Delta Variant Spreading Across The World Like Wildfire - Part 1: Iran

Iran’s health minister has called for two weeks of lockdowns to be enforced by the armed forces and the law enforcement officers, so as to curb the alarmingly speedt rise of COVID-19 cases across the country.

Iran is entering the 5th wave of coronavirus infections. This time it is dominated by the virulent Delta variant and is expected to be even more catastrophic and irreversible if nothing is done. The health care system is at it breaking point. Even if the country does not run out of hospital beds, it will run out of healthcare professionals, staffs and workers.

“Even though they are vaccinated, my co-workers are all becoming sick due to long bouts of sleeplessness and stress,” said the health minister.

“The pressure is so high that I’m worried even this plan won’t be enough, unless we reduce the exponential load of illnesses through quick preventive measures and boosting adherence to health protocols,” he wrote in a letter he has sent to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The heads of 65 medical universities and faculties across the country also called for a lockdown in a letter to outgoing President Hassan Rouhani last week.

More than 3.9 million cases of COVID-19 have been registered in Iran since February 2020 and more than 91,000 people have lost their lives in what has long been the deadliest pandemic of the Middle East.

Iran's health ministry said 366 more Iranians died on Sunday. The death rate has surged by 38 percent compared with a week earlier.

More than 32,500 newly infected l cases were reported on Sunday. This shows a 32 percent increase compared with a week before.

Iran has introduced numerous temporary lockdowns and shutdowns across the country since the pandemic began, but most have not been strictly enforced.

The lockdowns are pointless because most businesses do not closed down and travel restrictions have been flouted amid low enforcement of safety measures.

The situation is getting worse but it has yet reach its peak.

Iran's national Anti-Coronavirus Task Force (ACTF), said on Saturday that 29 of Iran’s 31 provinces are now in the throes of the Delta variant and hospital beds are quickly being filled".

Hundreds of cities across the country are now classified “RED”, denoting the severity of the outbreaks.

The ACTF also said that adherence to health protocols requiring the use of face masks and observing physical distancing has dropped to below 40% across the country, against a backdrop of above 70% less than two months ago.

Apart from other difficulties, implementing a forced two-week lockdown across the country is sure to prove challenging for Iranian authorities as people and businesses are under immense economic pressure due to decades of US sanctions and poor economic performance.

In an economy marked by 40% inflation and high unemployment, many small businesses have been unable to close down their shops even for a few days.

A country of more than 83 million people, Iran has so far been able to vaccinate only about 10 million people, due to vaccines shortage. The other 73 million people have been living with the coronavirus for the last one and a half years already. Singaporeans who wish to live with the coronavirus should emigrate to Iran. I am sure the coronavirus there would welcome them with open arms and spikes.

The road ahead seems very dark not only for Iran but also for many other countries in the world. Dying with the coronavirus or with the mRNA vaccines seems to be the norm, going forward.


SSO - 2 August 2021

The Evil Empire, the U.S. wants to destroy China and the Chinese people.

   Today, China and the Chinese people face a mortal danger from the 5-Eyes Anglo-Saxon countries and their allies of seven European countries  of NATO, all white people's countries. The white supremacists just want to remind China of this same gang of Western countries which invaded China in 1900-1901 and of how the two Opium Wars ( 1839 - 19342 and 1856 - 1860 ) devasted and destroyed China. In the Second World War ,China and the Chinese had managed to defeat the Japanese imperialist invaders and drove the Western powers out of China. Now, China's former enemies are coming back thinking they can still play havoc with China and the Chinese people. That is their pipe-dream or day-dreaming and wishful thinking for China today is not the China of the Qing Dynasty or the decadent KMT of  Chiang Kai-Shek. Today if they try to do anything  evil to China they will inevitably face their own destruction and demise. Once more motherland China or our ancestral  China calls for the Chinese people to rise up again to face even a greater danger from the marauding combine forces of the white countries headed by imperial America which have a clear intention of destroying China and the Chinese people.

The United States  via its criminal agencies CIA and  NED  ( National Endowment for Democracy ) is organising and fomenting regional choas, unrest and destabilities around China's immediate neighbouring countries like Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines and Myanmar  to undermine these countries economies and sabotaging these countries undertaking the Belt And Road Projects with China. They are trying to use these regional choas to undermine China's security and to control and contain China's development.

   In the face of lethal danger posted against China and the Chinese people by the insane 5-Eyes Anglo-Saxon countries headed by the United States it is imperative for all Chinese throughout the world to unite in solidarity to confront this danger from the white imperialists bravely and fiercely to nib this danger in the bud and destroy the evil force. 

