Archive | December 26th, 2019

China’s High-Speed Trains

By Larry Romanoff

One of the great advantages of train travel compared to flying is the saving in wasted time. A flight in most any country normally involves a one-hour trip to the airport with a requirement to arrive at least 1.5 hours prior to departure. At the arrival end, there is always the seemingly long wait to deplane, the long walk to the baggage carousels or the exits, then the one hour or more trip downtown.

When we take into account the commute and the necessary pre-departure allowance for check-in and security clearance and the 2-Km walk to the departure gate, then the post-arrival delays and the commute downtown at our destination, trains are equal to flying in trips up to 1,200 or even 1,500 Kms, and much faster than flying for shorter trips. Not only much quicker, but less expensive than air travel. The frequency of departures, at least between major centers in China is astonishing, the Shanghai-Beijing route having some 75 or 80 HSR trains each way each day, often leaving only 10 minutes apart.

In China, the railway stations are downtown so the commute is minimal, one arriving at the station with luggage in hand only 20 or 30 minutes before departure. There is no ‘check-in’ process as with the airlines, only the usual security check and luggage scanners when entering the station where you can spend time in comfortable waiting rooms or simply find the correct platform and board your train. Even though many stations are huge, walking distances are normally much shorter than in most airports.

Another advantage of train travel is the considerable convenience and comfort, trains being much superior in both categories with an absence of pressure and time apprehension. Trains eliminate most unpleasant elements of air travel, with the attraction of being able to see the countryside; from a plane, we see nothing. On a plane, we are forced to adhere to a rigid schedule: the time for coffee or a meal, the time to close the window curtains and darken the cabin so the staff can rest. If the food cart is out, you cannot get up to walk around or go to the bathroom. Everything seems regulated and under pressure. Leaving your seat is often a major inconvenience. By contrast, on a train you are free to do as you please. Your luggage is accessible at any time, the food carts come by regularly, the dining car is always there, seats have twice the leg room, the aisles wide enough to accommodate passengers, everything much more relaxed, pleasant, and enjoyable.

China’s high-speed trains are very quiet, without wind noise and mercifully free of the incessant hum of aircraft engines. On the latest generation of HSR with its flawlessly-welded rails, even the soft clacking of the rails is gone. The seats are as wide or wider than airline business class, they recline partially (recline fully in business class) and, with the comfort and silence, it is very easy to work or sleep on a train. At the destination, since that station is also downtown, taxis and subways are conveniently at hand.

Trains not dedicated to short runs have sleeper cars which are perfectly comfortable even in older trains, the later generations offering lovely duvets, a separate TV for each bunk, electrical outlets, lights, Wi-Fi. The sleeper cars offer a pleasant alternative to air travel for the typically rushed and pressurised one-day business trips, for example from Shanghai to Guangzhou, Shenzhen or Hong Kong. We board our train in the evening after dinner, do a bit of work or watch TV, and awake at 7:00 AM downtown at our destination, with enough time for breakfast before our first meeting. On the return trip, after a full unpressurised day, we have a leisurely dinner with friends, board the train and awake at 7:00 AM back in Shanghai. With two full nights’ sleep, there is no jet lag and no residual fatigue.

China’s HSR system is built to an intense high quality. The 300 Kph and 400 Kph trains run on special dedicated, elevated tracks laid on deep and heavily-reinforced beds of high-density concrete with vertical and horizontal deviations measured in millimeters, these tracks supported by massive columns of high strength concrete spaced very closely. HSR tracks are, insofar as is humanly and technologically possible, a straight and level line. China has the highest standards for stabilising high-speed trains in their longitudinal, lateral and vertical dimensions, a rail expert stating, “It is no exaggeration to say the Beijing-Shanghai rail lines were built with the highest standards in the modern world”, and that China leads the world in rail stability. When traveling by train I sometimes place a coin on its edge on the windowsill, and I have video of the coin remaining stable for four or five minutes before it finally falls over – and this is at 300 Kms per hour. I have lost the link, but there is a video on YouTube of a coin remaining on edge for 8 minutes.

China has not succumbed to the privatisation pressure from the neocon bankers and has retained control of its infrastructure, an enormous blessing for rapid and efficient development. The country is able to plan and amend its entire travel infrastructure as a whole, considering air, rail and road, taking into account only the benefits to the entire country rather than having to appease a multitude of private interests. HSR trains have cut travel time so dramatically that airline services on many routes have been suspended. In the absence of competing interests, a nationwide plan can be conceived, examined, discussed and approved in a much shorter time than in countries with a different system, and implementation times much reduced as well.

China’s new HSR line from Shanghai to Beijing, a distance of about 1,200 Kms was a masterpiece of unobstructed planning and execution. For construction, the government hired almost 140,000 workers to build multiple sections simultaneously, the entire project completed in two years at a cost of less than $20 billion. By contrast, in the US, the cost of an HSR line along the Eastern seaboard, a distance only half as long, has been estimated at $120 billion and might require 20 years to completion.

As another example, the province of Alberta in Canada is considering construction of an HSR line connecting the two major cities – a route of only 300 Kms, yet the planning stage is expected to take 5 years and cost $50 million; if approved, the subsequent construction process is projected to require another 5 years at least. The interim negotiations for right of way, the bidding processes, the dealing with all the various private interests as well as the cities involved, is expected to add 5 years to the process.

It is critical to note that economic development follows transportation. Countries like Canada and the US would never have developed without the cross-country transportation systems being in place. But it is almost certainly too late for both Canada and the US with high-speed rail, too many decades of auto-dependent development condemning both countries to irreversible transport deficiencies.

China’s high-speed rail ambitions are already global. China Railway Group is participating in a high-speed rail project in Venezuela.

China Railway Construction Corp. is helping build a high-speed line in Turkey linking Ankara and Istanbul.

Chinese companies are bidding for contracts in Brazil, and Russia, Saudi Arabia and Poland have expressed interest.

China is already expanding its domestic rail network to mesh with new routes in Vietnam and plans to extend a route all the way to Singapore.

Chinese rail officials are also in the planning stages of a high-speed rail route through Western China and Xinjiang Province, through Kyrgyzstan and other ‘stans’, connecting with the lines in Turkey and proceeding Westward into Europe. It may one day soon be possible to travel by HSR all the way from Shanghai to London – at a fraction of the cost of flying, and with far more comfort and the ability to see many countries on route.

Technology Transfer is not Free

Whenever the subject of technology transfer arises, there seems to always arise a flurry of accusations about copying or stealing. Readers should carefully note that China did not “steal” anyone’s rail technology; instead, it was all purchased. China paid billions of dollars for that transfer of technology. It is the same in all important industries today. China has the money, and is willing to pay handsomely for technology it needs to further its development.

High-speed rail was pioneered in post-war Japan in the 1950s and early 1960s with the construction of the Shinkansen ‘bullet train’. France, Germany and other European countries followed suit in the 1980s. Serious thinking about building faster rail in China began in the 1990s and, to make up for a late start, the Chinese government looked abroad. In 2004, China signed agreements with Alstom and Kawasaki to cooperate with local firms in building HSR train sets for China. Kawasaki, who designed the original Hayate bullet train, signed a deal with the Chinese ministry of Railways for the transfer of a full spectrum of HSR technology to a manufacturer in Qingdao.The World’s Most Expensive Railway

China’s arrangement to obtain European and Japanese high-speed train technologies carried a stiff price. Kawasaki’s 2004 deal with the Railways Ministry alone, which included the transfer of the whole spectrum of technology and know-how for the bullet train, cost China nearly $800 million at the time. Kawasaki originally manufactured train sets and exported them to China fully assembled, then helped Chinese manufacturers produce another 50 sets locally. Kawasaki also supplied China with training in both Japan and China, and various technology updates, each new provision costing many millions of dollars in fees.

Siemens, Bombardier and Alsthom signed similar deals with China to transfer the technology necessary to produce their train sets. Chinese firms also paid many millions of dollars in fees to purchase upgrades of the technology and further training; in many cases, Chinese engineers were sent to Europe and Japan for extended periods for study. Later, the companies helped set up production facilities within China. They trained Chinese engineers while helping the country develop its own supply chain for train components.

And Some Sellers’ Remorse

Major foreign industries had long sought to tap China’s vast market for the imagined enormous rewards, and high-speed rail was in the forefront. The Japanese and European companies that pioneered high-speed rail agreed to sell trains to China on the expectation of access to the most ambitious rapid rail system in history and contracts worth billions per year indefinitely into the future. Their eagerness in agreeing to the sale of technology was based on expectations that the Chinese would need perhaps 30 years to absorb and implement the technology before being ready to proceed on their own. The reality was somewhat different: they found themselves having to compete with Chinese firms who adapted and improved their technology and produced superior products only three years later.

Many decades have passed since the Japanese built the first HSR, and relatively little development was achieved before China entered the picture. Certainly part of the reason was that the Japanese hoarded their technology for the sake of national pride, rather than marketing it to the world. By the time they changed their attitude, the world had passed them by and their technology is now old. Japan agreed to a technology sale rather late in the process, and held back the latest generation of developments. When China proved its ability to combine technologies from all firms and create a new, superior product, the Japanese appeared quite bitter, Kawasaki going so far as to claim that China’s trains were just ‘tweaked versions’ of its original bullet train with minor variations to the exterior paint scheme and interior trim. Of course the real problem is that it is now impossible for Japan to compete with China on international markets since they hoarded their technology for too long and have been surpassed. Marketing is difficult when your only selling point is that the other guy’s faster and cheaper trains are copies of your slow and expensive ones.

Something similar occurred with Shanghai’s 430 Kph Maglev train (the world’s only operating Maglev) which was built by Siemens. Maglev technology is simple in principle at low speeds, but smoothness and stability at high speed are exceptionally complicated. Due to pride of authorship as with the Japanese, Siemens also refused to consider a sale of technology, preferring to hold out for astonishingly high prices of the finished product. The result was that Chinese engineers turned their full R&D attention to Maglevs and Siemens may find itself permanently out of the market. Chinese engineers first produced very successful low-speed Maglevs (200 Kph) entirely on their own IP, for use throughout China as city trains, but are now beginning commercial production of a fabulous 600 Kph Maglev which may become a substitute for traditional high-speed rail. The cost to Shanghai for Siemens’ Maglev was very high, but Chinese engineers have managed, again on their own IP, to bring down the cost for this very fast train to only two-thirds that of regular high-speed trains.

The Western firms confused their head start with their R&D capacity, attributing both to natural superiority, confidently assuming they were more innovative rather than simply having begun earlier. Kawasaki and Siemens in particular knew the Chinese engineers wanted to produce trains based entirely on domestic technology, so they refused to part with their more advanced products and sold China rail technology that was already two or even three generations old. The assumption was that Japanese and German R&D capability coupled with their huge lead would maintain an impassable gap and permit them to capture the entire Chinese market.

To say that they underestimated the power of Chinese innovation and the speed and quality of R&D in China, is an understatement of some magnitude, with both Kawasaki and Siemens finding themselves left at the starting gate only a few years later. The Chinese rail companies paid billions of dollars for older technology from four established firms. As a first step they disassembled, evaluated, and combined all those technologies into one train with the best features of each. The second step was to utilise their formidable R&D abilities to then create entirely new trains built entirely on Chinese-owned IP, producing trains that were faster, smoother, quieter, and less expensive than the newest generation of their former suppliers.

High speed rail was pioneered in Europe and Japan, but there was no market outside those areas until China entered the picture, this entrance validating the feasibility of widespread adoption and greater affordability. It appears now that China will dominate the HSR market for the foreseeable future, but foreign companies will still share in a much larger worldwide market. This was not an accident. The Chinese government planned the largest scale HSR network in the world 30 years ago and committed large sums to fund the program. Chinese engineers have exhibited enormous ingenuity and creativity and are still aggressively pushing the rail technology envelope. Developing countries are particularly grateful that China has brought the cost of HSR to affordable levels.

I will make here one observation on safety. When China’s HSR had an accident at Wenzhou about ten years ago, the Western media were so delirious with schadenfreude that no one bothered to report the cause. It happens that every opportunity to criticise China will be transformed into a proven failure of China’s one-party government. In reporting on this train accident in 2011, the entire Western media eagerly pinned the blame not on a signals failure but on China’s one-party system. But Wikipedia lists 69 pages of rail accidents for the US alone, having several major and a bunch of minor ones every year. Since theology must be universal to be credible, it seems clear where the fault lies for all these terrible disasters – democracy causes train crashes.

But I digress. That rail accident was eerily reminiscent of Boeing’s 737 Max, where a major programming problem was not covered in the operating manuals. China’s railway system has dozens of installations across the country where every train is constantly monitored for many metrics like speed, axle temperatures, weather conditions. There developed a problem with a Japanese-made signaling system where the Japanese didn’t want Chinese engineers to fully understand the workings of the equipment and so provided faulty documentation. When the fault occurred, Chinese engineers immediately knew something was wrong and followed the operating manual, but to no avail because the manual was incomplete. I would note further that this was by no means the first time Chinese engineers had been deliberately misled on either the function or operation of IP they had bought and paid for.

Ripley’s ‘Believe it or Not’

This essay wouldn’t be complete without some reference to the US.

In 2012 and 2013 the US wallowed in an anguish created by envy of China’s high-speed rail network, America’s rickety and accident-prone rail system suffering badly in comparison. When it became apparent that the Americans could never duplicate China’s success, and confronted with the imminent failure of their ambition to join the world of high-speed rail, the Americans reduced the definition of “high-speed trains” from 400 Kph to 250 and then 150, before abandoning their quest altogether. Then, rationalisation through the uniquely American moral lens of politics and religion. “Our slow rail network is the price we pay for the great things about America like our democratic political system and our freedom of religion.”

An internet reader commented:

“The American failure to realise an HSR system is not because China has better leadership, vision, planning and execution and the wisdom to sacrifice short-term benefits and minority interests for the long term gain and the greater good; it’s because Americans have democracy and love freedom. The bickering and indecision, the squabbling, the vacillation and eventual paralysis of all levels of US government on this issue, an impossibility in any sane country, are actually a badge of merit in America, evidence of their virtuous freedom. So, let China build its high-speed trains. The more trains they have, the less free they become. The Americans would never be so foolish as to sacrifice freedom for good transportation or democracy for roads and bridges.”

I don’t know the author of this brief passage below, but I want to share the quote with you because he captured perfectly the American spirit.

“At the end of 2013, California was still hoping to build the nation’s first high-speed rail line, a 830 Kms track from Los Angeles to San Francisco, that would be scheduled for completion in 2029 (more than 16 years) and would cost about $70 billion not including the inevitable cost over-runs. By contrast, China built its 1,320 Kms Shanghai-Beijing HSR line in only three years at a cost of 200 billion Yuan – about $32 billion. So the US high-speed train – if it’s ever actually built – will be 60% slower than China’s, will take five times as long to build and cost almost five times as much for an equivalent distance. Of course, the Americans could just ask China to build their HSR in only 18 months at a cost of only $20 billion, but that would mean admitting Chinese superiority, and that means the US will never have high-speed rail.”

However, unknown to the world at large, America does indeed have a “high-speed train”, Richard Branson’s new ‘Brightline’, that runs 100 Kms from Miami to West Palm Beach in Florida. According to the promotions, these are “sleek, neon-yellow trains, which travel at speeds of up to 127 Kms/hr (!!!)”. To be fair to the Americans, they initially promoted this train as a “higher-speed train”, a small but worthy concession to reality that quickly disappeared. To be fair to the sleek, neon-yellow train, it is unable to reach its advertised top speed and in fact seldom reaches even 100 Kph, faster than a freight train, but not by much.

