A Textbook Case of Genocide

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Raz Segal
JEWISH CURRENTS

Resize text-+=

A Textbook Case of Genocide

Israel has been explicit about what it’s carrying out in Gaza. Why isn’t the world listening?

First run on October 13, 2023

Destruction in Gaza July 27, 2014. Photo by Oxfam / flickr. The current massacre is not the first one.

ON FRIDAY, Israel ordered the besieged population in the northern half of the Gaza Strip to evacuate to the south, warning that it would soon intensify its attack on the Strip’s upper half. The order has left more than a million people, half of whom are children, frantically attempting to flee amid continuing airstrikes, in a walled enclave where no destination is safe. As Palestinian journalist Ruwaida Kamal Amer wrote today from Gaza, “refugees from the north are already arriving in Khan Younis, where the missiles never stop and we’re running out of food, water, and power.” The UN has warned that the flight of people from the northern part of Gaza to the south will create “devastating humanitarian consequences” and will “transform what is already a tragedy into a calamitous situation.” Over the past week, Israel’s violence against Gaza has killed more than 1,800 Palestinians, injured thousands, and displaced more than 400,000 within the strip. And yet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu promised today that what we have seen is “only the beginning.”

Israel’s campaign to displace Gazans—and potentially expel them altogether into Egypt—is yet another chapter in the Nakba, in which an estimated 750,000 Palestinians were driven from their homes during the 1948 war that led to the creation of the State of Israel. But the assault on Gaza can also be understood in other terms: as a textbook case of genocide unfolding in front of our eyes. I say this as a scholar of genocide, who has spent many years writing about Israeli mass violence against Palestinians. I have written about settler colonialism and Jewish supremacy in Israel, the distortion of the Holocaust to boost the Israeli arms industry, the weaponization of antisemitism accusations to justify Israeli violence against Palestinians, and the racist regime of Israeli apartheid. Now, following Hamas’s attack on Saturday and the mass murder of more than 1,000 Israeli civilians, the worst of the worst is happening.

The UN Genocide Convention lists five acts that fall under its definition. Israel is currently perpetrating three of these in Gaza: “1. Killing members of the group. 2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group. 3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” The Israeli Air Force, by its own account, has so far dropped more than 6,000 bombs on Gaza, which is one of the most densely populated areas in the world—almost as many bombs as the US dropped on all of Afghanistan during record-breaking years of its war there. Human Rights Watch has confirmed that the weapons used included phosphorous bombs, which set fire to bodies and buildings, creating flames that aren’t extinguished on contact with water. This demonstrates clearly what Gallant means by “act accordingly”: not targeting individual Hamas militants, as Israel claims, but unleashing deadly violence against Palestinians in Gaza “as such,” in the language of the UN Genocide Convention. Israel has also intensified its 16-year siege of Gaza—the longest in modern history, in clear violation of international humanitarian law—to a “complete siege,” in Gallant’s words. This turn of phrase that explicitly indexes a plan to bring the siege to its final destination of systematic destruction of Palestinians and Palestinian society in Gaza, by killing them, starving them, cutting off their water supplies, and bombing their hospitals.

It’s not only Israel’s leaders who are using such language. An interviewee on the pro-Netanyahu Channel 14 called for Israel to “turn Gaza to Dresden.” Channel 12, Israel’s most-watched news station, published a report about left-leaning Israelis calling to “dance on what used to be Gaza.” Meanwhile, genocidal verbs—calls to “erase” and “flatten” Gaza—have become omnipresent on Israeli social media. In Tel Aviv, a banner reading “Zero Gazans” was seen hanging from a bridge.

Indeed, Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza is quite explicit, open, and unashamed. Perpetrators of genocide usually do not express their intentions so clearly, though there are exceptions. In the early 20th century, for example, German colonial occupiers perpetrated a genocide in response to an uprising by the Indigenous Herero and Nama populations in southwest Africa. In 1904, General Lothar von Trotha, the German military commander, issued an “extermination order,” justified by the rationale of a “race war.” By 1908, the German authorities had murdered 10,000 Nama, and had achieved their stated goal of “destroying the Herero,” killing 65,000 Herero, 80% of the population. Gallant’s orders on October 9th were no less explicit. Israel’s goal is to destroy the Palestinians of Gaza. And those of us watching around the world are derelict in our responsibility to prevent them from doing so.

in less than a week.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Raz Segal is an associate professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Stockton University and the endowed professor in the study of modern genocide.

News 2739

If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
YOU know what we are talking about.

Things to keep in mind...

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. Meanwhile, fascist ideology and blatant lies also permeate the consciousness of most people in the West. Those in the comfortable top 10%, the "PMCs" (Professional Managerial Class), are especially vulnerable. They support and disseminate such ideas. They are the executors of the actual ruling class' orders, those in the 0.001%, who remain largely invisible. The PMCs are the political class, the media whores, the top military brass, some people in academia, and the "national security/foreign policy" industry honchos. Push back against these unethical, contaminated people with the truth while you can.

AND...where the US Government is at:

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Are there bounds to collective West’s cynicism? (Apparently not).

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Stephen Karganovic
STRATEGIC CULTURE FOUNDATION

Resize text-+=

There is a question that needs to be put to the leadership of Ecuador. The next time there is a coup in their country and, as deposed Latin American officials regularly do, they also take refuge in a foreign embassy, after the appalling precedent they foolishly established the other day how safe will they be from their pursuers? That is a matter they should be pondering gravely right now аs they contemplate the ruins of international law and the Vienna Convention following the ill-conceived incursion and abduction on foreign sovereign territory instigated on their orders in their own capital. But we do not intend to do their legal and intellectual work for them because this column is devoted to another topic.

In the United Nations General Assembly, a nasty resolution is being prepared to cement the narrative about the fabricated July 1995 genocide in Srebrenica. The resolution’s purpose is three-fold: to officially endorse the dubious findings of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, to condemn “Srebrenica genocide denial,” and to mandate that henceforth July 11 should be observed as the international Srebrenica genocide day, akin one supposes to Women’s Day on March 8.

The last such attempt to force Srebrenica down the international community’s throat was in 2015. It was sponsored unashamedly in the Security Council of the United Nations by the Perfidious Albion, the godfather of all genocides this side of antiquity, stretching from North America to India and with everywhere in between, not forgetting the unhappy Emerald Isle of Ireland, of course. That slimy attempt to tar an entire nation, the Serbs in this particular case, by sullying them collectively with the most heinous crime known in international law failed only because it was vetoed by Russia. The authors of the pending resolution assume that the clever change of venue to the General Assembly, where there are no inconvenient procedural obstacles to their machinations, should do the trick, thus avoiding a repetition of the 2015 failure. They hope that cajoling the usual assortment of obscure Pacific island statelets and subservient “allies” drawn from the four corners of the Earth should suffice to produce a respectable General Assembly vote in support of their Srebrenica resolution. It matters not to them that most of those strong-armed and blackmailed governments have no stake whatsoever in this matter and that their public for the most part have not even heard of Srebrenica.

The fact that such a resolution will have been sponsored by Germany and Rwanda, though of course it was conceived and written not by them but by their controllers, encapsulates the perfidy. Germany embodies genocide running into millions, and not just in Europe but in Southwest Africa as well. Rwanda, an obedient African protectorate of the collective West, exemplifies racially motivated mass killing on a ghastly scale in the 1990s, covertly managed by Western special services but brilliantly deconstructed and exposed by Prof. Edward Herman and David Peterson. The fact that these two governments tainted by genocide were tasked in the UN by their hegemonic masters to table a resolution on the subject of genocide, to morally compromise a nation that historically has itself been a victim a genocide, speaks volumes about the cynicism of this sick project’s degenerate authors.

The false narrative of “Srebrenica genocide” has been picked apart relentlessly over the last decade and a half, knocking out every one of its propaganda props. As Dr. Efraim Zuroff, director of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Jerusalem, said a few days ago “according to the original definition of genocide, which holds that it is an attempt to destroy an entire ethnic group, the crime committed in Srebrenica cannot be an act of genocide. Serbian forces let go all women and children before executing the men, some of whom were combatants. I do not consider the General Assembly of the United Nations to be competent to determine whether or not an event was genocide.”

The evidence strongly supports Zuroff’’s position. Over twenty years after the event, there is no proof that Serbian forces had the required special intent (dolus specialis) to exterminate the population of Srebrenica, not to speak of their coreligionists throughout Bosnia. As Zuroff observed, the reproductive part of the population was unharmed, which directly contradicts the existence of genocidal intent. Furthermore, autopsy reports show that there were remains of a total of 1,920 individuals in Srebrenica mass graves, which is less than a quarter of the wildly inflated official figure of 8,000 victims. Pattern of injury analysis reveals that even of those about 70% died of a variety of causes, mainly combat injuries, and that at most about 800 exhibited injuries consistent with execution.

That number is roughly equivalent to the number of Serbian civilians that were killed in raids on surrounding Serbian villages carried out from the UN protected enclave of Srebrenica during the three years that preceded its capture.

