What is unfolding right now in California—with hundreds of Marines deployed domestically; thousands of National Guard troops federalized; and military weapons, tactics and equipment on full display—is intended to intimidate, distract and discourage us from pulling back the curtain on the reality of the self-serving corruption, grift, graft, overreach and abuse that have become synonymous with his Administration.

Don’t be distracted. Don’t be intimidated. Don’t be sidelined by the spectacle of a police state.

This is yet another manufactured crisis fomented by the Deep State.

When Trump issues a call to “BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!” explaining to reporters that he wants to have them “everywhere,” we should all be alarmed.

This is martial law without a formal declaration of war.

This heavy-handed, chest-thumping, politicized, militarized response to what is clearly a matter for local government is yet another example of Trump’s disregard for the Constitution and the limits of his power.

Political protests are protected by the First Amendment until they cross the line from non-violent to violent. Even when protests turn violent, constitutional protocols remain in place to safeguard communities: law and order must flow through local and state chains of command, not from federal muscle.

By breaking that chain of command, Trump is breaking the Constitution.

Deploying the military to deal with domestic matters that can—and should—be handled by civilian police, despite the objections of local and state leaders, crosses the line into authoritarianism.

When someone shows you who they are, believe them.

In the span of a single week, the Trump administration is providing the clearest glimpse yet of its unapologetic, uncompromising, corrupt allegiance to the authoritarian Deep State.

These two events—the federalization of the National Guard deployed to California in response to protests and the president’s lavish, taxpayer-funded military parade in the nation’s capital—bookend the administration’s unmistakable message: dissent will be crushed, and power will be performed.

Trump governs by force (military deployment), fear (ICE raids, militarized policing), and spectacle (the parade).

This is the spectacle of a police state. One side of the coin is militarized suppression. The other is theatrical dominance. Together, they constitute the language of force and authoritarian control.

Yet this is more than political theater; it is a constitutional crisis in motion.

As we have warned before, this tactic is a familiar one.

In times of political unrest, authoritarian regimes often invoke national emergencies as a pretext to impose military solutions. The result? The Constitution is suspended, civilian control is overrun, and the machinery of the state turns against its own people.

This is precisely what the Founders feared when they warned against standing armies on American soil: that one day, the military might be used not to defend the people, but to control them.

It is a textbook play from the authoritarian handbook, deployed with increasing frequency under Trump. The optics are meant to intimidate, broadcast control, and discourage resistance before it even begins.

Thus, deploying the National Guard in this manner is not just a political maneuver—it is a strategic act of fear-based governance designed to instill terror, particularly among vulnerable communities, and ensure compliance.

America is being transformed into a battlefield before our eyes.

Militarized police. Riot squads. Black uniforms. Armored vehicles. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Stun grenades. Crowd control and intimidation tactics.

This is not the language of freedom. This is not even the language of law and order.

This is the language of force.

This transformation is not accidental—it’s strategic. The government now sees the public not as constituents to be served but as potential combatants to be surveilled, managed, and subdued. In this new paradigm, dissent is treated as insurrection, and constitutional rights are treated as threats to national security.

What we are witnessing today is also part of a broader setup: an excuse to use civil unrest as a pretext for militarized overreach.

We saw signs of this strategy in Charlottesville, Virginia, where police failed to de-escalate and at times exacerbated tensions during protests that should have remained peaceful. The resulting chaos gave authorities cover to crack down—not to protect the public, but to reframe protest as provocation and dissent as disorder.

Then and now, the objective wasn’t to preserve peace and protect the public. It was to delegitimize dissent and cast protest as provocation.

It’s all part of an elaborate setup by the architects of the Deep State. The government wants a reason to crack down, lock down, and bring in its biggest guns.

This is how it begins.

Trump’s use of the military against civilians violates the spirit—if not the letter—of the Posse Comitatus Act, which is meant to bar federal military involvement in domestic affairs. It also raises severe constitutional questions about the infringement of First Amendment rights to protest and Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless search and seizure.

Modern tools of repression compound the threat. AI-driven surveillance, predictive policing software, biometric databases, and fusion centers have made mass control seamless and silent. The state doesn’t just respond to dissent anymore; it predicts and preempts it.