Also unknown to the world, this American version of HSR has already (in two or three years since inauguration) had numerous derailments, scores of accidents, and around 100 deaths – several of which occurred during the test run, after which the train was cleared for service. Brightline, nevertheless, said “safety remains the company’s top priority”. Interestingly, the US Federal Railroad Administration data show significantly fewer deaths because (if you can believe this) they classify many of the deaths as “possible suicides”, and then impose “reporting restrictions intended to safeguard privacy”. (1)

According to one news report, Brightline trains had been performing test runs between Miami, Ft. Lauderdale and West Palm Beach since January 2017, a period during which several fatalities occurred. (2) Another news report stated that according to the Federal Railroad Administration this train has had “the most fatalities along the corridor in that time period”. (3) The situation is so bad that there are at least two Florida law firms now specialising in Brightline accident victim litigation. (4)

Also, according to the Federal Railroad Administration, “a Brightline locomotive derailed … at four miles per hour …”. The report continued that this was the second derailment within two months, the main cause being that this US high-speed train is using tracks and rail bed that were built more than 60 years ago and intended only for slow-moving freight trains. The company refused to confirm the accident for nearly six months, even in testimony to a Senate Committee, then called the derailment “minor”, and dismissed the critics’ concern as a “baseless fear tactic”. (5) Another article carried this smidgen of news: “fault of the tracks, new, still very rough, as if they would become better with use. Ten days later the stretch of track was straightened.” (sic)

These issues are noteworthy in several ways. First, on safety: Running “higher-speed” trains through level crossings (at ground level), is begging for fatalities. Running passenger trains on dilapidated trackage and rail beds that haven’t been maintained for 60 years, is the same. A second item is so illustrative of a pathological quirk that appears to exist only in the US. From Brightline’s home webpage:

“Hand-stitched leather seats. Sit 2 or 4 together at a table. Relax pre-departure in our first-class SELECT lounge with an ever-changing lineup of enticing bites and beverages. Lounge business services including iPads, a scanner & printer. Access to conference rooms in our stations (a $50/hr value). Complimentary onboard Wi-Fi.”

Hand-stitched leather seats and an ever-changing lineup of enticing bites on a train that derails at 4 miles per hour and has had scores of accidents and already killed about 100 people. This is the way Americans design their cars. Appearance is everything and substance is nothing. American auto designers hold frequent market tests where they introduce citizens to new automobiles, the purpose being to see if the new degradations in quality and safety can pass these public tests undetected. A so-called high-speed train running on dangerous tracks is glossed over for leather seats and Wi-Fi. Only in America. One internet commenter wrote, “This proves that Americans are too stupid for high-speed rail.”

This last item may contain research worthy of a Master’s thesis, this being a newspaper headline on one of the derailments: “Brightline accidents tragic, but is railway really to blame?” The article stated that this “innovative high-speed passenger rail service has been in operation for only about a week and a half, and already people have died”, then went on to say that most readers put the blame not on the railway but on “the decision-making of people”. There was an almost irresistible poignancy about this claim. In reading the reports, I could not shake the feeling of listening to a small child, disappointed at some failure but lacking the maturity to see reality as it was, and making an excuse typical of an 8 year-old mind. I believe we could argue this to be the consciousness level of the typical adult American.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. he is a frequent contributor to Global Research. He can be contacted at: 2186604556@qq.com

Notes

(1) https://abcnews.go.com/Travel/wireStory/higher-speed-florida-train-highest-us-death-rate-67434427

(2) https://www.injuryattorneyfla.com/brightline-train-accident.html

(3) cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/267542.aspx?page=2

(4) https://www.tcpalm.com/story/news/local/shaping-our-future/all-aboard-florida/2018/06/21/brightline-fatality-29-year-old-man-who-stepped-front-train/721236002/

(5) https://floridapolitics.com/archives/247058-brightline-february-train-car-derailment-comes-light-critics-call-disturbing

(6) https://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/opinion/letters-brightline-accidents-tragic-but-railway-really-blame/9evqeaR6V9bXTiqiZEJ0lK/

Posted in ChinaComments Off on China’s High-Speed Trains

The History of Hong Kong, Britain’s Colonial Legacy. Fast Forward to 2019

By Larry Romanoff

The recent history of Hong Kong doesn’t begin where most Westerners might imagine. It began with the Rothschild’s British East India Company that existed from the early 1700s to nearly 1900, when Rothschild conceived the idea of inflicting opium onto China. The plans had been well-made, with approval from the top. Rothschild had the franchise for growing the opium and David Sassoon received from Queen Victoria herself, the exclusive franchise for distributing the drug in China.

The reason Hong Kong was seized by England, on orders of Queen Victoria, was that Sassoon needed a logistics, warehousing, and distribution base for his opium operations. Similarly, the founding of HSBC, an event requiring permission of the monarch, was for the handling and laundering of Sassoon’s drug money, an expertise in which the bank still specialises today. The standard narrative tells us the HSBC was founded by Scotsman Sir Thomas Sutherland, who wanted a bank operating on “sound Scottish banking principles”, but that’s historical Photoshopping. I don’t know who Sutherland was, but, if he existed at all, he quickly disappeared and his name appears nowhere in a list of directors, executives or officers. The HSBC was never a British or Scottish bank, and it never was and certainly is not now a “Chinese bank”. It was always a Jewish bank and David Sassoon was the Chairman of the Board from its founding. I have copies of the original documents.

Image result for hong kong peninsula hotel

Most everything in Hong Kong today has its origin in opium trafficking, in one way or another. Even the famous Peninsula Hotel is owned by the Kadoorie family, one of the famous five families involved in China’s opium trade. And thus began China’s “century of humiliation” and the origins of modern Hong Kong. I now want to digress for a moment to make an important point.

The Americans’ first major attempt at colonisation was with their invasion of the Philippines, after which they forced their language onto that nation and immediately followed with a carefully-chosen selection of false American history, literature and propaganda. They spent decades and countless millions of hours in determining the best way to propagandise an entire nation of people to forget their own past, venerate their present colonial status, and learn to worship the Americans. The same Americans then destroyed and rewrote all Philippine domestic history books to erase from consciousness that nation’s heroes, traditions, cultures, and hopes of freedom from American imperialism. They tried to colonise the souls of the Philippine people, and failed, leaving the country today with almost no culture or traditions, no domestic products (which are a crucial part of a nation’s culture), and having lost all sense of a civilisation.

It is painful to read American commentary on the Philippines today, virtually classifying that nation as a failed state, identifying the lack of progress and apparent absence of social cohesion, and blaming the nation’s culture for these failings. It must surely be obvious to thinking people somewhere that a nation’s culture cannot be over-written without permanently damaging the national psyche in ways that perhaps can never be repaired. As an indication of the deep roots and subtle values embedded in a nation’s culture, it is an axiom that Englishmen claim to be only beginning to understand their French wives after 25 years of marriage. To attempt to forcibly over-write an Italian culture with a German one, or the Chinese with American, would leave a national psyche that is a schizophrenic social mess that might never fix itself. The people would survive, but nothing would be natural or normal to them. In simple terms, they wouldn’t know which way was up, and eventually society would cease to function normally. And yet this is what the Americans so deliberately and unconscionably do to other nations, driven by greed and by their infernal moral superiority fueling their lust for domination. Even worse, the real tragedy is that the Americans have no culture. They attempt to forcibly replace a real cultural heritage of a real nation with a fictional utopian concoction that is entirely fake, superficial and hypocritical, with so-called ‘values’ that the Americans themselves totally ignore in practice. The British did the same with India, which is why we have the schizophrenic mess in that country, Indians not now knowing if they are West or East. Japan avoided this because it remained Japanese and not “American”, as was true for Korea and is true for China today.

From a review of Ethan Watters‘ book, ‘Crazy like us: the globalisation of the American psyche’:

“The most devastating consequence of the spread of American culture across the globe has not been our golden arches or our bomb craters, but our bulldozing of the human psyche itself … In teaching the rest of the world to think like us, we have been homogenizing the way the world goes mad.”

And in his long tome Tragedy and Hope, Carroll Quigley wrote:

“The destructive impact of Western Civilisation upon so many other societies rests on its ability to demoralise their ideological and spiritual culture as much as its ability to destroy them in a material sense with firearms. The Americans specialise in doing both. When one society is destroyed by the impact of another society, the people are left in a debris of cultural elements derived from their own shattered culture as well as from the invading culture. These elements generally provide the instruments for fulfilling the material needs of these people, but they cannot be organised into a functioning society because of the lack of an ideology and spiritual cohesive. Such people either perish or are incorporated as individuals and small groups into some other culture, whose ideology they adopt …”.

Quigley should have more clearly stated that in this process, society itself is destroyed, with no possibility of resurrection.

The British did to the Chinese in Hong Kong precisely as the Americans did to the Philippines: they attempted to colonise the souls of the people, and failed. The major factor underlying many of Hong Kong’s problems and symptoms today, most especially the social and political elements, was this century-long program of cultural genocide that left in its wake a schizophrenic emotional angst, which the US government is today milking for everything it’s worth. The British followed the American path, first forcing the change in national language, then doing their best to force the population of Hong Kong to forget their own past, venerate their colonial status, and learn to worship the British Empire. Few people, and no young people, in Hong Kong today have any knowledge of this part of their history because the British did what the Americans did – they burnt all the history books and re-wrote Hong Kong’s history in an attempt to erase their own sordid past from the consciousness of Hong Kong’s people.

It is heart-breaking to look at Hong Kong today, to see both the cause and the effects, and the existentialist dread that infects that city, the uncertainty, anxiety and fear manifesting itself in American-incited and financed puerile political demonstrations, racism and even hatred of the Mainland Chinese – hatred of their own people, of themselves – the schizophrenic overflow from a century of mostly-failed psychic re-programming. For the sake of cheap political gain, Hong Kong as a whole is being terrorised by the Americans to abandon its own civilisation and national identity and to adopt reprehensibly false American values. The Hongkongnese today have neither awareness nor understanding of what is happening to them while they are being pushed to make choices that will in the end tear them apart emotionally, all to give the Americans a platform from which they can stab at China from underneath.

We can now fast-forward to 1967, the year of Hong Kong’s civil war, though no one wants to call it that, most references reducing it to an “uprising” with the blame levied on Mainland China. It was no such thing. The so-called uprising was a direct result of the cruelty, the oppression, and the savage cultural destruction of the Chinese people. It was the pent-up outrage of a century of humiliation and cultural assault that exploded into an eight-month war that left Hong Kong uncontrollable and with Chinese troops massed at the border to prevent an overflow into the Mainland. Today most people in Hong Kong believe their civil war was merely a ‘disturbance’ created by ‘leftists’ from Mainland China, one of the many lies they’ve been told about their own history.

Prior to 1967, no Chinese in Hong Kong were permitted to attend school, education being for the foreigners and the elite few. Much more, local Chinese, virtually all forcibly in the lower class, were truly treated with contempt. There are many elderly Chinese in Hong Kong today who can tell you of being approached by small white children, being spat upon and called a “dirty yellow dog”. Local Chinese were treated with contempt not only by the British and other foreigners, but by those same few elite Chinese. One of these was Li Ka-Shing, today feted as “Papa Li” and Hong Kong’s richest man. According to documented reports, in 1967 Li approached the workers in his plastic flower factory to inform them their wages would be reduced by 20%, their hours increased by 20%, and various other oppressive maneuvers. According to my documents, Li repeated the maneuver in another factory he owned at the time, these in a circumstance where workers were already expected to work 12 to 14 hours a day without a break. These events were the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Workers refusing to accept the new rules were fired, police arresting many workers refusing to permit goods to leave the factories, these events erupting into violent riots that soon engulfed the entire city and resulted in a civil war. This was not all Li’s fault by any means; his actions were merely the detonator but he was nevertheless one part of a huge seething social problem.Hong Kong: Can Two Million Marchers Be Wrong?

Thus, in addition to the forces of cultural disintegration, most of Hong Kong experienced severe economic and labor oppression, producing economic and social unrest that eventually erupted into violent political demonstrations. Factories were burned, police stations bombed, there were widespread transportation and other strikes, street demonstrations and rioting. Buses were torched and government offices were looted and buildings burnt. The colonial government fired thousands of local Chinese staff for participating in the demonstrations. The police forced their way into a union office, arresting many and killing others, leading to more retaliatory violence. The government and foreign media launched a massive media campaign blaming Mainland China for the unrest.

The 1967 civil war was widely seen as a watershed in Hong Kong’s history, which forced the colonial government to introduce sweeping social reforms, especially on education and social welfare, the Governor finally admitting there was “much needed to be done in Hong Kong”, and later the British Colonial Secretary conceding that “there would never have been any reform” without the civil war against the foreigners and the Hong Kong elite. The insurrection forced the British colonial administration to provide – for the first time – the opportunity for nine years of school education for local Chinese, and amended the labor law to reduce the maximum working hours for women and children to (only) 57 hours per week. It should be noted the reforms did not include political items; there was never any “democracy” for the Chinese in Hong Kong, nor had the British ever contemplated such.

Fast-Forward to 2019

Hong Kong today has two major problems:

The first, as Martin Jacques pointed out so well in a recent article, Hong Kong has never had an efficient or independent government, nor an administration structure meant to manage a large modern city. It was entirely a colonial government designed to carry out and enforce orders from London, and it remains thus today. But London is gone and China’s efforts to improve the situation are viciously condemned by the West as interference and ‘removing freedoms’. This colonial government is effectively hamstrung because the political environment in Hong Kong was created specifically for the oligarchy, created by either opium money or by looting the public, and they do so today with the protection of the so-called “opposition” in the government who refuse all attempts to make Hong Kong a more human city and more affordable for residents. From this, the city is suffering most of its social problems.

As one example, any attempt to use vacant land for affordable housing is killed by this opposition who have been bought by the few land developers, resulting in home ownership being impossible for young people, the smallest home of perhaps 20 square meters costing US$ one million. Hong Kong is the only city I know where tens of thousands of people literally live in dog cages of two square meters, stacked three or four high in warehouses, many housing the very elderly or mothers with young children, and yet forced to pay as much as US$200 per month rent for squalid conditions with no toilets or cooking facilities. Virtually all the infrastructure and much of the retail landscape, is owned by only a few families who take advantage to unconscionably gouge the residents. The reports of the brutal treatment and effective slavery of Philippino nannies and housekeepers, are sufficient to make normal humans cringe. Andre Vltchek wrote in a recent article that poverty rates in Hong Kong are high, and that the city suffers from corruption and savage capitalism. So true on both counts. He wrote that the contrast between Shanghai, Beijing and Hong Kong is shocking. Also true. People, especially young people, in Hong Kong feel they have no future, and they are right. But instead of looking to the only source of their salvation in the Mainland, they are turning to the source of their problems, the Americans. Thus, for them, “no future” is guaranteed.

In the West, we read media reports that Hong Kong has a rule of law that puts to shame everyone in Asia including China, Japan and Singapore. If only that were true. Some basic civil protections may be fine, but the picture is very different with corporations freely looting the civil population. Hong Kong is a Wild-West corporate town with the most brutal form of capitalism, where the Robber Barons have always ruled and where most fortunes made were, and still are, either illegitimate or inhumane. Here are a few examples from different sectors of Hong Kong business.

A prominent Hong Kong land developer constructed some luxury apartment buildings that were greatly hyped and overpriced. Prospective buyers were comforted by evidence that much of the project had already sold out at those levels and that the prices would soon be even higher. Unfortunately, the sales were all fake. The developer had “sold” many of the flats to friends and acquaintances on the understanding that they had no liability and that the purchases would be unwound as innocent buyers took the bait. But no problem, at least not for the developer.

One of Hong Kong’s more prominent citizens owns a mobile phone company that attracted many new customers by giving a “free” mobile phone to anyone over 16 with an HK ID card. The cries of complaint were immediately almost deafening, subscribers receiving huge bills with no information on how the charges were assessed, and no copy of a contract to determine the fees. Eventually the matter ended in court, the many plaintiffs depending on Hong Kong’s famous “rule of law” to protect them. The courts repeatedly ordered the company to provide each customer with a copy of the contract so they could know the basis for the charges and fees. After years of delay and repeatedly ignored court orders, each subscriber finally received a contract, the document shrunk to a type size so small that all 4 pages were printed on one side of a piece of A-4 paper, and on grey paper with pink ink. Totally unreadable by man or machine. Back in court, the company claimed it was “just trying to save trees”. To my best knowledge, that was the end of the matter.