It was also established, on the basis of survivor statements, that in the period immediately following the Serbian forces’ entry into Srebrenica, on July 11, 1995, fierce combat continued with the 28th Division of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as it was breaking out of Serbian encirclement. That resulted in several thousand combat deaths that were entirely legitimate under international law and therefore could not be attributed to “genocide”. However, collective West propaganda and the illegal Tribunal at the Hague that was set up specifically to reach preordained legal and factual conclusions about the war in Bosnia were happy to conflate combat casualties with real victims in order to fix the 8,000 victims figure that they regarded as the psychological minimum for the allegation of genocide to appear credible.

The politically motivated Srebrenica resolution is due to be introduced on the General Assembly’s agenda toward the end of April, 2024. Coincidentally, that also happens to be a date of great significance to a real genocide, commemorated at roughly the same time. On April 22, 1945, just days before the defeat of the Axis and the end of World War II, the few surviving prisoners of the Jasenovac concentration camp in Nazi-aligned “Independent State of Croatia,” called by Israeli historian Gideon Greif the “Auschwitz of the Balkans,” staged a rebellion, with a handful managing to escape. It is estimated that between 1941 and 1945 in Jasenovac about 600,000 victims, Serbs, Jews and Roma, perished for reasons of their race or ethnicity.

And yet this anniversary of a real genocide is of no interest to the German government. It chose pointedly to ignore it when signing on to the baseless Srebrenica resolution. If it had a shred of honour and decency it would not have done so, regardless of the instructions of its Transatlantic overseers. The appalling details of the uninterrupted four- year butchery in Jasenovac are not in dispute, having horrified even hardened SS officers. It was regarded with disgust by the German commanding general in Zagreb Glaise von Horstenau and the top German diplomat in the Balkans, Hermann Neubacher. The Jasenovac death camp was run and atrocities there were committed by the Croat equivalent of Ukrainian Banderites, that is correct, but under international law, as the occupying power, it is Germany that had overall responsibility to ensure the safety of civilians and to prevent their indiscriminate extermination.

By choosing not to interfere with the bestiality of its local Croatian satellites, instead of preventing Germany in fact facilitated those outrages.

We now have a clear answer to the question in the title of this text. No, there seem to be no limits to their contemptible cynicism and hypocrisy. If Germany were truly looking for a way to assuage its conscience and to demonstrate repentance, it would be submitting in the General Assembly a resolution to condemn one of the authentic genocides, in Jasenovac and throughout Croatia during World War II, in the perpetration of which it played at least a facilitating role. It would not be virtue signalling with the politically concocted “genocide” in Srebrenica, made up out of thin air to humiliate and bully a proud nation that refuses to submit to the dictates of the collective West (of which Germany is a subservient member) today, just as its grandparents had refused to bow to Hitler and his minions in 1941.

Sadly, whatever Germany and its Transatlantic handlers ultimately do, it would be naïve to expect that they will receive their proper comeuppance from the cowardly Serbian government. That government will not, as it should and is perfectly entitled to do, introduce in the General Assembly its own resolution calling on the world community to recognise and condemn the genocidal extermination of the Serbian people in Jasenovac and elsewhere in Banderite Croatia during World War II.

In fact, it is a matter of great interest to see whether in fear of its Western masters that miserable government will even dare to vote against occupied Germany’s and pathetic Rwanda’s resolution in the General Assembly, blaming the Serbian people for the fictitious “genocide” in Srebrenica.

After all, in November 2022 the Serbian government instructed their representative in the UN to shamefully abstain on the resolution condemning the glorification of Nazism, racism, and xenophobia, evils from which their own people had suffered immeasurably. So on the upcoming Srebrenica resolution, all bets are off.

Stephen Karganovic
Is President of the Srebrenica Historical Project

News 2739

If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
YOU know what we are talking about.

Things to keep in mind...

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. Meanwhile, fascist ideology and blatant lies also permeate the consciousness of most people in the West. Those in the comfortable top 10%, the "PMCs" (Professional Managerial Class), are especially vulnerable. They support and disseminate such ideas. They are the executors of the actual ruling class' orders, those in the 0.001%, who remain largely invisible. The PMCs are the political class, the media whores, the top military brass, some people in academia, and the "national security/foreign policy" industry honchos. Push back against these unethical, contaminated people with the truth while you can.

AND...where the US Government is at:

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

It’s Capitalism, Stupid! Universities Are Making Billions Gatekeeping Your Meds

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Helen Santoro
THE LEVER

Resize text-+=

Universities Are Making Billions Gatekeeping Your Meds

The University of California has raked in a previously undisclosed $1.6 billion from Xtandi sales, and now doesn’t want the government lowering exorbitant drug costs.

UCLA Powell Library (Wikipedia)

Research universities, many of them public, have joined forces with pharmaceutical companies and Wall Street firms to fight new government efforts to curtail out-of-control drug prices, saying the regulations could stifle innovation.

But these universities are also likely concerned that drug-price reforms would hamper their profits. Case in point: the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) has quietly reaped more than a billion dollars in payouts from Xtandi, a lifesaving cancer drug that it developed with the help of government funding and now costs U.S. patients $200,000 a year.

The university is among those working to block the government from lowering the cost of prescription drugs like Xtandi that have been developed with taxpayer money.

Since this first-of-its-kind prostate cancer drug was approved for use in 2012, UCLA has received $1.6 billion in royalty fees, patent income, and reimbursement payments thanks to its development of Xtandi, according to information obtained through the California Public Records Act by The Lever.

As the price of Xtandi increases and demands mount to lower its cost, the public institution — which exists because of federal land grants and is supported by government funding — has seen its royalty fees grow substantially, increasing by $11.6 million from 2021 to 2022.

Wear Your Support

Check Out The Lever Store Now

These payouts are on top of the $520 million UCLA received in 2016 after selling some of its royalty rights — and suggest that UCLA has a vested interest in stopping new drug pricing reforms, thus allowing Xtandi’s price to reach ever higher.

“For UCLA, this has been the gift that keeps on giving,” said Robert Sachs, who was prescribed Xtandi after being diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer and petitioned government agencies to reduce the drug’s price.

While researchers deserve compensation for developing breakthrough medicines, experts say the opposition against even limited drug pricing reforms hurts patients and their access to lifesaving medications.

Last December, the Biden administration announced plans to use a long-standing federal law to lower the price of prescription drugs developed with taxpayer funds. The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 allows government agencies to “march in” and license brand-name drug patents to generic manufacturers to sell the medication at a more reasonable price.

In response, the University of California system — along with pharmaceutical giants, generic drugmakers, and venture capital firms — argued that march-in rights were not meant to address high drug prices and that doing so would stifle innovation.

The march-in provision “is not supported by the statute itself and the authors (Senators Bayh and Dole) have clarified that this is not the legislative intent,” the University of California wrote in a 2021 letter about these rights. “Any perceived possibility for misuse or added uncertainty on the interpretation of this provision will have significant harmful effects on the University’s ability to collaborate with or license federally funded inventions to an industry partner.”

Steve Knievel, an expert in policy matters affecting drug pricing and medicine access at the consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen, says this pushback is likely from universities’ academic technology transfer offices, which manage researchers’ intellectual property and partner with outside companies to commercialize inventions. These offices “see licensing of inventions made at universities to be a potential way to make some serious funds,” said Knievel.

More expensive drugs therefore lead to more money for the university. “Their concern is: If the drugs are cheaper, we get less in our royalty payments from the drug companies,” said economist Dean Baker, who cofounded the Center for Economic and Policy Research think tank.

TILL WHEN ARE WE GOING TO FALL FOR THIS OLD B.S.? "In response, the University of California system — along with pharmaceutical giants, generic drugmakers, and venture capital firms — argued that march-in rights were not meant to address high drug prices and that doing so would stifle innovation."

In response to a request for comment, UCLA Health’s Senior Director of Communications Phil Hampton wrote in an email that, as noted in the university’s 2016 news release, “UCLA is using some of the revenue to support undergraduate scholarships and graduate student fellowships. In addition, inventors and Howard Hughes Medical Institute receive a share of the proceeds.”

“Unreasonable, And Indeed Outrageous”

The research that laid the groundwork for Xtandi came about in the early 2000s, thanks to grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S. Army. UCLA chemist Michael Jung designed a molecule called enzalutamide, known commercially as Xtandi. With the help of then-UCLA professor of medicine Charles Sawyers, the two discovered that the molecule can block cell absorption of androgens — a group of hormones that includes testosterone and fuel prostate cancer cell growth.

In 2005, UCLA licensed three Xtandi patents to the biopharmaceutical company Medivation, which later entered into a global agreement with Japan-based Astellas Pharma to develop and commercialize the drug. In 2012, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the drug, and the pill, which is very effective at slowing prostate cancer growth, is now taken by hundreds of thousands of patients worldwide. In 2016, the pharmaceutical behemoth Pfizer spent $14 billion to acquire Medivation, adding Xtandi to its ever-growing cancer-drug roster.

Now, global sales of Xtandi by Pfizer and Astellas Pharma are $5 billion each year. The U.S. market, where Xtandi costs $136.50 per 40-milligram pill, accounts for roughly half of those sales. In 2022, Medicare and Medicaid spent $2.6 billion on the drug.

since January 2022. In Japan, where Astellas Pharma is based, the drug costs less than a fifth of the U.S. wholesale price.

