Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space.
He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire....
Bruce Gagnon joined me in discussing the pro-Palestinian protests that
the Trump administration has criminalized on street corners, social
media, and university campuses where students and faculty are being
“expelled.”
Of course, the discussion led to the US/West direct war against
Russia in Ukraine, and a discussion about Trump’s fake “peace
initiative” with Putin, with whom he is now “angry and pissed off,” as
he blames Putin for not wanting peace. It is becoming clearer every day
that Trump is a blowhard, and the furthest thing from a “peace
president” he could be, with the exception of Barack Obomba, though he’s
still got plenty of time to pass him as the president who likes to
kill.
The NYT’s article was no bombshell.
"In reality, the West has been waging war on Russia for years now.
That
means that two things are true: "The West has almost started World War
III. And the reason it has not – not yet, at least – is Moscow’s unusual
restraint, which, believe it or not, has actually saved the world.
Here’s
a thought experiment: Imagine the US fighting Canada and Mexico (and
maybe Greenland) and learning that Russian officers are crucial in
firing devastating mass-casualty strikes at its troops. What do you
think would happen? Exactly. And that it has not happened during the
Ukraine War is due to Moscow being the adult in the room. This should
make you think.” (From RT.com)
From there Bruce
raised a most important question: “what if Trump is being used to
destroy the USA and the collective West?” To some of us, it seems clear
that Trump is advancing the goals of Klaus Schwab and the WEF, and the
UN Agenda 2030…the “Great Reset,” reducing the population of the planet
to a “Golden Billion,” making those who survive post human, technocratic
serfs.
The only hope seems to be the BRICS countries, with Russia
in the lead, that are working to create a new world order that would
replace the colonial, hegemonic order of the West that has existed for
hundreds of years.
The only question that remains is, will those
crazed, some say evil, hegemonic, murderous monsters, realizing they
have lost this epic battle for the future order and control of the
world, take the whole world down with them in a nuclear Armageddon.
Russia, being the only adult in the room, is the only one that has averted this extinction event. [don't forget China]
As
Bruce proclaimed, “we must all get out there and resist, because it is
about the next generation’s, our children’s and grandchildren’s future.”
South Koreans in favor of President Yoon Suk Yeol's impeachment celebrated after the country's Constitutional Court decided on April 4 to remove him from office.
Yoon attempted to impose martial law on the nation but was defeated by the massive protest movement that resulted in response to his illegal actions.
Washington was believed to have been involved in Yoon trying to bring martial law to clamp down on the people.
President Macron convened some 30 ‘willing’ governments in Paris with the official aim of ‘building a solid peace for Ukraine and Europe.’ This was in fact not a peace summit but a war summit.
Before the summit Macron phoned Trump. He then held a press conference with Zelensky, declaring that ‘Russia shows a willingness to continue aggression’. During the summit, Macron said that "Moscow is pretending to negotiate" and that is why sanctions will be maintained, a decision that all participants agreed on.
Macron then announced the creation of a "reassurance force" to be "deployed in strategic locations in Ukraine in the event of peace," and that France and Britain would send a team to Ukraine to train Kiev's future army.
Italian President Meloni reaffirmed "continued support for Ukraine in the Euro-Atlantic context, including on the basis of a model that can be partly modeled on Article 5 of the Washington Treaty". Since this states that if a NATO member is attacked, all other members must intervene in its defence, this means that Ukraine is de facto considered a member of NATO.
The Russian Foreign Ministry warns that 'the deployment of NATO countries' troops in Ukraine risks provoking a direct military confrontation between Russia and NATO'.
All this hinders and effectively nullifies the agreement between the Presidents of the US and Russia to ensure safe navigation in the Black Sea, so that both Russia and Ukraine can export grain, fertilizer and other products by sea.
The US and Russia, despite having reached such an agreement, remain distant on other important issues. While the US would like to take control of all Ukrainian nuclear facilities, including the Zaporozhye NPP now under Russian control, Moscow says it will never hand over the NPP to Ukraine or any other country. The Zaporozhye nuclear power plant is therefore at risk of being hit again by Ukrainian forces, putting the whole of Europe at risk.