Authorities investigated Richard Li (the son of Li Ka-Shing) in his bid to buy out PCCW, Hong Kong’s leading phone carrier. A judge called his takeover deal “nothing less than dishonesty”. According to Hong Kong law, a majority of voters is necessary for these bids, but Li had no majority. News reports claimed a senior member of Li’s buy-out group instructed a manager at Fortis Insurance Asia (a firm once controlled by Li) to distribute 500,000 shares to 500 of the company’s employees who then voted in favour of the takeover, tipping the balance for the deal to go through. According to the same reports, neither Mr. Li, nor his company, nor PCCW, nor Fortis, nor any of Fortis’ executives had any knowledge of any of this.

Nathan Road is perhaps the most famous and well-known of all Hong Kong’s shopping and tourist areas, but the criminality of this area has been legendary for decades, with hundreds of thousands of tourists and visitors badly cheated every year. These truths about Nathan Road are available even on the Hong Kong government’s own tourism website, with stories that sometimes are heart-breaking. You purchase an expensive new computer or mobile phone and the clerk asks you to pay with cash to preserve your huge “discount”. He then goes into the storage room to get your item but you become alarmed and ask for help when he doesn’t return after 20 minutes, only to be told that no staff member fits the description you provide, and the store has no idea who took your money. You buy an expensive new camera, take the box back to your hotel and discover it contains a cheap knock-off that is worth perhaps 10% of the price you paid. Of course, you return to the shop to complain, but the owner tells you there’s nothing he can do because you could have made the exchange yourself and are trying to cheat him. But it wouldn’t have mattered because only the casing looks real; the insides are cheap junk. Numerous people on Nathan Road pretend to be tailors offering large discounts on Hong Kong’s legendary high-quality suits. In a room containing expensive fabrics and photo catalogues, you select your dream suit for which you must pay in advance, and which will be delivered to your hotel prior to your departure. But the suit delivered just before you rush to the airport will be a poorly-fitting $100 piece of polyester and, if you have time to complain, your “tailor” is nowhere to be seen. The Hong Kong police could shut down all of this in a day, if they wanted. But they don’t want.

Today, China is everyone’s favorite whipping boy for copied or fake products, but these began their lives in Hong Kong, not in Mainland China and, while the factories may indeed be in China, the owners are now and have always been in Hong Kong, shifting their factories across the border for easier access to lower-cost labor when Hong Kong reverted to China. Even today it is easily possible to buy all manner of fake and copied Western products on the streets in Hong Kong, while the Western media have not a word of criticism. The hypocrisy is deafening.

It’s worthy of special note that foreigners – at least some foreigners – can loot Hong Kong citizens even more rapaciously than the local oligarchy. China, due to its oversight of its own money and economy, suffered little from the 2008 US financial meltdown. Unfortunately, our “free, democratic, and American” Hong Kong didn’t fare quite as well. A great many Hong Kong residents were cheated out of their life savings invested in bonds issued by Lehman Brothers, which were rated AAA+ by the US rating agencies, billions of US dollars worth flooding Asia and particularly Hong Kong. The US FED and the Treasury Department were fully aware of Lehman’s insolvency, the so-called ‘international bankers and investors’ dumping these bonds while plans were in progress to permit Lehman to file for bankruptcy. It was not an accident that Hong Kong citizens incurred such massive losses, the famous ‘rule of law’ nowhere to be seen. The Western media totally ignored the story. There were no videos on CNN of the elderly protesting in front of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange building, no stories in the New York Times praising these Chinese seeking justice.

The second major problem is that (under the same oligarchy control) Hong Kong is a Major Operations Base for literally countless thousands of Americans and others tasked with irritating Mainland China, destabilising the country, and blackening its name on the world stage. If people in Hong Kong had any idea of the extent of US meddling, influence and control – and financing – of their political processes; if they had any idea of the extent to which they are blind puppets whose political strings are being pulled by the US government and the CIA, they would likely die of shame. It is truly unfortunate that most people in Hong Kong fail to recognise the external and foreign stimuli behind street protests, candlelight vigils, and so much more, being used as destabilisation entities targeted at Mainland China.

Hong Kong has literally hundreds of US-sponsored NGOs, plus online media, newspapers, university departments, foreign reporters, stabbing at China from underneath, all with the purpose of destabilising China and overthrowing its government. There are many dozens of Western-oriented political and propaganda organisations, staffed by foreigners and indoctrinated Hongkongnese who constantly denigrate China and push the US political and ideological agenda. To those of us resident in the Mainland, it sometimes appears that Hong Kong has been transformed into one big US war club to beat China into submission. China’s ‘reform and open’ policy has legalized foreign infiltration into every aspect of the HK economy and society, allowing Hong Kong, now officially under Chinese sovereignty, to continue to be an anti-China foreign base and a hot-bed safe haven for promoting unrest on the mainland. From the NED website alone, we can document tens of millions of dollars spent each year in Hong Kong for these purposes. The NED also spends millions of US dollars in attempts to recast its own imperial political ambitions as “protection” for the human rights of HK residents and a benevolent wish for what it terms ‘democratic representation’. It also uses Hong Kong as a base for an enormous amount of political campaigning meant to draw local HK and international attention to the political changes it hopes to effect in Hong Kong, by disguising and presenting them as human rights issues.

The US attempts to take the lead in all public debate within Hong Kong, dictating in advance the terms and conditions within which this debate will take place. The NED carries out so-called “public opinion research” and initiates organised “public debates” on Hong Kong’s political system, centering on US-dictated models of constitutional reform, with attempts to propagandise these to the Hong Kong population and try to force a consensus that these are the only models acceptable to Hong Kong residents. The NED publishes discussion papers and other information, presenting this US-selected content as the only model relevant for Hong Kong, thereby pushing to the side the wishes and aims of China’s central government. Other branches and agencies of the US government are already spending many millions of dollars propagandising Hong Kong residents, creating NGOs, organising protest groups and other mechanisms to create potentially serious disruptions in Hong Kong in order to force political changes that would benefit US foreign policy interests.

The range of interference is unimaginable to an average Westerner. George Soros funds the so-called China Media Project, run by David Bandurski at Hong Kong University, tasked with trashing Mainland China. It was Bandurski who fabricated the stories of China’s “50-cent army”, claiming China’s government had hired 280,000 people who were paid US$0.50 for each favorable internet post about China. The game succeeded for years until someone published screen shots of the Israel government actually and literally offering all Jewish university students US$0.50 for every post made that favored Israel. At that point, Bandurski’s false claims disappeared overnight. As another example, the US government has sponsored several ‘speakers bureaux’ with an imaginatively seditious nature, and staffed by former US diplomatic and White House personnel. The plan is to recruit middle-level Chinese officials and businessmen to profit from invitations as speakers at a multitude of events. Given their lack of experience, the bureau managers provide not only appropriate topics but a handy outline of the speeches, replete with not-too-veiled demands for the removal of China’s government system, for the abolition of China’s SOEs, for the fire sales of China’s infrastructure to European bankers, and much more. If successful, the US will have thousands of unwitting Chinese traveling their country while selling their own countrymen the American road to destruction.

These plans involve not only propaganda but violence. We have seen plenty of that in Hong Kong in recent months, but there was more we haven’t seen. It wasn’t reported in the Western media, but during the ‘Occupy Central’ demonstrations several years ago, Hong Kong police discovered caches of bomb-making equipment that included very high-explosive materials, and masks bearing the likeness of Guy Fawkes, who was behind a failed plot to blow up Britain’s Parliament. At the same location, police also found maps of the Wan Chai and Admiralty neighborhoods, locations of the city legislature and government headquarters and also the Mainland Chinese Army base. Officials concluded at the time that the CIA had produced a small core of fanatics and supplied them with materials and instruction for committing grave acts of violence.

China’s wish several years ago to include what the West termed “communist propaganda” in Hong Kong schools, was more an attempt to introduce the truth of Hong Kong’s history to the people of Hong Kong, the resulting demonstrations against this effort clearly having been directed from outside, and for obvious reasons. The 2019 protests were triggered initially by Mainland China’s request for an extradition bill with Hong Kong, a request hardly unusual since all nations have extradition agreements between states and provinces. The reason is that if someone commits a crime in New York and then runs to Virginia, the NYC police have no authority in that state and cannot simply cross the border to search and arrest, but must rely on local law enforcement. Hence, the extradition agreements. Further, China has several good reasons for wanting such agreements with Hong Kong and Taiwan. For one, more than a few Mainland Chinese businessmen or government officials have embezzled money or defrauded investors, then fled to Hong Kong to live the good life free of repatriation fears. Understandably, China would like those individuals brought back home to stand trial. A similar problem, and perhaps larger, is that more than a few Hong Kong residents have travelled to the Mainland, committed fairly large numbers of imaginative and not-so-imaginative crimes, primarily large-scale fraud but also including espionage and murder, then fled back to Hong Kong, again out of reach of the Mainland Chinese police.

There is however a third category, one not mentioned in the media, that was the likely cause of the US so ardently fanning the flames for this latest series of riots. The Americans have a huge contingent in Hong Kong (about 80,000 people, few of whom are businessmen), beginning with the US Consulate but extending very much farther with the media, the NED, and the entire alphabet soup of US-based NGOs, George Soros’ Hong Kong Media Project, and many more, mostly but not all CIA-funded, on a permanent mission to stab at Mainland China from its underbelly of Hong Kong. Much of what these people do, is illegal, against HK law, Mainland China law, and international law, but they are protected in Hong Kong by US government pressure and, without an extradition treaty, they cannot be sent to China and be brought to trial. The Americans needed for their own sake to kill that extradition bill, and they succeeded. The enormous violence they instigated will likely ensure that bill won’t be introduced again for a long time, if ever.

I will say that Hong Kong was one of my favorite cities 20 or 30 years ago. At the time, I thought it a great city and full of life. Those days are gone. I have been to Hong Kong 50 or more times, the experience quality slowly degrading until now it is mostly unpleasant, and especially so for Mainland Chinese who are very often insulted, abused, spat upon, and sometimes assaulted, by the same young students today seeking “democracy and freedom” by torching subway stations.

Posted in China, Hong KongComments Off on The History of Hong Kong, Britain’s Colonial Legacy. Fast Forward to 2019

Tiananmen Square: The Failure of an American-instigated 1989 Color Revolution

Beijing: June 04, 1989

By Larry Romanoff

There are few places in China that seem more burned into the consciousness of typical Westerners than Tiananmen Square, and few events more commonly mentioned than the student protests of 1989. But the stories are wrong on several levels. It was never reported in the Western media that there were two separate events that occurred in Beijing on June 4, 1989. One was a student protest that culminated in a sit-in in Tiananmen Square by several thousand university students, which had lasted for several weeks and finally terminated on June 4. The other was a one-day worker strike that occurred (perhaps not by chance) also on June 4, when a group of workers unhappy with their lot in life, organised their own protest independently of the students, and in a different place. For reasons that will become apparent, the workers’ protest is the necessary focus for understanding the events of that date, so I will begin there.

The Workers’ Revolt

A group of workers gathered, and barricaded several streets in Muxidi, an area in Beijing five or six kilometers from Tiananmen Square, the barricades attended by several hundred mostly adult workers, with an undetermined few young people. However, there was a third quite large group present that to my knowledge has never been clearly identified, though it is obvious from the photos they were not workers and certainly not young students. (1) Thugs or anarchists might be an appropriate adjective, but the facts seem to support the conclusion (and my own personal judgment) that they were mercenaries. (2)

The government sent in busloads of soldiers, accompanied by a few APCs to clear the barricades and re-open the streets to traffic. (3) The violence began when the third group attacked the young men attempting to clear the barricades. They were well-prepared, armed with at least hundreds and perhaps thousands of gasoline bombs, and immediately torched dozens of buses and the few APCs – with the soldiers still inside. Many soldiers in both types of vehicles escaped, but many others did not, and many burned to death. There are countless photos of dead soldiers burned to a crisp, some hung by the thugs from lampposts, others lying in the street or on stairs or sidewalks where they died, others hanging out of bus windows or the APCs, having only partially escaped before being overcome by the flames. There are documented reports and photos showing that the group of thugs managed to get control of one APC, and drove it through the streets while firing the machine guns on the turret. (4) It was only then that the government sent in armed soldiers and military equipment.

Government reports and independent media personnel generally claim a total of 250 to 300 civilian deaths before the violence subsided, but a similar number of soldiers had already been killed. When police or military are attacked in this way, they will surely use force to defend themselves and cannot be faulted for that. If you or I were the military commander on the scene, watching our men being attacked and burned to death, we would have done the same. From everything I know, I can find no fault here.

Here is an eyewitness report from someone who was there, an excerpt from the book ‘Tiananmen Moon’: (5)

“There was a new element I hadn’t noticed much of before, young punks decidedly less than student-like in appearance. In the place of headbands and signed shirts with university pins they wore cheap, ill-fitting polyester clothes and loose windbreakers. Under our lights, their eyes gleaming with mischief, they brazenly revealed hidden Molotov cocktails. Who were these punks in shorts and sandals, carrying petrol bombs? Gasoline is tightly rationed, so they could not have come up with these things spontaneously. Who taught them to make bottle bombs and for whom were the incendiary devices intended?

Someone shouted that another APC was heading our way. My pace quickened as I approached the stalled vehicle, infected by the toxic glee of the mob, but then I caught myself. Why was I rushing towards trouble? Because everyone else was? I slowed down to a trot in the wake of a thundering herd of one mass mind. Breaking with the pack, I stopped running. Someone tossed a Molotov cocktail, setting the APC on fire. Flames spread quickly over the top of the vehicle and spilled onto the pavement. I thought, there’s somebody still inside of that, it’s not just a machine! There must be people inside.

Someone protectively pulled me away to join a handful of head-banded students who sought to exert some control. Expending what little moral capital his hunger strike signature saturated shirt still exerted, he spoke up for the soldier. “Let the man out,” he cried. “Help the soldier, help him get out!” The agitated congregation was in no mood for mercy. Angry, blood-curdling voices ricocheted around us. “Kill the mother fucker!” one said. Then another voice, even more chilling than the first screamed, “He is not human, he is a thing.” “Kill it, kill it!” shouted bystanders, bloody enthusiasm now whipped up to a high pitch. “Stop! Don’t hurt him!” Meng pleaded, leaving me behind as he tried to reason with the vigilantes. “Stop, he is just a soldier!” “He is not human, kill him, kill him!” said a voice. “Get back, get back!” someone screamed at the top of his lungs. “Leave him alone, the soldiers are not our enemy!” After the limp bodies of the soldiers were put into an ambulance, the thugs attacked the ambulance, almost ripping off the rear doors in an attempt to remove the burned soldier and finish him off. After that, charred bodies of soldiers were hung from a lamp post, and a large amount of ammunition was taken from the APC.” (6)

From a Government Report on the Worker’s Riot:

“Rioters blocked military and other vehicles before they smashed and burned them. They also seized guns, ammunition and transceivers. Several rioters seized an armored car and fired its guns as they drove it along the street. Rioters also assaulted civilian installations and public buildings. Several rioters even drove a public bus loaded with gasoline drums towards the Tiananmen gatetower in an attempt to set fire to it. When a military vehicle suddenly broke down on Chang’An Avenue, rioters surrounded it and crushed the driver with bricks. The rioters savagely beat and killed many soldiers and officers. At Chongwenmen, a soldier was thrown down from the flyover and burned alive. At Fuchengmen, a soldier’s body was hung upside down on the overpass balustrade after he had been killed. Near a cinema, an officer was beaten to death, and his body strung up on a burning bus.

