An update now on an article originally posted back in October of last year called Fentanyl: Weapon Of Mass Destruction. Reports out of Asia indicate that ground zero in the fight against illicit fentanyl and methamphetamine has moved to Southeast Asia, specifically Burma. I still call it Burma because, like many, I don’t recognize the legitimacy of a name change made by an unelected ruling military junta. Hence Burma.
About ten days ago Patrick Winn, a correspondent for Public Radio International’s program The World, published an article about a massive drug bust there in which the haul was so big that it had to be displayed on a football pitch. In all 18 tons of methamphetamine, mainly in pill form, were recovered as well as about 1,000 gallons of the powerful fentanyl analogue methyl fentanyl, which has been estimated to be anywhere between 400 to 6,000 times more potent than morphine in certain instances.
The contents of a meth-producing superlab in Myanmar. Credit:Myanmar’s Central Committee for Drug Abuse Control
The labs were set up in northern Burma near the Chinese border and according to Burma News International were run by the Sam Gor (Brother Number Three in Cantonese) Syndicate. Brother Number Three’s real name is Tse Chi Lop, a Canadian national who was born in China and is suspected of leading a large multinational narcotics network. The media have even labeled him “Asia’s El Chapo” and “The Most Wanted Man In Asia”.
Hopefully it isn’t long before Brother No.3 is captured and dealt with by Asian authorities. If he is apprehended in Canada he will be subject to the Canadian justice system and would in all likelihood be granted low bail. Then assuming he didn’t escape, made his trial date, and was found guilty he’d probably serve six months at one of Correction Canada’s many resorts, ie minimum security prisons.
BURMA ARMY’S NEW STRATEGY: Anti-narcotics move and disarmament of a militia
The seizure was made by Burma’s army, or Tatmadaw, which shortly afterwards also announced the disbandment of the Kaungkha (People’s Militia). The Kaungkha were implicated in the drug trade by turning a blind eye to, and perhaps even a profit from, the sale of illicit narcotics. The move comes as part of a sudden government crackdown on the drug trade, where in the past it had been much more lenient.
BURMA ARMY’S NEW STRATEGY: Anti-narcotics move and disarmament of a militia
There have been reports that US President Donald Trump asked Chinese leader Xi Jinping for his cooperation in combatting the problem by restricting sales of the precursor chemicals that are used in the illicit manufacture of methamphetamine and fentanyl. It appears as though this may be the case, however this does not, in my opinion, exonerate Communist China from they role that they have played up until now.
It is worth remembering that we are at war with China, again my opinion, and it is still in their strategic advantage to have North America plagued by a serious opioid drug crisis such as we have today. It is taking tens of thousands of lives and adding a huge strain on the resources and economies of jurisdictions across Canada and the United States.
Time Will Tell
But right now the main focus now needs to be on Burma to see whether or not it continues to exercise its crackdown on narcotics production. If it does, it won’t be long before the results are being seen in the streets and drug markets across North America and South Asia, and hopefully in a decrease in the number of deaths. Only time will tell.
I am going to start this out by saying that this is an opinion piece, so don’t expect very much in terms of journalistic objectivity here. I personally think that these two are complete idiots, but I’m only going upon what we’ve had to judge them by so far. While both hold university degrees, Morrison’s degree in applied economic geography holds a little more clout than Justin’s degrees in literature and education.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau meets with Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea November 18, 2018 Photo by Adam Scotti (PMO)
It also seems extremely strange for me to be using the term “strongman” when it comes to this pair. There is simply nothing about either of them that even whispers “strongman”. Just over a year ago I was joining a chorus of other voices in asking these two idiots to do something to help get our people out of Afghanistan. I think we all know how that worked out.
Lee Humphrey
I’d say Trudeau has done this in a very different way using the power of the PMO & powerful DM appointed by the PMO to essentially neuter Ministers. Same outcome, centralized power!
I got to know Lee Humphrey over the last couple of years, having seen him around the Twittersphere, and he is someone whose opinion I value when it comes to a number of things, and politics is one of those things. I started thinking about something yesterday in the wake of the epic meltdown that Scott Morrison appears to be having. There had been rumblings in Ottawa’s dark corners of this kind of thing going on here too, and after seeing what was transpiring in Australia I began to wonder myself.
I put out a post on Twitter posing this question and sent it out to Lee and the rest of the Twitterverse that I reach. It wasn’t long before Lee had sent me a reply that made sense and had been demonstrated before in the past.
What did Scott Morrison do?
In a move that was unbeknownst to anyone else with the sole exception of the Governor General, Morrison had himself appointed as a secret shadow minister in a number of portfolios, a highly questionable act with potential legal and ethical implications for those involved.
How ScoMo was able to do it.
He exploited a loophole in the Australian Constitution that technically allowed him to do what he did, in that the wording is rather vague, but sections 64 and 65 basically give the Governor General the power to do pretty much whatever they want in this particular instance.
64. Ministers of State
The Governor-General may appoint officers to administer such departments of State of the Commonwealth as the Governor-General in Council may establish.
Such officers shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General. They shall be members of the Federal Executive Council, and shall be the Queen’s Ministers of State for the Commonwealth.
Ministers to sit in Parliament
After the first general election no Minister of State shall hold office for a longer period than three months unless he is or becomes a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.
65. Number of Ministers
Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the Ministers of State shall not exceed seven in number, and shall hold such offices as the Parliament prescribes, or, in the absence of provision, as the Governor-General directs.
As in Canada, Australia also has a Governor General acting as the representative of the British crown in the country. In Australia, this person is David Hurley, a retired ADF general and former Chief of the Defense Staff.
It is a largely ceremonial role, however, there are some instances where the GG is actually something of an essential part of deciding whether or not something gets done. For instance, a Prime Minister can visit the GG and ask that parliament be dissolved and that a snap election be called, at ANY time during their mandate. Under normal circumstances the GG usually just rubber stamps the writ and an election is called.
HOWEVER, the GG does also have it within their power to deny the Prime Minister’s request and order them to resume sitting and fix whatever it is that needs to be fixed in order for parliament to work. The Governor General is not there to serve at the beck and call exclusively for the Prime Minister’s use, especially under highly unusual circumstances such as these. If Hurley were performing his duties in the way that they were meant, he should have flat-out rejected the request and sent ScoMo on his way.
Hurley didn’t do this, however, and would in fact sign four different orders at Morrison’s behest on four separate occasions over the span of 14 months, which has raised some eyebrows. What was that all about? Did Morrison have something on Hurley, or was this more of a quid pro quo situation? David Hurley is a pretty big part of this scandal, yet he is remaining defiant amid calls for him to step down.
How it was done.
March 14, 2020 – Morrison is appointed Minister of State for the Department of Health.
The day before, a safety net package of $1.1billion was announced by the Prime Minister to expand mental health and tele-health services, increase domestic violence services and provide more emergency food relief.
The day before this, Australia and China were reported to be at odds over a proposed economic dialogue mechanism, leading to increased tensions between the countries.
None of the Ministers of these portfolios ever informed that the Prime Minister was actually acting in the capacity of a babysitter over them. Their decisions ultimately meant nothing and Morrison would have complete control over the ministries, all the while nobody would be the wiser. These former Ministers must feel like they just got a giant middle finger from their former boss, who didn’t seem to have the confidence in them to run their departments without his personal oversight.
A lonely ScoMo.
Back when he was still PM Morrison had the trappings of office available to him, which would have included various and sundry assistants as well as a Chief of Staff to help him run the show, though he sure seemed to want to do that by himself. Morrison’s Chief of Staff was Dr. John Kunkel, who has worked as an “economist, speech writer, policy analyst, adviser to government and industry executive” according to his LinkedIn profile. Prior to being ScoMo’s Chief of Staff for the entirety of his term Kunkle worked in the private sector.
Dr. John Kunkle. Photo: LinkedIn
Now that he’s just another crappy backbencher, ScoMo’s budget has been slashed, so he’s probably in an office the size of the bathroom in the PM’s office, and has like one assistant named Tiffany or something. As for social media, he doesn’t have anyone to take care of that for him anymore, he now has to handle it himself like all the other backbench seat-fillers.
The rant that started it all.
I’m thinking that, aware the news was about to come out, Scott Morrison decided that the best thing to do would be to launch a preemptive mea culpa ahead of it. The only problem was that he no longer had the support system in place that he once did, so he was out of his element and in a hurry to get his side out before it hit the news. The result would be the half-assed, disjointed, and quite frankly pitiful attempt that was posted for all to see.
Scott Morrison – Failed Stalinesque Strongman.
Morrison didn’t have the political network or infrastructure that he ultimately would have needed to remain in power. Because of this, he was forced to centralize his power within himself alone, either that or he was foolish enough to believe that it could be accomplished without the need to resort to terror and intimidation like Soviet strongman Josef Stalin. If you are going to centralize the power in yourself, then you had better be prepared to take things to the next level.
For now, he continues to refuse to step down, apparently oblivious to the gravity of his actions though for how much longer remains to be seen. The net result will probably be the utter destruction of the Liberal Party of Australia and three terms for PM Albinetti if he doesn’t manage to botch it up.
In Part 2….
A look at what style of strongman has made a man referred to as Little Potato so successful, and the Gruesome Twosome that got him there.
Two members of my family are gone because of fentanyl, one of the most toxic substances on the planet.
For my little brother, who left us far too soon. I’ll miss you, Ryan.
December 21, 1975 – September 6, 2019
More than three years after I first wrote this, the crisis is worse than ever with no end in sight. Having cleaned it up a bit I am republishing it in light of this story from the BBC.
How the fentanyl crisis’ fourth wave has hit every corner of the US
This is the first time that I have written anything since I lost my younger brother almost a month ago. He was 43 when he passed away as the result of an accidental overdose of fentanyl, sometime in the early morning hours of September 6th. Like millions of others, my little brother was addicted to drugs and had been for a long time. So great was the internal anguish that he had felt, that turned to narcotics to ease it.
I don’t want him to be defined by the way he died, but rather by the man that he was. He was not perfect, but he was one of the kindest, most generous people that I knew. He was loyal to his friends and family, and had many long-term friendships, some going back well over 30 years. He touched a lot of lives and will be profoundly missed by those of us he leaves behind.
I have learned that in the days leading up to his death, he had been talking about entering a long-term rehab facility. He was so very tired of the life he was living and wanted nothing more than to get better, to heal physically, emotionally, and spiritually. On the day he died, he was supposed to get together with one of his good friends and together they would look online for long-term rehab facilities located outside of town.
Last year, one of my cousins lost his life to an accidental overdose of the fentanyl analog carfentanil, a drug 10,000 times stronger than morphine. It is so dangerous that many first responders have had to be hospitalized after coming into contact with a person having an overdose.
I wanted to know more about the poison that had claimed two members of my family, so as always, I started looking for some answers. The information I found in a very short amount of time sent a chill up my spine. Apart from the effect that fentanyl has had on my life personally, it also has significant international relations ramifications. The People’s Republic of China manufactures most, if not all, of the precursor chemicals used to synthesize fentanyl. You should also consider this; synthesized by scientists in a university laboratory in China, there is now a fentanyl analog so lethal, that one teaspoon would kill about as many people as the Great Plague did in Europe in the 14th century.