In the Middle East, the US and Russia pursue diametrically opposed goals. The US, in synergy with Israel, is strengthening its military presence in the region and attacking Yemen with the aim of striking Iran, while Russia is implementing a strategic cooperation agreement with Iran.
In East and South-East Asia, the US is deploying forces and armaments, including nuclear weapons, against China, Russia's ally with which it forms the BRICS backbone.
Defeated on Russian territory in Kursk regions, stopped in the
border areas in Belgorod, the Ukrainian military does not stop
provocations.
Another direction of a possible breakthrough across the
border may be the Russian border Bryansk region.
Ukarine's US-NATO directed (armed, trained, funded) army also continues to violate the partial ceasefire with Russia that called for a suspension of attacks on energy facilities.
It's becoming quite clear that the British and French are now controlling Kiev's military operations since Trump has stepped a bit back.
The French and British goal of creating a 'Coalition of the Willing' seems to be floundering due to a growing split in Europe on keeping the proxy war in Ukraine going. The citizens of Europe are increasingly seeing the war for what it truly is - a vain attempt to break Russia into smaller pieces like the US-NATO did to Yugoslavia during the Bill Clinton administration.
Trumps peace negotiations with Russia have thus hit the wall.
Washington is ignoring Kiev’s violations of the US-mediated moratorium on attacks against energy infrastructure in the conflict with Russia, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.
Last month, US President Donald Trump successfully urged Russian President Vladimir Putin to pause strikes on energy sites. Moscow agreed and held back.
While Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky publicly endorsed the moratorium, the Russian Defense Ministry has reported numerous attacks against Russian energy infrastructure since the agreement was announced on March 18.
Meanwhile, the German military has begun its first permanent deployment of troops
on foreign soil since World War II. The 45th Armored Brigade is being
positioned in Lithuania, near Russian ally Belarus, as Berlin prepares
for a potential conflict in the coming years.
Many in Europe still dream of the day they can destroy Russia and take control of its vast resource base. For more than 500 years Europe has repeatedly invaded Russia with the hope of doing so.
Successive attempts by Sweden, England, France and Germany have failed to conquer Russia.
It's ever more crazy to attempt to do so during the current nuclear age.
Interview with Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, conducted by Melinda Tuhus
Last week, President Bush announced his goal of sending Americans back to the moon by 2020 and then on to Mars. He promised only $1 billion in new funds for the project over the next five years, saying $11 billion in that period will come from a redeployment of money already allocated to NASA, the U.S. space agency. While some see this as a political move by Bush to sound Kennedy-esque as his campaign for re-election gears up, others foresee a scenario unfolding that could boost the fortunes of the controversial "Star Wars" anti-missile defense system, as the U.S. seeks to extend its superpower status into space.
Between The Lines' Melinda Tuhus spoke with Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. Gagnon has worked on space issues [since 1982] and was organizer of the Cancel Cassini Campaign, an effort to stop the launch of 72 pounds of plutonium into space onboard a satellite in 1997. Though ultimately unsuccessful, the campaign attracted worldwide attention and support.
Gagnon discusses the Bush administration's space proposal, how much it will likely cost, where the funds will come from and who stands to profit. He also lays out his hope for the world community to take space exploration in a different direction.
Elon Musk's favorite T-shirt
Bruce Gagnon: I think it’s part of a long, long-time plan to begin to build the infrastructure to use space to control the earth and then ultimately to create a 50-year, 100-year plan to control the shipping lanes between the earth and planetary bodies. There’s a plan to actually mine the skies. They’ve discovered gold on the asteroids. On Mars, there’s magnesium and cobalt and uranium. That little rover driving around Mars today, it’s not looking for the origins of life like we’re told; they’re doing soil identification and they’re trying to identify what is where on that planet. There’s helium-3 on the moon. In fact, there’s a New York Times story where they say that it will replace fossil fuels when they are gone on the earth, and helium-3 will be used for fusion reactors. Coincidentally, the U.S. never signed the 1979 Moon Treaty that outlaws permanent bases on the moon, military bases, and most importantly, says that no country or corporation or individual can claim ownership of the moon. The U.S. didn’t sign that treaty because we’ve always intended to have military bases on the moon. I have a copy of a secret Army study from 1952 that says the U.S. has to control the moon. They long ago realized that whoever controls the moon actually will be able to control the pathway on and off the planet Earth - they call it the earth-moon gravity well; whoever is at the top of the well will control who can get on and off the planet. And a congressional study in 1989 entitled, Military Space Forces: the Next 50 Years, stated that with our bases on the moon, we would be able to 'hijack rival shipments upon return', so that if anyone else tried to mine the sky but they weren’t authorized, we would be able to take them out on the way back. It's high-tech piracy.