Over 1,280 vehicles were burned or damaged in the rebellion, including over 1,000 military trucks, more than 60 armored cars, over 30 police cars, over 120 public buses and trolley buses and over 70 motor vehicles of other kinds. The martial law troops, having suffered heavy casualties before being forced to fire into the air to clear the way forward. During the counter-attack, some rioters were killed, some onlookers were hit by stray bullets and some wounded or killed by armed ruffians. According to reliable statistics, more than 3,000 civilians were wounded and over 200, including 36 college students, were killed. As well, more than 6,000 law officers and soldiers were injured and scores of them killed.” (Cables from the US Embassy in Beijing confirmed the basics of this report as well as the casualty estimates). (4)

Though conclusive direct evidence is still thin, it appears a certainty the revolt had considerable outside help. In addition to the curious timing, there is too much evidence of advance preparation for violence and supply of the weaponry used. Gasoline was tightly rationed at the time, and unavailable in the volume required for this event. Black hands arranged the supply lines and provided instructions for the manufacture and use of the gasoline bombs which were almost unheard of in China before that time.

There are also too many signs of external incitement in the still-unidentified third group, whose violent actions in no way represented the sentiment of the attending public. The enormity of violence unleashed at Muxidi requires considerable prior emotional programming and could not possibly have originated spontaneously from a simple workers’ strike, almost a guarantee of external interference. Disaffected citizens in any country may parade and protest from real or imagined grievances, but burning young soldiers to death and stringing their charred bodies from lampposts, are not the acts of naive students wanting “democracy” or of workers protesting an inadequate social contract. (7) They are almost always the result of substantial programmed incitement from behind the scenes, usually directed to regime change.

The Student Protest

Briefly, the students congregated in the Square and waited for an opportunity to present various petitions dealing with social policy, perceived corruption, idealism, in fact the same things that we as students all had on our list of changes we wanted to make in the world. Since the government did not immediately respond, the students camped in the square and waited. Government officials held talks with the students for several weeks, and finally set a June 4 deadline for evacuation of the Square. Soldiers were sent to the Square on the day prior, but they were unarmed and carried only billy sticks. By all reports, there was no animosity between the students and the soldiers. Neither had a philosophical dispute with the other, nor did they see each other as enemies. In fact, photos and reports show the students protecting the soldiers from angry bystanders.

Discussions were held between the students and the soldiers at repeated times during the evening and throughout the night. Almost all of the students were persuaded to leave the Square during the evening, and the small remainder left the following morning. Tanks and bulldozers did enter the Square the following morning, flattening all the tents and rubbish that had piled up during the previous three weeks, pushing the garbage into huge piles and setting them afire. This was the apparent origin of claims that “thousands of students” were crushed by tanks streaming through the Square, but this was just the clean-up crew and the students were long gone when the bulldozers and heavy machinery arrived. There is overwhelming documented evidence from a multitude of reputable sources (8-15) that no violence occurred in the Square, that no students were killed, and that there never was any “Tiananmen Square Massacre”. Gunfire was apparently heard in the distance, but the few reports of gunfire from within the Square itself were later quickly discredited and, as mentioned above, the soldiers in the Square were not armed. (16)

The Ever-Present Black Hand

It seems plausible that the student movement in China during the late 1980s may, at its origin, have generated spontaneously, but there is no shortage of evidence that the entire movement was quickly hijacked by agencies of the US government long before the students gathered at Tiananmen Square. It has taken some time to open locked doors and ferret out details, but it is no longer in dispute that the leaders of China’s student movement were trained in Hong Kong and Guangdong by Col. Robert Helvey, an officer of the Defense Intelligence Agency of the Pentagon, who spent 30 years instigating revolutions throughout Asia on behalf of the military and the CIA. (17)

There is little reason to question the assertion that a major part of US foreign policy then, as today, lay in attempts to destabilise China and perhaps instigate a massive revolution that would open the door to US influence and control. It is increasingly clear today that the student movement in 1989 was a major part of that strategy, orchestrated by the US State Department with the full approval of then President George Bush. (18)

I live in China and was for many years the editor of a widely-read newsletter that gave me trusted access to about 2,500 middle and high-level corporate executives who were university students in China during the period in question, many of whom were involved in the student movement, and more than a few of whom were at Tiananmen Square. I’ve spoken to many of them at length about the student movement and the events of the time. In addition to confirming my observations and conclusions, their comments and testimony strongly suggest that the very idea of a mass confrontation with the government, and the selection of Tiananmen Square as the venue, did not originate with them but were orchestrated ”from somewhere outside”.

It is necessary to understand that the student movement in China in 1989 was categorically not a “pro-democracy movement”. At its origin the student protest was primarily pragmatic civics, and secondly Chinese cultural. The students visioned themselves intellectual protesters, not political activists, with no thought of their government replicating the political structure of the West. From my discussions with many former students, the references to ‘democracy’ were imposed upon them by their CIA handlers as the best method of realising their practical and cultural ends. And these cultural ends were not necessarily very deep. Wu’er Kaixi, one of the student leaders, responded to questions about his participation by saying (in different words) “Because we want to wear Western brands and take our girlfriends to bars like the Americans do.”

Many of the students with whom I spoke, particularly those who were actually present at the Square, have told me of the supplies provided for them by various US government sources. They especially mentioned the countless hundreds of Coleman camp stoves – which at the time were far too expensive for students in China to acquire, and many commented on the well-established supply lines of these and other items. Adding to the student supplies were manuals, instructions, training, strategy and tactics, and the patiently inflammatory rhetoric of the VOA broadcasts from Hong Kong. It is not possible to sensibly challenge the assertion that the puppet-masters were American.

According to a government report, many Americans were active in stage-managing the student leaders, in violation of the martial law decrees operative in parts of Beijing at the time. John Pomfret, now of the Washington Post, was an AP correspondent in Beijing, and an important information conduit for the ringleaders, and Alan Pessin, a VOA correspondent in Beijing at the time, violated the restrictions by his illegal VOA news coverage, and repeatedly dispatched distorted reports, spreading false rumors and encouraging both rebellion and violence among the students. (19)What Really Happened in Tiananmen Square 25 Years Ago

Most university students of that day will tell you of the influence of the VOA and the picture it painted of “freedom and democracy”. They tell of listening to the VOA in their dorms late into the night, building in their imaginations a happy world of freedom and light. The Voice of America:

“The world’s most trusted source for news and information from the United States and around the world.”

They also confirm that the VOA was broadcasting to the students 24 hours a day from their Hong Kong station during the weeks of the sit-in at Tiananmen Square, offering provocative encouragement and giving advice on strategy and tactics.

One of the original participants in the student sit-in wrote this:

“We settled down and continued with our study. We dated, found our loved ones, and many sought to go abroad. By the time we graduated there was almost no discussion about the student movement and we no longer listened to the VOA. One thing I have been kept thinking was the role of the VOA. Many students were the fans of the radio station before, during and shortly after the student movement. Even when we were on the square many students were listening to their programs as if only they could tell us what was going on. I remember at one stage . . . I realized how stupid I was . . .”

Another student made these comments:

“But it was true that the 1989 student movement was being manipulated by someone, wasn’t it? The students had nothing but emotions and superficial knowledge of politics. We started only demanding the cleaning up of corruption by officials, yet the slogans were somehow led through a transformation into ones “demanding democracy”.

There is a huge difference in political implication between these two classes of demands. So what was democracy? What kind of democracy was practiced in the west? What kind of democracy would befit China? Frankly, I (we) didn’t have clue. In other words, I didn’t know what I really wanted. I simply had this … resulting impulse to go onto the street and shout slogans. It was as if I participated just to participate and I was moved by the simple fact of experiencing a students movement. And then things got out of control. But because the student leaders refused to change stance, the students wouldn’t back off. So the whole thing dragged on. Yet a miracle happened, those “leaders” somehow managed to escape unharmed. For many years since 1989, I had been reluctant to accept that I and the other students were actually so stupid and naive to be truly manipulated by others behind the scene.”

The perception in the West, and also in China, has always been that the student congregation in Tiananmen Square was spontaneous, idealistic and, above all, peaceful. It may at its origin have been idealistic, but it was in no way spontaneous and, by May and June, the underlying peacefulness was rapidly coming to an end. In 1995, two American filmmakers at the Longbow Group, Dr. Carma Hinton and Richard Gordon, released a now-famous documentary on Tiananmen Square titled “The Gate of Heavenly Peace”. (20) Chai Ling, the Tiananmen students’ self-proclaimed “Supreme Commander”, for years pursued lawsuits against the film company (21), primarily because the documentary included incriminating video dated May 28, 1989, of her in an interview with American journalist Philip Cunningham:

“The students kept asking, ‘What should we do next? What can we accomplish?’ I feel so sad, because how can I tell them that what we are actually hoping for is bloodshed, for the moment when the government has no choice but to brazenly butcher the people (i.e. the students: Ed.). Only when the Square is awash with blood will the people of China open their eyes. Only then will they really be united. But how can I explain this to my fellow students? I can’t say all this to my fellow students. I can’t tell them straight out that we must use our blood and our lives to call on the people to rise up. Of course, the students will be willing. But they are still such young children! And what is truly sad is that some students, and famous well-connected people, are working hard to help the government, to prevent it from taking such measures. For the sake of their selfish interests and their private dealings they are trying to cause our movement to collapse and get us out of the Square before the government becomes so desperate that it takes action.”

If this isn’t clear, Chai Ling is openly stating her intention to provoke the government to a violent military solution, filling Tiananmen Square with the blood of the students – for the express purpose of “uniting the people” to incite a widespread political revolution. She then laments that (1) she cannot reveal to the students that their lives are meant to be sacrificed for this cause, and (2) “what is truly sad” is that some people, “for the sake of their selfish interests” are seeking to avoid bloodshed by preventing the government from resorting to violent measures, and seeking to disband the student protests before they themselves turn violent.

Cunningham then asked, “Are you going to stay in the Square yourself?” “No, I won’t.” “Why?” Chai replied, “Because my situation is different. I want to live. . . . I believe that others have to continue the work I have started. A democracy movement can’t succeed with only one person!” And finally, “I might as well say it – you, the Chinese, you are not worth my struggle! You are not worth my sacrifice!”

In the video there is a damning reference to American cold-bloodedness in directing the student protests, a literal confession by Chai Ling that, after the students had already voted to end their protest and leave the Square, her Hong Kong handlers still pushed her and the students to remain in the square and continue to agitate until they provoked their own bloodshed, encouraging them to sacrifice their lives as the only way to attract the world attention and sympathy which had somehow now become crucial to their cause. Transcripts and video of her entire interview along with reader comments are available online. (22)

The American plan was to incite the students to not only irritate but eventually enrage the Chinese government sufficiently to provoke a violent crackdown against the students, with the expectation this would in turn provoke the general population into a ‘color revolution’ resulting in the overthrow of the government and the collapse of China. In accord with this plan, the students were pushed to begin demanding “democracy”, quickly followed by insistent and intractable demands that the government step down. As part of the process, the students were given details on the construction of a huge papier-mâché “goddess of democracy” statue in the Square. In an intelligence summary prepared for then US Secretary of State James A. Baker dated June 2, 1989, the hope was noted that the statue would “anger top leaders and prompt a response”, stating that the students (or, factually more likely, the US government) hoped the erection of the statue would provoke “an overreaction by authorities (and) breathe new life into their flagging movement.” (23) In all cases in all countries, students and young people are co-opted into a US attempt at regime change. Westerners may not easily appreciate that Beijing in 1989 was not different in any material aspect.

After the Government declared martial law, Chai Ling’s American puppet-masters rapidly escalated their offensive by having her distribute leaflets inciting armed rebellion against the Government, calling upon the students and the general public to “organize armed forces and oppose the Communist Party and its government”, going so far as to actually make a list of names of government officials they planned to kill, encouraging the students to obtain firearms for the purpose. She claimed they would never yield and “would fight to the finish” with the government, scheming until past the end to provoke a bloody incident in Tiananmen Square.

China was spared a national catastrophe primarily by the patient and non-threatening stance of the government which served to dampen the inflammatory rhetoric emerging from the VOA and their handlers in Beijing and the urging toward bloodshed by their stage managers in Hong Kong. The result was that when the deadline approached for the evacuation of the Square, the students abandoned their “Supreme Commander” and agreed to leave peacefully, meaning that the Americans simply ran out of time. My feeling is that China was protected by Providence, because the specter of violence and bloodshed may have been very near indeed. (24)

Intricate plans had been made in advance to spirit the student leaders out of China when the hoped-for bloodshed began. Operation Yellowbird (25) was a Hong Kong-based CIA scheme to help the leaders of the student protests and of the violence at Muxidi to escape arrest under the diplomatic protection of the American Embassy, by offering political sanctuary, by the advance issue of US passports, and by arranging their escape from China. The CIA was central in this, but the UK MI6 and the French intelligence agencies were also involved. When the protests failed and the students dispersed, the primary leaders fled first to Hong Kong, then to the US. (26) Some of the leaders of the violence in Muxidi were helped to flee, while others where sheltered in the American Embassy in Beijing, the Americans refusing to surrender them to the Chinese authorities. (27)

As well, for their efforts to destroy their own country, these student leaders were handsomely rewarded by the Americans with prestigious university degrees, good jobs, and CIA salaries for continuing to incite political instability in China. Chai Ling was given an honorary degree in political science from Princeton university and a job with the management consultancy of Bain & Co., as well as being the salaried head of an NGO especially created for her and tasked with condemning China’s then one-child policy. Wu’er Kaixi, who was actually a troublesome and unstable Uigur named Uerkesh Daolet, was rewarded with a free pass to Harvard university. Liu Xiaobo remained in China on a CIA stipend of $30,000 per year, tasked with irritating the Chinese government under direction from the US State Department.

The Path Forward

The Americans succeeded, perhaps beyond their wildest expectations, with the inflamed violence in Muxidi, but failed miserably in their main effort which was the provocation of bloodshed in Tiananmen Square, which offered the possible prize of a revolution and the overthrow of the government.

The most immediate problem faced by the US State Department was that their success in Muxidi was not a particularly useful victory from a political standpoint since it had no long-term propaganda value. Nobody in the West, especially when seeing photos of the carnage produced, would have much sympathy for a workers’ revolt in a far-away country, and it would have ceased being news within a day or two. What the Americans wanted, and badly needed, the prize they were hoping for, was photos of dead student bodies and student blood in thestreets since these infallibly draw universal condemnation. But, with the peaceful resolution in Tiananmen Square, these didn’t exist, so they gathered the photos of the carnage and dead bodies from Muxidi and presented those to the world as evidence of a student massacre in Tiananmen Square by the Chinese government, a totally fabricated story.

By the time the students voted to evacuate the Square and even before the violence in Muxidi had subsided, plans were already well in place for more than the evacuation of the leaders. Without exception, the Western media in all countries immediately published identical claims and photos, consistently omitting all the contradictory evidence. Every photographer who took photos at Muxidi knew where he took them, and he and the media editors knew full well those photos were not taken in Tiananmen Square. It is not possible that more than 200 newspaper editors and more than 100 TV station news managers in more than 30 countries mis-captioned the same photos in the same way by carelessness or accident. This is why the Western media suppressed entirely the facts of the violence in Muxidi, and unanimously refused to publish photos of the soldiers burned to a crisp and hanging from lamp posts. They needed the facts and photos for their already-planned “Tiananmen Square Student Massacre” story.

It has been 30 years since the June 4, 1989 student protests in Tiananmen Square. In spite of all the categorical documentation proving there was never any student massacre in China, the US Government and its handlers refuse to let go of their prize because of its powerful political propaganda value, having enabled the West for decades to define China as being “ruled by the jackboot, the rifle, and the thought police”. This has been unquestionably one of the greatest propaganda victories in history, turning a US State Department-sponsored color revolution, albeit a failed one, into a whip that could lash China non-stop for 30 years. It was so successful that the Western media, led by the NYT but followed by nearly everyone, publish in June of every year a kind of “anniversary story” to continue to milk it for its residual propaganda value. This false story has been hammered into the consciousness of Westerners for 30 years, to the point where it is nearly impossible to discuss Tiananmen Square due to the enormous emotional baggage it carries.