Opioid or Opiate?
To make the distinction, opiates are those drugs naturally derived from the flowering opium poppy plant (i.e. morphine, codeine). Opioids are a much broader category and include any substance, natural or synthetic, which binds to the brain’s opioid receptors.
Fentanyl
Fentanyl will probably be the drug most associated with the opioid crisis, even though that distinction belongs to OxyContin, the Purdue Pharma extended-release formulation of oxycodone that has the dubious reputation of starting it.
Although it has gained a great deal of attention 0ver the last decade, fentanyl has been around for a lot longer than that. Dr. Paul Jannsen first synthesized it in 1958 under a patent held by his company, Jannsen Pharmaceutica. It is now owned by conglomerate Johnson & Johnson, who have lost big-dollar lawsuits brought by women claiming Johnson’s Baby Powder caused their ovarian cancer.
It was a powerful analgesic, some 100x more powerful than morphine, and could also be used for anesthesia. It would hit the market in the 1960s. as an IV anesthetic with the brand name Sublimaze.
Fentanyl Analogs and Derivatives
A chemical analog is a compound that is structurally similar to another compound on a molecular level but differs from the original compound to some degree. Not long after Sublimaze was released its popularity would lead to the development of a number of fentanyl analogs and derivatives. among which were Sufentanil, Alfentanil, Lofentanil and Remifentanil.
Sufentanil
The strongest analgesic available for human use, it is 5x the strength of fentanyl and 500x stronger than morphine. It is used in hospitals as an analgesic and as an adjunct to anesthesia under the brand names Dsuvia and Sufenta.
Alfentanil
Alfentanil has a potency that is approximately 10-25% that of fentanyl. Its onset of action is 4x that of fentanyl but only lasts one-third as long. It is used as a short-acting anesthetic.
Lofentanil
One of the most potent fentanyl analogs, it is most similar to carfentanil.
Remifentanil
Used in a hospital setting, remifentanil is used for sedation, as an anesthesia adjunct, and as an analgesic, having the brand name Ultiva. It is twice the strength of fentanyl and 200x more powerful than morphine.
Carfentanil
Carfentanil is used as a sedative for large animals under the brand name Wildnil. At 100x the strength of fentanyl, it is 1000x more potent than morphine. It started to appear on the streets a few years ago with deadly results. The estimated lethal dosage in humans is 50 micrograms. By comparison, a poppy seed weighs approximately 300 micrograms.
Comparison of the lethal doses of heroin, fentanyl, and carfentanil.
A lethal dose of fentanyl for the average adult (2mg)
Ohmefentanyl – The most potent and deadly fentanyl analog
Ohmefentanyl was first synthesized in the early 1970s by scientists in a lab at the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Guangzhou, China. More than 6,000x stronger than morphine, it is so potent that one ounce of ohmefentanyl is enough to kill 175 MILLION people. That being said it is far more complex to synthesize ohmefentanyl than it is to synthesize fentanyl. The process involves more equipment and additional precursors and solvents and, because it is so toxic, it is extremely hazardous to manufacture and can only be handled safely using protective equipment.
Synthesis and analgesic activity of stereoisomers of cis -fluoro-ohmefentanyl
Fentanyl is synthesized using ingredients known as precursors. These precursor chemicals are sold by manufacturers in China, who make tens of thousands of such compounds. These compounds include things such as food additives, veterinary products, pesticides, and the precursor chemicals used to synthesize pharmaceutical drugs, including fentanyl.
The vast majority of the precursors used in the synthesis of fentanyl are sent to Mexico, where most of the illicit fentanyl in the US is made. It takes a trained chemist to synthesize fentanyl from scratch, something the Mexican cartels do not have. But, it is easier to make fentanyl using bulk supplies of the precursor chemicals, which is what the cartels do.
On September 17th of this year, the DEA announced that it was putting forth a proposal to control three of the precursor chemicals needed to synthesize fentanyl. It’s difficult to say what effect if any this will have since the vast majority of illicit fentanyl is made in Mexico.
The take-home message here is that there are millions of fentanyl analogs that can be made from commercially available chemicals. It is all but certain that many of them will have fentanyl-like properties and that some of these will make even the most powerful analogs today, such as carfentanil and sufentanil, seem like cotton candy.
It just isn’t realistic to think that treaties or international law will end the production and distribution of these precursor compounds. There is simply no easy or effective way of enforcing international agreements amongst sovereign nations. Just look at the current state of international relations.
One way or another these chemicals will continue to be manufactured, the genie cannot be put back into the bottle. The fact also remains that scientists, primarily in The People’s Republic of China, will continue to attempt to synthesize something even stronger.
“NPP is a sensitive products. Why you buy it?” one Yuancheng saleswoman asked me on Skype, before the product was scheduled in China. “I know many people buy it. But I don’t know what it is used for.”
I explained that it was used to make fentanyl.
“I know fentanyl,” she continued, “but why people use it? We Chinese don’t use it.”
It’s highly addictive, I said.
“Yes, I know it is a bad products to person,” the saleswoman admitted, “but I still sell it, so sometimes I feel guilt. NPP is not forbidden in China, so we can sell. I sell it, because I want earn money, earn a living.”
While the DEA proposed making regulatory changes in their announcement of September 17th, similar regulatory changes in Canada came into effect on May 6th, 2019, when they were registered in the Canada Gazette.
Government of Canada changes regulations to help prevent illegal production and trafficking of controlled substances
The international symbols for radiological, biological, and chemical hazards.
With such an extremely high potency, compounds like ohmefentanyl are simply not practical, or safe, for use as an analgesic in human beings. The only logical reason for synthesizing ohmefentanyl would be to use it as a weapon of mass destruction. Granted it would take a huge effort to weaponize it and come up with an effective delivery system, but it is still a distinct possibility.
In May 2018, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a fact sheet for Federal EPA On-Scene Coordinators who respond to any incidents of environmental contamination by fentanyl or its analogs. It is a comprehensive 11-page document, and some of the information contained in it caught my attention. It includes a list of the possible exposure pathways, in other words, the ways that fentanyl could be spread to a population. These include open areas, water/water systems, indoor facilities, and food.
Fact Sheet for OSCs: Version 1.0 05/22/2018 Fentanyl and Fentanyl Analogs
Open Areas: While fentanyl is a solid powder at room temperature, it poses an inhalation or incidental ingestion exposure threat if sufficient powder becomes airborne. Fentanyl can also be dissolved in solvents and fentanyl citrate is soluble in water, which allows exposure in aerosol form. The literature indicates that police officers showed symptoms of opiate exposure after police activities created fentanyl dust/aerosol or when they worked in dusty areas.
Water/Water Systems: Fentanyl in liquid solution creates a possible dermal exposure pathway and is commonly used in many medicinal forms of fentanyl. Literature reviews indicate that aqueous fentanyl may be found as an illicit drug in intravenous form, nasal sprays, eye drops, and vape pen liquids. While fentanyl could enter natural waters or a water system, neither is a likely exposure pathway.
Indoor Facility: Fentanyl could potentially be dispersed as solid particulates or liquid spray (aerosol) inside a building or facility; HVAC systems may be affected. Fentanyl particulates are heavier (less buoyant) than air and will accumulate on lower levels and in utility corridors and/or deposit on surfaces inside a building.
Food: While food is an unlikely exposure pathway, fentanyl can be released as a fine dust or aerosol that may contaminate food.
Before anyone accuses me of giving terrorists and lunatics a great new idea, it is more than likely that someone has already come up with the idea and so have the security agencies that protect us. At least they should have anyway.
It is now clearer than ever to me that the only way to eliminate the threat posed by fentanyl and its analogs, aside from banning its production, would be to have it classified as a chemical weapon, and heavily restrict its production and distribution as well as the production and distribution of its precursor chemicals.
The Startling Numbers
This will never happen, it simply isn’t a realistic expectation for a number of reasons. In the meantime, until someone can come up with a workable solution to counter this plague, the number of people killed by fentanyl will continue to rise.
Deaths
Here in Alberta, the statistics are alarming, to say the least. In 2016 out of 803 drug and alcohol poisoning deaths 43% (347) were attributed to fentanyl or its analogs. In 2017 it had increased to 59% (565/951) and in 2018 fentanyl constituted 63% of overdose deaths (622/985).
Of these overdoses, 80% involved fentanyl mixed with other drugs. 50% involved methamphetamine, 25% cocaine, and 5% heroin. Drug dealers will add fentanyl to other drugs in order to increase their profitability and as a means of attracting and retaining customers. What usually results however is that their customers wind up dead.
Nationally the number is even higher. In 2016 total number of overdose deaths in Canada was 3023, of which 50% were from fentanyl or its analogs. In 2017 it rose to 67% (4120) and was 73% in 2018 (4588). In the first three months of 2019, it was 79%.
The number of overdose deaths increased sharply as well, up 36% from 2016 to 2017 and up 11% from 2017 to 2018.
Trafficking in fentanyl is a very lucrative business. In fact, it is the most lucrative illicit narcotic currently sold. In 2017, 1 KG of pure fentanyl could be purchased for $4,150. That 1 KG could potentially generate $1,600,000 in revenue for the trafficker, a profit of over 38,000%
By comparison, traffickers will only realize a 1,300% profit off of heroin or $80,000 in revenue from 1KG of heroin purchased for $6,000.
Fentanyl profitability in the US compared to heroin.
It has been more than a decade since media articles began reporting on what was then called an opioid epidemic, and is now referred to as the “opioid crisis”. In North America, fentanyl has become a threat to public safety unlike any illicit drug before, more than heroin, cocaine, or methamphetamine. It is the most potent and most addictive narcotic there is which also makes it the most dangerous.
Putting an end to this crisis will require action on the part of several governments. There is an ever-growing population of opioid addicts who require immediate intervention, but there is currently a critical shortage of treatment facilities. Adding the extra capacity would require taxpayer funding, which would then make it a political issue, and politicians are loathe to spend money on projects from which they will receive no benefit.
There also needs to be the political will to implement a different strategy to combat the problem. At the moment, efforts are geared more towards harm reduction for addicts. Some jurisdictions have opened safe injection sites, where addicts can do their drugs in a sterile environment and with medical intervention available in the event of an overdose.
There is also a segment of the population who believes that the legalization and regulation of all illicit narcotics is the solution. Many will cite Portugal as an example of success.
Portugal in the late 1990s was dealing with a drug crisis of its own. One percent of its population, 100,000 people, were heroin users and on average more than 350 people a year were dying from a drug overdose. In the early 2000s, Portugal overhauled its drug laws, decriminalizing small amounts of narcotics for personal use.
The number of overdose deaths has since plummeted, though this is not a direct result of decriminalization. The Portuguese also recognized that it wasn’t enough to simply decriminalize illicit drugs, they also provided the means for addicts to access treatment and assisted them as they reintegrated back into society.
If police find you with illicit drugs, you’ll be arrested and taken to a police station where the drugs will be weighed. If the amount is above the strictly enforced threshold limits — designed to be a 10-day supply for personal use, or 25 grams of cannabis, five grams of cannabis resin, two grams of cocaine, or one gram each of ecstasy or heroin — you can be charged as a trafficker. If convicted, jail terms range from one year to 14 years.