 The 5-Eyes Anglo-Saxon countries headed by the United States have coerced all white European countries in NATO to gang up against China and the Chinese people. The Anglo-Saxon Americans are mentally deranged and for whatever reasons known only to themselves they hate  China and the Chinese so much that they have worked out plans to destabilise and destroy China and the Chinese people. Everywhere worldwide Chinese people are being threatened, beaten up, bullied and disparaged and China demonized. As a first step we Chinese must unite in sodidarity to boycott all goods and products from the 5-Eyes Anglo-Saxon countries viz U.S., UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. We need to carry out this Boycott urgently because the Evil Empire is banning many Chinese companies about 60 high end companies in which US find it difficult to compete and thus it hopes in doing this it can control,undermine  and contain China's development. Also the rogue US government working hand in glove with America's big corporations had criminally kidnapped Meng Wan-Zhou the Chief Financial Officer of Huawei with the intention of extorting billions of dollars from Huawei and so thus to cripple the Chinese high tec company in a similar way in past precedence when they forced Toshiba of Japan and Alstom of France to close down. China and all Chinese people must not allow this to happen to Huawei. We need to strongly support Huawei's products and stop buying into Apple's second rate mobile phones. We need to agitate for Meng Wang-Zhou's release from illegal arrest. Meng Wang-Zhou is the darling and heroine of the Chinese people and she represents the indomitable fighting spirit of the Chinese people and country.

Below is an urgent message forwarded to me via WhatsApp by a dignified Chinese American explaining the need at this critical juncture for all Chinese people to unite and boycott products from these satanic white Anglo-Saxon countries.

Beginning of message:     

"Please forward : BOYCOTT   American and Australian products.  FIGHT FOR PEACE."

"Dear Friends, The US has been leading a global campaign to attack and demonize China using lies and faked news. They pretend to fight for freedom and democracy when in fact their sole purpose is to maintain their global hegemony so that they can continue to exploit others. The United States Dollar domination enables the US to print trillions of fiat dollars out of thin air at the expense of those who maintain their foreign reserves in US Dollar and US Dollar assets. 

American attacks on China over Taiwan , Hong Kong and lies about Xinjiang are attacks on China's core interests. Not surprisingly China has and will respond strongly. America has even pushed NATO to contain China. The US also organised India, Australia ( a most willing deputy ) and Japan to be China's enemies. They even pressure other European countries (e.g. Britain, Franceand Holland ) to send their warships to the South China Sea , a horrible provocation and reminder of gunboat diplomacy of the past. As the result of all these provocvations the risks of war is high, whether deliberate or accidental. Both the US and China are nuclear powers, any war between them will bring global catastrophe. 

We have been exchanging an endless number of messages on this subject but I believe we need to do more. Being an echo chamber for each other is not enough . We need to engage in collective action to send a message to the US leaders and their deputy sheriff ( Australia ) that enough is enough." 

"PLEASE boycott American and Australian products and services whenever you can. 

And please forward this message to all your friends and relatives. "

On my part , I Southernglory1 may repeat posting this message for those who may miss it today. The white race especially the Anglo-Saxons British and Americans are really very evil and wicked and we Chinese must never allow them to bully and and trample over us again. 

Southernglory1

Tuesday, 3rd August, 2021.

Covid19 - When things get so ridiculous

 Never has a medical and health problem been so politicised to the extent that the well being of the people been compromised to achieve political ends. By now those who are able would have read both sides of the narrative about the effectiveness of the different types of vaccines and their adverse effects that may lead to serious illnesses and even death.

Despite the fact that none of the vaccines has come up on top where there is a consensus that one is better in effectiveness and safety, supposedly responsible people are still taking the position that one should be used and not the other and refused to admit that the other could be equally good or even better. They have made their choice for their own interest or whatever, that die, die other people must accept their dictates to use only one type of vaccine.

The medical and scientific community are split as to which vaccine is the better choice, but the politicians are so darn clear, can you believe that, and adamant that their choice is the right choice. To make matter worse, their favourite choice has been proven to be dangerous, with some scientists calling it poison, with no proven track record, and still experimental and good only for emergency use, and its possible side effects waiting to happen.

How callous and audacious can such people be, to in some ways coerced or pressure others to accept their controversial choice of vaccines? How much do they know when the scientists and medical professions are still in disagreement, without a clear consensus that a particular vaccine is safe and effective? How dangerous is their position when the contrary view is that their favoured vaccine could even be unsafe and could kill? The benefits outweigh the risk? Is this a reasonable and acceptable statement when the risk is serious illness or death?

