , Hussein laid claim to the title Caliph in 1924 , which his rival Wahhabite Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud rejected and declared war , defeating the Hashemites .
Hussein abdicated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the British India Office , was proclaimed King of Hejaz and Najd in 1926 , which led to the founding of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia .
While the British were promising Arab rule and independence to the Hashemite Hussein and his sons , the British were simultaneously promising a homeland in Palestine to the Jews .
In the Balfour Declaration of November 2nd , 1917 the following was declared : Britain received the mandate over Palestine from the League of Nations in July 1922 .
Throughout the 1920s and 1930s violent confrontations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Palestine costing hundreds of lives .
In 1936 a major Arab revolt occurred over 7 months , until diplomatic efforts involving other Arab countries led to a ceasefire .
In 1937 , a British Royal Commission of Inquiry headed by William Peel concluded that Palestine had two distinct societies with irreconcilable political demands , thus making it necessary to partition the land .
The Arab Higher Committee refused Peel ’ s “ prescription ” and the revolt broke out again .
This time , Britain responded with a devastatingly heavy hand .
Roughly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ armed forces and police .
Following the riots , the British mandate government dissolved the Arab Higher Committee and declared it an illegal body .
In response to the revolt , the British government issued the White Paper of 1939 , which stated that Palestine should be a bi-national state , inhabited by both Arabs and Jews .
Due to the international unpopularity of the mandate including within Britain itself , it was organised such that the United Nations would take responsibility for the British initiative and adopted the resolution to partition Palestine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would announce its termination of its Mandate for Palestine on May 15th , 1948 after the State of Israel declared its independence on May 14th , 1948 .
A New Strategy for Securing Whose Realm ?
Despite what its title would have you believe , “ Clean Break ” is neither a “ new strategy ” nor meant for “ securing ” anything .
It is also not the brainchild of fanatical neo-conservatives : Dick Cheney and Richard Perle , nor even that of crazed end-of-days fundamentalist Benjamin Netanyahu , but rather has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the British Empire .
“ Clean Break ” is a continuation of Britain ’ s geopolitical game , and just as it used France during the Sykes-Picot days it is using the United States and Israel .
The role Israel has found itself playing in the Middle East could not exist if it were not for over 30 years of direct British occupation in Palestine and its direct responsibility for the construction of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict , which set a course for destruction and endless war in this region long before Israel ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officially launched operation “ Clean Break ” by directly and fraudulently instigating an illegal war against Iraq to which the Chilcot Inquiry , aka Iraq Inquiry , released 7 years later , attests to .
This was done by the dubious reporting by British Intelligence setting the pretext for the U.S. ’ ultimate invasion into Iraq based off of fraudulent and forged evidence provided by GCHQ , unleashing the “ War on Terror ” , aka “ Clean Break ” outline for regime change in the Middle East .
In addition , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be unlawfully instigated by Britain .
In a report published by the British Foreign Affairs Committee in September 2016 , it was concluded that it was “ the UK and France in March 2011 which led the international community to support an intervention in Libya to protect civilians from forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi ” .
The report concluded that the Libyan intervention was based on false pretence provided by British Intelligence and recklessly promoted by the British government .
If this were not enough , British Intelligence has also been caught @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Skripal affair .
Therefore , though the U.S. and Israeli military have done a good job at stealing the show , and though they certainly believe themselves to be the head of the show , the reality is that this age of empire is distinctly British and anyone who plays into this game will ultimately be playing for said interests , whether they are aware of it or not .