If the amount is below the limit, you’ll be sent the following day to the Commission for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction — even if you’re a tourist. There, you will be interviewed by a psychologist or social worker before appearing before a three-person panel that will offer suggestions aimed at stopping your drug use.
From there, you’re fast-tracked to whatever services you’re willing to accept. If you refuse help, you can be asked to do community service or even, eventually, facing a fine, perhaps even having possessions confiscated and sold to pay the fine.
It’s why Goulão is so quick to point out that Portugal’s success isn’t because of decriminalization. It’s because, in 2001, his country made a commitment to providing whatever its citizens need to be as healthy and as fully engaged in society as possible.
“Decriminalization is not a silver bullet,” he said. “If you decriminalize and do nothing else, things will get worse.
“The most important part was making treatment available to everybody who needed it for free. This was our first goal.”
The precursor chemicals used to synthesize fentanyl and its analogs are manufactured in The People’s Republic of China, and the government places no restrictions on their production or shipping. For the manufacturers, the only concern is that they sell their product and make a profit on it, without regard for its end use or the ensuing consequences it may bring. There is also very little likelihood that the Chinese will place any restrictions on the manufacture and distribution of these chemicals and very little that anyone can do about it. In and of themselves they are not dangerous and do not pose a threat
When I analyze this through the lens of International Relations, I come to some conclusions that many will no doubt disagree with. I may even be labelled as paranoid or a conspiracy theorist, but I will leave it to you to draw your own conclusions.
Strategically speaking it is to China’s benefit that these chemicals be used to synthesize fentanyl. The economic benefit to China is relatively small compared to the strategic benefit. A rapid and dramatic increase in the number of drug addicts within a society will act as a destabilizing force within it, draining resources that could be better used elsewhere.
The Chinese have also led the way in the synthesis of the most potent and deadly fentanyl analogs, with the potential ability to kill tens of millions of people. There are no conventions banning the research and development of synthetic opioid drugs like there are for chemical weapons or other WMD. Yes, I know that it would be very difficult and that it would need the proper vehicle for delivery in order to be effective. How do we know that one hasn’t already been developed, or is being worked on now? Theoretically, they could have already produced enough ohmefentanyl to wipe out half the population of the continental United States. This has the potential to weigh heavily on the global balance of power.
Share This Information
There are no quick and easy fixes to be found here, and people are going to continue dying in ever-growing numbers. Individually there isn’t much that any of us can do either, it must be dealt with on a governmental level and frankly, this gives me little hope that a solution will soon be found.
A lot of people will die who didn’t have to, people like my brother, and my heart breaks for the families and loved ones that will be left behind. Share this information with the people you know so that as many people as possible are aware of just how very bad the situation is. It is possible that it might one day save a life, perhaps the life of someone you know and love.
VAC Employee Counsels Vet With PTSD, Brain-Injury, About Assisted Suicide.
Global News is reporting that multiple sources have told them that an agent from Veteran’s Affairs Canada (VAC) offered advice about assisted suicide to a brain-injured combat veteran with PTSD.
The agent in question brought up the subject with the veteran, despite not being requested by him, in what sounds like a rather cavalier and nonchalant manner. The veteran was reportedly left “deeply disturbed”, and he and his family were left feeling betrayed by the agency that was supposed to be looking out for his best interests.
Veteran’s Affairs has also confirmed to Global News that the discussion did in fact take place. According to sources, the veteran had been experiencing positive improvements in his physical and mental health up until that point, and this encounter has served to halt any progress he had made and has been harmful to the well-being of the veteran and his family.
An apology was made to the family by VAC, but only AFTER numerous complaints had been made regarding this atrocious incident. A statement from VAC stated that “VAC deeply regrets what transpired”, and further said that an internal investigation would be conducted into the matter without discussing it or the potential consequences facing the employee.
Veteran’s Affairs Minister Needs To Step Down Immediately.
Lawrence MacAulay, Minister of Veteran’s Affairs
I would say that for starters the Minister of Veteran’s Affairs, the “Honourable” Lawrence MacAulay, needs to resign IMMEDIATELY. VAC has been a dysfunctional abomination for a very, very long time, but this ridiculousness has about topped it all and the person in charge MUST GO.
MAID for the mentally ill?
It’s pretty clear to me that the idiot VAC agent doesn’t seem to be too familiar with the Government of Canada’s stance regarding MAID and mental illness right now. A mental illness does NOT meet the eligibility requirements for MAID in the first place, so it wasn’t supposed to be brought up AT ALL, to begin with.
Now, either the VAC agent has a deficient IQ, in which case they shouldn’t be working there in the first place, or the mentally deficient VAC agent wasn’t properly instructed on the law by his equally mentally deficient superiors. Either way, there needs to be some SERIOUS training or re-training done here.
About mental illness and MAID
If a mental illness is the only medical condition leading you to consider MAID, you are not eligible to seek MAID at this time. Under the new changes made to the law, the exclusion will remain in effect until March 17, 2023.
While I may find the idea of MAID distasteful for myself personally, I find the idea of MAID being offered to the mentally ill as being absolutely repugnant. Mental illness cannot by any stretch of the imagination be equated to a terminal illness, and those who would argue otherwise must in my estimation be mentally ill themselves. In this case then perhaps these people ought to be euthanized.
A duty to serve, not kill.
It is the duty of VAC employees to serve our veterans and make sure that they are taken care of properly, not dead. You will forgive me and many thousands of others who are tonight left wondering if that isn’t really the plan. To counsel the mentally ill to kill themselves, because it would alleviate their pain and suffering, but also help alleviate the backlog of cases and the billions of dollars that have to be spent caring for them.
There must be a Royal Commission impanelled to deal with the VAC issues on and for all.
I am calling upon our federally elected officials in Ottawa to do the right thing and call for a Royal Commission of Inquiry to look into what has gone so horribly, horribly wrong with the system and what can be done to fix it in the most expedient manner possible. Perhaps that will include offering MAID counselling for any VAC agents displaying signs of intellectual deficiency in the future.
On Tuesday Mr Albanese said he had been told by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet that Mr Morrison became joint minister for the health, finance, treasury, home affairs and resources portfolios in the two years before losing power in May.
Shaima Khalil, Australia Correspondent BBC.com
Well then. Just when I thought that Australian politics couldn’t get any weirder than it already has, a story out today showed me that I was wrong on that point. In the three years that I have followed and written about politics in the land down under, I thought that I had heard everything. Far from being the world’s most stable democracy, Australia has looked more like the kind of corrupt police state one might see in Asia or perhaps Central/South America. During his tenure as Prime Minister, Scott “ScoMo” Morrison appears to have taken micro-management to some new and rather ridiculous heights. Despite not outwardly appearing to be the type, Morrison was acting very much the Strongman, akin to others like Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Fidel Castro, and Manuel “Pineapple Face” Noriega.
BBC Australian Correspondent Shaima Khalil writes an excellent analysis of the bizarre rant Morrison posted on Facebook only four hours before the time I wrote this.
Some ministers – including the then finance minister Mathias Cormann – were reportedly unaware they were sharing portfolios with Mr Morrison.
Shaima Khalil, Australia Correspondent BBC.com
Unbeknownst to anyone, Morrison had secretly appointed himself as the joint minister of health, finance, treasury, home affairs, and resources.
At one point in his leadership, Mr Morrison was also operating as minister of health, finance, home affairs, resources and the treasury. High profile ministerial positions – and the decision-making powers that come with them. All now centralized by one person. All done in secret.
Shaima Khalil, Australia Correspondent BBC.com
If you’re thinking this is veering off the democracy road you wouldn’t be wrong.
I remember when the former prime minister would stand alongside his then health minister Greg Hunt to hold Covid briefings. Little did the public know that they were hearing from two health minister – one of them secretly self-appointed.
Shaima Khalil, Australia Correspondent BBC.com
The Facebook Post.
When I saw this for the first time, I thought that it had been posted on a Scott Morrison parody account, but as it so happens this is legit.
At the time that I am writing this, the Facebook post in question remains up, but in the event that it gets taken down I wanted to preserve its content, all 1,279 words of it.
Because, COVID.
The devastating impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated recession required an unprecedented policy response from our Government.
These were extraordinary times and they required extraordinary measures to respond. Our Government’s overriding objective was to save lives and livelihoods, which we achieved. To achieve this we needed to ensure continuity of government and robust administrative arrangements to deal with the unexpected in what was a period of constant uncertainty during the nation’s biggest crisis outside of wartime.
Information and advice changed daily and even hourly. Meetings with Ministers, officials and advisers were constant, as was liaison with industry and other stakeholders as we were dealing with everything from supply chain shocks to business closures, the overwhelming of the social security and hospital system and the sourcing of critical medical supplies and workforce. The prospect of civil disruption, extensive fatalities and economic collapse was real, especially in the early stages, which was occurring in other parts of the world.
The risk of Ministers becoming incapacitated, sick, hospitalised, incapable of doing their work at a critical hour or even fatality was very real. The Home Affairs Minister was struck down with COVID-19 early in the pandemic and the UK Prime Minister was on a ventilator and facing the very real prospect of dying of COVID-19.
The Parliament was suspended from sitting for a time and Cabinet and others meetings were unable to be held face to face, as occurred with businesses and the public more generally.
As Prime Minister I considered it necessary to put in place safeguards, redundancies and contingencies to ensure the continuity and effective operation of Government during this crisis period, which extended for the full period of my term.
To ensure oversight, the Government, with the support of the Opposition, established a concurrent public Senate Inquiry into the management of COVID that effectively ran for the duration of my term as Prime Minister.
In addition I took the precaution of being given authority to administer various departments of state should the need arise due to incapacity of a Minister or in the national interest. This was done in relation to departments where Ministers were vested with specific powers under their legislation that were not subject to oversight by Cabinet, including significant financial authorities.
Given the significant nature of many of these powers I considered this to be a prudent and responsible action as Prime Minister.
It is not uncommon for multiple Ministers to be sworn to administer the same Department. However, given that such additional Ministers were in a more junior position in the relevant Departments, and would not be familiar with all the details of the pandemic response, I considered it appropriate that the redundancy be put in place at a higher level within the Government and not at a more junior level.
The major Department for which this was considered was the Health Department, given the extensive powers afforded to the Minister by the Biosecurity Act. This was put in place on March 14, 2020. The Department of Finance was added on March 30, 2020.
As an added administrative precaution, as a ‘belts and braces’ approach, the Departments of Treasury and Home Affairs were added some time after in May 2021. I did not consider it was likely that it would be necessary to exercise powers in these areas, but the future was very difficult to predict during the pandemic. As events demonstrated with the resurgence of COVID-19 in the second half of 2021, we could never take certainty for granted. In hindsight these arrangements were unnecessary and until seeking advice from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet today, I had not recollected these arrangements having been put in place. There was a lot going on at the time.
Thankfully it was not necessary for me to trigger use of any of these powers. In the event that I would have to use such powers I would have done so disclosing the authority by which I was making such decisions. The authority was pre approved to ensure there would be no delay in being able to make decisions or take actions should the need arise.
The crisis was a highly dynamic environment and it was important to plan ahead and take what precautions could lawfully be put in place to ensure I could act, as Prime Minister, if needed.
