Thursday 28th of September 2023

joe biden lies, tells porkies, says crap, speaks with a forked tongue, bullshits, deceives.....

President Joe Biden has denied that the US is attempting to stem China's international influence, after signing a new historic deal with Vietnam. 

More than 50 years since the last American soldier left Vietnam, Mr Biden travelled to Hanoi to sign the agreement that will bring the former foes closer than ever before.

The Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Vietnam is a major relationship upgrade for the US. It is the culmination of a relentless push by Washington over the last two years to strengthen ties with Vietnam, which it sees as key to counter China's influence in Asia.

It is also no small feat. The partnership with Washington is the highest level of diplomatic ties extended by Vietnam, one of China's oldest and staunchest friends.




BY Brian Berletic

A series of announcements by the US reflect its large and still growing military presence across Asia-Pacific, particularly in East and Southeast Asia. Together, they reflect a continued and increasingly desperate desire by Washington to encircle and contain China.

These announcements include plans for expanding the number of US air bases across the region as part of the US Air Force’s (USAF) new “Agile Combat Employment” (ACE) doctrine. It also includes plans for a “civilian port” in the Batanes islands, less than 200 km from the Chinese island province of Taiwan. Then there were recently announced plans by the US Department of Defense to create drone swarms for countering China’s growing advantage in materiel and manpower.


Washington’s “ACE” in the Hole? 

A recent article published by Defense One titled, “Air Force expanding number of bases in Pacific over next decade,” reported on the Pentagon’s plans to expand the number of air bases across the Pacific over the next decade to fulfill the requirements of the USAF’s “ACE” doctrine.

More than simply increasing the number of air bases in the region, ACE seeks to disperse US aircraft, ammunition, and personnel among a larger number of smaller bases, thus creating more targets for potential adversaries and increasing the overall survivability for USAF assets.

The article notes:

The U.S. Air Force will increase its number of bases across the Pacific over the next decade, in an effort to spread out and become more survivable in conflict.

And that:

In the ACE concept, a few airfields serve as central ports, or hubs, while several smaller airfields serve as spokes. The idea is to be able to distribute weapons and assets over a large area and to increase survivability, versus just having a few large airfields throughout the geographically enormous region. 

Despite USAF assets being distributed, command and control would be able to mass together assets from across multiple smaller bases for each specific mission or “force package.”

The concept is meant to make it more difficult in a potential conflict with China for it to target and destroy US air bases with its large missile arsenals and by doing so, significantly disrupting US air capabilities in the region.

While ACE doctrine may be a realistic shift away from the relatively centralized nature of US military bases across the Pacific, it will take many years to implement and only if the Pentagon’s budget is adjusted to do so. By then, China’s missile arsenal will only have increased in size and capabilities, possibly neutralizing any advantage the US seeks to achieve by pursuing this doctrinal shift.

And while an eventual dispersal of US air assets may complicate China’s ability to target and destroy US warplanes before even leaving the ground to perform missions, China also possesses a large and very capable integrated air defense system able to intercept both US warplanes and the munitions they would be using against Chinese targets.


US Seeks “Civilian Port” Dangerously Close to Taiwan 

Reuters, in an article titled, “Exclusive: U.S. military in talks to develop port in Philippines facing Taiwan,” would report:

The U.S. military is in talks to develop a civilian port in the remote northernmost islands of the Philippines, the local governor and two other officials told Reuters, a move that would boost American access to strategically located islands facing Taiwan. 

U.S. military involvement in the proposed port in the Batanes islands, less than 200 km (125 miles) from Taiwan, could stoke tensions at a time of growing friction with China and a drive by Washington to intensify its longstanding defence treaty engagement with the Philippines.

The article also notes:

The Bashi Channel between those islands and Taiwan is considered a choke point for vessels moving between the western Pacific and the contested South China Sea and a key waterway in the case of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. The Chinese military regularly sends ships and aircraft through the channel, Taiwan’s defence ministry has said.

The article fails to mention a much more important fact, that this “choke point” leading into the “contested South China Sea” is already “a key waterway,” one for Chinese maritime shipping.

While the US poses as underwriting peace, stability, and prosperity in the “Indo-Pacific” region and more specifically, in upholding “freedom of navigation” in areas like the South China Sea, the reality is that most of the “navigation” taking place in these waters is trade moving to and from China between other nations in the region which consider China their largest trade partner.

US government and arms industry-funded think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), as part of its “China Power” project, published a post titled, “How Much Trade Transits the South China Sea?” It included an interactive map indicating the percentage of trade that flowed through the South China Sea from each nation.

China, by far, was the largest beneficiary of navigation through the South China Sea, accounting for over a quarter of all trade passing through it. South Korea (7%), Japan (4%), and Southeast Asian nations like Thailand (5%), Vietnam (5%), and Singapore (6%) also accounted for large percentages of trade through the sea, with each of these nations counting China as their largest trade partner.