Cynthia Chung
In 1996 a task force, led by Richard Perle, produced a policy document titled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm for Benjamin Netanyahu, who was then in his first term as Prime Minister of Israel, as a how-to manual on approaching regime change in the Middle East and for the destruction of the Oslo Accords.
The “Clean Break” policy document outlined these goals:
Ending Yasser Arafat’s and the Palestinian Authority’s political influence, by blaming them for acts of Palestinian terrorism Inducing the United States to overthrow Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq. Launching war against Syria after Saddam’s regime is disposed of. Followed by military action against Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.
“Clean Break” was also in direct opposition to the Oslo Accords, to which Netanyahu was very much itching to obliterate. The Oslo II Accord was signed just the year before, on September 28th 1995, in Taba, Egypt.
During the Oslo Accord peace process, Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu accused Rabin’s government of being “removed from Jewish tradition…and Jewish values.” Rallies organised by the Likud and other right-wing fundamentalist groups featured depictions of Rabin in a Nazi SS uniform or in the crosshairs of a gun.
In July 1995, Netanyahu went so far as to lead a mock funeral procession for Rabin, featuring a coffin and hangman’s noose.
The Oslo Accords was the initiation of a process which was to lead to a peace treaty based on the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, and at fulfilling the “right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.” If such a peace treaty were to occur, with the United States backing, it would have prevented much of the mayhem that has occurred since.
However, the central person to ensuring this process, Yitzak Rabin, was assassinated just a month and a half after the signing of the Oslo II Accord, on November 4th, 1995. Netanyahu became prime minister of Israel seven months later. “Clean Break” was produced the following year.
On November 6th, 2000 in the Israeli daily Ha’aretz, Israeli Justice Minister Yossi Beilin, who was the chief negotiator of the Oslo peace accords, warned those Israelis who argued that it was impossible to make peace with the Palestinians:
Zionism was founded in order to save Jews from persecution and anti-Semitism, and not in order to offer them a Jewish Sparta or – God forbid – a new Massada.”
On Oct. 5, 2003, for the first time in 30 years, Israel launched bombing raids against Syria, targeting a purported “Palestinian terrorist camp” inside Syrian territory. Washington stood by and did nothing to prevent further escalation.
“Clean Break” was officially launched in March 2003 with the war against Iraq, under the pretence of “The War on Terror”. The real agenda was a western-backed list of regime changes in the Middle East to fit the plans of the United Kingdom, the U.S. and Israel.
However, the affair is much more complicated than that with each player holding their own “idea” of what the “plan” is. Before we can fully appreciate such a scope, we must first understand what was Sykes-Picot and how did it shape today’s world mayhem.
Arabian Nights
WWI was to officially start July 28th 1914, almost immediately following the Balkan wars (1912-1913) which had greatly weakened the Ottoman Empire.
Never one to miss an opportunity when smelling fresh blood, the British were very keen on acquiring what they saw as strategic territories for the taking under the justification of being in war-time, which in the language of geopolitics translates to “the right to plunder anything one can get their hands on”.
The brilliance of Britain’s plan to garner these new territories was not to fight the Ottoman Empire directly but rather, to invoke an internal rebellion from within. These Arab territories would be encouraged by Britain to rebel for their independence from the Ottoman Empire and that Britain would support them in this cause.
These Arab territories were thus led to believe that they were fighting for their own freedom when, in fact, they were fighting for British and secondarily French colonial interests.
In order for all Arab leaders to sign on to the idea of rebelling against the Ottoman Sultan, there needed to be a viable leader that was Arab, for they certainly would not agree to rebel at the behest of Britain.
Lord Kitchener, the butcher of Sudan, was to be at the helm of this operation as Britain’s Minister of War. Kitchener’s choice for Arab leadership was the scion of the Hashemite dynasty, Hussein ibn Ali, known as the Sherif of Mecca who ruled the region of Hejaz under the Ottoman Sultan.
Hardinge of the British India Office disagreed with this choice and wanted Wahhabite Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud instead, however, Lord Kitchener overruled this stating that their intelligence revealed that more Arabs would follow Hussein.
Since the Young Turk Revolution which seized power of the Ottoman government in 1908, Hussein was very aware that his dynasty was in no way guaranteed and thus he was open to Britain’s invitation to crown him King of the Arab kingdom.
Kitchener wrote to one of Hussein’s sons, Abdallah, as reassurance of Britain’s support:
If the Arab nation assist England in this war that has been forced upon us by Turkey, England will guarantee that no internal intervention take place in Arabia, and will give Arabs every assistance against foreign aggression.”
Sir Henry McMahon who was the British High Commissioner to Egypt, would have several correspondences with Sherif Hussein between July 1915 to March 1916 to convince Hussein to lead the rebellion for the “independence” of the Arab states.
However, in a private letter to India’s Viceroy Charles Hardinge sent on December 4th, 1915, McMahon expressed a rather different view of what the future of Arabia would be, contrary to what he had led Sherif Hussein to believe:
[I do not take] the idea of a future strong united independent Arab State … too seriously … the conditions of Arabia do not and will not for a very long time to come, lend themselves to such a thing.”
Such a view meant that Arabia would be subject to Britain’s heavy-handed “advising” in all its affairs, whether it sought it or not.
In the meantime, Sherif Hussein was receiving dispatches issued by the British Cairo office to the effect that the Arabs of Palestine, Syria, and Mesopotamia (Iraq) would be given independence guaranteed by Britain, if they rose up against the Ottoman Empire.
The French were understandably suspicious of Britain’s plans for these Arab territories. The French viewed Palestine, Lebanon and Syria as intrinsically belonging to France, based on French conquests during the Crusades and their “protection” of the Catholic populations in the region.
Hussein was adamant that Beirut and Aleppo were to be given independence and completely rejected French presence in Arabia. Britain was also not content to give the French all the concessions they demanded as their “intrinsic” colonial rights.
Enter Sykes and Picot.
Sykes-Picot: the Gentlemen’s Etiquette on Backstabbing
Francois Georges Picot was sent to negotiate with the British on November 23rd, 1915. He was chosen for this role due to his policy outlook of the “Syrian party” in France, which asserted that Syria and Palestine (which they considered a single country) were French property, for historical, economic, and cultural reasons.
Approximately six months later, the top secret terms of the agreement were signed on May 16th, 1916. The map showcases the agreed upon ‘carving up’ of these Arab territories, to be the new jewels of Britain and France.
Notice Palestine is marked as an international zone in yellow. Palestine was recognised as something neither country was willing to forfeit to the other. And thus, according to the gentlemen’s etiquette, meant that one would simply have to take it while the other wasn’t looking, which is exactly what happened.
In 1916, Sir Mark Sykes created the Arab Bureau whose headquarters would be in Cairo, Egypt (which was under British rule), as a branch of British Intelligence and under the direction of Lord Kitchener. Among the notable members of the Arab Bureau was T.E. Lawrence, better known as “Lawrence of Arabia”.
The raison d’être of the Arab Bureau was to exact British control over Arabia via British Egypt.
The Arab revolt, led under the façade of King Hussein, was launched in Hejaz in early June 1916, however, the hundreds of thousands of Arabs the British were expecting to defect from the Ottoman army and join the revolt…did not show up.
Instead, British aircraft and ships were deployed, along with Muslim troops from British Egypt and elsewhere in the Empire.
As the revolt continued to show its weaknesses and lack of support by the Arabs themselves, to such a point that Britain was starting to despair of its success, T.E. Lawrence (who was known as “the man with the gold”), organised a confederation of Bedouin tribal chiefs to fight alongside the British forces in the Palestine and Syria campaigns.
In 1917, War Minister Lloyd George ordered troops from British Egypt to invade Palestine, expressing his wish to General Allenby that Jerusalem be taken by Christmas.
Obligingly, on December 11th 1917, Allenby walked into Jerusalem through the Jaffa Gate and declared martial law over the city (see picture). Allenby explained to Picot, that Jerusalem would remain under British military administration, for some time.
The British India Office invaded Mesopotamia and took Baghdad on March 11th, 1917. The southern province of Basra, largely Shi’ite, was to be British, while the ancient capital of Baghdad was to be under some form of British protectorate.
After the British conquests of Palestine and Mesopotamia, Syria would be taken by September 1918 by British led forces and Damascus would ultimately, after a bit of squabbling, be left under French control or “advisory”.
The final settlement for allocation of territories was established in 1920 with the Treaty of Sevres which stipulated that Syria and Lebanon were to go to France, and that Mesopotamia (Iraq) and Palestine would be under British control with Arabia (Hejaz) being officially “independent” but ruled by British puppet monarchs. Britain was also granted continued influence over Egypt, Cyprus and the Persian Gulf coast.
Faisal, the son of Hussein ibn Ali and who had been under the “tutelage” of T.E. Lawrence this whole time, was proclaimed King of Iraq, after his failed attempt as King over Greater Syria before the French chased him out with their military, recognising that he represented British interests.
As for Persia (Iran), the British established their control through the infamous Anglo-Persian Agreement of 1919, with Ahmed Shah.
In 1926 the Mosul Treaty was signed where Iraq got nominal control over the oil region and the interests were divvied up among British (52.5%), French (21.25%) and American (21.25%) oil companies.
As far as central Arabia was concerned, Hussein laid claim to the title Caliph in 1924, which his rival Wahhabite Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud rejected and declared war, defeating the Hashemites. Hussein abdicated and ibn Saud, the favourite of the British India Office, was proclaimed King of Hejaz and Najd in 1926, which led to the founding of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
The Fate of Palestine
While the British were promising Arab rule and independence to the Hashemite Hussein and his sons, the British were simultaneously promising a homeland in Palestine to the Jews. In the Balfour Declaration of November 2nd, 1917 the following was declared:
His majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object…”
Britain received the mandate over Palestine from the League of Nations in July 1922.
Throughout the 1920s and 1930s violent confrontations between Jews and Arabs took place in Palestine costing hundreds of lives. In 1936 a major Arab revolt occurred over 7 months, until diplomatic efforts involving other Arab countries led to a ceasefire.
In 1937, a British Royal Commission of Inquiry headed by William Peel concluded that Palestine had two distinct societies with irreconcilable political demands, thus making it necessary to partition the land.
The Arab Higher Committee refused Peel’s “prescription” and the revolt broke out again. This time, Britain responded with a devastatingly heavy hand. Roughly 5,000 Arabs were killed by the British armed forces and police. Following the riots, the British mandate government dissolved the Arab Higher Committee and declared it an illegal body.
In response to the revolt, the British government issued the White Paper of 1939, which stated that Palestine should be a bi-national state, inhabited by both Arabs and Jews.
Due to the international unpopularity of the mandate including within Britain itself, it was organised such that the United Nations would take responsibility for the British initiative and adopted the resolution to partition Palestine on November 29th, 1947.
Britain would announce its termination of its Mandate for Palestine on May 15th, 1948 after the State of Israel declared its independence on May 14th, 1948.
A New Strategy for Securing Whose Realm?
Despite what its title would have you believe, “Clean Break” is neither a “new strategy” nor meant for “securing” anything. It is also not the brainchild of fanatical neo-conservatives: Dick Cheney and Richard Perle, nor even that of crazed end-of-days fundamentalist Benjamin Netanyahu, but rather has the very distinct and lingering odour of the British Empire.
“Clean Break” is a continuation of Britain’s geopolitical game, and just as it used France during the Sykes-Picot days it is using the United States and Israel.
The role Israel has found itself playing in the Middle East could not exist if it were not for over 30 years of direct British occupation in Palestine and its direct responsibility for the construction of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which set a course for destruction and endless war in this region long before Israel ever existed.
It was also Britain who officially launched operation “Clean Break” by directly and fraudulently instigating an illegal war against Iraq to which the Chilcot Inquiry, aka Iraq Inquiry, released 7 years later, attests to.
This was done by the dubious reporting by British Intelligence setting the pretext for the U.S.’ ultimate invasion into Iraq based off of fraudulent and forged evidence provided by GCHQ, unleashing the “War on Terror”, aka “Clean Break” outline for regime change in the Middle East.
In addition, the Libyan invasion in 2011 was also found to be unlawfully instigated by Britain.
In a report published by the British Foreign Affairs Committee in September 2016, it was concluded that it was “the UK and France in March 2011 which led the international community to support an intervention in Libya to protect civilians from forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi”.
The report concluded that the Libyan intervention was based on false pretence provided by British Intelligence and recklessly promoted by the British government.
If this were not enough, British Intelligence has also been caught behind the orchestrations of Russia-Gate and the Skripal affair.
Therefore, though the U.S. and Israeli military have done a good job at stealing the show, and though they certainly believe themselves to be the head of the show, the reality is that this age of empire is distinctly British and anyone who plays into this game will ultimately be playing for said interests, whether they are aware of it or not.
Originally published by Strategic Culture