It is important to note that throughout this time Ministers in all Departments, where I was provided with authority to act, exercised full control of their Departments and portfolios without intervention. Ministerial briefs were not copied to me as Prime Minister in a co-Minister capacity, as this was not the nature of the arrangement. These arrangements were there as a ‘break glass in case of emergency’ safeguard. I also did not wish Ministers to be second guessing themselves or for there to be the appearance to be a right of appeal or any diminishing of their authority to exercise their responsibilities, as this was not the intention of putting these arrangements in place. I simply wanted them to get on with their job, which they did admirably and I am grateful for their service.
The decision in relation to the Department of Industry, Energy and Resources was undertaken in April 2021 for separate reasons. This was the consequence of my decision to consider the issues of the PEP11 license directly. Under the legislation the decision is not taken by Cabinet, but unilaterally by a Minister with authority to administer that Department. I sought and was provided with the authority to administer matters in relation to this Department and considered this issue observing all the necessary advice and issues pertaining to the matter before making a decision, without prejudice, which I announced publicly. Once having been given the authority to consider this matter I advised the Minister of my intention to do so and proceeded to consider the matter. I retained full confidence in Minister Pitt who
I was pleased to have serve in my Ministry. I believe I made the right decision in the national interest. This was the only matter I involved myself directly with in this or any other Department.
The use of the powers by a Prime Minister to exercise authority to administer Departments has clearly caused concern. I regret this, but acted in good faith in a crisis.
I used such powers on one occasion only. I did not seek to interfere with Ministers in the conduct of their portfolio as there were no circumstances that warranted their use, except in the case of the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources which I have explained.
The pandemic has been a difficult time for Australia, although we have performed better than almost any other developed country in the world. There is no guide book in these circumstances and there is much commentary that will be offered in hindsight from the comfort of relatively calmer conditions. It is not surprising that some of this commentary will have a partisan or other motive, but that’s politics. In a democracy it is a positive thing for these issues to be discussed and for experience to inform future decisions and I hope my statement will help inform that process.
I have endeavoured to set out the context and reasoning for the decisions I took as Prime Minister in a highly unusual time. I did so in good faith, seeking to exercise my responsibilities as Prime Minister which exceeded those of any other member of the Government, or Parliament. For any offence to my colleagues I apologise. I led an outstanding team who did an excellent job and provided me great service and loyalty as Ministers.
Former Australian PM Scott “ScoMo” Morrison, Facebook post August 16, 2022.
Five hours before making the Facebook post in which he admits to taking joint control of THREE portfolios. Somehow he seems to have remembered another two portfolios following the interview. This then begs the question as to whether or not he stopped at five or if perhaps he just said “screw it” and decided to throw caution to the wind, assuming this role for the entirety of his cabinet.
This whole coming clean thing seems to be new territory for ScoMo, so I suppose he could be forgiven for stumbling out of the gate.
The cat’s out of the bag.
On Tuesday Mr Albanese said he had been told by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet that Mr Morrison became joint minister for the health, finance, treasury, home affairs and resources portfolios in the two years before losing power in May.
Shaima Khalil, Australia Correspondent BBC.com
It seems as though Morrison knew that he was busted, and so he decided to try and get ahead of things before they spiralled too far out of control. I don’t think he managed to accomplish what he set out to do if this is in fact the case.
More Yet To Come.
My sources in Oz who are in the know about things tell me that there is going to be plenty more yet to come. I’m hearing that the pins have been pulled on some grenades that will be going off in the media very soon, and some big players are about to resemble Tetley Tea Bags. The ones with 2,000 perforations.
It appears as though I’m going to have to make another bowl of popcorn.
His Excellency Ambassador Witold Dzielski, ambassador of Poland to Canada
Your Excellency,
I would like to take a moment to respond to your August 11th article in Esprit de Corps, “NATO’s Eastern Flank – Our Common Responsibility”.
I most definitely agree with your opening assertion that we are all of us at a turning point in history. It is beyond this point in the article, however, that we begin to disagree on a few things.
Sadly, Russia’s brutal and unprovoked aggression against Ukraine shows how, in the space of hours, a legacy of generations can be turned to ruins.
The world remains shocked by the savagery and brutality of the Russian invasion: the massacre of civilians, destruction of infrastructure and the wanton targeting of public facilities such as hospitals, schools and shopping malls.
To begin, I believe that it is either disingenuous or naive of anyone to suggest that this aggression has been unprovoked. It shouldn’t take an expert to tell you that NATO’s actions from 1991 to the current day would have brought us to where we are at today.
That the Russians have acted with savagery and brutality also comes as no great surprise to anybody, frankly, we’ve all seen what they are capable of in the past. But what has been a surprise is how long this has dragged out so far, and how badly the Russian military has performed until now.
Historic Polish-Soviet animus.
Make no mistake your Excellency I understand the visceral reaction that many Poles have when it comes to their feelings about Russians, and the actions of the Soviet Union before and during the invasion by the Nazi’s on September 1st, 1939. Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler conspired to carve up Poland in the wake of the invasion, and the result would be the loss of a generation of your potential best and brightest in the Katyn Forest. Over 17,000 members of the Polish officer corps were murdered on Stalin’s order
Solidarność
Like everyone else did back then, I watched the events of the world through a television screen on the nightly news, and in the early ’80s, the Solidarity trade union and its leader Lech Walesa were on regularly. We became familiar with the Gdansk shipyards and with the equipment that was being sent out to quell demonstrations. Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelsky was deploying well-armed and equipped riot police and soldiers firing rubber bullets into some crowds and vehicles with water cannons against other crowds of pro-democracy demonstrators.
I would come to know several people who had either been exiled from or had managed to escape from Poland. Treated as criminals by the Soviet puppet Jaruzelsky, I met engineers and others who had to flee to Canada after being exiled by the communist regime. I listened to many, many stories from friends or their parents, or from Polish co-workers who would happily tell a curious person about life in Poland at that time.
I even bought a Solidarność pin to show my support for the brave men and women of Poland who were fighting against an oppressive regime. Once Karol Cardinal Wojtila was elected Supreme Pontiff in late 1978, the world seemed to know that this Polish Pope was about to set some historic things into motion. The greatest battle of the Cold War was about to begin, and Gdansk, Poland was where the front line would start. Poland was going to be playing a leading role in the battle to leave the Warsaw Pact and communism behind for the history books to recall. It was now also the dawn of the cable news network and the 24-hour news cycle, and CNN allowed us all to be able to watch history unfold in real-time. Things were much, much different back then.
Bias
It is therefore difficult for me to believe that Poland’s actions in the present day haven’t been coloured by this history.
NATO evolution 1949-1991, 1991-Present.
At one point in time, I did believe in NATO, that point lasting up until the time the Soviet Union became Russia again actually. It was all downhill after that with the fiasco in the Balkans being a rather bad start to the new era of a NATO without a Soviet adversary. The way I see it, NATO is just as much to blame for the current crisis facing the humanoids of this planet as does Russia.
Such a very different world now.
Aside from the obvious fact that it is now 30 years older, the world is a vastly different one than the one that existed from the early ’80s to the early ’90s. The balance of power looked nothing at all like it does today, where we no longer live in the bipolar world of east vs. west. Western influence has drastically waned, while China is on the verge of emerging as the next superpower, and Russia attempting to recapture the title it once held.
Even with tensions at their highest in November of 1983, when the TV movie “The Day After” premiered, I seem to recall feeling safer back then as opposed to now. While Ronald Reagan was in office and there was a Soviet state funeral seemingly every year for a while, I was still able to rest assured that Mutually Assured Destruction was going to keep the sides from launching their missiles at each other.
The MAD doctrine is completely inapplicable today, it just doesn’t work. There are now so many actors involved including non-state actors like terrorist groups such as Hamas or Islamic Jihad. Rogue states like North Korea and Iran have also complicated the mix even further, the world the NATO allies faced was not the one the NATO of today faces whatsoever. NATO cannot simply continue to act the way it would have 30 years ago and expect a damn thing to work.
Not cheering for either side.
I have a natural aversion to liking Putin so I obviously do not want to see him come out on top of this, which should therefore translate into support for NATO and the Ukrainians. It doesn’t translate to this at all, and so I found myself not really cheering for either side when this started in February. I didn’t want to see Vladimir the shirtless come out as the victor, but I couldn’t handle seeing NATO come out on top either.
It’s an untenable situation because it means that there is no good ending for this either way. I felt a sense of relief later when I found out that I wasn’t the only one to feel this way, in fact, there are a LOT of people who think this way. Many of them are combat veterans of the War in Afghanistan, and they were feeling just as bewildered as I was too it seemed.
NATO’s Eastern Flank – Our Common Responsibility
An obvious opening statement.
The Russia of Vladimir Putin is exhibiting history’s worst elements – authoritarianism, nationalism, imperialism and colonialism. Any remaining illusions of Russia as a reliable partner in international affairs are gone.
Again, Vladimir Vladimirovich has in the past longed for the good old days of the Soviet Union so this is also no great surprise. What would completely shock me is if the Russian military were to suddenly act with professionalism and strictly within the bounds of international humanitarian standards.
What of Afghanistan?
Poland and Canada are jointly weighing the consequences of Russia’s invasion; importantly, they are responding appropriately and resolutely to its implications for peace and stability in the world. As NATO allies and like-minded countries, Poland and Canada are staunchly defending fundamental values that are seriously being jeopardized by Putin’s authoritarian policies. As two countries and two nations, our political institutions and civic organisations, in tandem with millions of our individual citizens, have hastened to assist Ukraine and Ukrainians in their time of need.
It was also a year ago at about this time that NATO and other like-minded countries were fleeing Afghanistan before it was over-run by a loosely-knit band of terrorists who had no apparent leader. There’s still the small matter of the humanitarian disaster that NATO left in its wake, and untold thousands of people remain at risk with no plan on how to deal with them in a timely and efficient unbureaucratic manner.
Not an entirely unified group.
NATO. Unity in light of the Madrid Summit
Adopted during the Madrid Summit, the new Strategic Concept sets out NATO’s main lines of action and development over a number of years. It pinpoints Russia as the most serious and direct threat to the security of the Allied countries, and it reiterates the idea that collective defense against all threats remains the Alliance’s principal aim and responsibility. This is a point of view shared by both Poland and Canada.
Polish aid.
Poland, in many respects, has provided more assistance to war-torn Ukraine than any other single country. With regard to monetary aid to Kyiv, Poland has delivered USD 3.1 billion dollars, or 0.46% of its GDP (as of 2 June 2022), in addition to extensive financial support to individual Ukrainian refugees residing in Poland. Warsaw has similarly provided wide-ranging political and diplomatic assistance to Kyiv both in the international sense and in bilateral formats. This action has resulted, among other things, in the imposition of sanctions on Russia.
I should like to remind your Excellency that Canada has been falling short of its NATO commitments forever, so I hope you aren’t trying to lay a guilt trip on us now. We get enough grief from the US about this already. Canada is also in a position where it is having to try and BORROW the military aid it has pledged to Ukraine, in particular, the thousands of $5,000 apiece artillery shells that Ukrainians will eventually be lobbing at Russian positions.
A touch of hubris just to keep things interesting.