Some missing pieces of this story began to fall into place when, in 2011, Wikileaks released all the cables sent to Washington from the US Embassy in Beijing on June 4, 1989, confirming that the student movement ended peacefully and that there had been no violence, no student massacre in Tiananmen Square and, importantly, confirming some important basics of the violence at Muxidi. As well, some highly-respected international journalists, as well as foreign camera crews, and some foreign diplomats, who were present in Tiananmen Square at the time of the student dispersal, have written books and articles testifying that the student sit-in ended peacefully and that the stories of a student massacre at Tiananmen Square are pure fiction.

Faced with this release of evidence, Western media editors and prominent columnists are attempting to prolong this myth by fabricating an entirely new one, this being that it was the students who rigged and manned the barricades at Muxidi to prevent the military from proceeding to Tiananmen Square to kill the students there,so the Chinese government instead massacred the students at Muxidi. (28) There is no evidence whatever to support those claims, and it should be obvious from the above narrative that they are false on all counts. (29) (30)

If there were a massacre in Beijing on June. 4, 1989, it was at Muxidi, not at Tiananmen Square, and the massacre was of soldiers, not students, with all evidence indicating it was engineered by the US Department of State and the CIA. While the American government deserves to take the blame for orchestrating these events, the blame must be shared since the Americans were themselves puppets. The conspiracy against China was wider and deeper than I’ve indicated here.

Notes:

(1) From the photos, some appear to be Xinjiang Uigurs, of which there are five distinct groups, four being eminently sociable, the last seeming genetically predisposed to almost any kind of crime.

(2) To produce a unit of this kind would normally involve prior training and cash payment. One reason the US Consulates in China insist on cash-only payments for US visa applications from Chinese citizens (1,000 RMB each) is that this money bypasses the banking system and is freely available for black operations, today producing more than 800 million RMB per year that leaves no paper trail.

(3) Military use for civilian purposes is a normal operation in China for typhoon and flood evacuations, landslide and earthquake rescues, and other similar emergencies. These are not armed soldiers in military vehicles, but simply able-bodied men available on command in the large numbers often required for such occasions. In Muxidi, these were all young men, most appearing from the photos to be perhaps in their early 20s. They were not armed, and arrived at the scene in ordinary city buses. 

(4) The Morning Intelligence Summary for June 4, 1989, for US Secretary of State Baker, described the violence in Muxidi, and referred to how civilians “swarmed around military vehicles. APCs were set on fire, and demonstrators besieged troops with rocks, bottles, and Molotov cocktails.”

(5) I haven’t a link for the availability of this book. I believe it is out of print but may be obtainable as a download from secondary or tertiary websites. 

(6) If we read carefully, it is evident from even this minuscule report that the third group, the ‘mercenaries’, were not acting in concert with either the workers or the students but were unknown outsiders acting against and above the public wishes and pursuing their own agenda of violence for which they had come prepared, and functioning as a team in the carnage they unleashed.

(7) The strikingly similar pattern of uncontrolled violence by China’s Xinjiang Uigurs several years ago, where they bombed police stations, randomly burned hundreds of cars and buses, and killed indiscriminately hundreds of people (mostly police), were not, as the Western media claimed, spontaneous rebellions against intolerance by Beijing, but the result of a deliberate process of emotional programming. After the rebellion was put down, the government found in the hands of these people thousands of foreign-supplied “Otpor” manuals, inflammatory DVDs, instructions on bomb-making, and more, all clearly part of a planned program. The rioting in Hong Kong today exhibits the same fundamentals.

(8) A mere glance at any of the published photos displaying violence or mayhem, will permit anyone with even a passing familiarity with Beijing to see instantly that none of those photos were taken in Tiananmen Square. It was only the world’s lack of knowledge of China that permitted the US government and the international media to perpetrate this enormous fraud. 

(9) One cable sent on June 22, 1989 from the US Embassy in Beijing to the US Department of State in Washington, was a document that, in the words of its authors, “attempts to set the record straight” about the events of the night of June 3-4. It claims that, contrary to the reports in the Western media, any deaths did not occur in Tiananmen Square, but elsewhere. It also confirmed the casualty estimates. The contents of this cable were suppressed for more than 20 years until Wikileaks released it.

(10) In addition to the reports and chronicles from the Chinese government, the cables from the US Embassy in Beijing, and the written testimony of a number of respected journalists and diplomats who were present at the Square, a Spanish News camera crew took live video, which I believe is still available, of the peaceful clearing of the square. The video has never been shown.

(11) The Spanish Ambassador to China, Eugenio Bregolat, was present at the Square with the camera crew and wrote a book on the event, in which he vents his anger at the Western media for fabricating the massacre story. Publishers in English-speaking countries unanimously refuse to print a translation, and Amazon refuses to carry the original.

(12) The Columbia Journalism Review conducted a detailed study in 1998, and published an article written by Jay Matthews, titled “The Myth of Tiananmen And the Price of a Passive Press”; the Columbia Journalism Review; June 4, 2010; https://www.cjr.org/

(13) In 2009, James Miles, who was the BBC correspondent in Beijing at the time, admitted he had “conveyed the wrong impression” and that “there was no massacre on Tiananmen Square”, claiming “we got the main story right, but some of the details wrong”.

(14) New York Times, June 05, 1989. Article by Nicholas Kristoff confirming a peaceful end to the student sit-in.

(15) Birth of a Massacre Myth; How the West Manufactured an Event that Never Occurred; Japan Times; Monday, July 21, 2008, By Gregory Clark; http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20080721gc.html

(16) “Live Reports” were published from some Western reporters detailing the view from their windows of the Beijing hotel of hundreds of students being mowed down by machine guns. Their reports were ridiculed and condemned by others who revealed that the Square cannot be seen from the Beijing Hotel. Similar claims were made by Wu’er Kaixi, the Uigur student leader, also discredited when foreign reporters stated that he was seen in a far side of Beijing at the time he claimed to have seen those events.

(17) Helvey organised student revolutions in Vietnam and Myanmar, along with Otpor! in Serbia, Kmara! in Georgia, Pora! in Ukraine, Czechoslovakia’s “Velvet revolution” in 1989, then spreading his talents to Africa and South America. Helvey was associated with Gene Sharp in the George Soros-funded Einstein Institute, formed in 1983 as an offshoot of Harvard University to specialise in organising student political protests as a form of US colonial warfare. It was Sharp and Helvey who created the Otpor manuals that began the process of the destruction of Jugoslavia. 

(18) Near the end of May, 1989, Wan Li, the Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, was in Washington for a meeting with then President George Bush, in which Wan raised the issue of the student protest in Beijing. The record of the meeting is too heavily redacted to create much understanding or draw conclusions but, after the meeting, Wan abruptly cut short his US visit, returned home, and publicly supported the dire necessity for the government’s prior declaration of martial law. 

(19) The VOA is operated by the NED – the National Endowment for Democracy – a front company funded by the CIA that does much of that agency’s dirty work not involving actual killing – although sometimes it does that, too. The VOA is funded for its public activities by the US State Department, and by the CIA for its participation in black ops.

(20) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gate_of_Heavenly_Peace_(documentary

(21) Longbow lawsuit: The New Yorker; May 7, 2009 The American Dream: The Lawsuit

(22) TAM Transcript Index; Chai Ling; http://www.tsquare.tv/film/transcript_complete.php

(23) Tiananmen Square, 1989: The Declassified History; Edited By Jeffrey T. Richelson and Michael L. Evans; National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 16; Published – June 1, 1999; http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/index.html 

(24) For the potential showdown in Tiananmen Square, the workers’ protest, and the mercenary violence in Muxidi, it is difficult to believe the simultaneity was accidental. The theory that appears to fit all the known facts is that the workers’ revolt, with the mercenary violence separately coordinated and injected into the picture, was timed to coincide with the hoped-for Tiananmen bloodshed with the intent of reducing much of Beijing to violence and anarchy, resulting in a range of unpleasant possibilities. It nearly happened just this way.

(25) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Yellowbird

(26) In those days, travel to Hong Kong was not quick and easy as today, so some clever logistics were necessary, Chai Ling claiming to have been shipped to Hong Kong in a suitcase.

(27) Many diplomatic problems resulted from the US government’s interference in China’s internal affairs at the time. In addition to stoking revolutionary fires in the students and fueling the violence at Muxidi, the US government was condemned for providing sanctuary in the US Embassy for several of the Chinese riot leaders, and on June 11 a US Embassy cable reported that Chinese radio and TV stations read official letters on the air, accusing the US government of not only actively supporting political rebels but providing refuge for the “criminals who created the violence” at Muxidi. (18) The Western media entirely censored all such news.

(28) US Embassy confirms China’s version of Tiananmen Square events; Cables obtained by Wikileaks confirm China’s account. UK Telegraph, By Malcolm Moore, Shanghai; 04 Jun 2011;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8555142/Wikileaks-no-bloodshed-inside-Tiananmen-Square-cables-claim.html 

(29) Students were not involved in arranging the protest at Muxidi though a few may have been in attendance. The square already had a contingent of soldiers and was in no need of reinforcement, the military may have entered Muxidi with guns firing, but students were not the target, and in any case the students had already voted to clear the square before the violence erupted at Muxidi.

(30) It should be noted that the truncated version of the famous “tank man” photo, which was taken a day or two later, of a single young man apparently defying several military tanks, was used to embellish the hoax. The wide-angle view of that photo shows a long string of military vehicles on a totally unrelated passage down Chang’An Avenue and through the Square and, in any case, they were clearly leaving, not arriving.

Posted in USA, ChinaComments Off on Tiananmen Square: The Failure of an American-instigated 1989 Color Revolution

A Brief Introduction to Tibet

By Larry Romanoff

Westerners appear to have a willful blindness about Tibet, with strong opinions often held by those who haven’t been there and whose knowledge appears gleaned from misguided propaganda in the popular press. The Western media have imposed on our imaginations an image of a fabled theocracy where a reincarnated god rules over a peaceful people spinning prayer wheels in a pastoral idyll. The West’s fascination with Tibet has turned it into a mythic place upon which we project our dreams and our own spiritual fantasies. The result is what I call the Shangri-La syndrome (1), millions of Westerners choosing to believe in an attractive but wholly mythological, romantic fantasy which has never existed.

The first adjective that would come to mind about Tibet is ‘desolate’. Those who have been in the far North beyond the Arctic Circle, or above the tree line in the North American Rocky Mountains or the European Alps, will have some idea of the Tibetan landscape – which is 10,000 feet above the tree line. There is nothing hospitable about the isolated conditions or climate in Tibet and few of us would live there by choice. Tibet is a high-altitude desert with little oxygen, almost no rainfall, and harsh temperatures. Only sparse numbers of the hardiest animals can survive there and, in much of the land, the severe climate means that nothing, or almost nothing, can grow. No one in Tibet has ever seen a tree or even a bush.

Native Tibetans are not dissimilar to the Mongolian ethnic groups in China, being partially nomadic but susceptible to education and societal structure with built stable communities. It is noteworthy that few Tibetans will naturally or spontaneously engage in commerce whereas virtually all Chinese will do so, leading Westerners to view the Han Chinese shops in Lhasa as ‘commercial exploitation’ or some such. This is perhaps an aside, but this is one reason we see no street beggars in China (except for one subset of Xinjiang Uigurs). Even the most impoverished Chinese old woman will purchase green onions in a market, lay them out for sale on a cloth on the sidewalk, and live independently.

The Western press refer euphemistically to Tibet’s pre-1950 social structure as a benign ‘feudal system’, but it was no such thing. When Mao went in to clean it up, Tibet was a slave colony. Virtually all the people were literally owned by the Dalai and other lamas, the people forbidden to own land, and worked their entire lives without pay. The highest monks each owned 35,000 to 40,000 slaves.

The level of poverty in Tibet (outside the monasteries) until the 1950s could not be imagined by Westerners; it would have to be seen to be believed. Tibetans couldn’t afford fabric clothing, still wearing sheepskins as they did centuries earlier. Life was brutal, harsh, and corrupt. Life expectancy was barely 30. The prettiest girls and boys were confiscated to the monasteries for sex. Education was forbidden to all but the monks because education was expensive and educated peasants were considered dangerous to the system. The Dalai Lama prohibited any development of industry because wealth of the population brought independence from the religion. The Lamas, however, sent their children to British schools in India, and freely transferred the Province’s financial assets to British banks.

The so-called Tibetan religion was so intertwined with government as to be inseparable, and was merely a method of population control – with more forcible methods when religion failed. To this end, torture was rampant. For anyone who cares to look, the internet contains no shortage of photos of the torture rooms, especially at the Potala Palace and Gandan Monastery, with instruments used for crushing fingers and cutting leg tendons. There are handcuffs of many sizes, including small ones for children, instruments for cutting off noses and ears, others for breaking off the hands. One favorite of the Dalai and other Lamas was an ingenious method of gouging out eyes. They had carved a special stone cap with two holes that was pressed down over the head to force the eyes to bulge through the holes, in which position the eyes were gouged out, after which boiling oil was poured into the sockets. (2)Tibet Rises From Poverty: Fantasy and Reality

Typical daily events in Tibet involved the Lamas and their thugs rounding up peasants insufficiently enamored with the life to come and desiring a bit more of the life that is today, normally exemplified by cutting and extracting ankle and leg tendons, sentencing those people to lives as creeping reptiles. Another common punishment was severing hands at the wrists. One example typical of those widely reported was of a man objecting when a Lama attempted to confiscate his attractive wife to the monastery for sex. The Lama had the man’s hands placed on a flat stone and beaten with clubs until they were reduced to a pulpy flesh and separated. For good measure, they repeated the process with the man’s brother and sister. Both died from the assault.

Tibet has been described as the darkest slavery system in human history, one even darker and more backward than medieval Europe and in some ways even worse than in the US, with no rights or freedom in any form. Virtually the entire population of Tibet consisted of private property to be used, sold, given as gifts, used to pay debts or traded for other property. The Dalai and other Lamas ruled not only their earthly lives with absolute power, but literally terrorised the people under the guise of rewards and punishment in their afterlives, in part justifying religious privileges of breeding at will. Hence the lack of education and focus on religion.

The Dalai Lama was responsible for all this. The US pressure to give him a Nobel Peace Prize was an obscenity equivalent to paying such respects to the American Commander of Guantanamo Bay. Many Western news articles refer to the Dalai Lama as a spiritual leader, but he was never so much that as the former head of a shockingly inhumane and repressive government. There is literally nothing published in the popular Western media about Tibet that even remotely resembles its true history. When the CIA realised their inability to strip Tibet from China, the Dalai Lama changed his tune to one of freedom for the people rather than independence from Chinabut included in that definition of freedom was a return to the old ‘feudal’ system.

Tibet had been under China’s governance for many centuries though it was largely self-managed up to the 1950s, a fact long-recognised by the world but today conveniently omitted in an eagerness to disparage China. Even a US Rand-McNally atlas from the 1800s clearly displays Tibet as a province of China. China’s so-called ‘invasion’ of Tibet in the 1950s is one of the more repugnant examples of historical revisionism promulgated by the West.

China, through Chou En-Lai, tried for ten or more years without success to negotiate with the Dalai Lama the freedom from slavery of the Tibetan people. The greatest cause of his failure was that the Americans became involved in the midst of all the discussions, with the CIA training insurgents in Nepal and launching terrorist attacks in Tibet. It was then, when China finally moved in to stop the slaughter and oppression, that the CIA engineered the Dalai Lama’s “flight to India”, which T. D. Allman termed “one of the CIA’s greatest cold war propaganda triumphs. The Western media were filled with lurid reports of massacres and desecrations of priceless religious relics.” (3)

China has invested heavily in Tibet’s economic development, as well as in housing, infrastructure, and education and health services. The Chinese national government recently built more than 60,000 new homes in Tibet, given to the people free of charge, to remove them from poverty, put them together in real communities, and help to protect the environment. Many Westerners won’t care to hear this, but there is no oppression in Tibet, and the average Tibetan has never enjoyed such a standard of living as today.