The people have a right to choose which vaccine they preferred to inject into their bodies. This is not about injesting chicken rice or nasi lemak. This is about injecting something that can take your life away. Now, who in his right mind, when he is not a medical expert, would dare to pressure people to inject controversial and dangerous substance into their body? Getting vaccinated in normal cases is a good call. Telling people to get vaccinated cannot be wrong, but not in this instance when the vaccines are not only controversial and unsafe but also a political football.

Yes, I also have two questions to ask before I listen to anyone on their recommendations? Today, other than the illiterate seniors, many of us are better informed and educated than the preacher. So, the first question to ask, is the preacher smarter and wiser than you? Two, is the preacher more well informed than you, a medical professional or just another pretender whose little knowledge acquired is from hearsay?

For your own good, please use your head and question whoever is asking you to inject something that is questionable, not just about its effectiveness, but also if it is safe to your health. 

And for goodness sake, if you are not a medical expert, do not ask or even coerced people to inject something into their body that could kill them. If you do that, you are being irresponsible, and ultimately responsible to the death of the person that listened to you.

At this point in time the vaccines are not only controversial, but subject to too much politiking that what is good or bad has been so muddled by political and business interests that the truth is furthest from the truth. What could be a terrible decision is for one to be injected with an experimental unproven vaccine when the reason is to open the economy, the priority is economics not your health?

The least a responsible govt can do is to allow the people the choice of vaccines as the people are not fools to have cotton or wool pulled over their eyes. This is not a case of what to eat or what to drink. This is a choice that could mean being alive or dead. The govt is not right to make this choice for the people. It is the life and well being of the people and it must be made by them, an educated choice, not a forced choice.

The more unfit and unqualified people are coming out to put pressure on the innocent people to get vaccinated by a vaccine that is anything but good and safe, the more suspicious one must be on the intent and purpose of the preachers and the goodness of the vaccine. 

If the recommended vaccine is really that good, there should not be so much controversy and unhappiness and reluctance on its use. When the experts in the medical and scientific community are of two minds, the non professionals should not be smart alecs.

Let the people have a choice on what vaccines to use. It is unacceptable, immoral, unethical, criminal to use political power to force people to accept the vaccine you want them to use and disclaim liability should they fall seriously ill or die. Remove the disclaimer if the govt wants to force this on the people and be held responsible for this action. You do not have the full knowledge to know what you choose is safe for the people. You may be morally and criminally wrong in your choice. You may be withholding the right vaccine from the people instead. 

If you are that sure, remove all the non liability clauses and accept full responsibility if you are wrong, if people die or suffer from adverse effects within 3 months after taking the vaccine.

Was the US Invasion of Afghanistan Legal Under International Law? - Part 5,6 & 7

According to the UK Parliament briefing papers, "the initial invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001 was therefore not conducted with the authorisation of a specific UN Security Council Resolution". Nonetheless, the UK and US claimed that the attack was justified under Article 51 of the UN Charter, as military action against Afghanistan was undertaken with the provisions of Article 51 covering self-defence. This raises questions about the authority of the UN and its scope as an international peace keeping body. If countries feel that they have the right to go to war without the UN’s approval then what legitimacy and power does such an organisation actually hold?

Furthermore, if states can act in such an aggressive manner without facing any repercussions, then what is to say that another such costly and damaging war will not occur in the near future?


It should be noted that:

1. International Law must be clearly distinguished from the use of force for revenge or punishment; states, like persons, must not act as vigilantes.

2. In criminal law, self-defence may be invoked in the face of an imminent threat of death or grave bodily harm. The threat must be immediate and the response must not be pushed beyond what is reasonably required to repel that threat. Therefore, in general, self-defence may not be invoked to justify physical retaliation to an attack a few weeks after it occurs. This is a key issue, as the rhetoric from the US government after 9/11 and just prior to the invasion made a direct correlation between the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and the imminent action in Afghanistan.

3. In relation to the retaliatory nature of the invasion, International Law Professor Marjorie Cohn said that “the bombings of Afghanistan by the United States and the United Kingdom are illegal.”

Because International law does not allow for a State to enter into war on the grounds of retaliation for a prior act.

4. Such a feeble reason for going to war could be used by countless other countries too, in order to justify an invasion that they perceive to be legitimate. One such example being that ‘Iranians could have made the same argument to attack the United States after they overthrew the vicious Shah Reza Pahlavi in 1979 and he was given safe haven in the United States’, as he was seen by the Islamic republic as a terrorist and enemy or Iran.