A total of 4.57 million Ukrainian refugees have crossed the Polish-Ukrainian border since the beginning of the Russian invasion. For most their stay is temporary, while others continue to remain in Poland. This influx of Ukrainian refugees has triggered an unprecedented outpouring of generosity from Polish citizens, many of whom donate clothes and food, drive to the border to help transport refugees, and most importantly, open their homes unconditionally to those in need. Polish institutions on a governmental and local level have also extended privileges and social support to our Ukrainian sisters and brothers – identical to what Polish citizens themselves receive. This support ranges from free access to education and health care, psychological support and a variety of social benefits.
Fortunately, Afghanistan is far enough away that well, you don’t need to worry about any refugees from there getting near Polish borders.
I do not feel so obliged sir.
Thus, it is the obligation of our governments, media and experts to not allow the so-called phenomenon of war fatigue to creep into our mindset. We need to remain watchful with respect to some of our politicians and business actors who might hope to return to business as usual with Russia on the energy front. Furthermore, we need to understand that energy co-operation with Moscow will always have strings attached. These strings will be used to blackmail and destabilize the links between our countries. For this reason, Europe must continue strengthening its independence from the Russian energy supplies. Given its vast resources, technology and know-how, Canada has a special role to play in this regard.
I also take deference to your statement regarding the obligations that you expect this or any other sovereign nation to undertake. I also take umbrage with the fact that you feel it necessary to remind us what we should and should not prioritize when it comes to matters of Canadian foreign policy and security. We got it, thank you though.
With regards to your concerns about “war fatigue”, perhaps if NATO hadn’t been mishandling military and foreign policy since the early 1990’s there wouldn’t be near as many wars to become fatigued about.
I would also submit that recent events have shown that NATO is hardly united on the issues, in particular when it comes to the matter of energy security. It has caused a rift with Germany, a long-standing NATO partner, and this cannot be denied.
NATO’s chickens coming home to roost.
The brain trust within NATO can hardly be expected to be able to do anything to fix this current crisis since it is, after all, a crisis entirely of their own making. The organization is responsible for this mess, what makes you think I believe that it has any hope of fixing things?
Many innocent people will once again pay the price for their leaders’ hubris.
On both sides of this, Ukrainian AND Russian. I grieve for the innocent people in Ukraine who have been caught in the middle of this, blown to pieces in the crossfire and while under direct attack. I also feel for the young Russian conscripts who have been thrown into this meat-grinder because of all of this. Dying for nothing, fighting in an action they neither understand nor want any part of.
A lot of men and women who made the choice to wear the uniform of the armed forces of their countries will die that otherwise wouldn’t. And for what?
Grieving Russian mothers are Putin’s kryptonite.
I am of the firm belief at this moment that the world is in the most danger it has been in, ever, and frankly sir, right now I’m not holding out a whole lot of hope that things will work out. If the world does stand a hope of getting saved from the brink, it will be because of the impassioned cries of Russia’s women.
Very early on in his very first term as President of Russia, Putin had to deal with another group of wives and mothers, these ones the relatives of the crew of the submarine Kursk. As Russian officials mishandled the situation, Putin let things spiral out of his control as the nation witnessed a grieving mother being sedated on live television.
Not my circus…
Meeting of NATO countries leaders in Madrid, June 2022. President of the Republic of Poland Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau. (At least everyone got the memo about wearing blue to the photo op.)
As I have mentioned previously, I have spent considerable time speaking with people who came here from Poland, so I became used to the accent and the peculiarities of language that are unique to each one in its way. Sometimes if you listen you can hear these peculiarities, for instance, I was able to surmise that many Polish people express surprise in a conversation by saying “can you believe it?” in a manner and tone that might seem somewhat incredulous.
In the same way, I also discovered that the Polish had a saying that went “Not my circus, not my monkeys”, or basically, whatever seems to have gone haywire here is NOT my problem at all.
The problem however your Excellency, is that this IS our bloody circus and those ARE our damn monkeys, and they are now on the loose, and now nobody is safe.
I have recently discovered a work written by retired United States Marine Corps Major General Smedley Darlington Butler in 1935, titled “War is a Racket”, which was an expanded form of a speech he began giving after his retirement in 1931. It seriously resonated with me, and as I finished reading it, I realized that some 30 years before Dwight D. Eisenhower would first use the term “military-industrial complex” in his 1961 farewell address to the nation before turning things over to John F. Kennedy, Butler had already identified it.
He sums things up quite nicely in five chapters, though I find Chapter Three of particular importance. It’s the chapter where he lays out who pays the price for war and the answer is pretty obvious. It’s the average person, the ones like my friends who decided to serve their country, only to have it go horribly awry and as a result, would somehow never be the same again. That is simply a price that is too high and should no longer be getting paid.
In conclusion.
Please understand your Excellency that it is not my intention to insult you personally in this response, however, I believe that the circumstances dictate that I speak plainly with you today. I hold no ill will towards you nor any other citizen of Poland, Russia, or Ukraine.
It is the governments of the world who have placed us all in this untenable position, and as such, I categorically reject what it is that you are saying about this matter.
Perhaps, in another time, in another universe, we could have been friends, perhaps had drinks together. That time may or may not yet happen, and I truly wish that it will. But not the way that things stand right now your Excellency.
That sir, is my five cents, or 10 zloty worth on the subject.
A friend of mine sent me the link to this piece that was written in 1935 by retired United States Marine Corps Major General Smedley Darlington Butler. Butler was born July 30th, 1881, in West Chester, Pennsylvania to Quaker parents, and received his commission as a First Lieutenant in the USMC on April 8th, 1899.
Ol’ Gimlet Eye
Butler would go on to become the most decorated Marine in its history until that distinction was passed on to the legendary Lt. Gen. Lewis “Chesty” Puller. It should be noted however that Puller was never awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, whereas Butler was awarded the accolade twice. He earned his nickname during one of his three deployments to Nicaragua, where he was given the name after leading his men into battle despite having a fever of 104 degrees from a bout of malaria.
An incredible TWO Congressional Medals of Honor.
He won his first CMH in 1914, following action in Vera Cruz, Mexico where the then Major “was eminent and conspicuous in command of his Battalion. He exhibited courage and skill in leading his men through the action of the 22nd and in the final occupation of the city.”
His second was awarded only 19 months later for action in Haiti “for bravery and forceful leadership as Commanding Officer of detachments of Marines and seamen of the USS Connecticut in repulsing Caco resistance on Fort Riviere, Haiti, 17 November 1915″ when he was a Lt. Colonel.
Service in the Great War.
During World War I, he commanded the 13th Regiment in France. For exceptionally meritorious service, he was awarded the Army Distinguished Service Medal, the Navy Distinguished Service Medal, and the French Order of the Black Star.
Post-war service and retirement.
Following the war Butler would go on to serve as Commanding General in Quantico, Virginia and San Diego, California, spending time in China as well before retiring on October 1st, 1931.
After retiring, Butler toured the United States giving a speech he called “War is a Racket”, and upon seeing how successful it was he decided to publish a longer version as a booklet in 1935.
Rather than publishing it in its entirety, I am going to select key passages from each chapter, the exception being Chapter Three which I am posting in its entirety. I would however recommend everyone click on the link and give this a good read for themselves.
Context
Whenever studying the people of times gone by, it is ALWAYS important to put things into the proper context, namely, the times during which they lived and wrote the things that they did.
So, here is a retired Marine Corps General, who spent 33 years in uniform, and whose experiences in the late 19th and early 20th centuries shaped his worldview.
At the time he retires the world is gripped by the Great Depression and Adolf Hitler is still just a loud-mouthed rabble-rouser. By 1935 Hitler has taken over as the Chancellor of Germany, and rumours of another European war have started to circulate. The United States is very much in the hands of isolationists who want absolutely nothing to do with another war in Europe, Hitler be damned.
The changing nature of war.
Prior to the War of 1914-18, European wars had been waged for economic reasons, between the various royal houses spread across the continent. It was being done for the overall economic gain of the nation, or at least the royal houses leading them anyway. For the most part.
Although World War One may have started out as a battle between a bunch of European cousins, it would ultimately end up becoming the beginning of the age of the modern military-industrial complex.
Everyone should read this.
This message is as relevant today as it was almost 100 years on, so I would ask you to please take a bit of time to look this over, thoroughly.
Humanity needs to remember these words now more than ever.
Chapter One: War Is a Racket.
WAR is a racket. It always has been.
A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.
Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few — the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.
And what is this bill?
This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.
….a war that might well cost us tens of billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of lives of Americans, and many more hundreds of thousands of physically maimed and mentally unbalanced men.
Of course, for this loss, there would be a compensating profit — fortunes would be made. Millions and billions of dollars would be piled up. By a few. Munitions makers. Bankers. Ship builders. Manufacturers. Meat packers. Speculators. They would fare well.
Chapter Two: Who Makes the Profits?
The World War, rather our brief participation in it, has cost the United States some $52,000,000,000. Figure it out. That means $400 to every American man, woman, and child. And we haven’t paid the debt yet. We are paying it, our children will pay it, and our children’s children probably still will be paying the cost of that war.
The normal profits of a business concern in the United States are six, eight, ten, and sometimes twelve percent. But war-time profits — ah! that is another matter — twenty, sixty, one hundred, three hundred, and even eighteen hundred per cent — the sky is the limit. All that traffic will bear. Uncle Sam has the money. Let’s get it.
Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people — didn’t one of them testify before a Senate committee recently that their powder won the war? Or saved the world for democracy? Or something? How did they do in the war? They were a patriotic corporation. Well, the average earnings of the du Ponts for the period 1910 to 1914 were $6,000,000 a year. It wasn’t much, but the du Ponts managed to get along on it. Now let’s look at their average yearly profit during the war years, 1914 to 1918. Fifty-eight million dollars a year profit we find! Nearly ten times that of normal times, and the profits of normal times were pretty good. An increase in profits of more than 950 per cent.
Take one of our little steel companies that patriotically shunted aside the making of rails and girders and bridges to manufacture war materials. Well, their 1910-1914 yearly earnings averaged $6,000,000. Then came the war. And, like loyal citizens, Bethlehem Steel promptly turned to munitions making. Did their profits jump — or did they let Uncle Sam in for a bargain? Well, their 1914-1918 average was $49,000,000 a year!
Let’s group these five, with three smaller companies. The total yearly average profits of the pre-war period 1910-1914 were $137,480,000. Then along came the war. The average yearly profits for this group skyrocketed to $408,300,000.
A little increase in profits of approximately 200 per cent.
Does war pay? It paid them. But they aren’t the only ones. There are still others. Let’s take leather.
For the three-year period before the war the total profits of Central Leather Company were $3,500,000. That was approximately $1,167,000 a year. Well, in 1916 Central Leather returned a profit of $15,000,000, a small increase of 1,100 per cent. That’s all. The General Chemical Company averaged a profit for the three years before the war of a little over $800,000 a year. Came the war, and the profits jumped to $12,000,000. a leap of 1,400 per cent.
American Sugar Refining Company averaged $2,000,000 a year for the three years before the war. In 1916 a profit of $6,000,000 was recorded.
Listen to Senate Document No. 259. The Sixty-Fifth Congress, reporting on corporate earnings and government revenues. Considering the profits of 122 meat packers, 153 cotton manufacturers, 299 garment makers, 49 steel plants, and 340 coal producers during the war. Profits under 25 per cent were exceptional. For instance the coal companies made between 100 per cent and 7,856 per cent on their capital stock during the war. The Chicago packers doubled and tripled their earnings.