In Tibet, as in Xinjiang, the government is teaching Mandarin Chinese to the locals. This is not, as the NYT or WSJ will tell you, genocide” of their culture. The Tibetan (or Uigur) language is not being replaced. Instead, the locals are learning a second language – the basic language of the nation – to further help remove them from isolation. Religion is the same. Temples, prayer flags and prayer wheels are so common in all the ethnic areas in China as to be a nuisance. The only change is that religion has been separated from politics, most particularly the American terrorist kind.

In truth, China’s government has spent countless billions trying to bring Tibet out of the Stone Age. Education is now almost universal, the $4 billion (pressurised) Qinghai-Tibet railway brings in billions in tourist dollars and finally provides a way to move goods in and out. Tibet’s economic rate of growth and standard of living are higher now than in much of the rest of Western China. This is so true that China has pampered Tibet over the remainder of the undeveloped Western rural provinces like Qinghai and Gansu who are now poorer than Tibet.

It has been well-documented by many authors that the CIA and NED fund all the ‘Free Tibet’ groups in North America and Europe. “A main reason why so many in the West have taken part in the protests against China is ideological: Tibetan Buddhism, deftly spun by the Dalai Lama, is a major point of reference of the New Age hedonist spirituality which is becoming the predominant form of ideology today. Our fascination with Tibet makes it into a mythic place upon which we project our dreams. When people mourn the loss of the authentic Tibetan way of life, they don’t care about real Tibetans: they want Tibetans to be authentically spiritual on behalf of us so we can continue with our crazy consumerism.” (4)

Since the early 1950s there has been systematic and substantial CIA involvement in stirring up anti-Chinese troubles in Tibet, so Chinese fears of external attempts to destabilise Tibet are not irrational. In fact, there is an enormous body of documentation, perhaps falling a bit short of incontrovertible proof, that the sudden violence in Tibet in 2008 was merely America’s gift to China for the Olympics, rather like their gift to Russia for the Sochi Olympics. Xinjiang is of course the same, in this case with incontrovertible proof.

But in fact, Western interference and attempts at genocide began more than 100 years ago. Few people today seem aware that the British instigated a war in Tibet in the early 1900s, later boasting that their machine guns mowed down thousands of Tibetans (who had only knives or sticks), without themselves suffering a single casualty.

But still, everybody wants to save the Tibetans. In this context, consider the (European) white man’s record of saving domestic populations: they totally exterminated the ancient Inca, Maya and Aztec civilisations as well as the Carib Indians and 95% of the North American natives. Australia exterminated about 90% of their aboriginal people, New Zealand about 75% of theirs, Canada about the same, and everyone participated in exterminating the entire race of Tasmanian people, slaughtering every man, woman and child on the island. It would thus appear much to the benefit of Tibetans that they have not been saved.

Posted in ChinaComments Off on A Brief Introduction to Tibet

Chemical Weapons Watchdog Is Just an American Lap Dog

By Scott Ritter

A spate of leaks from within the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the international inspectorate created for the purpose of implementing the Chemical Weapons Convention, has raised serious questions about the institution’s integrity, objectivity and credibility. The leaks address issues pertaining to the OPCW investigation into allegations that the Syrian government used chemical weapons to attack civilians in the Damascus suburb of Douma on April 7, 2018. These allegations, which originated from such anti-Assad organizations as the Syrian Civil Defense (the so-called White Helmets) and the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS), were immediately embraced as credible by the OPCW, and were used by the United States, France and the United Kingdom to justify punitive military strikes against facilities inside Syria assessed by these nations as having been involved in chemical weapons-related activities before the OPCW initiated any on-site investigation.

The Douma incident was initially described by the White Helmets, SAMS and the U.S., U.K. and French governments as involving both sarin nerve agent and chlorine gas. However, this narrative was altered when OPCW inspectors released, on July 6, 2018, interim findings of their investigation that found no evidence of the use of sarin. The focus of the investigation quickly shifted to a pair of chlorine cylinders claimed by the White Helmets to have been dropped onto apartment buildings in Douma by the Syrian Air Force, resulting in the release of a cloud of chlorine gas that killed dozens of Syrian civilians. In March, the OPCW released its final report on the Douma incident, noting that it had “reasonable grounds” to believe “that the use of a toxic chemical as a weapon has taken place on 7 April 2018,” that “this toxic chemical contained reactive chlorine” and that “the toxic chemical was likely molecular chlorine.”

Much has been written about the OPCW inspection process in Syria, and particularly the methodology used by the Fact-Finding Mission (FFM), an inspection body created by the OPCW in 2014 “to establish facts surrounding allegations of the use of toxic chemicals, reportedly chlorine, for hostile purposes in the Syrian Arab Republic.” The FFM was created under the direction of Ahmet Üzümcü, a career Turkish diplomat with extensive experience in multinational organizations, including service as Turkey’s ambassador to NATO. Üzümcü was the OPCW’s third director general, having been selected from a field of seven candidates by its executive council to replace Argentine diplomat Rogelio Pfirter. Pfirter had held the position since being nominated to replace the OPCW’s first director general, José Maurício Bustani. Bustani’s tenure was marred by controversy that saw the OPCW transition away from its intended role as an independent implementor of the Chemical Weapons Convention to that of a tool of unilateral U.S. policy, a role that continues to mar the OPCW’s work in Syria today, especially when it comes to its investigation of the alleged use by the Syrian government of chemical weapons against civilians in Douma in April 2018.

Bustani was removed from his position in 2002, following an unprecedented campaign led by John Bolton, who at the time was serving as the undersecretary of state for Arms Control and International Security Affairs in the U.S. State Department. What was Bustani’s crime? In 2001, he had dared to enter negotiations with the government of Iraq to secure that nation’s entry into the OPCW, thereby setting the stage for OPCW inspectors to visit Iraq and bring its chemical weapons capability under OPCW control. As director general, there was nothing untoward about Bustani’s action. But Iraq circa 2001 was not a typical recruitment target. In the aftermath of the Gulf War in 1991, the U.N. Security Council had passed a resolution under Chapter VII requiring Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD), including its chemical weapons capability, to be “removed, destroyed or rendered harmless” under the supervision of inspectors working on behalf of the United Nations Special Commission, or UNSCOM.

The pursuit of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction led to a series of confrontations with Iraq that culminated in inspectors being ordered out of the country by the U.S. in 1998, prior to a 72-hour aerial attack—Operation Desert Fox. Iraq refused to allow UNSCOM inspectors to return, rightfully claiming that the U.S. had infiltrated the ranks of the inspectors and was using the inspection process to spy on Iraqi leadership for the purposes of facilitating regime change. The lack of inspectors in Iraq allowed the U.S. and others to engage in wild speculation regarding Iraqi rearmament activities, including in the field of chemical weapons. This speculation was used to fuel a call for military action against Iraq, citing the threat of a reconstituted WMD capability as the justification. Bustani sought to defuse this situation by bringing Iraq into the OPCW, an act that, if completed, would have derailed the U.S. case for military intervention in Iraq. Bolton’s intervention included threats to Bustani and his family, as well as threats to withhold U.S. dues to the OPCW accounting for some 22% of that organization’s budget; had the latter threat been implemented, it would have resulted in OPCW’s disbandment.

Bustani’s departure marked the end of the OPCW as an independent organization. Pfirter, Bolton’s hand-picked replacement, vowed to keep the OPCW out of Iraq. In an interview with U.S. media shortly after his appointment, Pfirter noted that while all nations should be encouraged to join the OPCW, “We should be very aware that there are United Nations resolutions in effect” that precluded Iraqi membership “at the expense” of its obligations to the Security Council. Under the threat of military action, Iraq allowed UNMOVIC inspectors to return in 2002; by February 2003, no WMD had been found, a result that did not meet with U.S. satisfaction. In March 2003, UNMOVIC inspectors were withdrawn from Iraq under orders of the U.S., paving the way for the subsequent invasion and occupation of that nation that same month (the CIA later concluded that Iraq had been disarmed of its weapons of mass destruction by the summer of 1991).U.S. Again Cries ‘Chemical Warfare’ in Syria

Under Pfirter’s leadership, the OPCW became a compliant tool of U.S. foreign policy objectives. By completely subordinating OPCW operations through the constant threat of fiscal ruin, the U.S. engaged in a continuous quid pro quo arrangement, trading the financial solvency of an ostensible multilateral organization for complicity in operating as a de facto extension of American unilateral policy. Bolton’s actions in 2002 put the OPCW and its employees on notice: Cross the U.S., and you will pay a terminal price.

When Üzümcü took over the OPCW’s reins in 2010, the organization was very much the model of multinational consensus, which, in the case of any multilateral organization in which the U.S. plays a critical role, meant that nothing transpired without the express approval of the U.S. and its European NATO allies, in particular the United Kingdom and France. Shortly after he took office, Üzümcü was joined by Robert Fairweather, a career British diplomat who served as Üzümcü’s chief of Cabinet. (While Üzümcü was the ostensible head of the OPCW, the daily task of managing the functioning of the OPCW was that of the chief of Cabinet. In short, nothing transpired within the OPCW without Fairweather’s knowledge and concurrence.)

Üzümcü and Fairweather’s tenure at the OPCW was dominated by Syria, where, since 2011, the government of President Bashar Assad had been engaged in a full-scale conflict with a foreign-funded and -equipped insurgency whose purpose was regime change. By 2013, allegations emerged from both the Syrian government and rebel forces concerning the use of chemical weapons by the other side. In August 2013, the OPCW dispatched an inspection team into Syria as part of a U.N.-led effort, which included specialists from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.N. itself, to investigate allegations that sarin had been used in attack on civilians in the town of Ghouta. While the mission found conclusive evidence that sarin nerve agent had been used, it did not assign blame for the attack.

Despite the lack of causality, the U.S. and its NATO allies quickly assigned blame for the sarin attacks on the Syrian government. To forestall U.S. military action against Syria, the Russian government helped broker a dealwhereby the U.S. agreed to refrain from undertaking military action if the Syrian government joined the OPCW and subjected the totality of its chemical weapons stockpile to elimination. In October 2013, the OPCW-U.N. Joint Mission, created under the authority of U.N. Security Council resolution 2118 (2103), began the process of identifying, cataloging, removing and destroying Syria’s chemical weapons. This process was completed in September 2014 (in December 2013, the OPCW was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its disarmament work in Syria).

If the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons was an example of the OPCW at its best, what followed was a case study of just the opposite. In May 2014, the OPCW created the Fact-Finding Mission, or FFM, charged with establishing “facts surrounding allegations of the use of toxic chemicals, reportedly chlorine, for hostile purposes in the Syrian Arab Republic.” The FFM was headed by Malik Ellahi, who served as head of the OPCW’s government relations and political affairs branch. The appointment of someone lacking both technical and operational experience suggests that Ellahi’s primary role was political. Under his leadership, the FFM established a close working relationship with the anti-Assad Syrian opposition, including the White Helmets and SAMS.

In 2015, responsibility for coordinating the work of the FFM with the anti-Assad opposition was transferred to a British inspector named Len Phillips (another element of the FFM, led by a different inspector, was responsible for coordinating with the Syrian government). Phillips developed a close working relationship with the White Helmets and SAMS and played a key role in OPCW’s investigation of the April 2017 chemical incident in Khan Shaykhun. By April 2018, the FFM had undergone a leadership transition, with Phillips replaced by a Tunisian inspector named Sami Barrek. It was Barrek who led the FFM into Syria in April 2018 to investigate allegations of chemical weapons use at Douma. Like Phillips, Barrek maintained a close working relationship with the White Helmets and SAMS.

Once the FFM wrapped up its investigation in Douma, however, it became apparent to Fairweather that it had a problem. There were serious questions about whether chlorine had, in fact, been used as a weapon. The solution, brokered by Fairweather, was to release an interim report that ruled out sarin altogether, but left the door open regarding chlorine. This report was released on July 6, 2018. Later that month, both Üzümcü and Fairweather were gone, replaced by a Spaniard named Fernando Arias and a French diplomat named Sébastien Braha. It would be up to them to clean up the Douma situation.

The situation Braha inherited from Fairweather was unenviable. According to an unnamed OPCW official who spoke with the media after the fact, two days prior to the publication of the interim report, on July 4, 2018, Fairweather had been paid a visit by a trio of U.S. officials, who indicated to Fairweather and the members of the FFM responsible for writing the report that it was the U.S. position that the chlorine cannisters in question had been used to dispense chlorine gas at Douma, an assertion that could not be backed up by the evidence. Despite this, the message that Fairweather left with the OPCW personnel was that there had to be a “smoking gun.” It was now Braha’s job to manufacture one.

Braha did this by dispatching OPCW inspectors to Turkey in September 2018 to interview new witnesses identified by the White Helmets, and by commissioning new engineering studies that better explained the presence of the two chlorine cannisters found in Douma. By March, Braha had assembled enough information to enable the technical directorate to issue its final report. Almost immediately, dissent appeared in the ranks of the OPCW. An engineering report that contradicted the findings published by Braha was leaked, setting off a firestorm of controversy derived from its conclusion that the chlorine cannisters found in Douma had most likely been staged by the White Helmets.

The OPCW, while eventually acknowledging that the leaked report was genuine, explained its exclusion from the final report on the grounds that it attributed blame, something the FFM was not mandated to do. According to the OPCW, the engineering report in question had been submitted to the investigation and identification team, a newly created body within the OPCW mandated to make such determinations. Moreover, Director General Arias stood by the report’s conclusion that it had “reasonable grounds” to believe “that the use of a toxic chemical as a weapon has taken place on 7 April 2018.”

Arias’ explanation came under attack in November, when WikiLeaks published an email sent by a member of the FFM team that had participated in the Douma investigation. In this email, which was sent on June 22, 2018, and addressed to Robert Fairweather, the author noted that, when it came to the Douma incident, “[p]urposely singling out chlorine gas as one of the possibilities is disingenuous.” The author of the email, who had participated in drafting the original interim report, noted that the original text had emphasized that there was insufficient evidence to support this conclusion, and that the new text represented “a major deviation from the original report.” Moreover, the author took umbrage at the new report’s conclusions, which claimed to be “based on the high levels of various chlorinated organic derivatives detected in environmental samples.” According to email’s author “They were, in most cases, present only in parts per billion range, as low as 1-2 ppb, which is essentially trace quantities.” In short, the OPCW had cooked the books, manufacturing evidence from thin air that it then used to draw conclusions that sustained the U.S. position that chlorine gas had been used by the Syrian government at Douma.

Arias, while not addressing the specifics of the allegations set forth in the leaked email, recently declared that it is “the nature of any thorough inquiry for individuals in a team to express subjective views,” noting that “I stand by the independent, professional conclusion” presented by the OPCW about the Douma incident. This explanation, however, does not fly in the face of the evidence. The OPCW’s credibility as an investigative body has been brought into question through these leaks, as has its independent character. If an organization like the OPCW can be used at will by the U.S., the United Kingdom and France to trigger military attacks intended to support regime-change activities in member states, then it no longer serves a useful purpose to the international community it ostensibly serves. To survive as a credible entity, the OPCW must open itself to a full-scale audit of its activities in Syria by an independent authority with inspector general-like investigatory powers. Anything short of this leaves the OPCW, an organization that was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its contributions to world peace, permanently stained by the reality that it is little more than a lap dog of the United States, used to promote the very conflicts it was designed to prevent.

Related Articles:

Video: Douma ‘Chemical Attack’ Narrative Collapses, Russia Trains New Militia in Hasakah

New WikiLeaks Bombshell: 20 Inspectors Dissent from Syria Chemical Attack Narrative. Leaked Documents and Emails of OPCW

US/NATO Staged “False Flag”: More Evidence of OPCW Doctored Douma Chemical Weapons Attack, Syria Documents

Syria Will Not Cooperate with the OPCW New Investigation Team

WikiLeaks Exposes Doctored OPCW Report on Alleged CW Attack in Syria

Syria: OPCW Whistleblowers Confirm What We Already Knew. The OPCW has Deliberately Suppressed Evidence

Posted in USA, Politics, UNComments Off on Chemical Weapons Watchdog Is Just an American Lap Dog

The Russia-Ukraine Gas Deal Took the World by Surprise. New Detente?