offguardian--2020-05-20--Plans for post Covid NHS hatched behind the lockdown

Debates over relaxing the lockdown and whether or not the peak of the Covid-19 crisis may now be behind us have run alongside fleeting glimpses of the surreptitious plans being laid to exploit the continued lockdown on NHS public meetings and spring a succession of unpleasant surprises on the NHS as soon as any recovery period begins .
As we go to press [ May 14th ] The Lowdown has also seen a letter from NHS England ’ s London Regional Director Sir David Sloman , sent out internally on April 29 but not published , requiring Integrated Care System @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ urgent action ” on system plans for London that “ fundamentally change the way we deliver health and care.
” Each ICS is ordered to supply a “ revised ICS plan ” by Monday May 11 .
The letter spells out a 12-point list of issues on which bureaucrats in each area are supposed to devise new policy , on the hoof , for a “ Recovery Board ” meeting on May 13 .
Even if the country was not on lockdown , this 12-day turn-round period for proposals on fundamental changes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for London , to be in place by November 2021 , would indicate a complete disregard for any serious consultation or discussion .
But it ’ s clear from the way this is being done that any notion of public engagement or accountability is a very low priority afterthought .
The accompanying Powerpoint presentation entitled ‘ Journey to a New Health and Care System ’ states that over the next 12-15 months they hope to keep public engagement to a bare minimum : “ Include public and stakeholders in the process within the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposes mergers of admin and clinical support services , implying job losses , and a focus on getting people out of hospital as soon as possible – but with no details on how they should be supported after that .
Chances of seeing a health professional would be increasingly small , as primary care and outpatients seem set to become “ virtual by default ” .
Perhaps just as worrying is that while pushing through a whistle-stop process of planning , NHS England is only planning a snail ’ s pace return to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a plan to restart routine elective care as outlined in the national guidance within 12 months ” .
The Powerpoint slides also make clear NHS England is looking to use private hospitals to clear the waiting list that has grown so rapidly with months of cancelled elective operations .
There is no discussion of where the staff are to be found to carry out this additional work , or the added costs of prolonging the NHS block-booking of private beds ( which have only been partially used during the Covid crisis , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remained empty ) .
There is equally little if any consideration of mental health , community services , or the specific problems of social and racial inequalities .
Conspicuously as with every NHS reorganisation there is no attempt whatever to critically assess previous plans and proposals , and the extent to which so many plans since Sustainability and Transformation Plans in 2016 have disastrously focused on cost-cutting , reconfiguration and cutbacks in hospital services and capacity – and left the NHS in the capital and throughout England desperately ill-prepared , under-staffed and ill-equipped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scale .
Clearly the plan is to use jaunty new rhetoric of a “ post-Covid NHS ” to distract attention while NHS bosses covertly consolidate changes that have been accepted with minimal discussion to deal with the Covid crisis , but which would be controversial as a permanent arrangement .
The London Powerpoint makes this clear under the heading of ‘ Innovation ’ ; they see the task as being to : “ Catalogue the innovations made , ” and to “ determine those to be retained ; evaluate ; plan for widespread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , outpatients , remote diagnostics , new approaches to triage , workforce models , use of volunteers , remote working , pace and urgency to decision making , financial models ) ” .
NHS England bosses are keen to exploit the situation to short circuit any consultation , “ stepping up the new borough-based ICPs ” which are not public bodies and lack any statutory legitimacy , along with “ streamlined decision-making ” – in other words even less public consultation on anything .
While each ICS is required to catalogue “ changes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also warned that “ reversal requires London approval ” .
So as the NHS eventually emerges from its biggest-ever crisis , campaigners will need to be proactive in preventing NHS England bosses steering it straight into a new system – designed without evaluation of the impact of the crisis measures or consultation with local communities , and without any public accountability .
Those who don ’ t share NHS England ’ s vision of the brave new post Covid NHS will need to “ stay alert ” and “ protect our NHS ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continued work of bureaucrats behind the scenes in South West London to drive through a controversial hospital reconfiguration that could halve numbers of acute beds – while all public meetings and discussions are paused .
These plans reach into Surrey , where the HSJ has now also revealed the newly merged Surrey Heartlands CCG starts life with an inherited deficit of £62m – confirming that the much vaunted recent cancellation of £13.4 billion of NHS debts related only to loans run up by trusts , and that the post-Covid financial regime seems set @ @ @ @ @ @ @

John Lister
Debates over relaxing the lockdown and whether or not the peak of the Covid-19 crisis may now be behind us have run alongside fleeting glimpses of the surreptitious plans being laid to exploit the continued lockdown on NHS public meetings and spring a succession of unpleasant surprises on the NHS as soon as any recovery period begins.
As we go to press [May 14th] The Lowdown has also seen a letter from NHS England’s London Regional Director Sir David Sloman, sent out internally on April 29 but not published, requiring Integrated Care System Chairs and Senior Responsible Officers to take “urgent action” on system plans for London that “fundamentally change the way we deliver health and care.”
Each ICS is ordered to supply a “revised ICS plan” by Monday May 11. The letter spells out a 12-point list of issues on which bureaucrats in each area are supposed to devise new policy, on the hoof, for a “Recovery Board” meeting on May 13.
Even if the country was not on lockdown, this 12-day turn-round period for proposals on fundamental changes for a New Health and Care system for London, to be in place by November 2021, would indicate a complete disregard for any serious consultation or discussion.
But it’s clear from the way this is being done that any notion of public engagement or accountability is a very low priority afterthought. The accompanying Powerpoint presentation entitled ‘Journey to a New Health and Care System’ states that over the next 12-15 months they hope to keep public engagement to a bare minimum: “Include public and stakeholders in the process within the constraints of an emergency”.
It proposes mergers of admin and clinical support services, implying job losses, and a focus on getting people out of hospital as soon as possible – but with no details on how they should be supported after that.
Chances of seeing a health professional would be increasingly small, as primary care and outpatients seem set to become “virtual by default”.
Perhaps just as worrying is that while pushing through a whistle-stop process of planning, NHS England is only planning a snail’s pace return to previous levels of elective surgery: “a plan to restart routine elective care as outlined in the national guidance within 12 months”.
The Powerpoint slides also make clear NHS England is looking to use private hospitals to clear the waiting list that has grown so rapidly with months of cancelled elective operations.
There is no discussion of where the staff are to be found to carry out this additional work, or the added costs of prolonging the NHS block-booking of private beds (which have only been partially used during the Covid crisis, while tens of thousands of NHS beds have remained empty).
There is equally little if any consideration of mental health, community services, or the specific problems of social and racial inequalities.
Conspicuously as with every NHS reorganisation there is no attempt whatever to critically assess previous plans and proposals, and the extent to which so many plans since Sustainability and Transformation Plans in 2016 have disastrously focused on cost-cutting, reconfiguration and cutbacks in hospital services and capacity – and left the NHS in the capital and throughout England desperately ill-prepared, under-staffed and ill-equipped to deal with a pandemic of any scale.
Clearly the plan is to use jaunty new rhetoric of a “post-Covid NHS” to distract attention while NHS bosses covertly consolidate changes that have been accepted with minimal discussion to deal with the Covid crisis, but which would be controversial as a permanent arrangement.
The London Powerpoint makes this clear under the heading of ‘Innovation’; they see the task as being to: “Catalogue the innovations made,” and to “determine those to be retained; evaluate; plan for widespread adoption (e.g., virtual primary care, outpatients, remote diagnostics, new approaches to triage, workforce models, use of volunteers, remote working, pace and urgency to decision making, financial models)”.
NHS England bosses are keen to exploit the situation to short circuit any consultation, “stepping up the new borough-based ICPs” which are not public bodies and lack any statutory legitimacy, along with “streamlined decision-making” – in other words even less public consultation on anything.
While each ICS is required to catalogue “changes made to date,” they are also warned that “reversal requires London approval”.
So as the NHS eventually emerges from its biggest-ever crisis, campaigners will need to be proactive in preventing NHS England bosses steering it straight into a new system – designed without evaluation of the impact of the crisis measures or consultation with local communities, and without any public accountability.
Those who don’t share NHS England’s vision of the brave new post Covid NHS will need to “stay alert” and “protect our NHS”.
The Lowdown has previously highlighted the continued work of bureaucrats behind the scenes in South West London to drive through a controversial hospital reconfiguration that could halve numbers of acute beds – while all public meetings and discussions are paused.
These plans reach into Surrey, where the HSJ has now also revealed the newly merged Surrey Heartlands CCG starts life with an inherited deficit of £62m – confirming that the much vaunted recent cancellation of £13.4 billion of NHS debts related only to loans run up by trusts, and that the post-Covid financial regime seems set to be as tight as before.
originally published at Lowdown NHS