As the first medication of its kind on the market, Xtandi’s exorbitantly high price set a precedent for other androgen-blocking prostate cancer drugs, said Sachs. For example, darolutamide, made by the Finnish pharmaceutical company Orion Corporation and drug giant Bayer, costs $14,303 for 120 tablets.

This is an exploitation of the “weak response of the United States to excessive pricing of drugs,” advocacy groups wrote in a 2016 letter to the NIH, Department of Defense, and Department of Health and Human Services requesting that the government use march-in rights to reduce Xtandi’s cost.

“In our opinion, it is unreasonable, and indeed outrageous, that prices are higher in the United States than in foreign countries, for a drug invented at UCLA using federal government grants,” the groups wrote in the letter.

The NIH and Department of Defense rejected the march-in request, and prices for Xtandi subsequently increased, according to James Love, director of Knowledge Ecology International, who has been following the march-in fight for years.

During this time, a Canadian pharmaceutical company also offered to sell generic versions of Xtandi to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for $3 per pill (the Medicare price at the time was $69.41 per pill). Andy Slavitt, then-administrator of CMS which runs all federal health care programs, turned down the offer.

March-in supporters picked up the fight again starting in 2019, when individuals with prostate cancer, including Sachs, petitioned the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Health and Human Services to grant march-in rights for Xtandi patents. Nineteen organizations and 25 members of Congress also urged the Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra to take action.

However, these requests were once again denied. According to a 2023 letter from the NIH, the “practical application” of Xtandi, based on the U.S. Code for patent law, is “evidenced by the ‘manufacture, practice, and operation’ of the invention and the invention’s ‘availability to and use by the public,’” Therefore, the agency claimed that the University of California “does not fail the requirement for bringing Xtandi to practical application, as the drug is manufactured and on the market in the manner of other prescription drugs.”

definition of “practical application” under the U.S. Code on patent law also states that “to the extent permitted by law or Government regulations,” the invention must be made “available to the public on reasonable terms,” although the NIH did not mention this qualification in their letter.

“What the Biden Administration is saying is that charging U.S. residents three to six times more than any other high-income country is reasonable,” Love wrote in a post about the NIH’s rejection of march-in rights.

This rejection hasn’t stopped efforts to reduce Xtandi prices: On April 9, Knowledge Ecology International and other groups sent a letter to CMS demanding the Biden administration leverage their authority provided under patent law to “authorize qualified companies to make and sell generic versions of” Xtandi.

The authors noted that nine drug manufacturers, many of which are based in India, are currently making generic versions of Xtandi, and some of these drugmakers have tentative approval from the FDA to sell their medication in the U.S.

A Billion-Dollar Jackpot

Meanwhile, UCLA has earned millions of dollars in payouts — mostly royalty fees — from Xtandi sales each year. From 2012, when the drug was approved by the FDA, until the summer of 2023, quarterly royalty payments grew from $564,000 to $48 million, an 85-fold increase, according to data reviewed by The Lever.

In 2016, the university also sold a portion of the royalty rights it co-owned for $1.1 billion to Royalty Pharma, a company that purchases biopharmaceutical royalties to collect future payouts. Of this amount, UCLA received $520 million, which was put into a portfolio anticipated to bring in “approximately $60 million annually until 2027,” according to a university news release.

The remainder of the proceeds was split between the inventors, including Jung and Sawyers, and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Maryland, where Sawyers also worked when the drug was invented.

These payouts are on top of the billions of dollars the University of California system receives from federal, state, and local governments. During the 2022-2023 school year, the 10 universities in the system were awarded $5.5 billion in public money, with UCLA receiving more than a billion dollars.

Got A News Tip?

Know of powerful people who need to be held accountable? Have you stumbled upon something fishy? Have you gotten your hands on documents that need to be scrutinized?

Send Us Your Tip

Despite such massive benefits from taxpayer money, the University of California system continues to try to block the government’s use of march-in rights, spending $1.2 million lobbying on the Bayh-Dole Act, intellectual property and technology transfer issues, and other matters last year, according to lobbying records.

The University of California, along with Astellas Pharma and Pfizer, even went as far as to sue an India-based drugmaker in 2022 that wanted to sell generic versions of Xtandi — alleging that these generics would infringe one of the drug’s patents. Last year, the Indian drug manufacturer dropped all claims for the Xtandi patent.

Profits should have been taken out of the healthcare system a long time ago. But here we are, still mired in this idiotic and exploitative swamp. —Editor

This comes after the academic institution signed a landmark set of ethical licensing guidelines in 2007 that said universities should find “a way to share the fruits of what we learn globally, at sustainable and affordable prices” and “construct licensing arrangements in ways that ensure that these underprivileged populations have low- or no-cost access to adequate quantities of these medical innovations.”

Academic Opposition

UCLA is not the only research university opposing march-in rights. Others including Stanford University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have also submitted comments to the government decrying the fair drug pricing initiative.

March-in rights “will result in disincentivizing private sector partners from licensing advancements made through federally funded research,” a group of educational associations, including the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, wrote in response to the draft march-in rights framework proposed by the National Institute of Standards of Technology last December. “We recommend a complete and timely rescission of this framework by the administration.”

The Bayh-Dole Coalition, a group of research universities and other scientific organizations, also staunchly opposes march-in rights, writing in their comment that the “draft framework is being justified as a weapon to lower drug costs. It is no such thing,” and the “proposed framework violates both the letter and spirit of the Bayh-Dole Act and would cause untold harm to American companies, workers, and consumers if implemented.”

Although the Bayh-Dole Act is pivotal in helping universities license their inventions to the private sector, the creation of blockbuster drugs like Xtandi — which march-in rights were designed to address — is very rare.

Follow us on Apple News and Google News to make sure you see our stories first, and to help make sure others see our breaking news as well.

“There have been really some big moneymakers where the university gets a small licensing fee on some key patents on a blockbuster drug that can bring in some serious revenue,” said Knievel from Public Citizen. However, he added, “Most of the university grants don’t lead to those sorts of inventions. It’s sort of like they are playing the lottery.”

A few other academic institutions have hit the drug jackpot. In 2007, Northwestern University invented the pain and epilepsy medication Lyrica that was commercialized by Pfizer and resulted in a $700 million payout from Royalty Pharma — the same company that bought Xtandi royalty rights from UCLA. That same year, New York University hauled in $650 million from Royalty for its arthritis drug Remicade.

Because of how unusual it is to create a successful drug — and the many regulations involved — Knievel said the government’s march-in rights would only be used in rare circumstances. So he doesn’t believe the drug reforms would stifle innovation or destroy the pharmaceutical industry.

“If we’re only asking for some modicum of fairness, companies will retain the ability to be extremely profitable, we’ll still get plenty of new drugs that we need,” said Knievel.

Become A Supporter
Each day, The Lever ’s staff tirelessly investigates, researches, writes, fact-checks, and edits stories that hold the powerful accountable in ways corporate media will not. All of that work is supported by our readers who become paid supporters.

As we head deeper into a critical election year, while so many journalists are being laid off and media outlets are closing, the work has never been more important.

Time and again, The Lever has shown that independent journalism empowered by everyday people, rather than billionaires and massive global corporations, can move the needle. We’ve seen our reporting lead to legislation being introduced in Congress, referenced in presidential speeches, and driving the national conversation across the political spectrum. Perhaps most importantly, our work provides you with the insights you need to be a truly informed citizen — so you can know where your effort is most needed.

If you are able, please click here now to become a paid supporter of The Lever and be a part of holding the powerful accountable.

News 2739

If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
YOU know what we are talking about.

Things to keep in mind...

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. Meanwhile, fascist ideology and blatant lies also permeate the consciousness of most people in the West. Those in the comfortable top 10%, the "PMCs" (Professional Managerial Class), are especially vulnerable. They support and disseminate such ideas. They are the executors of the actual ruling class' orders, those in the 0.001%, who remain largely invisible. The PMCs are the political class, the media whores, the top military brass, some people in academia, and the "national security/foreign policy" industry honchos. Push back against these unethical, contaminated people with the truth while you can.

AND...where the US Government is at:

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

RUSSIAGATE: NYT, FB & FBI Say Anti-Trump Site, Now Shutdown, Was Russian Effort to Help Trump Win

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

EDITED AND HOSTED BY THE GREANVILLE POST

By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News
THIS IS A REPOST. FIRST RUN ON 7 SEPT 2020

Dateline: September 4, 2020

This kind of development, long expected, given the broad daylight preparations by various parts of the imperialist establishment, but specifically spearheaded by the Democrat wing which has shown itself shamelessly Machiavellian in its alliance with the security apparatus, represents a major threat to the survival of free speech on the Internet, and in particular dissident sites such as this. Similar Orwellian acts are being seen in Europe, too, with arch hypocritical Britain, saddled with a rotten upper class that often outstrips its American counterpart, leading the charge in dismantling its own vaunted democracy. As veteran journalist Joe Lauria warns, "The takedown of PeaceData worryingly may be a pretext to go after legitimate 'homegrown' media as 'disinformation campaigns' if they do not conform to the Establishment narrative." Equally troubling, this new inquisition is grounded in a cynical falsehood. As Lauria points out, "Progressive views may be a threat to the Establishment but not to the security of the nation, which the Establishment continuously confuses itself with." Indeed.