But here’s how some of the other patriotic industrialists and speculators chiseled their way into war profits.
Take the shoe people. They like war. It brings business with abnormal profits. They made huge profits on sales abroad to our allies. Perhaps, like the munitions manufacturers and armament makers, they also sold to the enemy. For a dollar is a dollar whether it comes from Germany or from France. But they did well by Uncle Sam too. For instance, they sold Uncle Sam 35,000,000 pairs of hobnailed service shoes. There were 4,000,000 soldiers. Eight pairs, and more, to a soldier. My regiment during the war had only one pair to a soldier. Some of these shoes probably are still in existence. They were good shoes. But when the war was over Uncle Sam has a matter of 25,000,000 pairs left over. Bought — and paid for. Profits recorded and pocketed.
There were lots of brilliant ideas for profit making during the war.
One very versatile patriot sold Uncle Sam twelve dozen 48-inch wrenches. Oh, they were very nice wrenches. The only trouble was that there was only one nut ever made that was large enough for these wrenches. That is the one that holds the turbines at Niagara Falls. Well, after Uncle Sam had bought them and the manufacturer had pocketed the profit, the wrenches were put on freight cars and shunted all around the United States in an effort to find a use for them. When the Armistice was signed it was indeed a sad blow to the wrench manufacturer. He was just about to make some nuts to fit the wrenches. Then he planned to sell these, too, to your Uncle Sam.
Still another had the brilliant idea that colonels shouldn’t ride in automobiles, nor should they even ride on horseback. One has probably seen a picture of Andy Jackson riding in a buckboard. Well, some 6,000 buckboards were sold to Uncle Sam for the use of colonels! Not one of them was used. But the buckboard manufacturer got his war profit.
It has been estimated by statisticians and economists and researchers that the war cost your Uncle Sam $52,000,000,000. Of this sum, $39,000,000,000 was expended in the actual war itself. This expenditure yielded $16,000,000,000 in profits. That is how the 21,000 billionaires and millionaires got that way. This $16,000,000,000 profits is not to be sneezed at. It is quite a tidy sum. And it went to a very few.
Chapter Three: Who Pays the Bills?
I have chosen to print this chapter in its entirety.
Who provides the profits — these nice little profits of 20, 100, 300, 1,500 and 1,800 per cent? We all pay them — in taxation. We paid the bankers their profits when we bought Liberty Bonds at $100.00 and sold them back at $84 or $86 to the bankers. These bankers collected $100 plus. It was a simple manipulation. The bankers control the security marts. It was easy for them to depress the price of these bonds. Then all of us — the people — got frightened and sold the bonds at $84 or $86. The bankers bought them. Then these same bankers stimulated a boom and government bonds went to par — and above. Then the bankers collected their profits.
But the soldier pays the biggest part of the bill.
If you don’t believe this, visit the American cemeteries on the battlefields abroad. Or visit any of the veteran’s hospitals in the United States. On a tour of the country, in the midst of which I am at the time of this writing, I have visited eighteen government hospitals for veterans. In them are a total of about 50,000 destroyed men — men who were the pick of the nation eighteen years ago. The very able chief surgeon at the government hospital; at Milwaukee, where there are 3,800 of the living dead, told me that mortality among veterans is three times as great as among those who stayed at home.
Boys with a normal viewpoint were taken out of the fields and offices and factories and classrooms and put into the ranks. There they were remolded; they were made over; they were made to “about face”; to regard murder as the order of the day. They were put shoulder to shoulder and, through mass psychology, they were entirely changed. We used them for a couple of years and trained them to think nothing at all of killing or of being killed.
Then, suddenly, we discharged them and told them to make another “about face” ! This time they had to do their own readjustment, sans [without] mass psychology, sans officers’ aid and advice and sans nation-wide propaganda. We didn’t need them any more. So we scattered them about without any “three-minute” or “Liberty Loan” speeches or parades. Many, too many, of these fine young boys are eventually destroyed, mentally, because they could not make that final “about face” alone.
In the government hospital in Marion, Indiana, 1,800 of these boys are in pens! Five hundred of them in a barracks with steel bars and wires all around outside the buildings and on the porches. These already have been mentally destroyed. These boys don’t even look like human beings. Oh, the looks on their faces! Physically, they are in good shape; mentally, they are gone.
There are thousands and thousands of these cases, and more and more are coming in all the time. The tremendous excitement of the war, the sudden cutting off of that excitement — the young boys couldn’t stand it.
That’s a part of the bill. So much for the dead — they have paid their part of the war profits. So much for the mentally and physically wounded — they are paying now their share of the war profits. But the others paid, too — they paid with heartbreaks when they tore themselves away from their firesides and their families to don the uniform of Uncle Sam — on which a profit had been made. They paid another part in the training camps where they were regimented and drilled while others took their jobs and their places in the lives of their communities. The paid for it in the trenches where they shot and were shot; where they were hungry for days at a time; where they slept in the mud and the cold and in the rain — with the moans and shrieks of the dying for a horrible lullaby.
But don’t forget — the soldier paid part of the dollars and cents bill too.
Up to and including the Spanish-American War, we had a prize system, and soldiers and sailors fought for money. During the Civil War they were paid bonuses, in many instances, before they went into service. The government, or states, paid as high as $1,200 for an enlistment. In the Spanish-American War they gave prize money. When we captured any vessels, the soldiers all got their share — at least, they were supposed to. Then it was found that we could reduce the cost of wars by taking all the prize money and keeping it, but conscripting [drafting] the soldier anyway. Then soldiers couldn’t bargain for their labor, Everyone else could bargain, but the soldier couldn’t.
Napoleon once said,
“All men are enamored of decorations . . . they positively hunger for them.”
So by developing the Napoleonic system — the medal business — the government learned it could get soldiers for less money, because the boys liked to be decorated. Until the Civil War there were no medals. Then the Congressional Medal of Honor was handed out. It made enlistments easier. After the Civil War no new medals were issued until the Spanish-American War.
In the World War, we used propaganda to make the boys accept conscription. They were made to feel ashamed if they didn’t join the army.
So vicious was this war propaganda that even God was brought into it. With few exceptions our clergymen joined in the clamor to kill, kill, kill. To kill the Germans. God is on our side . . . it is His will that the Germans be killed.
And in Germany, the good pastors called upon the Germans to kill the allies . . . to please the same God. That was a part of the general propaganda, built up to make people war conscious and murder conscious.
Beautiful ideals were painted for our boys who were sent out to die. This was the “war to end all wars.” This was the “war to make the world safe for democracy.” No one mentioned to them, as they marched away, that their going and their dying would mean huge war profits. No one told these American soldiers that they might be shot down by bullets made by their own brothers here. No one told them that the ships on which they were going to cross might be torpedoed by submarines built with United States patents. They were just told it was to be a “glorious adventure.”
Thus, having stuffed patriotism down their throats, it was decided to make them help pay for the war, too. So, we gave them the large salary of $30 a month.
All they had to do for this munificent sum was to leave their dear ones behind, give up their jobs, lie in swampy trenches, eat canned willy (when they could get it) and kill and kill and kill . . . and be killed.
But wait!
Half of that wage (just a little more than a riveter in a shipyard or a laborer in a munitions factory safe at home made in a day) was promptly taken from him to support his dependents, so that they would not become a charge upon his community. Then we made him pay what amounted to accident insurance — something the employer pays for in an enlightened state — and that cost him $6 a month. He had less than $9 a month left.
Then, the most crowning insolence of all — he was virtually blackjacked into paying for his own ammunition, clothing, and food by being made to buy Liberty Bonds. Most soldiers got no money at all on pay days.
We made them buy Liberty Bonds at $100 and then we bought them back — when they came back from the war and couldn’t find work — at $84 and $86. And the soldiers bought about $2,000,000,000 worth of these bonds!
Yes, the soldier pays the greater part of the bill. His family pays too. They pay it in the same heart-break that he does. As he suffers, they suffer. At nights, as he lay in the trenches and watched shrapnel burst about him, they lay home in their beds and tossed sleeplessly — his father, his mother, his wife, his sisters, his brothers, his sons, and his daughters.
When he returned home minus an eye, or minus a leg or with his mind broken, they suffered too — as much as and even sometimes more than he. Yes, and they, too, contributed their dollars to the profits of the munitions makers and bankers and shipbuilders and the manufacturers and the speculators made. They, too, bought Liberty Bonds and contributed to the profit of the bankers after the Armistice in the hocus-pocus of manipulated Liberty Bond prices.
And even now the families of the wounded men and of the mentally broken and those who never were able to readjust themselves are still suffering and still paying.
Chapter Four: How to Smash This Racket!
WELL, it’s a racket, all right.
A few profit — and the many pay. But there is a way to stop it. You can’t end it by disarmament conferences. You can’t eliminate it by peace parleys at Geneva. Well-meaning but impractical groups can’t wipe it out by resolutions. It can be smashed effectively only by taking the profit out of war.
The only way to smash this racket is to conscript capital and industry and labor before the nations manhood can be conscripted. One month before the Government can conscript the young men of the nation — it must conscript capital and industry and labor. Let the officers and the directors and the high-powered executives of our armament factories and our munitions makers and our shipbuilders and our airplane builders and the manufacturers of all the other things that provide profit in war time as well as the bankers and the speculators, be conscripted — to get $30 a month, the same wage as the lads in the trenches get.
Let all these kings and tycoons and masters of business and all those workers in industry and all our senators and governors and majors pay half of their monthly $30 wage to their families and pay war risk insurance and buy Liberty Bonds.
Why shouldn’t they?
Maybe I am a little too optimistic. Capital still has some say. So capital won’t permit the taking of the profit out of war until the people — those who do the suffering and still pay the price — make up their minds that those they elect to office shall do their bidding, and not that of the profiteers.
Another step necessary in this fight to smash the war racket is the limited plebiscite to determine whether a war should be declared. A plebiscite not of all the voters but merely of those who would be called upon to do the fighting and dying. There wouldn’t be very much sense in having a 76-year-old president of a munitions factory or the flat-footed head of an international banking firm or the cross-eyed manager of a uniform manufacturing plant — all of whom see visions of tremendous profits in the event of war — voting on whether the nation should go to war or not. They never would be called upon to shoulder arms — to sleep in a trench and to be shot. Only those who would be called upon to risk their lives for their country should have the privilege of voting to determine whether the nation should go to war.
There is ample precedent for restricting the voting to those affected. Many of our states have restrictions on those permitted to vote. In most, it is necessary to be able to read and write before you may vote. In some, you must own property. It would be a simple matter each year for the men coming of military age to register in their communities as they did in the draft during the World War and be examined physically. Those who could pass and who would therefore be called upon to bear arms in the event of war would be eligible to vote in a limited plebiscite. They should be the ones to have the power to decide — and not a Congress few of whose members are within the age limit and fewer still of whom are in physical condition to bear arms. Only those who must suffer should have the right to vote.
A third step in this business of smashing the war racket is to make certain that our military forces are truly forces for defense only.
To summarize: Three steps must be taken to smash the war racket.
We must take the profit out of war.