offguardian--2020-05-21--Brave New Normal – Part 2

Brave New Normal – Part 2

My columns haven ’ t been very funny recently .
This one isn ’ t going to be any funnier .
Sorry .
Fascism makes me cranky .
I don ’ t mean the kind of fascism the corporate media and the fake Resistance have been desperately hyping for the last four years .
God help me , but I ’ m not terribly worried about a few hundred white-supremacist morons marching around with tiki torches hollering Nazi slogans at each other , or Jewish-Mexican-American law clerks flashing “ OK ” signs on TV , or smirking schoolkids in MAGA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actual , bona fide fascism , or totalitarianism , if you want to get technical .
The kind where governments declare a global “ state of emergency ” on account of a virus with a 0.2 % to 0.6 % lethality ( and that causes mild , flu-like symptoms , or absolutely no symptoms whatsoever , in over 97 % of those infected ) , locks everyone down inside their homes , suspends their constitutional rights , terrorizes them with propaganda , and unleashes uniformed goon squads on anyone who doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m talking about the kind of totalitarianism where the police track you down with your smartphone data and then come to your house to personally harass you for attending a political protest , or attack you for challenging their illegitimate authority , and then charge you with “ assault ” for fighting back , and then get the media to publish a story accusing you of having “ set up ” the cops .
I ’ m talking about the kind of totalitarianism where the secret police are given carte blanche to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to scan you with their “ surveillance helmets , ” and dictate how close you can sit to your friends , and menace you with drones and robot dogs , and violently pry your kids out of your arms and arrest you if you dare to protest .
I ’ m talking about the kind of totalitarianism that psychologically tortures children with authoritarian loyalty rituals designed to condition them to live in fear , and respond to absurd Pavlovian stimuli , and that encourages the masses to turn off their brains and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wear a mask ” and “ flatten the curve , ” and to report their neighbors to the police for having an “ illegal ” private party … and to otherwise reify the manufactured mass hysteria the authorities need to “ justify ” their totalitarianism .
Yeah , that kind of stuff makes me cranky .
And you know what makes me really cranky ?
I ’ ll tell you what makes me really cranky .
It is people who publicly project themselves as “ anti-authoritarians ” and “ anti-fascists , ” or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brands and “ dissident ” personas on social media , or even in the corporate media , either zealously cheerleading this totalitarianism or looking away and saying nothing as it is rolled out by the very authorities and media propagandists they pretend to oppose .
I don ’ t know exactly why , but that stuff makes me particularly cranky .
I ’ ll provide you with a few examples .
The militant “ Portland anti-fascists ” who the corporate media fell in love with and made famous for bravely fighting off the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last four years , as soon as the Corona-Totalitarianism began , did what all true anti-fascists do when the state goes full-blown fascist … no , they did not “ smash the state , ” or “ occupy the streets , ” or anything like that .
Popular Internet “ anti-imperialists ” started accusing everyone opposing the lockdown of being part of some far-right Republican plot to “ promote mass death under the banner of freedom ” or to “ normalize death ” to benefit rich people , or being members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something .
Celebrity socialists took to Twitter to warn that we would “ shortly have the blood of thousands of people on our hands , ” and call us “ anti-vaxxers ” and “ flat earth fucks.
” Indie political and military analysts patiently explained why governments needed to be able to pull people out of their homes against their will and quarantine them .
Anarchist anthropologists averred that the lockdown wasn ’ t damaging the productive economy ; it was only damaging the “ bullshit economy , ” and those complaining about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work is “ largely useless.
” Others simply looked away or sat there in silence as we were confined to our homes , and made to carry “ permission papers ” to walk to work or the corner grocery store , and were beaten and arrested for not “ social-distancing , ” and were otherwise bullied and humiliated for no justifiable reason whatsoever .
My intent is not merely to mock these people ( i.e.
, these “ radical , ” “ anti-establishment ” types who fell into formation and started goose-stepping because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to die ) , but also to use them as a clear example of how official narratives are born and take hold .
That ’ s somewhat pertinent at the moment , because the “ Brave New Normal ” official narrative has been born , but it has not yet taken hold .
What happens next will determine whether it does .
In order to understand how this works , imagine for a moment that you ’ re one of these people who are normally skeptical of the government and the media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anti-authoritarian , or at least a friend of the working classes , and now you are beginning to realize that there is no Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu ( just as there were no “ WMDs , ” no “ Russian hackers , ” no “ pee-tape , ” etc . )
, and so it dawns on you that you ’ ve been behaving like a hysterical , brainwashed , fascist minion of the very establishment you supposedly oppose … or at the very least like an abject coward .
Imagine how you might feel right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foolish , right ?
And more than a little ashamed of yourself .
So … OK , what would do about that ?
Well , you would have a couple of options .
Option Number One would be admit what you did , apologize to whomever you have to , and try like hell not to do it again .
Not many people are going to choose this option .
Most people are going to choose Option Number Two , which is to desperately try to deny what they did , or to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in many cases are still actively doing ) .
Now , this is not as easy at it sounds , because doing that means they will have to continue to believe ( or at least pretend to believe ) that there is an Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu which is going to kill hundreds of millions of people the moment we stop locking everyone down , and forcing them to “ social distance , ” and so on .
They will have to continue to pretend to believe that this Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu exists , even though they know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is where that Orwellian “ doublethink ” comes in .
People ( i.e.
, these “ anti-authoritarians , ” not to mention the majority of the “ normal ” public ) are not going to want to face the fact that they ’ ve been behaving like a bunch of fascists ( or cowards ) for no justifiable reason whatsoever .
So , what they are going to do instead is desperately pretend that their behavior was justified and that the propaganda they have been swallowing , and regurgitating , was not propaganda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” In other words , in order to avoid their shame , they are going to do everything in their power to reify the official narrative and delegitimize anyone attempting to expose it as the fiction that it is .
They are going to join in with the corporate media that are calling us “ extremists , ” “ conspiracy theorists , ” “ anti-vaxxers , ” and other such epithets .
They ’ re going to accuse those of us on the Left of aligning with “ far-Right Republican militias , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of being members of the Russian-backed “ Querfront , ” and assorted other horrible things meant to scare errant leftists into line .
Above all , they are going to continue to insist , despite all the evidence to the contrary , that we are “ under attack ” by a “ killer virus ” which could “ strike again at any time , ” and so we have to maintain at least some level of totalitarianism and paranoia , or else … well , you know , the terrorists win .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by those too ashamed to admit what they did ( and try to determine why they did it ) , and not the narrative or the propaganda itself , that will eventually establish the “ Brave New Normal ” as “ reality ” ( assuming the process works as smoothly as it did with the “ War on Terror , ” the “ War on Populism , ” and the “ Cold War ” narratives ) .
The facts , the data , the “ science ” won ’ t matter .
Reality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consensus is being formed at the moment .
There is still a chance ( right now , not months from now ) for these people ( some of whom are rather influential ) to stand up and say , “ Whoops !
I screwed up and went all Nazi there for a bit.
” But I seriously doubt that is going to happen .
It ’ s much more likely that the Brave New Normal ( or some intermittent , scaled-down version of it ) will gradually become our new reality .
People @ @ @ @ @ @ @ locked down , ” and being ordered to wear masks , and not to touch each other , and to standing in designated circles and boxes , like they got used to the “ anti-Terrorism measures , ” and believing that Trump is a “ Russian asset.
” The coming economic depression will be blamed on the Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu , rather than on the lockdown that caused it .
Millions of people will be condemned to extreme poverty , or debt-enslaved for the rest of their lives , but they ’ ll be too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kind of broad resistance .
The children , of course , won ’ t know any better .
They will grow up with their “ isolation boxes , ” and “ protective barriers , ” and “ contact tracing , ” and they will live in constant low-grade fear of another killer virus , or terrorist attack , or Russian-backed white supremacist uprising , or whatever boogeyman might next appear to menace the global capitalist empire , which , it goes without saying , will be just fine .
Me , I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but I will try to find the humor in it all .
Bear with me … that might take a while .
C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright , novelist and political satirist based in Berlin .
His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing , Inc. His dystopian novel , Zone 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy , Swaine & Cormorant .
Volume I of his Consent Factory Essays is published by Consent Factory Publishing , a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amalgamated Content , Inc .
He can @ @ @ @ @ @ @