The bottom line is that this may be just the dress rehearsal for full blown McCarthyism and worse, at a time when, on the edge of a World War 3 cataclysm— the world depends more desperately than ever on truthful and accurate, or, at least, genuinely honest communications. Please take full note of the implications, not just for us, but for you.—The Editor

A website that Facebook and Twitter banned and which they and The New York Times say was being financed from Russia to help President Donald Trump get re-elected, until it was shut down on Friday, published several articles harshly critical of Trump, including one that called him “unstable and unhinged.”

The site, PeaceData (peacedata.net), also ran articles critical of Democratic nominee Joe Biden and other Democrats.

It was the site’s content, which critiqued both Establishment parties, more than its alleged financing from Russia, that appears to have alarmed U.S. intelligence agencies, corporate media and social media giants, leading to the site shutting itself down.

reported:

“The Russian group that interfered in the 2016 presidential election is at it again, using a network of fake accounts and a website set up to look like a left-wing news site, Facebook and Twitter said on Tuesday.

The disinformation campaign by the Kremlin-backed group, known as the Internet Research Agency, is the first public evidence that the agency is trying to repeat its efforts from four years ago and push voters away from the Democratic presidential candidate, Joseph R. Biden Jr., to help President Trump.

Intelligence agencies have warned for months that Russia and other countries were actively trying to disrupt the November election, and that Russian intelligence agencies were feeding conspiracy theories designed to alienate Americans by laundering them through fringe sites and social media.”

Twitter and Facebook acted after the Federal Bureau of Investigation tipped them off. The alleged “Russian operation” was first “detected by the National Security Agency,” the Times says. The FBI said it “provided information in this matter to better protect against threats to the nation’s security and our democratic processes.” (sic)

In other words, a very obscure left-wing website, critical of Trump and Biden, was chillingly deemed a “threat” to national security and democracy by America’s federal law enforcement agency.

Questions

PeaceData ran a rebuttal on Wednesday but questions remain about who ran the site. So far, Consortium News has been unable to obtain contact information for its listed editor, Jake Sullivan.

Misgivings about who ran this site, however, can co-exist with legitimate alarm about the combined attacks by the FBI, the Times and other corporate media on the political nature — and not the accuracy — of the published content. That presents the spectacle of a leading news outlet and two social media companies joining a state security agency in an effort to trample press freedom.

One headline of a PeaceData article that the Times cited as supporting Trump and white supremacist groups was headlined, “Boogaloo Movement: USA Far Right is Growing Thanks to Donald Trump.”

In later editions, the Times removed the reference to this particular article from the story, but its original inclusion raises questions about the diligence — and independence — of the paper’s work here.

The Times‘ reporters on the story did not appear to have read the article, whose contents are the exact opposite of the impression the Times was trying to create.

The PeaceData piece began:

“As of this writing, the United States is rocked with civil unrest due to racism and police violence, and the country continues to break records for the most cases of coronavirus. The unstable and unhinged president Donald Trump makes things far worse domestically and internationally with his inflammatory language and his disdain for science. As this occurs, a new, radical right-wing ‘movement’, one fueled at least in part by Trump’s racist rhetoric, has entered the U.S. This is known as the ‘Boogaloo’ movement, and while loosely organized, has as its goal civil war. Members tend to be gun enthusiasts, neo-Nazis and white supremacists.”

PeaceData also took on Trump over several other issues, including climate change, Covid-19, and immigration.

IRA Again

PeaceData was accused of being funded by the St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency, which the Times says “was very active in the 2016 presidential election, and a recent bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report detailed Russian interference in support of Mr. Trump’s election.” In fact, half of IRA’s Facebook ads were purchased after the 2016 election and half of those before the election supported Hillary Clinton, and the other half, Trump. The IRA spent about $100,000 on the ads, compared to the $6.5 billion spent by the Clinton and Trump campaigns.

“Now Facebook and Twitter are offering evidence of this meddling,” the fourth paragraph of the Times story begins, although nowhere in the rest of the article is any evidence presented. The Times says Facebook made its decision based on a report — which the Times does not link to — written by a company called Graphika.

While spotlighting PeaceData’s purported links to the Russian government, the Times fails to provide readers the same service when it comes to Graphika’s own official connections, in this case to the U.S. government.

Graphika describes itself as an:

“SAAS [software as a service] and managed services company. Our cutting-edge technology creates large-scale explorable maps of social media landscapes. Our in-depth analysis reveals meaningful insights to help clients and partners understand complex online networks and take decisive action.”

Graphika: Considers The Grayzone journalists as "Russian assets". Anyone to the left of Joe Biden is a suspect.

Among its clients are the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the U.S. Defense Department’s Minerva Initiative. Its report is peppered with intelligence jargon like, “we can conclude with high confidence.”

The Graphika report, linked here, claims, “The personas the network created masqueraded as left-wing journalists and editors.” This “network” consisting of the site and social media accounts, is supposedly run by IRA, a private company. Nowhere in the 38-page report does Graphika offer any evidence of IRA funding, such as wire transfers or linked bank accounts.

That didn’t stop Twitter from suspending five accounts linked to PeaceData because of “platform manipulation that we can reliably attribute to Russian state actors,” even though IRA has never been proven to be a state actor.

One-time home in St. Petersburg, Russia, of Internet Research Agency. (WikiMedia Commons)

Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted IRA officials in 2018 for supposedly interfering in the 2016 U.S. election. But the Department of Justice, after stalling on IRA lawyers’ demands for discovery, then dropped the case in March, arguing that the company sought to “weaponize” the documents they obtained. A federal judge had earlier ordered Mueller to stop referring to the IRA as a state actor.

The dropping of the 2018 case against the IRA is not mentioned in The New York Times account on Wednesday accusing the IRA of new allegations of electoral interference.

Political Content Attacked

Beyond the allegation that the IRA was paying for the website, Graphika, the Times (and othercorporate outlets), Facebook, Twitter and the FBI focused sharply on the political angle of the website.

“The Peace Data site appeared to be a more worrying example of ‘information laundering,‘ a more covert and potentially dangerous effort by Moscow,” reported the Times, which has itself made a habit of laundering anonymous U.S. intelligence disinformation — from WMD in Iraq to Russiagate.

“Russian intelligence agencies have used allies and operatives to place articles, including disinformation, into various fringe websites,” the Times said.

The Graphika report adds:

“In keeping with that identity, they [this alleged IRA “network” of Facebook pages and Twitter handles] published and shared articles about the race protests in the United States, accusations of foreign interference and war crimes committed by the U.S., corruption, and the suffering caused by capitalism. They particularly aimed their posts at progressive groups in the U.S. and UK and criticized both right-wing and center-left politicians while endorsing progressive and left-wing policies.”

Graphika seemed alarmed that on PeaceData’s Arabic-language site “some articles also attacked France in general and President Emmanuel Macron in particular, and accused them of an ‘imperialist’ approach toward Africa.” This is in line with the Times quoting Ben Nimmo, director of investigations at Graphika and an Atlantic Council fellow, as saying, “In terms of posting, they were clearly significantly left of the Biden-Harris campaign,” as if this were a threat to “national security” as the FBI contends.

PeaceData had a mix of original and republished articles, Graphika tells us, from publications such as The Grayzone, which Graphika smears as a “pro-Kremlin site.”

Troubled by Assange Reporting

Graphika also reported in a disapproving tone that PeaceData wrote stories favorable to imprisoned WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange:

“These articles systematically presented Assange and the leakers as victims of an oppressive system. Snowden, for example, was termed a ‘global hero,’ and Manning was labeled a ‘fighter against the concealment of the truth’ who was subjected to ‘police state viciousness.’ The court case against Assange was referred to as a ‘kangaroo court,’ ‘political persecution,’ and a ‘perceived international conspiracy.’ Assange himself was described as ‘rotting to death’ in a UK prison, the victim of ‘Starmer’s crusade against whistleblowing,’ and a victim of ‘mendacious and vindictive’ treatment by the UK legal system.

The PeaceData website also referenced WikiLeaks in its coverage of another issue: the chemical attacks on civilians in Douma, Syria, in April 2018.

On five occasions between December 2019 and May 2020, peacedata[.]net reproduced articles that alleged, based on Wikileaks leaks, that the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had doctored its report on the Douma attack. PeaceData’s decision to reproduce these reports is consistent with earlier Russian operations against the OPCW, notably the attempt by agents from Russian military intelligence to hack the OPCW in April 2018.”

Graphika generally runs down the progressive line of the site, pointing out that it was hostile to both Trump and Biden, which of course is a perfectly legitimate position to take. But there is apparently something nefarious about this, according to the Graphika report:

“There is no indication that the freelancers who wrote the articles were anything but sincere in their writing. However, in the context of an operation run by fake personas from Russia, the decision to espouse progressive positions and attack both center-left and right-wing politicians indicates an attempt to woo more left-wing audiences for future influence operations. This is consistent with the operation’s targeting of progressive Facebook groups, discussed below; it is also consistent with the original IRA’s attempt to depress support for then-Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton by infiltrating and influencing progressive audiences.”

This reduces journalism that rejects both Establishment parties to merely “an attempt to woo more left-wing audiences for future influence operations.”