5. United Nations Security Council Resolutions:

In the aftermath of 9/11, the United Nations Security Council drafted two resolutions in response to the attacks, which contained information as to what would constitute an appropriate response.

The two resolutions adopted were resolution 1368 and resolution 1373, both of which dealt with ‘threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts’.

Neither of these two resolutions allowed for military action on the ground in Afghanistan as a result of the attacks, nor did either contain any aggressive language that could be used to justify military action.

Furthermore, the latter resolution, although affirming that terrorism is an issue that needs to be dealt with and an issue for which the UN would support ‘international efforts to root out terrorism’, also goes on to say that it ‘expresse[d] its strong support for the efforts of the Afghan people to establish a new and transitional administration leading to a formation of a government’. None of this alluded to the approval of any military force in Afghanistan by the US or any other NATO member.

6. Was ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ Legal Under International Law?

An important fact that needs to be considered when assessing the legality of the war in Afghanistan is the fact that the 9/11 attacks were a one-off, isolated incident and were not part of a continuation of attacks on the US and American civilians. In relation to this point, was there really a need for such an aggressive response to the 9/11 attacks? It can indisputably be argued that this war was not legal under international law, as the criterion that needs to be fulfilled in order for a war to be conducted legally is UN Security Council authorisation. In this instance no such authorisation was given to the US, the UK or any other NATO member.

7. In addition, the US’ claim in relation to Article 51 of the UN Charter which deals with self-defence, namely that it had a right to the use of force against Afghanistan after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, is unfounded. The notion of preventative self-defence or retaliatory self-defence has no basis under international law.

The US’ rationale as justification for the invasion has two major issues of contention, the first being that the country it wanted to attack was not the main base of Al Qaeda and the second being that the US is a Sovereign State attempting to fight an organisation which has never claimed to have links to the Afghan establishment. Therefore, in accordance with the US’ thought process, the country that should have been pursued was Saudi Arabia. This is because Saudi Arabia was funding Al Qaeda and allowed for it to operate within its borders without any difficulties. Furthermore, Afghanistan had no direct link to 9/11 in the way that Saudi Arabia did, as none of the 9/11 terrorists were Afghan nationals but some were Saudi nationals.

8. The Repercussions of the War:

It has now been established that the war with Afghanistan was illegal under international law. But the repercussions of such use of force, whether legal or illegal, are also issues of grave concern that should not be overlooked. The intervention in Kosovo in 1998 was hailed a successful Western intervention, as it supposedly reduced and subsequently ended the massacre of Kosovans by the Serbs. However, if due analysis is given to this intervention then it can be argued that this intervention was just as bloody and pointless in its aims as any other Western intervention before or after it. The intervention lead to more violence being carried out by both Serbs and Kosovans towards one another, and as a result of the intervention there were ten thousand more civilian deaths.

Aside from the civilian casualties and that of NATO troops, the war in Afghanistan has led to an increase in the number of internal and external refugees. It has also deeply polarised and radicalised many young Afghan men, due to all the violence they have witnessed and suffered. The scores of radicalised young men has worked against the US and UK in eradicating Al Qaeda, its proxies in the region and other terrorist organisation with similar ideologies. This is because use of force which inadvertently targets civilians has inevitably led to more men adopting the very ideology the West is trying to eradicate. And Al Qaeda’s reach has now spread further afield to countries such as Somalia and Yemen since the war began.

9. The intervention did nothing to solve poverty and caused more people to flee the country, creating more refugees. The invasion has also led to an increase in malnutrition due to the restriction on the availability of food packages. Furthermore, the war has increased the opium trade in Afghanistan which is something that was contained and reduced during the Taliban rule of Afghanistan[32]. This is because more war lords who were previously incarcerated are back in control of various parts of the country.

 
10. The US had proliferated the Afghan War across the Afghan border into Pakistan, a nuclear state. This had led to the death of many innocent Pashtuns on the east of the Durand Line who have fallen victim to American drones. This is because the US had widen its operation, as the Taliban has gained more traction and operates within a far greater area of land. This is a very contentious issue and could be seen as an ‘act of war’, though the US is not at war with Pakistan but continued to act aggressively by using drones, which have killed civilians there.

11. This same principle can be applied to Pakistan too, as it was not party to the war between the US and Afghanistan but was claimed by the US as supporting and giving shelter to terrorists.