My columns haven’t been very funny recently. This one isn’t going to be any funnier. Sorry. Fascism makes me cranky.
I don’t mean the kind of fascism the corporate media and the fake Resistance have been desperately hyping for the last four years. God help me, but I’m not terribly worried about a few hundred white-supremacist morons marching around with tiki torches hollering Nazi slogans at each other, or Jewish-Mexican-American law clerks flashing “OK” signs on TV, or smirking schoolkids in MAGA hats.
I’m talking about actual, bona fide fascism, or totalitarianism, if you want to get technical. The kind where governments declare a global “state of emergency” on account of a virus with a 0.2% to 0.6% lethality (and that causes mild, flu-like symptoms, or absolutely no symptoms whatsoever, in over 97% of those infected), locks everyone down inside their homes, suspends their constitutional rights, terrorizes them with propaganda, and unleashes uniformed goon squads on anyone who doesn’t comply with their despotic decrees.
I’m talking about the kind of totalitarianism where the police track you down with your smartphone data and then come to your house to personally harass you for attending a political protest, or attack you for challenging their illegitimate authority, and then charge you with “assault” for fighting back, and then get the media to publish a story accusing you of having “set up” the cops.
I’m talking about the kind of totalitarianism where the secret police are given carte blanche to monitor everyone’s Internet activity, and to scan you with their “surveillance helmets,” and dictate how close you can sit to your friends, and menace you with drones and robot dogs, and violently pry your kids out of your arms and arrest you if you dare to protest.
I’m talking about the kind of totalitarianism that psychologically tortures children with authoritarian loyalty rituals designed to condition them to live in fear, and respond to absurd Pavlovian stimuli, and that encourages the masses to turn off their brains and mechanically repeat propaganda slogans, like “wear a mask” and “flatten the curve,” and to report their neighbors to the police for having an “illegal” private party … and to otherwise reify the manufactured mass hysteria the authorities need to “justify” their totalitarianism.
Yeah, that kind of stuff makes me cranky.
And you know what makes me really cranky? I’ll tell you what makes me really cranky.
It is people who publicly project themselves as “anti-authoritarians” and “anti-fascists,” or who have established their “anti-establishment” brands and “dissident” personas on social media, or even in the corporate media, either zealously cheerleading this totalitarianism or looking away and saying nothing as it is rolled out by the very authorities and media propagandists they pretend to oppose.
I don’t know exactly why, but that stuff makes me particularly cranky.
I’ll provide you with a few examples.
The militant “Portland anti-fascists” who the corporate media fell in love with and made famous for bravely fighting off the Trump-loving Putin-Nazi Menace over the course of the last four years, as soon as the Corona-Totalitarianism began, did what all true anti-fascists do when the state goes full-blown fascist … no, they did not “smash the state,” or “occupy the streets,” or anything like that.
They masked-up and started making vegan hand sanitizer.
Popular Internet “anti-imperialists” started accusing everyone opposing the lockdown of being part of some far-right Republican plot to “promote mass death under the banner of freedom” or to “normalize death” to benefit rich people, or being members of a “death cult,” or something.
Celebrity socialists took to Twitter to warn that we would “shortly have the blood of thousands of people on our hands,” and call us “anti-vaxxers” and “flat earth fucks.”
Indie political and military analysts patiently explained why governments needed to be able to pull people out of their homes against their will and quarantine them.
Anarchist anthropologists averred that the lockdown wasn’t damaging the productive economy; it was only damaging the “bullshit economy,” and those complaining about being out of work were people whose work is “largely useless.”
Others simply looked away or sat there in silence as we were confined to our homes, and made to carry “permission papers” to walk to work or the corner grocery store, and were beaten and arrested for not “social-distancing,” and were otherwise bullied and humiliated for no justifiable reason whatsoever.
(We are talking about a virus, after all, that even the official medical experts, e.g., the U.K.’s Chief Medic, admit is more or less harmless to the vast majority of us, not the Bubonic Fucking Plague or some sort of Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu … so spare me the “we-had-no-choice-but-to-go-totalitarian” rationalization.)
My intent is not merely to mock these people (i.e., these “radical,” “anti-establishment” types who fell into formation and started goose-stepping because the media told them we were all going to die), but also to use them as a clear example of how official narratives are born and take hold.
That’s somewhat pertinent at the moment, because the “Brave New Normal” official narrative has been born, but it has not yet taken hold. What happens next will determine whether it does.
In order to understand how this works, imagine for a moment that you’re one of these people who are normally skeptical of the government and the media, and that you consider yourself an anti-authoritarian, or at least a friend of the working classes, and now you are beginning to realize that there is no Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu (just as there were no “WMDs,” no “Russian hackers,” no “pee-tape,” etc.), and so it dawns on you that you’ve been behaving like a hysterical, brainwashed, fascist minion of the very establishment you supposedly oppose … or at the very least like an abject coward.
Imagine how you might feel right now.
You would probably feel pretty foolish, right? And more than a little ashamed of yourself. So … OK, what would do about that? Well, you would have a couple of options.
Option Number One would be admit what you did, apologize to whomever you have to, and try like hell not to do it again. Not many people are going to choose this option.
Most people are going to choose Option Number Two, which is to desperately try to deny what they did, or to desperately rationalize what they did (and in many cases are still actively doing).
Now, this is not as easy at it sounds, because doing that means they will have to continue to believe (or at least pretend to believe) that there is an Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu which is going to kill hundreds of millions of people the moment we stop locking everyone down, and forcing them to “social distance,” and so on.
They will have to continue to pretend to believe that this Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu exists, even though they know it doesn’t.
And this is where that Orwellian “doublethink” comes in.
People (i.e., these “anti-authoritarians,” not to mention the majority of the “normal” public) are not going to want to face the fact that they’ve been behaving like a bunch of fascists (or cowards) for no justifiable reason whatsoever.
So, what they are going to do instead is desperately pretend that their behavior was justified and that the propaganda they have been swallowing, and regurgitating, was not propaganda, but rather, “the Truth.”
In other words, in order to avoid their shame, they are going to do everything in their power to reify the official narrative and delegitimize anyone attempting to expose it as the fiction that it is. They are going to join in with the corporate media that are calling us “extremists,” “conspiracy theorists,” “anti-vaxxers,” and other such epithets.
They’re going to accuse those of us on the Left of aligning with “far-Right Republican militias,” and “Boogaloo accelerationists,” and of being members of the Russian-backed “Querfront,” and assorted other horrible things meant to scare errant leftists into line.
Above all, they are going to continue to insist, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that we are “under attack” by a “killer virus” which could “strike again at any time,” and so we have to maintain at least some level of totalitarianism and paranoia, or else … well, you know, the terrorists win.
It is this reification of the official narrative by those too ashamed to admit what they did (and try to determine why they did it), and not the narrative or the propaganda itself, that will eventually establish the “Brave New Normal” as “reality” (assuming the process works as smoothly as it did with the “War on Terror,” the “War on Populism,” and the “Cold War” narratives).
The facts, the data, the “science” won’t matter. Reality is consensus reality … and a new consensus is being formed at the moment.
There is still a chance (right now, not months from now) for these people (some of whom are rather influential) to stand up and say, “Whoops! I screwed up and went all Nazi there for a bit.” But I seriously doubt that is going to happen.
It’s much more likely that the Brave New Normal (or some intermittent, scaled-down version of it) will gradually become our new reality.
People will get used to being occasionally “locked down,” and being ordered to wear masks, and not to touch each other, and to standing in designated circles and boxes, like they got used to the “anti-Terrorism measures,” and believing that Trump is a “Russian asset.”
The coming economic depression will be blamed on the Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu, rather than on the lockdown that caused it. Millions of people will be condemned to extreme poverty, or debt-enslaved for the rest of their lives, but they’ll be too busy trying to survive to mount any kind of broad resistance.
The children, of course, won’t know any better. They will grow up with their “isolation boxes,” and “protective barriers,” and “contact tracing,” and they will live in constant low-grade fear of another killer virus, or terrorist attack, or Russian-backed white supremacist uprising, or whatever boogeyman might next appear to menace the global capitalist empire, which, it goes without saying, will be just fine.
Me, I’ll probably remain kind of cranky, but I will try to find the humor in it all. Bear with me … that might take a while.
C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing, Inc. His dystopian novel, Zone 23, is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. Volume I of his Consent Factory Essays is published by Consent Factory Publishing, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amalgamated Content, Inc. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org.