To the extent that any publication, including The New York Times, tries to sway its audience to a particular point of view, it is engaging in an “influence operation.” Ever since someone put a chisel to a clay tablet or pen to paper the aim has been influence. But it’s never called an “operation” unless it’s to smear anti-Establishment journalism as an “intelligence operation” directed by a hostile, foreign power.

Fake Editors

“Jake Sullivan” from the now shutdown website PeaceData.

Though the Times says PeaceData hired “real Americans” to write for it, it also says the site “used personas with computer-generated images to create what looked like a legitimate news organization.”

PeaceData’s editors and contributors were listed with headshots before the site was abruptly shut down on Friday. Graphika contends their photos were computer-generated composites: “Graphika analyzed these profile pictures and concluded with high confidence that all six were created by the form of artificial intelligence known as Generative Adversarial Networks (GAN).”

Business Insider, which concludes Sullivan is not a real person, says it tried to contact him and received no reply. It claims that Sullivan’s image found on PeaceData’s site appears nowhere else on the internet except as a “customer” rating a Russian shipping company.

A TinEye reverse search by Consortium News turned up no examples of Sullivan’s PeaceData picture on the internet.

article contains a purported interview with an American freelancer who says he’s shocked to learn he’s been duped by the Russians. The writer’s name is not revealed and he is identified only as “John,” making it impossible to verify the authenticity of the interview.

It would be highly unethical behavior that should be condemned if indeed made-up persons posing as editors and contributors were presented to the public by whoever ran PeaceData.

It is disturbing and unacceptable if “Jake Sullivan” is not a real person, as well as if a publication is secretly financed — by anyone. Hiding the owners’ identity did not preserve credibility but undermined it by opening themselves to the U.S. intelligence-initiated attack.

In the end, the content of the website’s articles should be judged on their own merits.

“John” never said he was directed what to write about and said his articles were lightly edited. The Business Insider interviewer, Charles Davis, suggests almost insidiously to “John” that 80 percent of Peace Data’s content are genuinely progressive articles, while the rest is inserted as propaganda.

Davis tells “John”: “I’m going to speculate here, but sometimes [these sites] publish completely legit, solidly progressive commentary – 80% of it could be legit – and then there’s like that 20% that is ‘and this is why we must defend [Syrian dictator] Bashar al-Assad.’”

Here is the brief response that PeaceData published to the allegations against it on Wednesday:

“On September 1, 2020 The New York Times, Reuters, CNN and other corporate media sources published the articles slandering our independent news site and our authors. These articles claimed that PD is a Russian propaganda tool.

We’re shocked and appalled! We can proudly say that it’s an ugly lie. Our news site is created by the people and for the people to spread the word about peace and expose greedy corporate powers and warmongers all over the world. We’re convinced that corporate media and their puppet masters want to destroy our journalism and shut us up forever for speaking truth about them. Don’t believe a single word from them. They hate truth and want it to disappear. We won’t allow them to do it.”

Later on Wednesday PeaceData published a more lengthy rebuttal.

Limited Reach

The very small reach this website had also raises questions about why it was given so much attention by the NSA, the FBI and corporate media as a “threat” to national security.

“Despite their targeted efforts at audience building, they failed to gain significant traction, measured in likes, shares, and comments. Most of the network’s English-language posts achieved single-digit engagement figures,” Graphika said.

This is what the FBI calls a threat to American democracy.

Progressive views may be a threat to the Establishment but not to the security of the nation, which the Establishment continuously confuses itself with.

It may have been a shock to “John” to find out who his real employers may have been, but it had no bearing on the publication of his articles. If “John” is a real person, he appears to have succumbed to the relentless campaign to denigrate journalism (even his own) that critiques both Establishment wings as being part of a “foreign influence campaign.”

The Establishment does not want to be criticized. To protect itself, it deems legitimate criticism as being controlled by a hostile foreign power intent on undermining “democracy” — the name the Establishment gives to the lucrative game it plays and urgently needs to keep going amid growing social unrest in the United States.

This appears to have been yet another example of Establishment actors trying to deprive agency from dissident journalism in the United States, as if dissenting American writers cannot come to positions critical of the U.S. on their own.

The Times says PeaceData was “set up to look like a left-wing website.” In fact, regardless of who ran it, it is a left-wing website of the sort that questions both major parties. As it lied outside Establishment circles, it was marginalized and depicted as a destabilizing instrument of a foreign power by an Establishment media that thinks it alone possess the truth and the correct perspective.

Ominously, the Times ends its report warning that unnamed “researchers are also concerned about homegrown disinformation campaigns, and the latest Russian effort went to some lengths to appear like it was made in the United States.”

The takedown of PeaceData worryingly may be a pretext to go after legitimate “homegrown” media as “disinformation campaigns” if they do not conform to the Establishment narrative.

Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former UN correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and numerous other newspapers. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London and began his professional career as a stringer for The New York Times. He can be reached at joelauria@consortiumnews.com and followed on Twitter @unjoe .

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Gaza: The Strategic Imperative

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Michael Hudson
with
Ania K.

Resize text-+=

Gaza: The Strategic Imperative

By Michael Sunday, April 14, 2024 Interviews Middle East Permalink

PROF. MICHAEL HUDSON, THE TRUTH ABOUT THE DESTRUCTION OF GAZA. – Ania K

ANIA: Hello, everyone. Welcome back to my channel. Today I have with me for the fourth time, I’m still counting, a very, very special guest, one of the best professors in economics and financial analysts in the world. And I’m very glad we are reconnecting with Professor Hudson again.

I want to start this live stream with asking all of you to check all my links down below this live stream, because being on other platforms, especially nowadays, is very important. So you have my locals there, you have mailing lists, and every other link if you choose to support my work as well.

Also, Professor Hudson’s three links. You have the website (michael-hudson.com), Patreon (patreon.com/michaelhudson), and all the books that Professor Hudson has published so far, you can order. It’s all the way down below this live stream. I’m sure this video will bring you immense value, and I would like you to hit this like, because it helps other people to see it, since YouTube recommends videos with a lot of likes. Leave the comments and also share the video, because the knowledge that you will be hearing today, it’s priceless.

Welcome back, Professor Hudson. Thank you so much for joining me today for this conversation.

MICHAEL HUDSON: Thanks for having me back again.

ANIA: And I would like to say to the audience as well that this video is dedicated to what is taking place, especially in Gaza and Israel. Of course, we will address other countries related to this situation, but Professor Hudson has sent me a very in-depth email after our last live stream a week ago, also on Friday, and we actually decided after we ended that live stream to have this particular topic to be the main topic of this video. So, I give this to you, Professor Hudson, where would you like to start this conversation, please?

MICHAEL HUDSON: I think I should start with my own background, because 50 years ago, in 1974, I was working with the Hudson Institute, with Herman Kahn, and my colleagues there were a number of Mossad agents who were being trained. Uzi Arad was there, and he became the head of Mossad and is currently the main advisor to Benjamin Netanyahu.

So, all of what is happening today was discussed 50 years ago, not only with the Israelis, but with many of the U.S. defense people, because I was with the Hudson Institute, which was a national security agency, because I’d written Super Imperialism, and I was a balance of payments expert, and the Defense Department used my book Super Imperialism not as an expose, but a how-to-do-it book. And they brought me there as a specialist in the balance of payments. Herman brought me back and forth to the White House to meet with cabinet members and to discuss the balance of payments. He also brought me to the War College and to the Air Force think tanks.

So, all of what is happening now was described a long time ago, and Herman was known as a futurist. He was Dr. Strangelove in the movie. That was all based for him on his theories of atomic war, but he was also the main theorist behind Vietnam. And nobody seems to have noticed that what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank now is all based on what was the U.S. strategy during the Vietnam War. And it was based on the “strategic hamlets” idea, the fact that you could cut back, you could just divide all of Vietnam into little parts, having guards at all the transition points from one part to another. Everything that Israel is doing to the Palestinians in Gaza and elsewhere throughout Israel was all pioneered in Vietnam.

And Herman had me meet with some of the generals there to explain it. And I think I mentioned I flew to Asia twice with Uzi Arad. We had a chance to [get to] know each other very much. And I could see that the intention from the very beginning was to get rid of the Palestinians and indeed to use Israel as the basis for U.S. control of Near Eastern oil. That was the constant discussion of that from the American point of view. It was Israel as a part of the oil.

So, Herman’s analysis was on systems analysis. You define the overall aim and then you work backward. How do you do it? Well, you can see what the Israeli policy is today. First of all, you isolate the Palestinians and strategic hamlets. That’s what Gaza had already been turned into for the last 15 years. It’s been carved up into districts requiring electronic passes from one sector to another to go into Israel, to go to Jerusalem, or to go to Israel for jobs to work.

The aim all along has been to kill them. Or first of all, to make life so unpleasant for them that they’ll emigrate. That’s the easy way. Why would anyone want to stay in Gaza when what’s happening to them is what’s happening today? You’re going to leave. But if they don’t leave, you’re going to have to kill them, ideally by bombing because that minimizes the domestic casualties. Israel doesn’t want its soldiers to die any more than Americans do. So, the American form of war, as it was in Vietnam, is bombing them. You don’t want person-to-person contact because people fighting for their lives and liberty tend to be better fighters because for them it’s really essential. For the others, they’re just doing soldier’s work.