Very clearly, the US, by expanding its military presence in and around the South China Sea, including at choke points like the Batanes islands, is best positioned to threaten, not protect maritime shipping in the region, which would hurt China first and foremost. But it would also hurt trade among Washington’s supposed “allies” in the region it seeks to recruit in its escalating confrontation with Beijing.

Within the pages of US government-funded think tank documents detailing war games between the US and China, the disruption of Chinese commerce is a key element of Washington’s strategy. By creating a “civilian port” at the northernmost reach of the Philippines, so close to Taiwan and at a critical choke point leading in and out of the South China Sea, the US is placing itself one step closer to a better position from which to launch a war against China.


Drone Swarms Aimed at China 

Defense One, in another article titled, “‘Hellscape’: DOD launches massive drone swarm program to counter China,” would report:

China’s most important asset in potential war with the United States is “mass,” says Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks: “More ships. More missiles. More people.” 

To counter that advantage, the Defense Department will launch an initiative called Replicator to create cheap drones across the air, sea, and land in the “multiple thousands” within the next two years. 

Cheap drones, of the type Ukraine has deployed to great effect against Russia, can be produced close to the battlefield at much lower cost than typical Defense Department weapons.

While at first glance the strategy may seem sound, within the article itself the primary problem with these plans reveals itself. The proliferation of swarms of cheap drones being used by both sides in Ukraine are made possible by easy-to-purchase Chinese-made components.

The whole reason China has “more ships” and “more missiles” than the United States in the first place is because of its much larger industrial base. Whatever drone swarm the US may be preparing for China, China will have the capacity to create one much larger to strike back with.


A Future War with China 

Amid the current conflict in Ukraine, Ukrainian drones have repeatedly targeted Russian air bases deep within Russian territory. Despite the vast majority of these drones being disabled or intercepted, small numbers still occasionally make it through, causing damage. Had Ukraine possessed greater long-range strike capabilities or were Russian air defenses less capable, the damage to these centralized air bases could have been much greater and may have even potentially disrupted Russian combat operations.

The wisdom behind the US Air Force’s “ACE” doctrine is apparent. Should Russia adopt a similar doctrine, distributing its warplanes over a larger number of smaller airfields, the rare instances of success Ukraine currently achieves would be even rarer still.

China is certainly learning from the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and is likely studying the posture of its own air assets in relation to the US military’s build-up and plans to not only disperse their assets over a wider number of smaller facilities, but also their plans to utilize drone swarms in addition to other long-range strike capabilities on a scale much larger than Ukraine is currently using.

Finally, as the US moves closer and closer to Chinese territory with its military and “civilian” infrastructure, and specifically near “choke points” that could potentially restrict or cut off Chinese maritime shipping, Beijing must consider contingencies to sustain its economy including its trade even under the worst-case scenario.

In many ways, the “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI) already partially accomplishes this. Growing trade with Russia across Russia and China’s shared border represents another means of maintaining essential trade, including the flow of energy and raw materials, even if the US implements a naval blockade in the Indo-Pacific.

Taken together, it is clear the US is moving as quickly as possible to position itself best for a coming conflict with China. While US leaders and the Western media suggest China is rushing to war “by 2025,” it is clear that time is on China’s side and that it is the US rushing to war.

The economic and industrial advantages China enjoys over the US today did not exist 2–3 decades ago. A decade from now, however, China’s advantages over the US industrially and thus militarily will only have grown. The US seeks to exploit a closing window of opportunity to fight now before the odds tilt any further in China’s favor. But considering the realities of these recent announcements by the US and how little they actually change the odds in Washington’s favor, some may conclude that the window has already shut.


Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.





still in use?.....

 By Denis Voltaire CovertAction Information Bulletin Vindicated by Revelations; Originally Exposed 1970 Manual, which CIA Called a Soviet Forgery, in January 1979 Issue. 



Criminal trials and investigations in Europe confirmed that top-secret “Supplement B” to U.S. Army Field Manual 30-31, contrary to the U.S. government’s oft-repeated denials, was indeed an authentic document.

FM 30-31B first surfaced in Europe in the 1970s and was long suspected to be used by U.S. and host countries’ intelligence as operational guidance for violent anti-Communist destabilization, including acts of terrorism.

U.S. intelligence claimed consistently that the document was a sophisticated “Soviet forgery.”

Investigative findings have ultimately vindicated the first assessment of CovertAction Information Bulletin, among the earliest sources to conclude that FM 30-31B was most likely genuine.

The document in question, the very existence of which is still officially denied, is a classified annex, known as “Supplement B,” to a Field Manual series of the US Army, coded “FM 30-31 Stability Operations—Intelligence.”