offguardian--2020-05-22--REPORT: EU Planning “Vaccination Passport” Since 2018

A report published by the European Commission in late 2019 reveals that the EU has been looking to increase the scope and power of vaccination programmes since well before the current “ pandemic ” .
The endpoint of the Roadmap is , among many other things , to introduce a “ common vaccination card/passport ” for all EU citizens .
This proposal will be appearing before the commission in 2022 , with a “ feasibility study ” set to run from 2019 through 2021 ( meaning , as of now , it ’ s about halfway through ) .
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roadmap ” is not an improvised response to the Covid19 pandemic , but rather an ongoing plan with roots going back to 2018 , when the EU released a survey of the public ’ s attitude toward vaccines titled “ 2018 State of Vaccine Confidence ” On the back of this research , the EU then commissioned a technical report titled “ Designing and implementing an immunisation information system ” , on – among other things – the plausibility of an EU-wide vaccination monitoring system .
In the 3rd quarter of 2019 these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ version of the the “ Vaccination Roadmap ” , a long-term policy plan to spread vaccine “ awareness and understanding ” whilst counteracting “ vaccine myths ” and combatting “ vaccine hesitancy ” .
You can read the entire report here , but below are some of the more concerning highlights [ emphasis throughout is ours ] : • “ Examine the feasibility of developing a common vaccinationcard/passport for EU citizens “ • “ Develop EU guidance for establishing comprehensive electronic immunization information systems for effective monitoring of immunization programmes.
” • “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the interoperability of national immunisation information systems ” On the 12th September 2019 , at the joint EU-WHO “ Global Vaccination Summit ” , they announced the “ 10 Actions Towards Vaccination for All ” , which cover much of the same ground .
One month later , in October 2019 , Event 201 was held .
For those who don ’ t know , Event 201 was a simulated pandemic exercise focusing on a zoonotic novel coronavirus originating in bats .
It was sponsored by Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation .
The result of the simulation was seven key suggestions .
In November of 2019 , these suggestions were published as a “ call to action ” .
One month later , China reported the first cases of Covid19 .
To be clear here ( and forestall any below-the-line arguments ) : this is not about vaccines , their effectiveness , safety or lack thereof .
The point is that proposed COVID countermeasures , which have been presented to the public as emergency measures thought up on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact existed since before the emergence the disease .
They already wanted to monitor your vaccination records and tie that to your passport , introduce mandatory vaccinations and clampdown on “ misinformation ” .
They just didn ’ t have a reason yet .
This was a situation which required a crisis and , fortuitously , it got one .
The exact ratio of contrivance to happenstance will never be known .
What we DO know , at this point , is that Sars-Cov-2 is nothing like the threat originally reported , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know they keep churning out the fear anyway .
And , thanks to documents like this , maybe now we ’ re starting to see why .

Kit Knightly
A report published by the European Commission in late 2019 reveals that the EU has been looking to increase the scope and power of vaccination programmes since well before the current “pandemic”.
The endpoint of the Roadmap is, among many other things, to introduce a “common vaccination card/passport” for all EU citizens.
This proposal will be appearing before the commission in 2022, with a “feasibility study” set to run from 2019 through 2021 (meaning, as of now, it’s about halfway through).
To underline the point: The “vaccination roadmap” is not an improvised response to the Covid19 pandemic, but rather an ongoing plan with roots going back to 2018, when the EU released a survey of the public’s attitude toward vaccines titled “2018 State of Vaccine Confidence”
On the back of this research, the EU then commissioned a technical report titled “Designing and implementing an immunisation information system”, on – among other things – the plausibility of an EU-wide vaccination monitoring system.
In the 3rd quarter of 2019 these reports were all combined into the latest version of the the “Vaccination Roadmap”, a long-term policy plan to spread vaccine “awareness and understanding” whilst counteracting “vaccine myths” and combatting “vaccine hesitancy”.
You can read the entire report here, but below are some of the more concerning highlights [emphasis throughout is ours]:
“Examine the feasibility of developing a common vaccinationcard/passport for EU citizens “
“ “Develop EU guidance for establishing comprehensive electronic immunization information systems for effective monitoring of immunization programmes.”
for effective monitoring of immunization programmes.” “overcome the legal and technical barriers impeding the interoperability of national immunisation information systems”
On the 12th September 2019, at the joint EU-WHO “Global Vaccination Summit”, they announced the “10 Actions Towards Vaccination for All”, which cover much of the same ground.
One month later, in October 2019, Event 201 was held.
For those who don’t know, Event 201 was a simulated pandemic exercise focusing on a zoonotic novel coronavirus originating in bats. It was sponsored by Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
The result of the simulation was seven key suggestions.
In November of 2019, these suggestions were published as a “call to action”.
One month later, China reported the first cases of Covid19.
To be clear here (and forestall any below-the-line arguments): this is not about vaccines, their effectiveness, safety or lack thereof.
The point is that proposed COVID countermeasures, which have been presented to the public as emergency measures thought up on the fly by panicking institutions, have in fact existed since before the emergence the disease.
They already wanted to monitor your vaccination records and tie that to your passport, introduce mandatory vaccinations and clampdown on “misinformation”. They just didn’t have a reason yet.
This was a situation which required a crisis and, fortuitously, it got one.
The exact ratio of contrivance to happenstance will never be known. What we DO know, at this point, is that Sars-Cov-2 is nothing like the threat originally reported, they admit as much themselves.
We also know they keep churning out the fear anyway.
And, thanks to documents like this, maybe now we’re starting to see why.