So, the genocide that you’re seeing today is an explicit policy, and that was a policy of the forefathers, the founders of Israel. The idea of a land without people was a land without Arabs in it, the land without non-Jewish people. That’s really what it meant. They were to be driven out starting even before the official funding of Israel, the first Nakba, the Arab Holocaust. And the two of the Israeli prime ministers were members of the Stern gang of terrorists. The terrorists became the rulers of Israel. They escaped from British jail and they joined to found Israel. So, what you’re seeing today is the final solution to this plan. And the founders of Israel were so obsessed with the Nazis, essentially, they wanted to do to them what they did to us, is how they explained it to people.

For the United States, what they wanted was the oil reserves in the Middle East. And again and again, I heard the phrase, ‘you’re our landed aircraft carrier in Israel’. Uzi Arad, the future Mossad head, would be very uncomfortable at this because he wanted Israel to be run by the Israelis. But they realized that for Israel to get by with the money that it needed for its balance of payments, it had to be in a partnership with the United States.

So, what you’re seeing today isn’t simply the work of one man, of Benjamin Netanyahu. It’s the work of the team that President Biden has put together. It’s the team of Jake Sullivan, the National Security Advisor, Lincoln, and the whole deep state, the whole neocon group behind them, Victoria Nuland, and everyone. They’re all self-proclaimed Zionists. And they’ve gone over this plan for essentially America’s domination of the Near East for decade after decade.

But as the United States learned in the Vietnam War, populations protest, and the U.S. population protested against the Vietnam War. What the Biden administration wants to avoid is the situation that President Johnson had in 1968. Any hotel, any building that he went to, to give a speech for his re-election campaign, there were crowds shouting, LBJ, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today? President Johnson had to take the servants entrance to get away from the press so that nobody would see what he was doing. And essentially, he went on television and resigned.

Well, to prevent this kind of embarrassment, and to prevent the embarrassment of journalists who were doing all this, Seymour Hersh described the [Mai Lai] massacre, and that helped inflame the opposition to Johnson. Well, President Biden, who’s approved Netanyahu’s plan, the first people you have to kill are the journalists. If you’re going to permit genocide, you have to realize that you don’t want the domestic U.S. population or the rest of the world to oppose the U.S. and Israel. You kill the journalists. And for the last, ever since the October 2nd Al-Aqsa event, you’ve had one journalist per week killed in Israel. That’s part of it.

The other people you don’t want, if you’re going to bomb them, you have to start by bombing the hospitals and all of the key centers. That also was part of the idea of the Vietnam War. How do you destroy a population? This was all worked out in the 1970s, when people were trying to use systems analysis to think, how do you work back and see what you need? And the idea, if you bomb a population, you can’t really hide that, even if you kill the journalists. How do you kill a population passively? So you minimize the visible bombing. Well, the line of least resistance is to starve them. And that’s been the Jewish, the Israeli policy since 2008.

You had a piece by Sarah Roy in the New York Review, citing a cable from 2008, from Tel Aviv to the embassy saying, as part of their overall embargo plan against Gaza, Israeli officials have confirmed to the embassy officials on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gaza economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge. Well, now they’re pushing it over the edge.

Amoral —even sociopathic—careerism is inherent in capitalist culture as America so eloquently proves.

And so Israel has been especially focusing after the journalists, after the hospitals, you bomb the greenhouses, you bomb the trees, you sink the fishing boats that have supplied food to the population. And then you aim at fighting the United Nations relief people.

And you’ve read, obviously, the whole news of the last week has been the attack on the seven food providers that were not Arabs. And this was, again, from a systems analyst point, this is exactly what the textbook says to do strategically. If you can make a very conspicuous bombing of aid people, then you will have other aid suppliers afraid to go, because they think, well, if these people, aid suppliers, are just shot at, then we would be too.

Well, the United States is fully behind this. And to help starve the Gazan people, Biden immediately, right after the ICJ finding of plausible genocide, withdrew all funding from the United Nations relief agencies. The idea, again, the hope was to prevent the United Nations from having the money to supply food.

So when the United States is now trying to blame one person, and Biden goes on a television recorded call with Netanyahu saying, please be humane when you’re dropping your bombs, do it in a humane way. That’s purely for domestic consumption. It’s amazing how nakedly hypocritical all this.

And ever since the Al-Aqsa Mosque was raided by Israeli settlers on October 2, leading to Hamas’s Al-Aqsa Flood retaliation on October 7, it was closely coordinated with the Biden administration. All the bombs have been dropped day after day, week after week, with the whole of the US. And Biden has said on a number of occasions, the Palestinians are enemies.

So I think I want to make it clear that this is not simply an Israeli war against Hamas. It’s an American-backed Israeli war. Each of them have their own objectives. Israel’s objective is to have a land without non-Jewish population. And America’s aim is to have Israel acting as the local coordinator, as it has been coordinating the work with ISIS and the ISIS commanders to turn them against targets provided by the United States.

Basically, that’s the duopoly that’s been created.

And I think Alastair Crooke has cited Trita Parsi, [the US-Iranian relations scholar], saying the objective really in all this, of Israel’s conflict and Biden’s acquiescence to it, is that Israel is engaged in a deliberate and systematic effort to destroy existing laws and norms about warfare. And that’s really it.

You have people, you have reporters, such as Pepe Escobar, saying that the United States is a chaos agent. But there’s a logic in this. The United States is looking forward to what it’s going to be doing in the Near East, in Ukraine, and especially in the China Sea and Taiwan. Looking forward, the United States says, how do we prevent other nations moving against us in the international court or suing or somehow putting sanctions against us? Israel is the test case, not simply for what’s happening there in Israel and Palestine itself, but against anything that the United States will be doing through the rest of the world.

That’s why the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., echoed by [Blinken] and other U.S. officials, said there’s no court of justice ruling against genocide, that it was a non-binding ruling. Well, of course it was binding, but it has no means of enforcement. And both [Blinken] and yesterday, the head of the army said, there is no genocide taking place in Gaza. Well, what that means is you have to go to a court, and that’s going to take years and years. And by the time the court case is over and there’s any judgment of reparations due, then you’re going to, by then the Gazans will all be dead. So the U.S. aim is to end the rule of international law that is why the United Nations was founded in 1945.

And in fact, this international law goes way back to 1648 with the peace of Westphalia in Germany to end the 30 years war. All the European nations agreed not to interfere with the internal affairs of other countries. Well, that also was part of the United Nations principle.

And yet you have the United States explicitly advocating regime change in other countries, and most specifically in Russia and throughout the Middle East. So if you can end the whole kind of rule of law, then there’s really no alternative to the United States rules-based order, which means we can do whatever we want, chaos.

And if you look at what’s happening in Gaza is facilitating a transition from a orderly world of the United Nations to chaos, then you’re going to understand basically what the whole, the big picture, the long range picture that’s been put in place really over a series of decades. That’s why the United States, and the United States has no plan B. It only has the plan A to do this. It’s not taking into account the counter reactions and the feedback. Maybe we can discuss that a little later. I’d better leave the questions up to you.

ANIA: Thank you. You actually have already answered many of my questions in that intro, but I want to ask you this now. I will jump a little bit now. I have a question about something that you wrote to me in your email.

I believe looking at many, many situations that are taking place in the world, that sometimes all you really need to do is to follow the money and it will give you a lot of answers. So as you said in your email that, let me check, where is it? The Israeli developers already are planning to turn Gaza into luxury beachfront properties.

So let me ask you here, Professor Hudson, What is really the main goal for Israel’s existence? And in this case, is this really about their luxurious properties, oil? What else is this region really about? Why is it so crucial?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, it’s not just about beach properties. It’s what’s off the beach, the gas, the natural gas that they’ve discovered right offshore the Mediterranean that belongs to Gaza. So the Israelis are after the gas.

But your basic question, you’d sent me a list of questions you were going to go through. And I think if you keep to that sequence, it’s good. What you’re really asking is, you know, what’s the main goal for Israel’s existence? And I think if people don’t really, their sense of justice is so strong that they can’t believe what the original goal was. And the initial goal in the 19th century was formed in a period where Europe was anti-Semitic. The most anti-Semitic part of all was Ukraine. If you read Leon Trotsky’s autobiography of growing up in Odessa, he described the pogroms there. And so the Zionists, the first wave of Zionists, were looking for how can the Jewish people escape from this anti-Semitism.

Here’s the problem. By 1947, when Israel was formed, anti-Semitism was passé. Most Jews in the United States, certainly who I grew up with, they were all assimilated. Of course, they had well wishes for Israel. There was very little talk of the Arabs. But you had two arms of Judaism.

The one arm were the people who remembered with a vengeance what was done for them against them in Ukraine and Russia, and especially by Hitler and the Holocaust. They wanted to be separate and to have just to be protected.

But most of the Jewish population in America and Europe was thoroughly assimilated. And the last thing they wanted was to be separate. They wanted just the opposite. They wanted anti-Semitism to end.

But the Zionists who were in charge of Israel, the Stern Gang leaders, were obsessed with the old antagonisms. And in a way, they were obsessed with Nazism and said, well, we want to do to them what they did to us.