While boots are on the ground in California, preparations are underway for a military spectacle in Washington, D.C.

At first glance, a military procession might seem like a patriotic display. But in this context, it is not a celebration of service; it is a declaration of supremacy. It is not about honoring troops; it is about reminding the populace who holds the power and who wields the guns.

This is how authoritarian regimes govern—through spectacle.

By sandwiching a military crackdown between a domestic troop deployment and a showy parade, Trump is sending a unified message: This is about raw, unchecked, theatrical power. And whether we, the people, will accept a government that rules not by consent, but by coercion.

The Constitution was not written to accommodate authoritarian pageantry. It was written to restrain it. It was never meant to sanctify conquest as a form of governance.

We are at a crossroads.

Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Strip away that consent, and all that remains is conquest through force, spectacle, and fear.

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, if we allow the language of fear, the spectacle of dominance, and the machinery of militarized governance to become normalized, then we are no longer citizens of a republic—we are subjects of a police state.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead.

As protests against ICE raids spread across the city, President Trump has deployed the California National Guard to Los Angeles, the first time in decades that a president has deployed the National Guard without a governor’s request. Trump’s border “czar” Tom Homan threatened to arrest California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, while Newsom says he plans to sue. “This is absolutely unprecedented. It’s extremely dangerous,” says legal expert Elizabeth Goitein. “It’s going to escalate tensions rather than deescalating them.”

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

The United States is advancing the fortification of its territory closest to China with the arrival of the first Marines from Okinawa and its first interceptor missile test in Guam last week.

About 100 Marines from Japan landed on Saturday, the vanguard of about 5000 due to be relocated to Guam under a security treaty with the US.

The US successfully downed one of its own unarmed ballistic missiles last Tuesday in what will be a regular occurrence in the territory over the next decade.

• READ MORE: Other Guam militarisation reports

The milestones come as the House of Representatives last week also passed the 2025 National Defence Authorisation Act — with more than US$2 billion in spending for Guam — that now goes to the Senate for approval.

Nicknamed the “tip of the spear” due to its proximity to China, Guam is considered a potential target in any conflict between the two nations. The island has no bomb shelters and the unprecedented military build-up continues to divide residents.

“The intensity of the build-up is overwhelming for citizens and public agencies trying to keep track and respond to military plans as they unfold,” said Robert Underwood, chairman of the Guam-based Pacific Centre for Island Security.

“A master plan is needed for understanding by all concerned. One must exist and we are not privy to it,” he told BenarNews.

Lays the groundwork
The arrival of the first troops lays the groundwork for preparing Marine Corps Base Camp Blaz to receive thousands more.

“Relocations will take place in a phased approach, and no unit headquarters will be moving during this iteration,” a US Marine Corps press release said on Saturday.

“Forward presence and routine engagement with allies and partners are essential to the United States’ ability to deter attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion and respond to crises in the region, to include providing humanitarian assistance and disaster relief when necessary,” the USMC said.

Japan will pay US$2.8 billion to fund some of the infrastructure projects on Naval Base Guam, Andersen Air Force Base and Camp Blaz.

The Missile Defence Agency last Tuesday tested its Aegis system, firing off an interceptor from Andersen Air Force to down an unarmed, medium-range ballistic missile more than 200 nautical miles north-east of Guam.

“The event marked a pivotal step taken in the defence of Guam and provides critical support to the overall concept for the future Guam defence system,” deputy Pentagon press secretary Sabrina Singh said in a press briefing last Wednesday.

The launch was the first in a series of twice-yearly missile defence tests on Guam over the next 10 years.

16 sites planned
The US Indo-Pacific Command plans to build a missile defence system with 16 sites, touted to provide 360-degree protection for Guam.

The urgency was highlighted after China conducted a rare ballistic missile test with a dummy warhead in September. Its flight path crossed near Guam, Federated States of Micronesia and Marshall Islands before falling into the ocean in the vicinity of Kiribati.

In July, US military officials had announced that the first missile defence test was set to take place in Guam “by the end of the year,” but did not provide the exact date.