offguardian--2020-05-22--There’s No Longer Any Question: Biden Carried Out a Cover-Up in Ukraine

Trump stands vindicated for accusing Biden of trying to cover up his son ’ s corruption in Ukraine after one of that country ’ s lawmakers released audio recordings of the former Vice President ’ s numerous conversations with former President Poroshenko to that effect , proving that the real Ukrainegate scandal has been about the Democrat front-runner all along .
Ukrainian lawmaker Andrei Derkach released audio recordings that he claims to have received from journalists which convincingly sound as though they ’ re truly of former President Poroshenko ’ s numerous conversations with former Vice President and current Democrat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chats concerns the latter ’ s efforts to pressure the then-Ukrainian leader to remove General Prosecutor Shokin , which Trump and many of his surrogates have claimed was undertaken in an attempt to cover up his son Hunter ’ s corruption at the Burisma gas company where he was employed and which was the subject of an investigation by Shokin .
The recordings are remarkably frank , with Poroshenko proudly pledging fealty to Biden and regularly updating him on the progress that he ’ s made in keeping what he refers to as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vice President .
The Daily Beast reported that suspicions are swirling over whether the leak was an inside job in Ukraine or the result of so-called “ Russian hacking ” , but that ’ s just an attempt to distract from the calls , just like the unproven claims that Russia was responsible for hacking the DNC ’ s emails four years ago .
The real Ukrainegate scandal therefore wasn ’ t over the now-debunked allegations that Trump engaged in a quid pro quo with current Ukrainian President Zelensky in an attempt to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but over Biden ’ s attempts to cover up his son ’ s corruption in Ukraine in order to not hurt the Vice President ’ s future campaign prospects .
This is similar in essence to how the real Russiagate scandal wasn ’ t about Russia allegedly helping Trump , but about Hillary trading the US ’ strategic uranium deposits for Clinton Foundation kickbacks .
The pattern at play is unmistakable , and it ’ s that the Democrats have recently taken to accusing Trump of the same spirit of what they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it in carrying out shady deals with Russia , Ukraine , or whichever other country ’ s dirty laundry has yet to reach the light of day , the Democrats have a track record of international corruption unlike Trump , who comes off as squeaky clean in comparison .
That ’ s not to absolve the sitting American President of whatever his administration might secretly be doing abroad , but just to point out that the two highest-profile accusations of corruption against him have been proven to be false and much more applicable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them in the first place .
The timing of the Biden-Poroshenko leaks is intriguing and deserves some further analysis .
It ’ s unclear why they weren ’ t released any earlier considering that the fake Ukrainegate impeachment conspiracy against Trump began last summer , which suggests that they might have either only been recently obtained or strategically kept in reserve to unveil at an opportune moment during the 2020 campaign .
If the latter , then the current timing might be connected to the Democrats ’ desperate attempts to pin the blame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ World War C on Trump personally in yet another effort to impeach him or at the very list tilt the upcoming vote to his opponent ’ s favor .
Regarding that selfsame opponent , Biden seems to be afflicted with dementia and is widely considered to simply be a stand-in functioning as a puppet of more shadowy party interests .
There ’ s been some debate in Democrat circles about the wisdom of promoting him as their candidate of choice , but they probably didn ’ t have any more viable option since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t manage to generate any genuine grassroots support from their party ’ s base or were considered too radical and therefore unable to appeal to the on-the-fence voters in “ Main Street ” America who ’ ll likely decide this election like usual .
With that in mind , these criminally incriminating leaks could either throw the party further into disarray or present an opportunity for a so-called “ dark horse ” replacement to be put forth by the party during its summer convention , meaning that they might have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deep state ” operatives who don ’ t believe in Biden ’ s ability to beat Trump and want to force the party to replace him .
It can only be speculated who ’ s really behind the leaks and why , but they ’ ll likely end up being extremely damaging to Biden ’ s campaign .
He ’ s now been caught red-handed doing exactly what his party wrongly accused Trump of last summer , and the average American – while generally susceptible to partisan propaganda from both sides of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as to not realize that .
At the very least , these leaks confirm that the Democrats are indeed the party of corruption seeing as how they denied Trump ’ s original accusations against Biden but then subsequently concocted a literal conspiracy to try to impeach him once it was proven that he took tangible action to revive the investigation into Hunter ’ s corruption .
They wouldn ’ t have done something so dramatic if there wasn ’ t any corruption there to begin with , which makes them look even guiltier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ longer any question that Biden carried out a cover-up in Ukraine , with it now remaining to be seen how this will impact his campaign and the Democrats more broadly .
In all likelihood , the party will be unable to recover from this enormous blow to its reputation , though there ’ s still a faint chance that they might seek to reinvigorate their electoral prospects by replacing Biden with a “ dark horse ” candidate during this summer ’ s convention .
Should that transpire , then that individual would probably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s now forever tainted with corruption after the second most powerful man in the country at that time has now been proven to have engaged in high-level corruption and foreign meddling .
Politically speaking , Biden is now a “ dead man walking ” , and it wouldn ’ t be surprising if the Democrats dump their puppet in favor of one who they can at least portray as being “ less controversial ” than Trump .