And again, the idea of a land without a people meant a land— we intend to make Israel into a land without non-Jewish people. That’s what a land without people, their slogan, meant. And from the very beginning, they started by driving Arabs out of Palestine, destroying their olive trees, destroying their orchards, taking their houses, and just killing them. That’s why the English threw them in jail before turning around and said, well, it’s true that we’ve thrown all the leaders in jail, but let’s recognize Israel and make Israel a whole country to do what these leaders that we were before throwing in jail were doing.

ANIA: Thank you.

You said also in your email that ISIS is part of America’s foreign legion. Can you please elaborate on that?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, ISIS was organized originally to fight in Afghanistan against the Russians. And al-Qaeda, which was the parent of ISIS, was simply the roster of people who were willing to fight under the U.S. command.

Well, part of al-Qaeda turned against America on 9-11, but most, especially the Sunni followers of Wahhabi theology, were very eager to fight against the Shiites. Islam is divided into two parts, the Sunni Islam of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Republics, and much of the Near East, and the Shiites from Iran and maybe half of Iraq and parts of Syria also.

So you had these two sectarian groups fighting each other, and the United States provided the funding and the organization to them and essentially delegated to Israel much of the organization of organizing ISIS to fight against Assad, to fight against whomever the United States designated as our enemies, meaning we want to take their oil lands. America has taken Iraqi oil and won’t leave, is taking Syrian oil and won’t leave.

So essentially, the U.S. has used ISIS to fight against all of the Shiites on the theory that the Shiite Islam is all controlled by Iran, and they want to essentially wipe out the Shiites as they’re doing in Gaza, even though I think the Palestinians are mainly Sunni, but you should think of the ISIS as America’s foreign legion. They’ve hired them, they pay them, and they recruit from them.

You’ve just seen in what happened in Russia from the Ukrainians, Oregon recruited Sunni terrorists from Tajikistan. You’ve seen the United States trying to use ISIS to recruit, to fight in Russia’s southern periphery in Central Asia and to fight in the Uyghur territories of Xinjiang in Western China. They’re using ISIS to try to essentially attack the integrity of China, Russia, and Syria and any other area where the United States wants a regime change to put in the usual client oligarchy.

ANIA: So interesting, and they sell it under the description that this is the enemy and terrorist, and they are founding it. And the public is still buying this, Professor Hudson. How is this possible?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, this is hypocritical. Everybody throughout the world is appalled by the cruelty and the barbarism of ISIS. The United States is not going to come right out and say, hey, that’s us that they’re fighting. We’re directing ISIS from the presidential office. We love ISIS.

Well, Biden loves ISIS, and Blinken loves ISIS, and the entire neocons, the CIA loves ISIS because they’re all running it, but they can’t say it to the American public. They have to pretend just like they’re pretending with Netanyahu that, oh my heavens, look at [what] ISIS is doing. We’ve really got to fight against it.

And for instance, when it put in the white helmets in ISIS, these were the American supplied public relations unit to essentially do false propaganda, false images, make false flag attacks. All of these false flag attacks, all of the white helmets and the propaganda has all been coordinated by the United States.

ANIA: I want to ask you now a question that to some extent you actually answered already. Does Israel make any independent decisions that are not consulted with the United States in regards to bombing Gaza?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, the question is, what is the United States or what do you mean by the United States? They don’t need official approval. There’s already a broad agreement in principle. Do whatever you have to do.

The United States has given them a free hand saying, we’re not going to interfere. You’re our managers on site. Just as you’re managing ISIS, you can manage certainly your own country. The U.S. has given blanket approval for Israel’s genocide. That’s why it says there’s no genocide there.

And it shares the aim of extending the war to fight Iran. Again and again, what Netanyahu is saying, we’re not going to be safe until we defeat Iran. Well, the United States has, that’s America, that’s the neocon plan outlined in the 1990s. It was spelled out, I think, by General Petraeus of first Afghanistan, then Iraq, then Syria, and then Iran. All of this was worked out from the beginning. The United States is trying to figure out, how do we do it?

Well, there’s a general expectation that one way to do it is to have Israel mount a false flag attack, something Iran does that is so bad that Israel retaliates and then, as it just bombed the Iranian embassy in Syria, that Iran is going to then do something to Israel and the United States will come to protect our Israeli brothers and world peace and prevent the genocide that the Gazans are trying to do against Israel and that Iran is trying to do against the rest of the world and bomb Iran.

Back in 1970s, there were discussions of what do you do? What will Iran do to fight back? Well, there’s one thing that Iran can do, that it doesn’t have to bomb American troops in Syria or Iraq. It doesn’t have to bomb Israel. All it has to do is sink a ship in the Strait of Hormuz. That’s the big strait. You’ve seen what happened, what the Houthis have done with the Red Sea. The big traffic is the Strait of Hormuz. That’s where Saudi Arabian oil and we could call it the oil gulf. It’s called the Persian Gulf, but it’s really the oil gulf. That’s where all the oil trade is. If you sink a ship or two in the oil gulf, that’s going to push oil prices way, way up because that’s going to cut most of the world off for as long as Iran wants from the Middle Eastern oil supply.

Well, that’s what really terrifies Biden because he’s pretending that there’s no inflation in the United States and that the economy is quite heavy. The inflation that would follow from Iran sinking a ship in Hormuz will essentially be crowning the American opposition to Biden, which is growing.

It’s one thing to be against genocide and killing people, but much more important is if your gas prices go up, the American people think that that’s really much more important than the fact of genocide and crimes against humanity. That’s really what is frightening the US.

The question is right now, how do they make the Israeli provocation against Iran— an excuse for the United States to come in with all of NATO’s and European support and somehow prevent Iran from having the power to close down the Straits of Hormuz. That’s what they’re trying to figure out now. I don’t know what they’re going to do, but when Blinken has said, Israel has not broken any rules. It’s all okay. What the United States really is [saying], if they can get away with this, they can say there are really no rules at all for the whole world. We can do whatever we want. Right now is coming to a peak. It’s the follow-up that was all thought in advance of the whole Israeli movement against Gaza.

ANIA: Thank you, Professor Hudson.

Next question that is about targeting civilians, journalists, and workers. Again, you’ve addressed this already, but I will ask you this. Why is the Israeli army targeting all those groups?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, it’s targeting everyone. It’s targeting all civilians because it wants a land without Palestinian people. It’s targeting the most critical people necessary for a Gazan society to survive. It targets the journalists because it doesn’t want the world to see what it’s doing, because Israel has already lost its standing in the world. The United States tells them, especially, you’ve got to kill the journalists because if you don’t kill them, we, the Biden administration, are going to look bad. We already have the Americans turning against the war.

There’s only one anti-war candidate running in the presidential elections for this November. That’s Jill Stein. Every other candidate is completely backing Israel in the war, but the American people, the majority of Americans look at what’s happening in Israel as genocide and as a crime against humanity. They’re not going to vote for Biden. Biden is going to lose the election or certainly not win it. It may go into the House of Representatives if nobody wins it.

In order to drive the rest of the Gazan populations out, you have to, number one, get rid of the journalists. Number two, you want to get rid of the hospitals. As you’re bombing the people, a lot of them are going to get injured. You want all the injured people from the bombs to die. For that, you have to bomb the hospitals. You especially have to target the doctors for killing. Not only will there not be doctors to heal the wounded people, but other doctors, doctors without borders from other countries, will be afraid to go into Gaza because if you go there, you know that if you’re a food worker bringing aid or a doctor or an aid worker, you’re going to get shot because you’re at the top of the target list.

ANIA: It’s horrible. Just listening to this, you know, it’s very hard to…

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, imagine how I used to feel sitting in meetings and all of this was just said as if this is part of a game and this is how we’re planning it all out. All of this was what was discussed. How do we do evil? I mean, this…

ANIA: Yeah, but those are not humans to me. They are not humans to me.

MICHAEL HUDSON: That’s right.

ANIA: Soulless beings that are not humans. That’s all I say here.

Professor Hudson, next question is about those Israeli developers who, as you said in your email, are already planning to turn Gaza into luxury beachfront properties. So what do you really know about this? They are already planning this? Like they have plans for those properties?

MICHAEL HUDSON: The Americans made a start. They began by building docks. You not only want beachfront property, you want docks for the buyers to have a place to tie up their yachts or their sailboats.

And so the United States is building these piers. One reason it’s doing it is it can pretend that it can say, we’re not building the piers for Israeli property owners to have yachts, we’re going to deliver food. But by the time we finish building the piers, there’ll be no more Gazans. I mean, that’s the whole point. By building the piers, they’ve enabled Israel to prevent the food trucks from coming in from the south. So building the piers is a means of pretending to help without doing anything at all to help actually [deliver] food to Israel.

So yes, all throughout the news, there have been statements by the Israeli real estate companies saying, Gaza could have been a nice place to live if there weren’t Arabs in it. And now if we can clear the land of Arabs, make it a land without those people, then this is a wonderful property. And it has natural gas to help the Israeli balance of payments. So the whole idea is to make this a center of Israel luxury development.