By Andrew Korybko

Few could have predicted several years ago that Russia and Ukraine would reconcile with one another to the point of agreeing to ensure the reliable delivery of gas to the EU for the next 5-15 years, but that’s exactly what just happened last week in the most convincing sign yet that the long-awaited “New Detente” is finally beginning to bear some fruit.

Russia and Ukraine took the world by surprise last week after agreeing to ensure the reliable delivery of gas to the EU for at least the next five years and with the option of extending their accord for a full decade after that. This outcome was previously thought to be a political fantasy after the two countries became acrimonious rivals following the neo-fascist consequences of the US-backed EuroMaidan coup in early 2014 and Crimea’s subsequent reunification with Russia shortly thereafter, to say nothing of the presently unresolved Ukrainian Civil War that continues to claim lives in Donbas to this day. It made perfect sense at the time for both parties to disengage from one another and no longer cooperate on the energy front, with Russia instead seeking to diversify its EU-destined transit routes through Nord Stream II and Turkish Stream whereas Ukraine was convinced to buy more expensive American LNG that would be pumped to the country from the West (primarily Poland) through a technique called “reverse gas flow” via existing pipelines.

Both countries made progress on each of these fronts in the years since, which is yet another reason why it was so surprising that they decided to bury the hatchet and agree to prolong their energy cooperation for the benefit of their mutual EU partners. This unexpected development speaks to the enormous achievements that have been made behind the scenes in negotiating the long-awaited “New Detente” since Zelensky’s election earlier this year made it easier for Trump to reverse the anti-Russian policies of their predecessors, Poroshenko and Obama respectively. Without changes at the top of the American and Ukrainian leaderships, it would have been impossible for both of them to reach pragmatic agreements with Russia that would ultimately be to their mutual interests. That’s not to say that the state of relations between the West (which includes Ukraine’s generally pro-Western government in this context) and Russia are perfect, but just that they’re comparatively better than at any time since the onset of the West’s anti-Russian sanctions in 2014.Belarus Is Between a Rock and a Hard Place. “Balance” its Relations between Russia and the US

Russia and Ukraine engaged in a prisoner swap earlier in September which was an important trust-building move signifying their joint intent to break the ice and reopen negotiations on other issues of bilateral interest. That development was importantly preceded by President Putin’s visit to France to meet with his counterpart a few weeks prior, during which time it became apparent that a “New Detente” was certainly in the cards. The subsequent prisoner swap further confirmed that, which was then followed by the resumption of the Normandy Talks earlier this month. The natural evolution of this fast-moving rapprochement was the surprise gas deal which adds some much-needed substance to this otherwise hitherto mostly symbolic process by making the EU as a whole a tangible stakeholder in its continued success. Furthermore, it’s extremely unlikely that this could have occurred had the US not tacitly allowed it, which speaks to its intentions to improve relations with Russia despite the ongoing Ukrainegate impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

Like it was earlier noted, the “New Detente” isn’t perfect, as seen most recently by the US’ decision to impose sanctions on the companies involved in Nord Stream II’s construction, but once again, the state of relations in general are still comparatively better than their nadir in mid-2014 immediately after the EuroMaidan coup and Crimea’s reunification with Russia. The US is still trying to “contain” Russia with mixed success, while Russia is undertaking its best efforts to break out of this “containment” noose and even “flip” some of the US’ traditional partners such as Turkey, so the New Cold War probably won’t end anytime soon. Nor, for that matter, did anybody reasonably expect that it would, but just like during the Old Cold War, there comes a time when the involved parties believe that it’s in their best interests to proverbially take a break and enter into a period of detente. It seems as though that phase is only now just beginning but which has finally borne some fruit after Trump promised to pursue this outcome all throughout the 2016 campaign.

One can argue over why that hasn’t already happened to the extent that he promised (or even if he was fully sincere in the first place), but the point to focus on in the here and now is that some tangible progress has finally been made concerning the future of Russia’s trans-Ukrainian gas supplies to the EU. From the looks of it, all the relevant players — Russia, Ukraine, the EU, and the US — have concrete interests in seeing that this agreement is upheld. It’s convenient for Russia to continue using existing pipelines, Ukraine wants to get paid for its transit role, the EU desires reliable but cheap gas imports, and the US recognizes that this outcome perpetuates the geostrategic role of its Ukrainian proxy that it could then leverage as a “bargaining chip” for reaching a more substantive “New Detente” with Russia sometime next year or the one afterwards. That said, while each player has their interests, they don’t exactly trust one another for different reasons, which means that the “New Detente” might still be offset if any of them decides to play the spoiler or is undermined by their “deep states”.

Posted in Russia, UkraineComments Off on The Russia-Ukraine Gas Deal Took the World by Surprise. New Detente?

A special leader of Fatah for “Quds”: Al-Barghouti decided his decision to run in the presidential elections

By: Sammi Ibrahem,Sr

bGKZO

Nazi Occupied Jerusalem: A member of the Revolutionary Council of the Fatah movement, Hatem Abdel Qader, revealed that the prisoner and a prominent leader in the movement, Marwan Barghouti, intends to run in the race for the presidency of the Palestinian Authority if the elections are held.

Abdul Qadir said in exclusive statements to “Quds Network” that Al-Barghouthi decided his decision to run for the presidential race in the upcoming elections, regardless of other positions.

The Fatah leader saw Barghouti as the most fortunate in his movement if President Mahmoud Abbas announced his non-participation, adding: “We have to wait until we know Abu Mazen’s position towards running the presidential race, especially since he previously announced his intention not to run in the upcoming elections despite the statements of a number of those close to him that The only motion candidate. “

And Abizaid: “We hope that there will be one candidate for the Fatah movement and that there will be no candidates if Abu Mazen intends to run in the elections in addition to Barghouti’s position running in the midst of these elections.”

Regarding the occupation’s delay in holding elections in Jerusalem, Abdel Qader commented: “The Israeli procrastination was expected and will not issue a presidential decree fixing the date for the legislative and presidential elections before knowing the Israeli position on holding them in Jerusalem.”

The Fatah leader expected that the Nazi regime would refuse to hold elections in the occupied city of Jerusalem, adding: “We do not expect the occupation to respond to the Palestinian request before holding its internal elections, and we will wait until then for the Europeans to exert pressure on the Israeli leadership to hold elections similar to the past in the city.” “.

Abdel Qader stressed that there are no elections without the occupied Jerusalem, which is the comprehensive Palestinian stance on this issue, as it considers the capital to be steady: “We will not accept that elections and candidacies be held in the city of Jerusalem.”

The Minister of the Nazi Occupation Army decides to withhold the salaries of eight prisoners from within 

80880187_692920164571546_4381560360742682624_n

The Nazi Minister of the Occupation Army, Naftali Bennett, issued a decision to seize and confiscate the salaries paid by the Palestinian Authority to eight prisoners from the occupied Palestinian interior.

According to a statement shown today, Wednesday, the decision includes the confiscation of hundreds of thousands of shekels transferred by the Palestinian Authority to families of prisoners convicted of “security” issues, and five of them were sentenced to life imprisonment.

The statement added that this is the first time that the Nazi occupation issues such a decision to book and confiscate the prisoners ’salaries directly, as it indicated that it will issue similar decisions during the coming period. 

According to the statement, the prisoners are; Muwaffaq ‘Arouq (77 years), from Jaffa Nazareth in the occupied Palestine 1948. He has been detained since 2003, and he is imprisoned for 30 years. He is one of six prisoners suffering from cancer in prisons.

Prisoner Walid Daqqa, a resident of Baqa al-Gharbiya, in the Nazi occupied Palestine 1948. He has been detained since 1986 for the murder of a Nazi soldier, who has been sentenced for 39 years, and the prisoner Muhammad Jabareen from Umm al-Fahm city. He was convicted of killing three Nazi soldiers in 1992 and is sentenced to life imprisonment.

The two prisoners, Ibrahim Bakri and Yassin Bakri, who live in 1948 occupied Palestine of Galilee region, are accused of helping a Palestinian to blow himself up in 2002 and were sentenced to life imprisonment for 9 times.

The liberated prisoner, Mujahid Zouqan, from the city of Al-Taiba, accused of aiding the “enemy” (according to the Nazi occupation) at the time of the war, was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment, and was released a few months ago.

The freed prisoner, Hikmat Naamneh, spent 23 months in prison, against the backdrop of supporting Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and the same prisoner Samir Sarsawi was released after spending thirty years in Nazi camp.

The prisoner Sarsawi was sentenced for life, but his name was among the seven prisoners of the interior that limited their sentence from open life to 30 years in prison.

For his part, the head of the Prisoners and Editors Affairs Authority, Major General Qadri Abu Bakr, said that this decision was a gross looting and declared theft of the families of the detainees, and that the salaries that the authority pays to Palestinian prisoners, regardless of their place of residence, are allocations that go to support their families from living, housing, health, education, etc. .

He added in a statement today, Wednesday, that the commission “will not abandon this duty, regardless of the different Israeli ways of blocking it, detaining it or stealing it like bandits.”

Abu Bakr considered this decision as another step in the war against Palestinian prisoners.  

Prisoner Manar Al-Shweiki gets her freedom

80033334_2701902879874394_7255266426661896192_n

Nazi Occupied Jerusalem: The Nazi occupation authorities released this evening, 19-year-old Jerusalemite, Manar Shweiki, after spending four years in the detention camps.

Majdi Al-Shweiki, the father of the captive, told Quds News  that the Haifa Court rejected the appeal filed by the Nazi Occupation Prosecution on a previous decision by the court to release his daughter, according to what is known as the “two-thirds” or “Shalish” session (called Hebrew).

He added that the Nazi judge agreed to release her after spending four years in the “Hasharon” and “Damon” prisons.

The Nazi occupation forces arrested Shweiki on the sixth of December 2015, where, according to her family, she had left her school in the town of Silwan, south of Al-Aqsa Mosque, at noon, and she sat near the Wadi Hilwa neighborhood.

The family explained that it was carrying the Qur’an in its hand in conjunction with the presence of Nazi soldiers in the place, as they approached it and investigated it on the ground and searched it, and claimed that it was reading the Qur’an before carrying out the stabbing operation, and they also claimed that a knife was in its possession.

After sessions in the Nazi occupation courts, Shweiki was sentenced to six years in prison, after being convicted of trying to implement an appeal.

His parents died while being detained. There is no joy for the holidays in the house of the prisoner Massad

% D9% 82% D8% A7% D9% 84% D8% A8% 20% D9% 85% D9% 88% D9% 82% D8% B9

The prisoner’s brother Ibrahim Massad reiterates that the family “lost the joy of the holidays” since his brother was arrested by the occupation forces and sentenced to life imprisonment.

The Christian prisoner Ibrahim Mosaad, from the city of Ramallah, was arrested by the Nazi occupation forces in 2006, after 6 years of stalking.

After his arrest, Ibrahim, as his brother “Quds Al-Akhbariya” shows, was subjected to a harsh investigation by Nazi Gestapo at the “Al-Maskubiya” Nazi center for more than 3 months, and then the Nazi occupation sentenced him to life imprisonment for participating in acts of resistance.

His brother says, “The feast since Ibrahim’s arrest has gone through like any other day, without the joy and atmosphere that his presence created between us.”

The bitterness of Ibrahim’s arrest was not only on holidays, as his parents died while captive, depriving them of a goodbye look.

His brother explains: “My father and Ibrahim, who has been detained by the Palestinian Authority, died in Jericho prison, where he spent 4 years from 1996 to 2000, and the mother left while he was a prisoner of Nazi occupation.”

Despite all these tragedies, Ibrahim, his brother, says, “He enjoys high spirits and is keen to use his time in prison to develop himself. He joined Al-Quds Open University to study political science.”

Ibrahim’s family’s wish “to be freed from the prisons of the occupation and to be present among them on the coming holidays, perhaps part of the joy that I left 14 years ago is to return to them.”

Serious complications for the health of the prisoner Mowaffaq Veins

66

The sick prisoner Muwaffaq ‘Uruq suffers from a difficult and deteriorating health condition, where he is currently hospitalized at the Zionist “Barzalai” hospital.

The Prisoners and Editors Affairs Authority said in a statement issued today, Thursday, that the administration of the “Ashkelon” prison had transferred several days ago to the sick prisoner, who had been hospitalized, after a marked deterioration in his health.

She added that serious complications occurred in the prisoner’s veins, including: “severe pain throughout his body, high fever, headache, emaciation, and the condition of smoke that caused him to fall to the ground twice.”

The Commission pointed out that the occupation doctors had discovered that he had cancer in the liver and stomach during the month of July of this year, after undergoing medical tests, but the prison administration delayed his transfer to the hospital for chemotherapy until November.

It is noteworthy that the prisoner Orouq (77 years), from occupied 1948 Yafa Nazareth has been detained since 2003, and is sentenced to 30 years in prison.

Al-Banna from Gaza is denied a visit

The commission also affirmed that the Nazi occupation authorities continue to deny the sick prisoner Mustafa Muhammad Al-Banna, from the Gaza Strip, his family’s visit to him since his arrest two years ago.

The Prisoners ’Authority stated, after its lawyer’s visit to the Al-Banna prison in“ Ashqelan ”detention center, that he had suffered a heart attack during the month of August 2019, and underwent a transplantation of a pacemaker, after the administration of the“ Nafha ”detention facility to provide treatment and transfer him to the hospital despite his continuous calls for Medical checks for his complaints of chest pain and high blood pressure.

It is noteworthy that the prisoner Mustafa Al-Banna (31 years old), is imprisoned for (40 months).

For the fourth day, the Zionist puppet Ab-A$$ force in Nablus arrested the activist Qutaiba Azim

Return rallies have become “monthly” and on prominent national events

Notifications of intent to occupy the imposition of house arrest on six young Jerusalem men

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, Human RightsComments Off on A special leader of Fatah for “Quds”: Al-Barghouti decided his decision to run in the presidential elections

Former NDP candidate stripped of human rights award after comparing ‘Israel’ to Nazi Germany

‘Gaza is the new #Auschwitz,’ she posted on Twitter

Rana Zaman.Rana Zaman/Facebook


By: Jesse Snyder

The Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission has stripped a former NDP candidate of an annual human rights award after comments she made that compared Israel to Nazi Germany.

Rana Zaman stepped down as a candidate for the party in June, roughly a year after posting a string of tweets that suggested Israeli forces were “aiming higher than 6 million” in their bid to wipe out the Palestinian people. “I wonder if #Israel borrowed this from the #Nazis after they saw how successful they were?” she wrote, adding, “#Gaza is the new #Auschwitz.”

The tweet was later deleted but had been captured in a screen shot by Jewish group B’nai Brith Canada.

The commission issued a press release on Friday saying it had “formally rescinded” an award it gave to Zaman. At the time of the award, the release said, its committee “was unaware of public statements made by Ms. Zaman that were directly contrary to the principles of the award.”

A spokesperson for the commission declined to confirm on the record whether the decision to strip the award was tied to Zaman’s tweets. The press release declined to mention which award was actually given to Zama. Earlier press releases that named the award recipients were no longer accessible on the human rights commission’s website. 

However, a press release from the Nova Scotia government dated Dec. 10, 2019 named Zaman as the recipient of an “Individual Award” for her “extraordinary advocacy efforts in bringing together diverse communities in Halifax.” The annual awards are part of an effort to “demonstrate a commitment to advancing human rights and enhancing equity and inclusion in their community,” the press release said.

Jewish advocacy groups the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) and the Atlantic Jewish Council (AJC) commended the decision on Friday. 

“This decision makes clear that people who engage in this type of hateful discourse disqualify themselves as human rights advocates,” the groups wrote in a joint statement. 

Zaman, a social activist and Muslim who has spoken publicly about fighting Islamophobia, was running for election in the Nova Scotia riding of Dartmouth-Cole Harbour. The NDP lost the seat in the October election to Liberal incumbent Darren Fisher.

