Multipolarity was triggered by the 2003 US invasion of Iraq

Multipolarity was triggered by the 2003 US invasion of Iraq Twenty years after the unlawful and destabilizing US-led invasion of Iraq, Washington must face the ultimate consequence of that war.

Twenty years after the unlawful and destabilizing US-led invasion of Iraq, Washington must face the ultimate consequence of that war: UNSC powers China and Russia (…)

Quelle: Multipolarity was triggered by the 2003 US invasion of Iraq

Cancel Culture Round Three Get Out?


[Note: Since this article was written, the organizers of “Rage Against the War Machine” have reversed their decision to withdraw their invitation for me to speak at the February 19 anti-war event in Washington, DC. They made this decision under pressure from many of the other speakers scheduled to attend who opposed my being removed from the event. This is the right decision. I recognize that being invited to speak at an event such as the one scheduled for February 19 is a privilege, not a right. I will do my utmost to ensure that my presentation is worthy of the occasion. I have no hard feeling against the organizers. However, the decision to kick me off the speakers list, after publicly announcing I would be speaking, sent a message to all those who promote “cancel culture” tactics that their methods work. This is a threat to everyone. Moreover, given the vicious and vociferous attacks that have been leveled against me, I believe it only appropriate that I respond by staying true to the emotions and mindset I had upon learning I had been removed, and which governed the tone and content of the article as originally written. Cancel culture cannot be allowed to prevail. Thank you again to those who supported me, and to the event organizers who have honored me by allowing me to be in the company of such esteemed individuals working in support of such a worthy cause.]  

Back in early January 2003, I was involved in a project intended to be a last-gasp effort to head off a US-led war with Iraq. In December 2002, Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesperson, had articulated during a press conference that while the official US policy toward Iraq was regime change, this did not necessarily mean removing Saddam Hussein by use of force. Fleischer indicated that a significant change in behavior on the part of the Iraqi government could constitute “regime change.”

I picked up on that theme and reached out to the Iraqi government (keeping in mind I had addressed the Iraqi Parliament back in September 2002 in a successful bid to get UN weapons inspectors back on the job), and outlined a proposal based upon a six-point plan of action that would have the Iraqi government agree to changes in policy regarding disarmament, human rights, democracy, diplomacy, economy and peace. (…)

Die politisch unkorrekte Wahrheit über das, was wirklich in Afghanistan passiert ist

Die politisch unkorrekte Wahrheit darüber, was wirklich in Afghanistan passiert ist

5. September 2021

By Andrew Korybko

Die politisch unkorrekte Wahrheit über das, was wirklich in Afghanistan passiert ist

Viele Amerikaner könnten die großen strategischen Ziele ihrer Regierung in dieser Hinsicht für das Fehlen jeglicher Moral, Ethik oder Prinzipien halten, wenn man bedenkt, dass sie jetzt weitgehend mit den Zielen Chinas, Pakistans, Russlands und sogar der Taliban übereinstimmen, obwohl die Öffentlichkeit über die Jahre hinweg glauben gemacht wurde, dass alle vier ihre Feinde sind.

Afghanische Ambiguität

Der Durchschnittsamerikaner hat Mühe, sich einen Reim darauf zu machen, was im letzten Monat in Afghanistan geschehen ist, da sich alles so plötzlich entwickelt hat. Den meisten war klar, dass der Krieg schon lange verloren war und sich in einen so genannten „endlosen“ Krieg verwandelt hatte, aber nur wenige hatten erwartet, dass er so enden würde, wie er es schließlich tat. Fast nichts von dem, was die Biden-Administration tat, ergab für sie einen Sinn, und nur wenige haben eine Vorstellung davon, was die Zukunft dort bringen wird. In diesem Beitrag soll alles in „politisch unkorrekten“ Begriffen erklärt werden, damit alle es besser verstehen können.

Ein Vorgeschmack auf das, was kommen wird

Beginnen wir mit dem verblüffenden Ergebnis und erklären wir dann, wie es dazu kam. Die USA sind jetzt teilweise mit denselben Taliban, die sie offiziell immer noch als Terroristen bezeichnen, in ihrem gemeinsamen Kampf gegen das vergleichsweise größere Übel ISIS-K verbündet. Amerikas Nachkriegspläne für die Region sehen auch vor, dass sie sich auf Chinas Vorzeigeprojekt der Belt & Road Initiative (BRI), den chinesisch-pakistanischen Wirtschaftskorridor (CPEC), stützen, um ihren wirtschaftlichen Einfluss in Afghanistan und Zentralasien auszuweiten, obwohl sie sich offiziell in einem neuen Kalten Krieg mit Peking befinden.