Nanette Reyes-Senior, a resident of Maina village, said she was “extremely surprised” that the MDA launched the flight test “without prior notice to the public — unless there was notice that I missed.”

Underwood has called for greater transparency about the missile defence of Guam.

“The missile testing had already been announced . . . but no specific week, let alone date was announced,” Underwood said.

With more tests to be launched in the coming years, Underwood said: “The general public should be given advanced notice and especially land owners.”

No significant impact
After public consultation earlier this year, the Missile Defence Agency decided the planned tests would not significantly impact humans or the natural environment.

President of the Pacific Association of Radiation Survivors Robert Celestial welcomed the US missile defense test.

“China had 23000 ballistic missiles, numerous ICBM missiles and 320 nuclear warheads. It is evident that we are preparing for war, so we should at least prepare to protect the civilian population from a nuclear attack,” he told BenarNews.

“Growing up in the 1960s we had duck-and-cover drills. I feel better prepared now than [to] suffer later.”

Guam is no stranger to war, being part of the Pacific campaign during World War II.

Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te’s visit to Guam earlier this month to strengthen ties has raised residents’ fears of the territory being further targeted in escalating tensions between Washington and Beijing.

Shelly Vargas-Calvo, a senator-elect who will assume her seat in the Guam legislature next month, said the growing tensions in the region will take Guam into the path of war.

“I applaud the successful test launch,” she said. “It is imperative to show power and capability despite having a small footprint in the region to send a message that we and our allies are not to be messed around with.”

Republished from BenarNews with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

After nearly two decades of obstruction by the U.S. military, The New Yorker has obtained and published 10 photos of the aftermath of the 2005 Haditha massacre, when U.S. marines killed 24 Iraqi civilians in revenge for an IED bombing that killed a service member. The graphic images show dead Iraqi men, women and children, many of them shot in the head at close range. The victims ranged in age from 3 to 76. Release of the photos came only after producers of the investigative podcast In the Dark sued the Navy, the Marine Corps and U.S. Central Command to force them to turn over the photos and other records. “What the photos clearly show is that these were innocent people who do not appear to be doing anything threatening at the time of their deaths,” says Madeleine Baran, host and lead reporter of the podcast. Four marines were charged for the killings, but the charges were dismissed in three cases, and the last ended with a plea deal that did not result in a single day in prison. Baran says the survivors of the massacre, who cooperated with producers to get the photos released, are still waiting for justice. “What they want is the world to know what happened to their family, to know that their family were good people, not insurgents, and they want justice,” she says.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

Photograph Source: FOX 52 – CC BY-SA 4.0

The tiltrotor V-22 Osprey has a plagued, bloodied history.  But blighted as it is, the aircraft remains a cherished feature of the US Marines, regarded as vital in supporting combat assault, logistics and transport, not to mention playing a role in search-and-rescue missions and delivering equipment for the Navy carrier air wings.

In March this year, V-22 flights were again permitted after a three-month pause following a fatal crash on November 29 of an Air Force CV-22B off Yakushima Island, Japan and the grounding of all V-22S aircraft in early December.  Col. Brian Taylor, program manager for the V-22 Joint Program Office, told a media roundtable two days prior to rescinding the ground order that a “meticulous and data-driven approach” had been used in investigations.

The approach, however, may well have been less meticulous and data-driven than a matter of desperation and self-interest, not to mention the role the aircraft is intended to play in the lighter, more agile forms of conflict envisaged by the “Force Design 2030” strategy.  A feature of that strategy is EABO, known to the military wonks as Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations.

Bryan Clark, senior fellow and director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Defense Concepts and Technology, offers a blunt assessment.  “There’s not a clear backup for the Marines, there’s not a clear backup for the Air Force, and soon there won’t be a backup for the Navy’s [carrier onboard delivery] mission.”

The Osprey’s failures have also left their spatter in Australia.  On August 27, 2023 a V-22B Osprey with 23 US marines crashed to the north of Darwin on Melville Island, leading to three fatalities.  Darwin, having become a vital springboard in projecting US power in the Indo-Pacific, hosts an annual Marine Rotational Force, so-called to avoid suspicions of a permanent garrisoning of the city.