Between The Lines: Is the money, then, going to come in the future, because it seems like a very modest proposal right now.
Bruce Gagnon: The first thing they’re going to do is to close down the international space station and the shuttle program, and move that money in. But once they get the commitment from Congress that yes, we’re going to go forward with this, it’s institutionalized in the budget, then the real bucks are going to kick in. The estimates for the collective costs of these Mars missions and moon missions is about $750 billion over time [in 2004 dollars]. Well, this is a massive, massive flow of funds into the aerospace corporation coffers, at the same time, remember, that they’ve also come out with, about a year ago -- the Bush administration did -- the Nuclear Systems Initiative, a $3 billion, five-year program to develop Project Prometheus, the nuclear rocket with nuclear reactors for engines, and other nuclear technologies [which will soon be tested over our heads in Lower Earth Orbit]. Those little rovers that are driving around Mars today are powered with plutonium. They are talking about having nuclear powered mining colonies on the moon and Mars. So all these… increasing the number of launches with nuclear materials on rockets with ten percent failure rates is going to ensure that sooner or later there will be a nuclear accident at the time of launch.
There was an editorial in one of the industry publications called Space News [in 1999], and the title was 'Mars missions are affordable.' And Space News went on to say, 'Look, we know that this stuff is going to be expensive, but we have a solution to the funding problem. So what we’re now doing is sending our lobbyists to Washington secure those funds from the Entitlement programs and moving the money into these space projects'.
Now, what are these entitlement programs that Space News was talking about? Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and what’s left of the welfare program today. So after the taxpayers would have paid all the years of space tech research and development, in the hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars, when the day comes that they can actually turn profit mining the skies, in the future, what they’re going to do, and NASA has already said, they’re going to privatize everything, turn it over to the corporations who will make the money. And in fact there’s legislation pending in Congress to make all profits in space tax-exempt.
Between The Lines: Do you see any value in space travel, in space exploration done a certain way?
Bruce Gagnon: I’m not opposed to space exploration in general. I think we all have that curiosity about what’s out there, and I think it’s something that we as a planet, should over time, be expected that we’re going to want to pursue. But I think when it comes at the cost of our own life here on this planet, when it comes at the cost of our children’s education, our health care, and cleaning up our own planet -- these things should come first. And then when we do move off this planet, I think we really need to have a collective understanding on earth: What kind of seed will we carry with us when we go into the heavens? Will it be this bad seed of war and greed and environmental degradation, or will it be a different kind of seed, a more positive seed? And I think right now is the time to debate this question globally. And that’s the work of our organization, to create a global consciousness and a global constituency, around this question: What kind of seed should our space program carry?
Will inflation increase as companies importing goods increase domestic prices to recover the tariff impacts?
Does the government want to drive the US and global economy downward?
Americans are now panicking as car prices are rising - up to $6,000 for some new cars.
China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi, during his 3 day visit to Moscow: “The US itself is sick but
is forcing others to get treatment,” Wang said, emphasizing that
Trump’s trade wars will “cause serious damage not only to the global
market and trade order but the US’s reputation” as well. “‘America
First’ cannot be achieved by American bullying, especially to the
detriment of the interests of other countries,” he said.
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov: “We recognize the responsibility of Moscow and Beijing to
maintain close coordination in the international arena. The majority of
countries perceive this as perhaps the most significant stabilizing
factor during these challenging times in global politics”.