ANIA: Again, absolutely disgusting to me, just listening to this. I want to ask you now about, were Gaza [to cease] to exist completely, what will happen to all the Palestinians who survived?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, the land is going to be there, and it’ll be beachfront property. Alastair Crooke has been, I think, the clearest writer. He was one of the negotiators between Israel and the Palestinians. He’s explained that there cannot be a two-state solution anymore.

The Israelis say, we are going to kill all of the Palestinians. The Palestinians say, well, we can’t exist with the Israelis, and we have to defend ourselves. If we don’t kill them, they’re going to kill us. So Israel has to be either Palestinian or Israeli. It can’t be both. That is ended forever. So anyone who talks of a two-state solution, they’re just not looking it up.

So the question is, how is Gaza going to exist? Either it’s going to be all Israeli, and the Gazans will be forced to flee. The Israelis want them to flee by boats and to be sunk, most of them will be sunk in the Mediterranean, just like after America and France destroyed Libya. The Libyans tried to flee in boats, and they were sunk.

So either they will drown, or they will somehow work their way into a prison camp that Egypt and its leader is setting up for Gazan refugees. And then the Gazans will somehow try to gain entry into Europe or other countries. So you can expect a huge influx of Gazans into Europe.

Some people have suggested, well, now that Ukraine is turning into a land without a people, maybe either the Gazans can turn Ukraine over to the Palestinians, or we could give it to the Israelis, saying, well, this is your ancestral land, this is where all of the pogroms that started Zionism began. Now you can go back and there are no more Ukrainians. They have programs against you. Maybe the Israelis should go to Ukraine. One population or the other has to emigrate.

Well, Israelis already have been losing a huge chunk of their population, especially their working age population, especially those who have jobs in information technology or highly paying jobs. So, you’re already seeing a population outflow.

So, Gaza will exist geographically, but we have no idea about what is going to be the demographic composition.

And I think the Israeli Defense Forces Chief, Herzi Halevi, said just last Sunday that Israel, he announced Israel knows how to handle Iran, just as they’re handling Gaza, that they’ve prepared for this. They have good defensive systems. And he said, we are operating and cooperating with the USA and strategic problems partners in this region. So, the US is going to be putting pressure on Egypt to expand the concentration camps that it’s setting up and to pressure the Europeans. Maybe so many Germans are leaving their country now that there’s no more work for them. Maybe the Palestinians will go to Germany and other European countries, and wherever they can find some kind of refuge.

America was willing to give the Jewish population refuge as long as the Jewish population served European imperialist aims of controlling the Near Eastern oil. But what can Palestine offer to be protected? If the Palestinians don’t have anything to offer the Europeans or the Americans, their governments simply do not care. They’ve done absolutely nothing to protect the Palestinians because they don’t care if there’s no money in it for them. And the Arab countries with money, the Saudi Arabians, the United Arab Republics have not really lifted a hand to help this. Even though a large labor force in Saudi Arabia is already Palestinian, they don’t need more Palestinians there. So, that’s basically what’s happening.

ANIA: Thank you, Professor Hudson. You know, before I ask you my last question, you know, people’s beliefs that the governments care about them. This is the most… I don’t understand how people can still believe that any government really cares about them in the world, looking at the situation like this. It’s heartbreaking. Just listening to what you said is a lot for me to take in.

The last question is when the bombing will stop and who is going to rebuild Gaza Strip?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, the bombing will stop when there are no more Palestinians to bomb. Israel doesn’t have the money to rebuild it or the intention of rebuilding. And even if Israel wants to rebuild it with nice homes all the way to the beachfront, who is going to do the building?

Well, already Israel has made a deal with India to get a lot of Indian construction workers from the poorest provinces of India coming over there. But again, who’s going to pay them? You can give them work permits, but the answer is who will pay them will be the contractors who are given the contracts to rebuild homes and offices and the new Israeli compound in Gaza, unless the world works and says, no, the Israelis have to give back all the land and it’s Israel that will be a minority under a Palestinian government.

You cannot have an Israeli government that is over the whole region because its policy is to kill the Palestinians. So I don’t see that, again, you can’t have a two-state solution. It doesn’t look like anyone’s supporting the Palestinians right now.

Who would help rebuild it? Well, the Turkish builders might come in and build it. Other Middle Easterners would rebuild it. Saudi Arabia could finance huge developments there. The United Arab Republics could buy land. American investors, maybe Blackstone could help develop there, but it’ll be foreign investment.

And if you look at the fact that the foreign investors of all these countries are looking for what they can get out of the genocide against Palestinians, you realize why there’s no real opposition to the genocide that’s taking place.

And the great benefit to the U.S. of all this is that as a result of this absence of any kind of the moral feeling that you’ve just expressed, no claims can be brought against the United States for any of the warfare, any of the regime change, interference that it’s planning for Iran, China, Russia, and as it’s been doing in Africa and Latin America. So Israel and Gaza and the West Bank should be seen, I think, as an opening of the new Cold War. And whatever you see happening in Gaza after the Gazans are driven out, you see this is really the plan for what the United States wants to do in China, in Russia, in Africa, in the whole rest of the world. You’re seeing a plan for basically how to financialize and make money out of genocide and the destruction of society. And in order to do that, you have to prevent anything like the United Nations of having any authority at all.

And the irony in all this is that the United States is creating just the opposite of what it wanted to do. I mean, obviously, while this is happening in Gaza, most of the global majority that we’ve spoken before, the world outside of NATO, America and Europe, are appalled. And the only way of stopping what’s happening in Gaza happening in the rest of the world is to create an alternative to the United Nations, an alternative to the World Bank, to the IMF, an alternative to all the organizations that the United States has controlled to turn the whole rest of the world into Gaza, if it can.

ANIA: Dr. Hudson, Professor Hudson, I want to thank you for coming back. I want to thank you for telling me after our last live stream to address this, because you shared it with me and with the audience. And I really hope that you will spread this video, guys, you will share it.

So I personally believe that we are fighting evil. And the way that I feel I am in a small way contributing to this is to trying to seek the truth and bring people who have knowledge and understanding and can share the facts and the truth with the world. Because if you don’t know what you’re fighting against, what you’re fighting with, then you’re like Don Quixote. You have to know what is the problem. And I am immensely grateful for guests like yourself to be on my channel and to share your knowledge with the audience. I can only imagine knowing all of this, what you shared with us today, living with this for so many years and watching the [unfolding] of those events in the world. For someone who has feelings and emotions, it’s very hard to bear. I can only imagine. So thank you for your contribution.

MICHAEL HUDSON: I’m on your show, Ania, because you see that this is evil, and it is evil.

ANIA: Yes. Thank you so much. I know you have to go. And I want to invite you again, of course, in the near future. Hopefully, you find time for our next conversation. To everyone who’s watching, make sure to check all the links to Professor Hudson that are already attached down below this live stream. And like I said, please share the video. Hit this like. It’s free of charge, and it helps the channel also. And more people can hear this information in the world. Thank you, everyone. And until next time.

hosny salah from Pixabay

News 2739

If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
YOU know what we are talking about.

Things to keep in mind...

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. Meanwhile, fascist ideology and blatant lies also permeate the consciousness of most people in the West. Those in the comfortable top 10%, the "PMCs" (Professional Managerial Class), are especially vulnerable. They support and disseminate such ideas. They are the executors of the actual ruling class' orders, those in the 0.001%, who remain largely invisible. The PMCs are the political class, the media whores, the top military brass, some people in academia, and the "national security/foreign policy" industry honchos. Push back against these unethical, contaminated people with the truth while you can.

AND...where the US Government is at:

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

A Textbook Case of Genocide

Raz Segal JEWISH CURRENTS

A Textbook Case of Genocide

Israel has been explicit about what it’s carrying out in Gaza. Why isn’t the world listening?

AND...where the US Government is at:

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Are there bounds to collective West’s cynicism? (Apparently not).

Stephen Karganovic STRATEGIC CULTURE FOUNDATION

AND...where the US Government is at:

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

It’s Capitalism, Stupid! Universities Are Making Billions Gatekeeping Your Meds

Helen Santoro THE LEVER

The University of California has raked in a previously undisclosed $1.6 billion from Xtandi sales, and now doesn’t want the government lowering exorbitant drug costs.

Wear Your Support

“Unreasonable, And Indeed Outrageous”

A Billion-Dollar Jackpot

Got A News Tip?

Profits should have been taken out of the healthcare system a long time ago. But here we are, still mired in this idiotic and exploitative swamp. —Editor

Academic Opposition

AND...where the US Government is at:

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

RUSSIAGATE: NYT, FB & FBI Say Anti-Trump Site, Now Shutdown, Was Russian Effort to Help Trump Win

Misgivings about who ran this site can co-exist with legitimate alarm about the combined attacks by the FBI, the Times and other corporate media on the political nature — and not the accuracy — of its published content, writes Joe Lauria.

Questions

IRA Again

Political Content Attacked

Troubled by Assange Reporting

Fake Editors

Limited Reach

Gaza: The Strategic Imperative

Michael Hudson with Ania K.

Amoral —even sociopathic—careerism is inherent in capitalist culture as America so eloquently proves.

AND...where the US Government is at:

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Raz Segal
JEWISH CURRENTS

Stephen Karganovic
STRATEGIC CULTURE FOUNDATION

Helen Santoro
THE LEVER

Michael Hudson
with
Ania K.