The crash also stirred unwanted memories of a previous Osprey crash in Australia, when a Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 265 failed to safely land on the flight deck of USS Green Bay on August 5, 2017.  That lethal occasion saw three deaths and 23 injuries.

The Osprey has pride of place in a military force that specialises in lethal aviation mishaps during training and routine operations.  Join the US Armed Forces, and you might just get yourself killed by your own machinery and practices.  The investigation into the Melville Island crash was instructive to that end, showing the aircraft to be, yet again, an object of pious reverence in US defence circles.

The initial investigation into the crash was initially eclectic: the Northern Territory police, fire and emergency services, along with personnel from the Australian Defence Force and the US Marine Corps.  At the time, acting assistant commissioner and incident controller, Matthew Hollamby, expressed his enthusiasm in carrying out a “thorough investigation”. “We are in the recovery phase and working closely with NT Fire and Rescue Service to assist us with a safe and respectful recovery operation of the three deceased US marines.”

Despite such utterances, it soon became clear that any investigation into the matter would ultimately be pared back.  Either the servitors were not considered up to the task, or all too capable in identifying what caused the crash.  In September 2023, the local press reported that territory officials were no longer needed, with NT News going so far as to claim that local agencies had been “ousted from the investigation”.  The Marines had taken full reins over the matter.

The top brass accordingly got the findings they wanted from the US Marines’ official report, which involved sparing the Osprey and chastising the personnel.  There had been no “material or mechanical failure of any component on the aircraft”.  The crash had been “caused by a series of poor decisions and/or miscalculations.”

The squadron’s attitude to procedure had also been less than enviable, marked by a “culture that disregarded safety of flight procedures”.  There had been a “lack of attention to detail and failure to comply with proper pre-flight procedures”.  There had also been a “lackadaisical attitude across the squadron” towards maintenance practices.  Command responsibility in not addressing that particular culture was also acknowledged, while the conduct of the Australian Defence Forces and “local nationals” in responding to the crash were deemed “admirable”.

Such reports are hardly intended as ironic, but the executive summary notes how Australian defence protocols were so developed as to enable the Marines to operate with even greater daring than they otherwise would.  The ADF’s “casualty evacuation (CASEVAC) and mass casualty (MASSCAS) support structure is allowing Marine units to conduct multi-national military training events in the Northern Territories without sacrificing force requirements.  Without these well-established relationships in place this mishap may have been more tragic.”

The findings should have given the then Northern Territory Chief Minister Eva Lawler pause for concern.  Squadrons of personnel operating such machinery indifferent to safety would surely stir some searching questions.  But NT officials, under the eagle eye of the Canberra military establishment, aim to please, and Lawler proved no different.  She knew “that the US Marines will do the work that’s needed now to make sure that any recommendations out of any inquiry are implemented in full.”

In a statement of unconvincing worth, the Marines insisted that they remained “unwavering” in their “commitment to the world class training of our aircrews and ensuring their safety”.  And that commitment, not to mention the type of training, is precisely what we should be afraid of.

The post Protecting the Widow Maker: The US Marines Exonerate the Osprey appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

In March this year, V-22 flights were again permitted after a three-month pause following a fatal crash on November 29 of an Air Force CV-22B off Yakushima Island, Japan and the grounding of all V-22S aircraft in early December.  Col. Brian Taylor, program manager for the V-22 Joint Program Office, told a media roundtable two days prior to rescinding the ground order that a “meticulous and data-driven approach” had been used in investigations.

The approach, however, may well have been less meticulous and data-driven than a matter of desperation and self-interest, not to mention the role the aircraft is intended to play in the lighter, more agile forms of conflict envisaged by the “Force Design 2030” strategy.  A feature of that strategy is EABO, known to the military wonks as Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations.

Bryan Clark, senior fellow and director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Defense Concepts and Technology, offers a blunt assessment.  “There’s not a clear backup for the Marines, there’s not a clear backup for the Air Force, and soon there won’t be a backup for the Navy’s [carrier onboard delivery] mission.”