Die „unheilige“ Anti-Terror-Partnerschaft zwischen den USA und den Taliban ist weder perfekt noch das, was einer der beiden ursprünglich wollte, sondern wurde in den letzten zwei Wochen des amerikanischen Rückzugs aus Kabul durch gemeinsame Interessen geschmiedet. Die Taliban schützten die Amerikaner vor diesen Terroristen, obwohl sie selbst von der amerikanischen Regierung offiziell als Terroristen bezeichnet wurden, weil sie hofften, dass Washington Afghanistan auch nach dem Ende des Krieges in gewissem Umfang unterstützen würde, wenn auch nur indirekt über internationale Organisationen. (…)


Rapid Taliban Takeover Shows How Little US Understood Afghanistan

August 15, 2021

Though the Taliban may be unpopular with many Afghans at least they are Afghans and not a propped-up government under foreign occupation, writes Joe Lauria.

By Joe Lauria Special to Consortium News Biden administration officials on Thursday said they expected the Taliban to arrive in

Quelle: Rapid Taliban Takeover Shows How Little US Understood Afghanistan

All roads lead to the Battle for Kabul — The Vineyard of the Saker

by Pepe Escobar, posted with permission and first posted at Asia Times


City after city have fallen from government to Taliban control but Afghanistan’s end-game is still unclear by Pepe Escobar, posted with permission and first posted at Asia Times The ever-elusive Afghan

All roads lead to the Battle for Kabul — The Vineyard of the Saker

Wild Conspiracy Theory? The Truth Behind the Biggest Threat to the ‚War on Terror‘ Narrative

27.10.2020 —

Wild Conspiracy Theory? The Truth Behind the Biggest Threat to the ‘War on Terror’ Narrative

Cynthia Chung

If you must break the law, do it to seize power: in all other cases observe it.”

– Julius Caesar

The illegal invasion of Libya, in which Britain was complicit and a British House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee’s report confirmed as an illegal act sanctioned by the UK government, over which Cameron stepped down as Prime Minister (weeks before the release of the UK parliament report), occurred from March – Oct, 2011.

Muammar al-Gaddafi was assassinated on Oct. 20th, 2011.

On Sept 11-12th, 2012, U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, U.S. Foreign Service information management officer Sean Smith, and CIA contractors Tyron Woods and Glen Doherty were killed at two U.S. government facilities in Benghazi.

It is officially denied to this date that al-Qaeda or any other international terrorist organization participated in the Benghazi attack. It is also officially denied that the attack was pre-meditated.

On the 6th year anniversary of the Benghazi attack, Barack Obama stated at a partisan speech on Sept 10th, 2018, delivered at the University of Illinois, that the outrage over the details concerning the Benghazi attack were the result of “wild conspiracy theory” perpetrated by conservatives and Republican members of Congress.

However, according to an August 2012 Defense Intelligence Agency report  (only released to the public in May 2015), this is anything but the case. The report was critical of the policies of then President Obama as a direct igniter for the rise of ISIS and the creation of a “caliphate” by Syria-based radical Islamists and al-Qaeda. The report also identified that arms shipments in Libya had gone to radical Islamist “allies” of the United States and NATO in the overthrowing of Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi. These arms shipments were sent to Syria and became the arsenal that allowed ISIS and other radical rebels to grow.

The declassified DIA report states:


Another DIA document from Oct 2012 (also released in May 2015), reported that Gaddafi’s vast arsenal was being shipped from Benghazi to two Syrian ports under the control of the Syrian rebel groups. (…)

Dr. Gary G. Kohls: Why Do Good People Become Silent About the Documented Facts that Disprove the Official 9/11 Narrative … and others

Martin Zeis
Preliminary remarks by Prof Michel Chossudovsky
September 9, 2019
September 9, 2001: Two Days Before 9/11, Global Research Was Born …

On the 9th of September 2001, the Global Research website at was born, two days before the tragic events of September 11.