12. Another particularly severe issue in relation to war more generally is its cost. This is especially true of ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’, as this war has lasted 20 years, from 2001 to 2021. Its casualties and financial burden have been tremendous for the UK, US and NATO. And even with the withdrawal of NATO troops in 2014 and UK and US troops in June-July 2021, these costs will continue to rise, as some US troops are still left behind to protect certain key installations and institutions, and to train the locals. The actual costs, both in terms of human casualties and financial matters for the duration of the whole operation will never be made known. However, we can easily say that they must be very heavy and unsustainable.


Conclusion

It can be argued that the US invasion of Afghanistan was not legal under international law. This is due to the fact that the UN resolutions that were drafted after the 9/11 attacks did not expressly permit an aggressive approach in tackling international terrorism.

Furthermore, Article 2(3) and Article 2(4) of the UN Charter were not adhered to. As a peaceful means to resolve the issue, it was not sufficiently considered and dialogue between the parties involved was not used as a means to end hostilities.

Also, the assertion made by the US that it was acting on the grounds of self-defence under Article 51 of the Charter is deeply contentious. This is because in this case, one state was looking to invade another to eliminate a terrorist organisation that had no affiliation to any particular state.

Lastly, the most crucial aspect here that proves that the invasion of Afghanistan was illegal under International Law was the fact that the UN Security Council had not given authorisation for the invasion of Afghanistan, which would have been necessary in order for the US to legally pursue Al Qaeda.


SSO - 31 July 2021

Credit is hereby declared:

This article is an adaptation and modification of an essay written by Rabia Khan for a Master's program at the University of London. It was written in January 2013 and published on 6 November 2013.

Random brief facts and truth. ( B ) The U.S. is an illegitimate country. It is a terrorist state and should be destroyed.

     The United States is an illegitimate country. It is a terrorist state and should be destroyed.

 The United States like to say China is an illegitimate country. Let's examine the facts. The United States being descendants of British evil imperialism established itself as a separate state from British colonisation of North America after the almost total genocide of the indigenous native Americans 240 years ago in 1776. But China, an ancient civilization is as old as the earth and it is the only ancient civilization still thriving today.  The Chinese government has almost 100 percent very strong support of the Chinese people. The U.S. government has less than 40 percent support of the people under the fake democracy of the dual mafia dictatorship of the Republicans and the Democrats.

Chinese government's policies are people's centered. The whole country can see in the progress and well being of its citizens. Chinese people are all united with one heart and spirit with the government to move the country forward.

The United States is ruled by the one percent Anglo-Saxon white supremacist elites , the rich exploiting oligarchies of the big bankers and business tycoons who control 99 percent of the country's wealth. America's representatives are selected by special interest groups who are selfish and only have self-interest and indulge in self-aggrandizement. 

The Chinese government always plan and talk about how to expand business and grow the economy. But the rogue U.S. government talks about permanent wars to sustain the Pentagon's Military Industrial Complex and how to exploit and destroy other countries for regime change to enable US  imperial control and hegemony. US is always interfering in other countries'internal affairs under the guise of bringing human rights democracy to these countries. US is actually making use of human rights and democracy as a dual tool kit to control other countries to fit its own imperial agenda.

China is always trying to enhance the improvement of the lives and well being of its country folks. But the US elitist government of Washington and its mafia gangsters in Wall Street and the CIA and Pentagon is always stomping their citizenery into the ground. Logic demands US strategy to protect its population but no, the one percent elites greed overules and the oligarchy dictates policy which is heading US into a crevice for self- destruction . But they will always scapegoat China or other countries for their own problems and debacles.

The Americans have no clue about the difference between communism and socialism. The US elitist government contrary to its aversion to socialism is hypocritically practising reverse socialism for the 99 percent poor to support the one percent rich elites as frequently seen in both their qualitive and quantitative easing worth billions and trillions of dollars going to the rogues, crooks and scoundrels in Wall Street, the White House and the Pentagon. Isn't this their policy, philosophy and draconian doctrinaire practice of Darwinism, an extreme form of Anglo-Saxon neo-liberal democratic captitallism which is clearly lack of human conscience and is full of inhumanity in spirit and kind. This American elite government is self-righteous and always thinks it has the right to grow rich and power at the expense of  destabilising and destroying other countries.

The United States with all its evil agenda to subvert the world to its domination and in which it came from nowhere but through the brutal genocide of native Americans is really an illegitimate country and should be destroyed. Hopefully the Coronavirus or Covid-19 will do just that.

Southernglory1

Monday, 2nd August, 2021