We must permit the youth of the land who would bear arms to decide whether or not there should be war.
We must limit our military forces to home defense purposes.
Chapter Five: To Hell With War!
I am not a fool as to believe that war is a thing of the past. I know the people do not want war, but there is no use in saying we cannot be pushed into another war.
Looking back, Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had “kept us out of war” and on the implied promise that he would “keep us out of war.” Yet, five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany.
In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their minds. The 4,000,000 young men who put on uniforms and marched or sailed away were not asked whether they wanted to go forth to suffer and die.
Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly?
Money.
There is only one way to disarm with any semblance of practicability. That is for all nations to get together and scrap every ship, every gun, every rifle, every tank, every war plane. Even this, if it were possible, would not be enough.
The next war, according to experts, will be fought not with battleships, not by artillery, not with rifles and not with machine guns. It will be fought with deadly chemicals and gases.
Secretly each nation is studying and perfecting newer and ghastlier means of annihilating its foes wholesale. Yes, ships will continue to be built, for the shipbuilders must make their profits. And guns still will be manufactured and powder and rifles will be made, for the munitions makers must make their huge profits. And the soldiers, of course, must wear uniforms, for the manufacturer must make their war profits too.
But victory or defeat will be determined by the skill and ingenuity of our scientists.
If we put them to work making poison gas and more and more fiendish mechanical and explosive instruments of destruction, they will have no time for the constructive job of building greater prosperity for all peoples. By putting them to this useful job, we can all make more money out of peace than we can out of war — even the munitions makers.
I was engaged in a discussion amongst some people about the state of affairs in Afghanistan after reports had come out on Sunday about a border skirmish between Taliban and Iranian troops at the border with Iran. This had come after the explosion earlier in the day that would turn out to be the CIA blowing up Ayman al-Zawahiri I had made something of a tongue-in-cheek comment about the Taliban having such a bad day, and that it had seemed to me as though everybody hated them. I mean hell, they’ve been known to have deadly factional clashes amongst themselves. A short time later I received a rather eloquent message from someone who wanted to remain anonymous, and I thought that it warranted being published. This individual is a retired professional with a bachelor’s degree and has experience living and working in the Middle East and Central Asia, having been to a number of countries including Syria.
I had been impressed not only by the response but also by the fact that it had been crafted and sent to me with the utmost confidence in a relatively short period of time, telling me that they knew of what they spoke. They also speak plainly and at times use explicit language that might be offensive to some readers, therefore I highly recommend discretion for anyone proceeding beyond this point. While I have made some minor changes to the formatting and have included photos and illustrations in this piece, I have left the content itself unchanged. I will also state that the contents published herein do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of either myself or Invictus Bellator Media Corporation.
Afghan Taliban fighters and villagers attend a gathering as they celebrate the peace deal signed between U.S. and Taliban in Laghman Province, Alingar district on March 2, 2020 / Wali Sabawoon / NurPhoto via Getty Images
Certainly, they do.
The ‘stans.
The other “Stans” hate the current Afghan Taliban (the Talibs) regime because it fulfills and supports the grassroots Western fear-driven view of countries with “Crazy Islamic Governments” that they are all trying to distance themselves from. Iran hates them because of what they as a Pashtun-dominated, predominantly Sunni organization, have done to the Shia/Hazaras for decades (such as recent bombings in Western Kabul targeting Hazaras) and because they draw US attention. From the Iranian perspective, who wants another US base in Helmand, close enough for sneaky sneaky JSOC ninjas to do ground incursions into Iran without detection?
Turkey.
Turkey hates them because it’s a short leap of Canadian and US-based Republican/MAGA/Scared Liberal/Green/Democrat/Conservative/People’s Party of Canada faith to draw the conclusions that “Erdogan = Muslim dictator, Taliban=Muslim dictators, therefore Erdogan=Taliban = WHY DO WE GIVE AID TO TURKEY, OMG THE USA HAS A BASE THERE????? OMG CLOSE INCIRLIK, OMG WHY DO WE LET L3 FROM CANADA GIVE CAMERAS TO THE BAKTAYR DRONES…AAHHH TERROR!
And greater scrutiny on Turkey may just draw forward the skeletons of the Ottoman (Turkish) Armenian Genocide of 1915 onwards, and the ongoing long-standing persecution of ethnic Kurds by the Ottoman Empire and modern-day Turkey back into the media cycle. And then there will be questions…. Turkey doesn’t want that.
Russia.
Russia hates them, well, because. So many books have been written on the subject, no need to mention it again here. That being said, would Russia try to exploit them as a lever against regional competitors? To keep the “Stans” off balance and a convenient buffer for Russia proper as it’s been since the days of the Tsars? To pressure Pakistan? To keep India off-balance? Absolutely. They may hate them… but would not be above using them.
Pakistan.
Pakistan hates them because they are shrugging off/ignoring ISI and Pakistani “advice/influence”. These Talibs grew up seeing Pakistan sell them out daily by playing USA vs Pakistan vs Taliban/Afghan Armed Faction chess where the Afghans always lost. If these Taliban are truly devout they have to realize Pakistan’s long-standing duplicity, finally, and say “enough is enough… yes, you let HiG and others hide there for years, but you have been FUCKING US for years”. Pakistan, of course, will not like to be called on its duplicitous bullshit.
India.
The Indians hate them because they are an unstable Islamic fanatic rulership in the region, and just because the Taliban hate the Pakistanis now, doesn’t mean that hate will stay hate, so therefore the Taliban can’t be trusted. This is bolstered by the fact that for religious and propaganda reasons, the Talibs need to hate the Indians on spec just because, so those feelings are mutual. It won’t stop India from making feelers into Afghanistan via aid and influence, to be a thorn in Pakistan’s side; if the Talibs rebuff India’s attempts… more reason to hate them.
Bangladesh.
Bangladesh hates the Taliban for causing the current refugee flood (think of Jordanian, Lebanese and Syrian feelings, reflected in their domestic policies towards Palestinian refugees that keep them impoverished, stateless and unable to own property) and because Western people (American Dems/Republicans and Euro Brexiteers and Greens, plus pretty much all Canadians with a limited view of the world) will look at a map and be like “OMFG Bangladesh is like 3cm away from Afghanistan on a map, so they might be ISLAMIC RADICALS THAT CRUSH HUMAN RIGHTS AND PERSECUTE LBGTQS++ PEOPLE and NOT EMBRACE GREEN ENERGY and MIGHT BE TERRORISTS so we CANNNOT GIVE THEM AID” so Bangladesh gets painted with the same brush and guess what no US/Western Aid Dollars for it. Plus the Talib recruits from Bangladesh and takes leave there while the Bangladeshi security service look the other way while pocketing the requisite bribe money proceeds.
China.
China hates them because again, instability, the Talibs likely are not willing to follow directions from Beijing, may not let China exploit their resources, and are generally a regional pain in the ass that could give the USA another “Foot in the Door” into the region, and just after they finally left after 20 years!
The Gulf States.
The Gulf States hate the Talibs because FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT’S HOLY WILL YOU STOP WITH THIS JIHAD ALREADY YOU ARE FUCKING UP OUR OIL SALES AND IT’S EXHAUSTING TRYING TO PRETEND TO BE FRIENDS WITH THE USA AND KEEPING UP THE CHARADE OF THAT WHILE YOU FUCK THE USA OFF IN PUBLIC AND THEN CALL US YOUR FRIENDS… AT SOME POINT THEY MAY START NOTICING!!! The Gulf States, of course, particularly their more virulent and fundamentalist Wahabbist elements, want all Westerners dead or converted to Islam, but they don’t want that stated in public because it’s bad for business and hampers the cash flow. No cash, hard to buy a new Lamborghini… Again, closeness to Talibs, such as the Taliban offices in Qatar, makes them suspect in the eyes of concerned citizens from Des Moines Iowa, Tyrell, Texas, and Cleveland.
Canada.
In the Great White North, no one in Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver or Toronto cares, nor does anyone in Red Deer, Iqaluit, Saint John or Revelstoke. Not that Canada’s thoughts or any lip service pontification by Canadian politicians would matter, because the Gulf States love current Canadian policies that hamstring Canada’s own domestic energy industry, essentially giving the Gulf States a ready, hungry energy market on a platter that they need make NO political concessions to access! Money talks… So they DON’T want the Talibs messing with cash flow!
North Korea.
NK hates the Talibs because they are subhumans who believe in the fairytale of Imaginary SkyGod which is anathema to the True Realism of Communism and the understanding that the Family Kim are the TRUE GODS. Plus, they are not orderly and are a chaotic society so worthy only of contempt. While not as morally corrupt as what the USA has done to their Brothers in the South, they still must be destroyed to ensure purity and order in the world. Plus, they may have much-needed resources, that NK will be unable to access under the Talib regime.
South Korea.
SK hates them because the US hates them and the last thing the SK wants are more fanatics on the doorstep, giving them another problem to deal with when “they know who the real enemy is” – ie The North and possibly China. They also hate the Talibs because they know that at some point the USA will get interested in quelling Afghan Terror again, which will draw attention, US Aid and diplomatic resolve away from supporting SK against NK and others, reducing their regional importance and making them stand more on their own vice relying on Big USA Brother whose attention is drawn away.
Also, Talibs in power and a failed Afghan state are not going to buy Samsung and LG appliances, Hyundai cars, trucks and equipment, Doosan excavators, paving machines and heavy equipment, which limits economic development and expansion, therefore it’s best they go so that the Afghan market can open up and benefit South Korea’s economy.
Australia.
Australia hates the Talibs because they know that due to the recently-consummated Pacific Defence BroMance (that Canada was excluded from, and rightly because Canada, despite rhetoric, is a non-lifter in the Pacific and inept, less lip service, in all aspects of Defence) they will get sucked into the USA’s next intervention there, so they are like “Oh Crikey like Vietnam again… and Iraq… and Afghanistan, fuck that shyte mate, we got to think about the Indonesians, sort the Solomon Islands out and get rid of these fackin migrants”. So they just don’t relish the thought of getting involved in that Afghan quagmire (some may describe it as a shower of shit) again, which they will if the USA goes in.
Plus, Australians killing Muslims in Afghanistan gives their greatest regional rival, Indonesia (the reason why Australia bought F-111 fighter-bombers, so they could fly them over Jakarta as needed and maybe influence the Indonesians with some High Explosive bombs If needed), a great source of diplomatic and regional influence ammunition to use against “Australian White Christian Commonwealth Colonizer Aggression” on the world stage, therefore opening Australia up to terror attacks from like-minded Western-influence-hating groups all over.
Singapore.
Singapore… like AC/DC says, Money Talks. Sucking interest into a worthless desert in SouthWest Asia draws attention from the Pacific Commons where Singapore’s economy needs the attention, US dollars, oil tanker transit money, wharfage fees, brokerage fees and the umbrella of security that US Carrier Battle Groups interested in playing Maritime Chess with China provide to Singapore. Carriers in the Indian Ocean flying air strikes into Afghanistan are less helpful.
Ukraine.