We started up in late August with a handmade web design in FrontPage. A student in philosophy gave me a hand in drafting the home page and putting the project online.

On the morning of September 8, I took a two hour “crash course” on the use of file transfer FTP software from a young software specialist, who taught me how to upload articles to the website.

Among our first articles was a coverage of the events surrounding 9/11 and the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan on October 7.

From these modest beginnings, with virtually no resources, the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) has evolved into a dynamic research and independent media group.

The landscape of the internet has shifted dramatically during the 18 years we have been in operation. Over the last five years, freedom of expression has become a key issue, with censorship becoming more prevalent and insidious. The situation for independent media has changed significantly, and not for the better. Despite this, in the face of large corporations attempting to censor our content and curtail our traffic and revenue, we are still here (…)




18 years later


9/11 Truth: Why Do Good People Become Silent About Documented Fact that Disprove the Official 9/11Narrative

By Dr. Gary G. KohlsThese “9/11 Truthers” have been unfairly labeled “conspiracy theorists” (a pejorative term invented by the CIA after the John F. Kennedy assassination in 1963 raised all sorts of skepticism doubting the official story blaming “the single shooter”). 

Read more:


Where Was Osama bin Laden on September 10, 2001? One Day Before 9/11. His Whereabouts Were Known

By Prof Michel ChossudovskyThis CBS Report suggests that Osama bin Laden had been admitted to a Pakistani Military hospital in Rawalpindi on the 10th local time, less than 24 hours before the terrorist attacks. 

Read more:


9/11 after 18 Years. „Hard Evidence Cannot Prevail over a Transparent Official Lie“

By Dr. Paul Craig RobertsThe 9/11 Commission report was not an investigation and ignored all forensic evidence. The NIST simulation of Building 7’s collapse was rigged to get the desired result. The only real investigations have been done by private scientists, engineers, and architects. 

Read more:


Who Is Osama Bin Laden?


By Prof Michel ChossudovskyA few hours after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, the Bush administration concluded without supporting evidence, that “Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organisation were prime suspects”. CIA Director George Tenet stated that bin Laden has the capacity to plan “multiple attacks with little or no warning.” Secretary of State Colin Powell called the attacks “an act of war” and President Bush confirmed in an evening televised address to the Nation that he would “make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them”. 

Read more:


9/11, Drug Money, Oil Resources and the Invasion of Afghanistan: Michael Ruppert Refutes the Official 9/11Story

By Michael Welch and Michael RuppertPertinent questions as to ulterior motives for a deadly military invasion of Afghanistan, or about the failure to scramble military aircraft to intercept the hijacked airplanes when they veered off course were never asked in the prominent newspapers, television networks and other major media organs of the day. 

Read more:


Another Official 9/11 Big Lie Exposed – Again

By Stephen LendmanOn September 10, 2001 (one day before 9/11), CBS News anchor Dan Rather reported his admittance to a Rawalpindi, Pakistan hospital. He was dying. 

Read more:


Fire Did Not Cause 3rd Tower’s Collapse on 9/11, New Study Finds


By AE911TruthDespite calls for the evidence to be preserved, New York City officials had the building’s debris removed and destroyed in the ensuing weeks and months, preventing a proper forensic investigation from ever taking place. Seven years later, federal investigators concluded that WTC 7 was the first steel-framed high-rise ever to have collapsed solely as a result of normal office fires. 

Read more:


Call for New 9/11 Investigation: New York Area Fire Commissioners Make History


By Ted WalterThey started off by saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Ten minutes later, they were reading the text of a resolution claiming the existence of “overwhelming evidence” that “pre-planted explosives . . . caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings.” 

Read More:



Iran goes for “maximum counter-pressure”

Pepe ESCOBAR 20.06.2019

Sooner or later the US “maximum pressure” on Iran would inevitably be met by “maximum counter-pressure”. Sparks are ominously bound to fly. For the past…

Quelle: Iran goes for “maximum counter-pressure”

Hans Christian WÄCHTER postet diesen Artikel in deutscher Sprache:




9/11 Wars In Iraq, Afghanistan, And Pakistan Killed 500,000 People: Brown University Study

US leaders attempted to „paint a rosy picture“ to shield public from the reality, finds new academic study.

Quelle: 9/11 Wars In Iraq, Afghanistan, And Pakistan Killed 500,000 People: Brown University Study