FM 30-31 essentially governs the intelligence liaison with countries hosting U.S. troops (HC), with respect to counterinsurgency operations.

The general idea behind it is that HC are friendly to U.S. interests and, absent an external aggression, the greatest security threat to HC would be internal “subversion.”

Dated March 18, 1970, Supplement B to FM 30-31 (“FM 30-31B”) was frequently referred to, eventually, as the “Westmoreland Directive” because it bears the signature of the former Supreme Commander of U.S. Armed Forces in Vietnam, General William Westmoreland.

Since the document was brought to the public’s attention, in the 1970s, it was strongly suspected that FM 30-31B had been used for training and orientation in violent domestic operations, including acts of terrorism.

The controversial nature of “Supplement B” is due to the fact that it calls for and describes highly destabilizing operations in host countries, when the latter show “indecisiveness” in the fight against internal insurgency (to be read, most of the time, against Communism).

A quote from section 11 of FM 30-31B (“Agents on Special Operations”) is indicative: “There may be times when HC governments show passivity or indecision in face of Communist or Communist-inspired subversion/and react with inadequate vigor to intelligence estimates transmitted by U.S. agencies. […]

In such cases, U.S. Army intelligence must have the means of launching special operations which will convince the HC governments and public opinion of the reality of the insurgent danger and of the necessity of counteraction.

To this end, U.S. Army intelligence should seek to penetrate the Insurgency by means of agents on special assignment, with the task of forming special action groups among the more radical elements of the insurgency. When the kind of situation envisaged above arises, these groups, acting under U.S. Army Intelligence control, should be used to launch violent or nonviolent actions according to the nature of the case.” [Emphasis added.]

In retrospect, that quote describes almost exactly what multiple criminal investigations in Europe exposed as a pattern of involvement of intelligence agencies in the activities of extremist groups, responsible for high-profile cases of terrorism during the Cold War.[1]

It is a fact that FM 30-31B first surfaced in either NATO countries (Turkey and Italy), or countries that had a strong political-military alliance with the U.S., such as Spain (the country became a NATO member in 1982).

In January 1979, CovertAction Information Bulletin (C.A.I.B.), the predecessor of CAM, was one of the few U.S. sources to cover the story critically and publish a copy of “Supplement B.”[2]

The CAIB article, which called the document a “guide to imperialist military operations,” is still a very informative source for the background and first analysis of FM 30-31B and can be referred to for that purpose.

While not drawing a definitive conclusion on the authenticity of Supplement B, CAIB was among the first sources to note that all indicators pointed to a positive answer.

Besides the contradictions of official denials, military experts contacted by the magazine unanimously concluded that the document appeared to be genuine.

Following the document’s first exposure, the U.S. government, after an initial, clumsy yet telling, response (the U.S. Embassy in Italy, on one occasion, informed the representative of a respected new magazine, L’Europeo, that the publication of the document would be “inopportune”), was compelled to take more of an explicit stance.

The U.S. State Department and intelligence community have maintained all along that the document is a “singularly effective” Soviet forgery, and there is no “Supplement B” to Field Manual 30-31.

Multiple criminal investigations in Europe, especially in Italy, initiated in the 1980s, would ultimately show otherwise.

The P2 Master, One More Time

It is perhaps unsurprising that Licio Gelli, head of the infamous Masonic Lodge Propaganda 2, better known as P2, should be involved in this matter.

After all, it dovetails perfectly with the role of a U.S.-NATO asset, intimately involved in radical, anti-Communist destabilization throughout the Cold War, that history ultimately made him known for.[3]








more US BS.....

China's economy has outperformed other major economy in the past four years - in most cases by a huge margin. However, the US has launched an all-out effort of disseminating propaganda to hide this reality, said John Ross, former director of economic and business policy for the mayor of London, in an interview with China Daily.

What are the motives behind the spread of the "China in decline" argument? Ross said there are two motives. The subjective one is that the US wants to dissuade foreign companies from investing in China because China is an extremely attractive market. It wants to perhaps create some demoralization in China by breeding such false stories to change people's ideas.

The objective one is the US wants to try to get China to adopt the wrong political and economic policies, he added.

How did the US create such a narrative? Ross noted that one is straightforward: telling things that are not true, either through fake news or claims that the US economy is outperforming China. The other one is what is rightly characterized as a dirty business in statistics, which is that you take one tiny aspect of a situation and blow it out of all proportion.

"There are bound to be individual indicators in individual quarters or individual months in which China is not the best-performing economy in the world," Ross said.

"So what I was trying to do was to lay out the situation absolutely systematically and I'd made a comparison therefore to every major country in the world, both advanced economies and developing countries, and showed that China is so outperforming them," he added.






he wasn't there....


WATCH: Biden FORGETS Where He Was After 9/11; Mehdi Hasan Urges Dems To IGNORE Warning Signs: Rising