Andrew Korybko
Trump stands vindicated for accusing Biden of trying to cover up his son’s corruption in Ukraine after one of that country’s lawmakers released audio recordings of the former Vice President’s numerous conversations with former President Poroshenko to that effect, proving that the real Ukrainegate scandal has been about the Democrat front-runner all along.
Caught Red-Handed
Ukrainian lawmaker Andrei Derkach released audio recordings that he claims to have received from journalists which convincingly sound as though they’re truly of former President Poroshenko’s numerous conversations with former Vice President and current Democrat front-runner Biden.
The content of their chats concerns the latter’s efforts to pressure the then-Ukrainian leader to remove General Prosecutor Shokin, which Trump and many of his surrogates have claimed was undertaken in an attempt to cover up his son Hunter’s corruption at the Burisma gas company where he was employed and which was the subject of an investigation by Shokin.
The recordings are remarkably frank, with Poroshenko proudly pledging fealty to Biden and regularly updating him on the progress that he’s made in keeping what he refers to as his “promises” to the former Vice President.
The Real Ukrainegate & Russiagate Scandals
The Daily Beast reported that suspicions are swirling over whether the leak was an inside job in Ukraine or the result of so-called “Russian hacking”, but that’s just an attempt to distract from the calls, just like the unproven claims that Russia was responsible for hacking the DNC’s emails four years ago.
The real Ukrainegate scandal therefore wasn’t over the now-debunked allegations that Trump engaged in a quid pro quo with current Ukrainian President Zelensky in an attempt to reopen this investigation for supposedly political reasons, but over Biden’s attempts to cover up his son’s corruption in Ukraine in order to not hurt the Vice President’s future campaign prospects.
This is similar in essence to how the real Russiagate scandal wasn’t about Russia allegedly helping Trump, but about Hillary trading the US’ strategic uranium deposits for Clinton Foundation kickbacks.
Pattern Of Hypocrisy
The pattern at play is unmistakable, and it’s that the Democrats have recently taken to accusing Trump of the same spirit of what they themselves are really guilty of. Be it in carrying out shady deals with Russia, Ukraine, or whichever other country’s dirty laundry has yet to reach the light of day, the Democrats have a track record of international corruption unlike Trump, who comes off as squeaky clean in comparison.
That’s not to absolve the sitting American President of whatever his administration might secretly be doing abroad, but just to point out that the two highest-profile accusations of corruption against him have been proven to be false and much more applicable to the same party that publicly made them in the first place.
Intriguing Timing
The timing of the Biden-Poroshenko leaks is intriguing and deserves some further analysis. It’s unclear why they weren’t released any earlier considering that the fake Ukrainegate impeachment conspiracy against Trump began last summer, which suggests that they might have either only been recently obtained or strategically kept in reserve to unveil at an opportune moment during the 2020 campaign.
If the latter, then the current timing might be connected to the Democrats’ desperate attempts to pin the blame for the US’ controversial handling of World War C on Trump personally in yet another effort to impeach him or at the very list tilt the upcoming vote to his opponent’s favor.
Regarding that selfsame opponent, Biden seems to be afflicted with dementia and is widely considered to simply be a stand-in functioning as a puppet of more shadowy party interests.
A “Dark Horse” For The Democrats?
There’s been some debate in Democrat circles about the wisdom of promoting him as their candidate of choice, but they probably didn’t have any more viable option since the other politicians in the primary either didn’t manage to generate any genuine grassroots support from their party’s base or were considered too radical and therefore unable to appeal to the on-the-fence voters in “Main Street” America who’ll likely decide this election like usual.
With that in mind, these criminally incriminating leaks could either throw the party further into disarray or present an opportunity for a so-called “dark horse” replacement to be put forth by the party during its summer convention, meaning that they might have been an inside job by disgruntled Democrat “deep state” operatives who don’t believe in Biden’s ability to beat Trump and want to force the party to replace him.
Democrats = Corruption
It can only be speculated who’s really behind the leaks and why, but they’ll likely end up being extremely damaging to Biden’s campaign. He’s now been caught red-handed doing exactly what his party wrongly accused Trump of last summer, and the average American – while generally susceptible to partisan propaganda from both sides of the aisle – isn’t so stupid as to not realize that.
At the very least, these leaks confirm that the Democrats are indeed the party of corruption seeing as how they denied Trump’s original accusations against Biden but then subsequently concocted a literal conspiracy to try to impeach him once it was proven that he took tangible action to revive the investigation into Hunter’s corruption.
They wouldn’t have done something so dramatic if there wasn’t any corruption there to begin with, which makes them look even guiltier in hindsight.
Concluding Thoughts
There’s no longer any question that Biden carried out a cover-up in Ukraine, with it now remaining to be seen how this will impact his campaign and the Democrats more broadly.
In all likelihood, the party will be unable to recover from this enormous blow to its reputation, though there’s still a faint chance that they might seek to reinvigorate their electoral prospects by replacing Biden with a “dark horse” candidate during this summer’s convention.
Should that transpire, then that individual would probably be distanced from the Obama Administration since it’s now forever tainted with corruption after the second most powerful man in the country at that time has now been proven to have engaged in high-level corruption and foreign meddling.
Politically speaking, Biden is now a “dead man walking”, and it wouldn’t be surprising if the Democrats dump their puppet in favor of one who they can at least portray as being “less controversial” than Trump.
Originally published by One World Press


offguardian--2020-05-23--Coronavirus Fact-Check #5: Infection-Fatality Ratio Update

The more data we gather , the more obvious it becomes that early fatality rate estimates were MASSIVELY exaggerated We covered in our third of these brief articles that , actually , the Coronavirus is NOT “ 20x deadlier ” than the flu .
That was evident once the early large-scale studies had been done in Germany , Iceland and South Korea .
It has only become more so in the weeks since .
Far from the 3.4 % predicted by the WHO back February , or the 1 % used by the Imperial Model , all the serological studies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 0.2 % .
Here are some recent examples : • On May 19th Dr John Ioannidis et al published their review of global cases , which found lethality ranging between 0.02 % and 0.4 % .
• On May 4th Dr Hendrilk Streeck et al published a study done in Germany which found an infection fatality rate ( IFR ) of < 0.36 % .
• Another study from Stanford University , published on April 30th and this time focusing on Santa Clara county , found an IFR of 0.17 % • @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Iran , published on May 1st , found an IFR of 0.12 % .
• On April 21st , theUniversity of Southern California ( USC ) published their study on the population of Los Angeles county , which found an IFR of < 0.2 % .
This list is far from exhaustive , visit SWPRS.org for more examples .
Although the numbers do vary from place to place – as you ’ d expect given changes in demographics , healthcare , methodology , sampling , population density etc .
– it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single one of them comes anywhere near the 3.4 % “ officially ” listed by the WHO , or even the 1 % used in the Imperial model .
Other studies , done all over the world from Boston to the Czech Republic to Japan – have found the level of infection in the general population to be at least 10x higher than expected ( and sometimes 100s of times higher ) .
Regardless of the specifics , ALL of the studies show that the danger of the virus was massively over-estimated .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Research , who have done wonderful work putting together fantastic resources .

The more data we gather, the more obvious it becomes that early fatality rate estimates were MASSIVELY exaggerated
We covered in our third of these brief articles that, actually, the Coronavirus is NOT “20x deadlier” than the flu. That was evident once the early large-scale studies had been done in Germany, Iceland and South Korea. It has only become more so in the weeks since.
Far from the 3.4% predicted by the WHO back February, or the 1% used by the Imperial Model, all the serological studies done to this point average out at about 0.2%.
Here are some recent examples:
This list is far from exhaustive, visit SWPRS.org for more examples.
Although the numbers do vary from place to place – as you’d expect given changes in demographics, healthcare, methodology, sampling, population density etc. – it’s easy to see that not a single one of them comes anywhere near the 3.4% “officially” listed by the WHO, or even the 1% used in the Imperial model.
Other studies, done all over the world from Boston to the Czech Republic to Japan – have found the level of infection in the general population to be at least 10x higher than expected (and sometimes 100s of times higher).
Regardless of the specifics, ALL of the studies show that the danger of the virus was massively over-estimated.
Compiled with the assistance of Swiss Policy Research, who have done wonderful work putting together fantastic resources.


offguardian--2020-05-23--WATCH: Prof Sunetra Gupta on LockdownTV

WATCH: Prof Sunetra Gupta on LockdownTV

Professor Sunetra Gupta was one of the first scientists to publicly criticise the now widely-discredited Imperial Model .
Her team @ @ @ @ @ suggested both that the coronavirus had been in the country much earlier than expected , @ @ @ @ @ fatality rate was far lower than either WHO or Imperial College had estimated .
( @ @ @ @ @ second list of experts coming out against the coronavirus hysteria ) .
In a wide-ranging @ @ @ @ @ Freddie Sayer , Prof Gupta talks antibodies , R0 numbers and much more .
Here @ @ @ @ @ : • “ Different countries have had different lockdown policies , and yet what we @ @ @ @ @ a uniform pattern of behaviour ” • “ Infection Fatality Rate is less than 1 @ @ @ @ @ to 1 in 10,000.
” • “ Remaining in a state of lockdown is extremely @ @

Professor Sunetra Gupta was one of the first scientists to publicly criticise the now widely-discredited Imperial Model. Her team’s work at Oxford suggested both that the coronavirus had been in the country much earlier than expected, and that consequently the infection fatality rate was far lower than either WHO or Imperial College had estimated. (She also appeared in our second list of experts coming out against the coronavirus hysteria).
In a wide-ranging interview with Unherd.com‘s Freddie Sayer, Prof Gupta talks antibodies, R0 numbers and much more.
Here are a few choice quotes:
“Different countries have had different lockdown policies, and yet what we’ve observed is almost a uniform pattern of behaviour”
“Infection Fatality Rate is less than 1 in 1000 and probably closer to 1 in 10,000.”
“Remaining in a state of lockdown is extremely dangerous”