In a series of tweets posted between June 2 and June 4, 2018, Zaman voiced her outrage at the shooting of Palestinian protesters. “If Israel is so advanced then why can’t they avoid shooting defenceless paramedics and journalists, unless they’re killing innocent people deliberately!” she wrote on June 3. “Israel’s injustice and arrogance can no longer be defended and people are wise to Israel’s tired old rhetoric.”

Zaman later apologized for the comments, saying they were “inappropriate, hurtful and sadly may be perceived as anti-Semitic.” She said she had reached out to members of the Jewish community in a bid to make amends.

Zaman had long been an advocate against Islamophobic online comments. After the New Zealand mosque shooting earlier this year in which 51 people were killed, Zaman wrote an op-ed in a Nova Scotia newspaper that said social media companies “need to be held accountable for allowing their platforms to be used to target minority groups with hate speech.”

“We need to hold hateful people accountable,” she said in Halifax newspaper The Coast. “Revise hate speech laws—currently it’s almost impossible for people to be charged and convicted.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, Human RightsComments Off on Former NDP candidate stripped of human rights award after comparing ‘Israel’ to Nazi Germany

Nazi Mass arrests in Jerusalem and the West Bank affected 12 Palestinians

By: Sammi Ibrahem,Sr

20190629090843

Nazi Occupied Palestine : At dawn today, Occupation police and army launched a massive campaign of arrests in the Nazi occupied West Bank cities and villages and towns of the illegally Nazi occupied Jerusalem.

Local sources reported that the Nazi occupation forces arrested at dawn, the freed prisoner Youssef Ezzat and Yusef Muhammad Saduq from the Dheisha camp south of Bethlehem, and Asid Abu Libdeh from Qalqilya.

Clashes erupted between Palestinian youths and the Nazi occupation forces in Qalqilya, Dura, south of Hebron, and the Deheisheh camp, which included shooting and poisonous gas bombs, which resulted in the recording of suffocation (did not call for medical intervention to treat it), and two rubber bullets in Deheisheh.

In Jerusalem, elements of the Nazi Gestapo and the Nazi occupation police stormed the house of the martyr Faris Abu Nab in the Ras al-Amud neighborhood of Silwan, south of the city.

He added that the Nazi occupation forces used to beat and push all those inside the house, and arrested the father of the martyr Bassam Abu Nab (52 years), and both: Yousef Abu Nab (14 years), Saif Abu Nab (17 years), and Muhammad Abu Nab (20 years) .

The Nazi occupation and intelligence police stormed several homes in the town of Issawiya, northeast of the city, and arrested: Muhammad Marwan Obaid, Ali Sufyan Ubaid, Younis Sufyan Ubaid, Faisal Luay Obaid, and Wasim Nayef Obaid.

Issawiya witnessed an attack by the occupation forces by targeting its young men and calling them to investigate or arrest them continuously, and concocted several charges related to them throwing stones and Molotov cocktails.

Return rallies have become “monthly” and on prominent national events

Notifications of intent to occupy the imposition of house arrest on six young Jerusalem men

In pictures: A school in Tulkarm was evacuated after being flooded with rain

The Nazi occupation sentenced a prisoner from Anata to nine years in prison

resize

The Nazi military “Ofer” court, which is under Nazi occupation, ruled on the prisoner Baraa Kayed Issa (22 years), with an effective prison term of nine years.

The Palestinian Prisoner Club said in a statement today, Wednesday, that the court ruled Prisoner Issa for nine years, in addition to compensation of 40,000 shekels.

He added that the Nazi occupation forces arrested the prisoner Issa on November 14, 2017, and charged him with carrying out a stabbing operation. 

It is noteworthy that the prisoner Issa was shot and wounded by the Nazi occupation forces in his stomach in 2014, that is, three years before his arrest, and caused him difficult health problems, he is still suffering its effects.

The captive is a resident of the town of Anata, northeast of Jerusalem, and is being held by the occupation in Raymond Prison, where he was recently transferred from Nafha Nazi camp.

Return rallies have become “monthly” and on prominent national events

Notifications of intent to occupy the imposition of house arrest on six young Jerusalem men

In pictures: A school in Tulkarm was evacuated after being flooded with rain

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, Human RightsComments Off on Nazi Mass arrests in Jerusalem and the West Bank affected 12 Palestinians

Ivanka an ‘Israeli’ Spy? Did she help write the ‘Pissgate” dossier?

By Gordon Duff,

A recent story from ABC News “‘Dossier’ author Chris Steele met Ivanka Trump years before Russia scandal, source says“, with versions carried on other media, suggests that the author of the infamous Trump dossier, the one that says Trump has been blackmailed by Russia, the “Pissgate” scandal, has for years been “close” to Ivanka Trump.

A story that was released, confirmed and expanded on his now imploded in a cloud of censorship and denial.  The story is a mix of facts and questions, of truths and assumptions and though not the most devastating of our era, perhaps the most entertaining and in some ways the most far-reaching.

ABC began its story like this, with some of the right questions and a few facts.  Later in the story, ABC begins to obfuscate and simply lie, with one purpose, to hide a fact so potentially shocking that it might well bring down a government.  From ABC News:

“Nearly a decade before the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump’s daughter Ivanka met a British intelligence officer who ran the Russia desk — and when the agent left his covert service and moved into private practice in 2010, she stayed in touch, ABC News has learned. The two exchanged emails but never worked together, and the man, Christopher Steele, would one day re-emerge in a most unexpected way, taking a central role in the Russia scandal that consumed the early years of her father’s presidency, according to a source familiar with their past contacts.

The prior relationship came to light as investigators with the Department of Justice Inspector General’s office was looking into allegations of political bias at the origins of the Russia investigation since May 2018.”

The whole story strongly suggests that Ivanka Trump has, for many years, been an intelligence operative, possibly CIA but most likely Mossad, well before her official 2009 conversion to Judaism.  It can suggest nothing else though it tries to, as you will note.

Steele himself initially claimed a relationship with a Trump family member but ABC News went much further, getting emails between them planning meetings, gift exchanges, and suggesting a possible or probable romantic relationship but working very hard “not go to there” because of the threat of lawsuits.

The dossier itself has become much more toxic to Trump based on IG findings.  First of all, the dossier is now seen as “not totally corroborated” rather than “fake.”  What is being kept from the public is which parts are totally proven, which may well the majority of the report and which are less confirmed but which have never been disproven in any way.

Where ABC got into very serious trouble is in what they said and what they failed to note.  From their article, a real blockbuster once you realize what you are reading:

“In 2007, Ivanka Trump met Steele at a dinner and they began corresponding about the possibility of future work together, the source said. The following year, the two exchanged emails about meeting up near Trump Tower, according to several emails seen by ABC News. And the two did meet at Trump Tower according to the source. The inspector general’s report mentions a meeting with a “Trump family member” there. They suggest Ivanka Trump and Steele stayed in touch via emails over the next several years. In one 2008 exchange, they discussed dining together in New York at a restaurant just blocks from Trump Tower.

Ivanka Trump worked as an executive vice president at the Trump Organization, managing a range of foreign real estate projects, including in parts of the world where Steele’s firm, Orbis Business Intelligence touted expertise. She and Steele discussed services Orbis could offer to the Trump Organization regarding its planned expansion into foreign markets, according to two sources familiar with the meetings.”

Where this blows up is simple, in 2007, Steele was head of the Russia desk at MI 6, the organization is best known for employing James Bond.

In 2008, Steele also was head of the Russia desk at MI 6, at the time Ivanka Trump offered to work with Steele, something that would have meant only one thing, that Ivanka Trump was working for an intelligence agency representing a government, most likely not the US, not while working in New York, leaving only Israel.

You see, the firm Orbis Business Intelligence was, as you can read below, founded in 2009 and, thus, didn’t exist in 2007 or 2008.  Ivanka made her offer of “partnership” with Britain’s highest-ranking government intelligence specialist dealing with Russia.

Ivanka couldn’t be selling overseas office space to a company that didn’t exist, in meetings with a British intelligence officer.

Typically, for Steele to entertain an offer to work together, perhaps share sources, or engage in operations, something MI 6 and the Mossad have done together for 60 years, he either saw Ivanka’s value as a trained intelligence asset or, as is likely as well, a very attractive young woman with an unlimited amount of money, let’s get real about this.

At the time, her father, now president, was and is partnered with Bayrock Investments run by Felix Sater, the American representative of Simon Mogeleivich, head of the Kosher Nostra, the Russian based alleged “Jewish mob.”

In fact, her father, billionaire Donald Trump is alleged to have been bailed out by Russian cash brought into the US through the CIA, cash that later helped fund the powerful “Little Odessa” crime organization made up of former KGB officers and professional killers from Russian gulags, which

From Wikipedia:

Early life

Christopher David Steele was born in the Yemeni city of Aden (then part of the Federation of South Arabia), on 24 June 1964.[10][11] His parents, Perris and Janet, had met while working at the Met Office, the United Kingdom’s national weather service. His paternal grandfather was a coal miner from Pontypridd in Wales.[12] Steele spent time growing up in Aden, the Shetland Islands, and Cyprus, as well as at Wellington College, Berkshire.[12]

Steele matriculated at Girton College, Cambridge in 1982. While at the University of Cambridge, he wrote for the student newspaperVarsity.[10][12][13] In the Easter term of 1986, Steele was President of The Cambridge Union debating society.[14][15] He graduated with a degree in Social and Political Sciences in 1986.[16]

Career

Steele was recruited by MI6 directly following his graduation from Cambridge[11] and worked for MI6 for 22 years.[17] He worked in London at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) from 1987 to 1989.[11] From 1990 to 1993, Steele worked under diplomatic cover as an MI6 agent in Moscow, serving at the Embassy of the United Kingdom in Moscow.[10][15][18] Steele was an “internal traveller”, visiting newly-accessible cities such as Samara and Kazan.[12][19][20]

He returned to London in 1993, working again at the FCO until his posting with the British Embassy in Paris in 1998, where he served under diplomatic cover until 2002. But Steele’s identity as an MI6 officer and a hundred and sixteen other British spies had their cover blown by an anonymously published list that Her Majesty’s Government attempted to suppress through a DSMA-Notice in 1999.[21][10][18][22][23][24]

In 2003, Steele was sent to Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan as part of an MI6 team, briefing Special Forces on “kill or capture” missions for Taliban targets, and also spent time teaching new MI6 recruits.[18] Steele returned to London and between 2006 and 2009 he headed the Russia Desk at MI6.[10][12][15][25]

Steele’s expertise on Russia remained valued, and he served as a senior officer under John Scarlett, Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), from 2004 to 2009.[25] Steele was a counterintelligence specialist[17] and was selected as case officer for Alexander Litvinenko and participated in the investigation of the Litvinenko poisoning in 2006.[18] It was Steele who quickly realised that Litvinenko’s death “was a Russian state ‘hit’”.[25] Twelve years later he allegedly was included himself into a hit list of the Russian Federal Security Service, along with Sergei Skripal who was poisoned in 2018 by a binary chemical weapon Novichok in Britain.[26]

Private sector

In March 2009, Steele with his fellow MI6-retiree Chris Burrows co-founded the private intelligence agency Orbis Business Intelligence, Ltd., based in Grosvenor Square Gardens.[29][15] Between 2014 and 2016, Steele created over 100 reports on Russian and Ukrainian issues, which were read within the United States Department of State, and he was viewed as credible by the United States intelligence community.[12] The business was commercially successful, grossing approximately $20,000,000 in the first nine years of operation.[10]

Steele ran an investigation dubbed “Project Charlemagne”, which noted Russian interference in the domestic politics of FranceItalyGermanyTurkey, and the United Kingdom.[10] Steele concluded in April 2016 that Russia was engaged in an information warfare campaign with the goal of destroying the European Union.[10]

As we see, ABC News clearly tried to pull “a fast one.”As to other issues, and there are more questions than answers, what were the aspects of this relationship?  Did it last beyond Ivanka’s 2009 marriage to Jared Kushner, certainly a meek and colorless character when compared with Steele?Past that, there is conjecture about Ivanka herself.  Her appearance, as the “White Queen,” pure wasp, purely Nordic in nature, wasn’t how she was born.

Above a very attractive teenage Ivanka Trump, whose appearance more reflects Eastern European or Jewish looks, certainly a dangerous area of discussion.  Her dramatic transformation into what she is today, and this was a very attractive young woman to begin with, does conceal ethnic markets.

As to whether this is significant is conjecture, was Ivanka marketed like a Trump product or, as the ABC story might suggest, an ingrained loyalty to Israel that pre-existed her conversion, one that may well explain who she represented when she met Steele.

Were one to look at the woman she is today, the idea of her being married to Jared Kusher, an androgynous character steeped in gender speculation, doesn’t easily compute.

What is clear is that these questions will remain unanswered but, looking back at 2007, what does it mean to the US if Donald Trump’s daughter who has been included in so many negotiations and has access to so many national secrets is, as ABC alludes, an intelligence officer for a nation with, at best a “mixed agenda?”

Then we look at the Steel Dossier itself, available below in full text.

What we know:

Christopher Steele, author of the much-maligned dossier on Donald Trump is now at the center of a much bigger story.

The Trump Russia Dossier as… 

by Grant Stern on Scribd

If Steele and Ivanka were close, why didn’t Steele go to Ivanka and give her a “heads up” about what he had been hired to do, and that is virtually destroying her father.

Another question, what if Ivanka had communicated with Steele during this period?  Could she be a source?  Who would benefit?  Might she have reason to hate her father

Let’s also note that Ivanka kept her relationship with Steele secret, a relationship that would have to have been disclosed to the FBI when she was interviewed for a security clearance to work in the White House.
This file would have been available to Mueller investigators and should have raised a huge “red flag” over what has been the very strange choice by Donald Trump to use his daughter as an emissary so many times or, as he did in 2017, attack Syria with cruise missiles on her advice.

From NBC News:

“Donald Trump’s decision to bomb Syria was influenced by his daughter, Ivanka, being “heartbroken and outraged” at the country’s alleged chemical weapons attack, one of the president’s sons told a British newspaper.

The president launched 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian government airbase he alleged was involved in a chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of civilians last week.

Trump’s 33-year-old son, Eric, told The Daily Telegraph on Monday that the strike was influenced in part by Ivanka, who he said was “heartbroken and outraged” by the chemical attack.”
MORE: Judge throws out a defamation lawsuit against Christopher Steele over the dossier
More from the ABC News story:

“ABC News first learned of the contacts between Ivanka Trump and Steele a year ago, but has only recently been able to view some of their communications.

Members of Trump’s family have never publicly discussed the interactions – and their past meetings with Steele went unmentioned as the Trumps leveled charges against the British intelligence expert in the wake of the controversial and hotly disputed memos he wrote about President Trump.

Christopher Steele, the former MI6 agent who set up Orbis Business Intelligence and compiled a dossier on Donald Trump, in London, March 7, 2017.Christopher Steele, the former MI6 agent who set up Orbis Business Intelligence and compiled a dossier on Donald Trump, in London, March 7, 2017.Victoria Jones/AP, FILE

ABC News sought comment from Ivanka Trump through her attorney but has not received a reply. Both Steele’s attorney and a representative for Steele’s firm, Orbis Business Intelligence declined to comment. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The inspector general’s report, which was released publicly today, briefly references these past dealings. In his discussion with investigators from the inspector general’s office, Steele cited his past cordial relationship with Ivanka Trump as a reason to believe that he was not biased against her.

‘If anything he was ‘favorably disposed’ towards the Trump family before he began his research,’ he told the investigators, the report says.”


Conclusion

Were they more than “friends?”  There is no reason to assume otherwise.

Was Ivanka recruited by the Mossad because her father or because of some other reason, something in the background of the Trump family itself, a family that is now largely Jewish and fanatical supporters of Israel and her policies, policies that stray from American interests and international law as demonstrated time and time again in front of the UN General Assembly?

Steele’s dossier says that Trump was “turned” by Russia due to blackmail and is working against the United States.  This other story makes one wonder who controls Russia as well.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Ivanka an ‘Israeli’ Spy? Did she help write the ‘Pissgate” dossier?

Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING

December 2019
M T W T F S S
« Nov   Jan »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031