Ukraine and the Caspian Region… They are the latest members (with Syria’s rebels) of the “hey the Russians and Russian Proxies attacked us too and keep doing bad things, help us”. Drawing attention and money from them back into Afghanistan is a bad thing when they are looking for arms and reconstruction money. Now, Ukraine, everyone can agree, is in a terrible situation. However, as seen in Afghanistan, particularly the disastrous Western (ie USA) withdrawal from Afghanistan, and how many countries, including Canada as one of the worst culprits, have, to be clear, fucked over their Afghan former employees, military and police proxies and refugees, thoughts/prayers and Strongest Possible Condemnation and Support today mean NOTHING for tomorrow, and I’m sure Ukraine realizes this. Right now, Ukraine is the flavour of the day. It won’t last. If the penny drops and attentions pivot back to the “urgent need to defeat the Taliban”, Ukraine will become a bullet point on a briefing slide.
So in the long game, once Russia declares defeat and shows itself as well and truly finished, and/or collapses, will divide attention away from Ukraine’s need for reconstruction money, aid, etc, particularly if the West turns to a Mission of Mercy/Reconstruction (ie the 2024 version of the Marshall Plan) to reconstruct a collapsed and unstable nuclear-armed Russia. Concurrently, if the Talibs continue with their ways, the hungry-for-weapons-release Western Military Machine that didn’t get to drop a lot of ordnance in Ukraine will want to get Back Into The War Business and send its sons and daughters back into the Hindu Kush. This will be bad for Ukraine – they could get squeezed out and forgotten if the attention is divided between “Build Back Better” for Russia and “defeat Terrorist, Human Rights Abusing Dictators in Afghanistan”. We all know how that goes.
Israel.
Well, Israel has, for its entire existence, posited itself to the West (after being rebuffed by the Soviet Union in the 1950s) as the “friend” that says “Hey, we need to be your primary for you to everything to give to us, we are the true front line against Islamic terror that keeps you safe”. But the Talibs might consider giving Hamas, PLO, PFLP, Hezbollah (although they are filthy Shia unbelievers that the Talib would love to exterminate, to White People, they are all stinky scary bearded guys that beat women and want to blow themselves up), Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other GoodTime Fun Guys a run for their money.
And that is NO GOOD for Israel. The world needs to focus, from the Israeli perspective, on the Greatest Threat to Israel, ensure it’s also seen as Greatest Threat to the USA, to ensure that free F35s, Iron Dome rockets, M109s, F16s, F15s, HIMARS, MLRS, communications intercept, digital surveillance and satellite intelligence keep flowing unhindered into Israel. Therefore, a Talib government that can actually govern and is coherent is a HUGE THREAT to Israel’s place in the world and its position as the “world’s greatest Victim that USA and Germany and Europe need to fund and cater to”. Better for them if the Afghans are just another collection of starving barefooted Muslims, like Palestinians but thankfully with no land claims in the West Bank to have to deal with. The Afghans? Fuck ’em says Chaim from Ramat Gan, Dorit from Azur, and Shlomo from Ashdod… we are the Chosen People and the USA and World need to keep showing that by giving us money and weapons.
Better for Israel to have a hostile terrorist Syria on their flank to tug at the Park Slope heartstrings and bank accounts in NYC than have to take action themselves, action which isn’t Cordon and Search operations on Palestinian villages and shooting kids throwing rocks which, as seen in the 2006 Hezbollah/Israel Rocket War facing an armed and determined enemy, they kind of suck at.
So from the Israeli perspective, having the West crush the Talibs and keep Afghanistan a stone age puppet state, but Free of ISLAMIC TERROR, plus keeping a hostile but ineffective Syria on the doorstep to enhance the Victim Culture that keeps Western money flowing and gives Israel carte blanche for assassination, murder, atrocities and use of heavy weapons in densely populated areas in Gaza and the West Bank and Ramallah and Bethlehem and Nazareth and Beit Jinn to “stop Palestinian Terrorists” without too much oversight is the best option. Therefore… need to hate the Taliban!
Syria.
Syria. Under the radar now, Assad is like “yeah everybody leave me alone, I’ll continue to gas my own population and fly my Russian-supplied gunships to rocket urban areas where the “terrorists” are when I FEEL LIKE IT.” Sucks for Assad if Russia collapses and Turkey gets tired of Syria’s shit and takes the gloves off. But likely it won’t happen, the USA will keep Turkey on the leash. However, if the Talibs get sporty and aggressive, someone like the Toms (Ricks or L. Friedman) or a place like the Centre for a New American Security think tank will start talking again about the “New Axis Of Evil” and you bet they’ll line up Syria with the Taliban government again, to justify and demand crossing “red lines”… and Tomahawks will fly…
So Syria will get hit with the splatter of Western hand-wringing “OMFG The Taliban are EVIL and DANGEROUS”, of course, players like Israel will feed that because why have half the Golan Heights when you can have all of it…. plus everything else up to the Litani River in the North and the Euphrates in the East (ie the State That Will No Longer Exist That Was Once Called Syria) as the Greater Eretz Israel, if given permission (plus significant continuing military aid) to do so, in order to ensure “Security” against “Terror”. While extremely unlikely to happen, the culturally-ingrained Baath Party suspicion of Israel’s desire to occupy and destroy Syria colours a lot of thinking as it has since the days of Assad Senior and his struggle to rule, hence, not wanting the undue attention that the Talibs can bring to the region and the convenient “Axis of Evil” regrouping popping up again. It would be best for all in that region if the whole “Syria/Talib” issue is not linked and causes bloodshed. In conclusion…
In conclusion…
Whew. I’m done.. for now. But that’s the world as I see it in real-person terms, not couched in the flowery and obtuse Nadsat-speak favoured by International Relations experts. To me, it does not really serve any of the players to have the Talibs be effective in governing, whether they are a terror-focused government or not. Like neighbourhood kids who want to keep a vacant lot in the hood to play in, find dead things in, drink stolen beers, light fires, in short a place where no one really cares too much what happens, that’s what the World and Region want for Afghanistan. A vacant lot is best for all because it doesn’t mess with the established order of things, or cause the upset that the 20+ years in Afghanistan before caused to the flow of aid, arms and attention to those “long-standing” players in the game who feel they deserve the attention of Rich Western Countries vice them wasting money dropping Hellfires on illiterate 15-year-olds putting bombs in the road.
Source of mystery missile attack solved and its victim identified.
Dr.Ayman al-Zawahri in a photograph taken by Hamid Mir, who took this picture during his third and last interview with Osama bin Laden in November 2001 in Kabul. Dr. al-Zawahri was present at the interview where he acted as translator for bin Laden.Source: Wikipedia
So it would appear as though the mystery behind the recent missile attack in Kabul may have been solved, as news broke Monday that al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri was killed in a CIA drone strike on Sunday in Afghanistan. As it turns out I was wrong in thinking that the explosion was probably linked to violence between Taliban factions, in fact, I hadn’t even considered this as a possibility. Then again I also wasn’t aware that the Egyptian-born cleric and heir to Usama bin Laden was even in Kabul, nor were many others.
This image taken from a video issued by As-Sahab, al Qaeda’s media branch, on April 5, 2022, shows al Qaeda leader Ayman Al Zawahiri speaking. (As-Sahab via AP)
Don’t uncork the champagne quite yet.
Screengrab from an address made by Joe Biden announcing the death of Ayman al-Zawahiri.
In announcing the death of Ayman al-Zawahiri, US President Joe Biden had the opportunity to make an address to the American people that many of his predecessors made. Making it almost seem as though they had gone out and killed one of the most wanted terrorists in the world, the fact is that Biden and the others just happened to be in office at the time these events took place. So even though Biden and his administration might be happy that something has finally happened which might actually translate into some better polling numbers heading into the mid-terms, they shouldn’t exactly be uncorking any champagne.
Many serious concerns still remain.
That al Zawahiri was hanging his hat in downtown Kabul came as a complete surprise to observers and analysts, myself included, but it just goes to show yet again that the Taliban had absolutely no intent on living up to their commitments in the Doha Agreement. As you may remember, one of the things that the Mullahs agreed to was that they wouldn’t allow al Qaeda or any other terrorist organizations to set up shop in areas under Taliban control. It would be rather impossible for them to deny knowledge of the fact that he was there when he was living in an area known to house their senior leadership and administration. Ties between the two groups were clearly not severed.
A statement put out by the Atlantic Council outlined their major concerns in the wake of the assassination.
Three critical counterterrorism concerns raised by the strike
The killing of Ayman al-Zawahiri is a huge blow for al-Qaeda, which has spent the past year working to rebuild its capabilities in Afghanistan after the chaotic US withdrawal. Zawahiri may not have been as charismatic a leader as his predecessor Osama bin Laden or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of ISIS. But the fact that he has now met the same fate will demoralize al-Qaeda’s rank and file, demonstrating that no terrorist is beyond the United States’ reach.
While this is a day to celebrate, Zawahiri’s death raises a number of critical questions about the future of American counterterrorism.
First, Zawahiri’s presence in post-withdrawal Afghanistan may indicate that, as feared, the Taliban has once more granted safe haven to the leaders of al-Qaeda—a group with which it has never broken. Zawahiri evidently felt safe enough to move back to downtown Kabul.
Second, it’s not clear if Sunday’s success can be replicated against other terrorist targets. This was the first US drone strike in Afghanistan in almost a year, and it remains to be seen whether the administration has the capability or intent to systematically dismantle the terror networks in the country that threaten the homeland. Until we know more, we should resist the urge to see the strike as a vindication of “over the horizon” counterterrorism.
Third, the next man on al Qaeda’s depth chart is Saif al-Adel—who has long been a guest of the Iranian regime. Tehran and al-Qaeda have made common cause against their shared enemies in recent years. We’ll need to keep a close eye on what their relationship looks like if, as expected, Saif ascends to al-Qaeda’s top role.
Atlantic Council
Ending the charade.
It is well past time enough now for this ridiculous charade to come to an end. I’m speaking of the dog and pony show that the Mullahs have been putting on for the benefit of whatever foreign media happens to be in Kabul. It is high time they realize that their quest for international recognition has not and will not be successful and that there are consequences that need to be paid for their intransigence. They need to know in absolutely no uncertain terms that death will rain down upon them from above if they continue to constitute a threat not only to international security but also to the security and well-being of the people of Afghanistan. The targeting and brutal killing of innocent civilians whom they consider to be traitors who aided the “foreign invaders” needs to end, and the only way that will ever happen is if the Taliban are punished through the use of devastating military force by the US and its NATO allies.
There is absolutely no chance that NATO will be doing this, considering they didn’t act one year ago when they should have. Instead, they put on an embarrassing display in allowing themselves to prove completely ineffective against a group of misfits who didn’t even have a semblance of having any kind of organized and coordinated leadership at the helm. They still don’t have that.
Instead, NATO will be doing as it always has, intervening in a situation that would be best left to take care of itself on its own, not unlike their other Balkan adventures over the years. Rather than acting to try and fix the problems that it was responsible for creating in Afghanistan to begin with, NATO has decided that it has much better things to do, like setting up the conditions for an all-out global conflict which could end in catastrophe for the human race. The next time mystery missiles start to rain down on people, they could have nuclear warheads, and it won’t really matter who launched them.
/https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/gta/2020/06/16/ex-toronto-man-dubbed-asias-el-chapo-runs-synthetic-drug-empire-thriving-amid-covid-19-international-investigators-say/tse_chi_lop_passport.jpg)
The Advocate-Equalizer 