The Osprey’s failures have also left their spatter in Australia.  On August 27, 2023 a V-22B Osprey with 23 US marines crashed to the north of Darwin on Melville Island, leading to three fatalities.  Darwin, having become a vital springboard in projecting US power in the Indo-Pacific, hosts an annual Marine Rotational Force, so-called to avoid suspicions of a permanent garrisoning of the city.

The crash also stirred unwanted memories of a previous Osprey crash in Australia, when a Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 265 failed to safely land on the flight deck of USS Green Bay on August 5, 2017.  That lethal occasion saw three deaths and 23 injuries.

The Osprey has pride of place in a military force that specialises in lethal aviation mishaps during training and routine operations.  Join the US Armed Forces, and you might just get yourself killed by your own machinery and practices.  The investigation into the Melville Island crash was instructive to that end, showing the aircraft to be, yet again, an object of pious reverence in US defence circles.

The initial investigation into the crash was initially eclectic: the Northern Territory police, fire and emergency services, along with personnel from the Australian Defence Force and the US Marine Corps.  At the time, acting assistant commissioner and incident controller, Matthew Hollamby, expressed his enthusiasm in carrying out a “thorough investigation”. “We are in the recovery phase and working closely with NT Fire and Rescue Service to assist us with a safe and respectful recovery operation of the three deceased US marines.”

Despite such utterances, it soon became clear that any investigation into the matter would ultimately be pared back.  Either the servitors were not considered up to the task, or all too capable in identifying what caused the crash.  In September 2023, the local press reported that territory officials were no longer needed, with NT News going so far as to claim that local agencies had been “ousted from the investigation”.  The Marines had taken full reins over the matter.

The top brass accordingly got the findings they wanted from the US Marines’ official report, which involved sparing the Osprey and chastising the personnel.  There had been no “material or mechanical failure of any component on the aircraft”.  The crash had been “caused by a series of poor decisions and/or miscalculations.”

The squadron’s attitude to procedure had also been less than enviable, marked by a “culture that disregarded safety of flight procedures”.  There had been a “lack of attention to detail and failure to comply with proper pre-flight procedures”.  There had also been a “lackadaisical attitude across the squadron” towards maintenance practices.  Command responsibility in not addressing that particular culture was also acknowledged, while the conduct of the Australian Defence Forces and “local nationals” in responding to the crash were deemed “admirable”.

Such reports are hardly intended as ironic, but the executive summary notes how Australian defence protocols were so developed as to enable the Marines to operate with even greater daring than they otherwise would.  The ADF’s “casualty evacuation (CASEVAC) and mass casualty (MASSCAS) support structure is allowing Marine units to conduct multi-national military training events in the Northern Territories without sacrificing force requirements.  Without these well-established relationships in place this mishap may have been more tragic.”

The findings should have given the then Northern Territory Chief Minister Eva Lawler pause for concern.  Squadrons of personnel operating such machinery indifferent to safety would surely stir some searching questions.  But NT officials, under the eagle eye of the Canberra military establishment, aim to please, and Lawler proved no different.  She knew “that the US Marines will do the work that’s needed now to make sure that any recommendations out of any inquiry are implemented in full.”

In a statement of unconvincing worth, the Marines insisted that they remained “unwavering” in their “commitment to the world class training of our aircrews and ensuring their safety”.  And that commitment, not to mention the type of training, is precisely what we should be afraid of.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

One year since Prime Minister Anthony Albanese went to San Diego to unveil the AUKUS deal the news came that the first of three second-hand Virginia class nuclear-powered submarines supposed to arrive in 2032 may not happen.

Former coalition prime minister Scott Morrison announced AUKUS in September 2021 and Albanese continued to champion the pact between the US, Britain and Australia.

Phase one involves Australia acquiring eight nuclear-powered submarines as tensions in the Indo-Pacific are growing.

• READ MORE: Other AUKUS reports

Concerns about the submarines ever materialising are not new, despite the US passing its National Defence Bill 2024 which facilitates the transfer of the nuclear-powered warships.

However, the Pentagon’s 2025 fiscal year budget only set aside funding to build one Virginia submarine. This affects the AUKUS deal as the US had promised to lift production from around 1.3 submarines a year to 2.3 to meet all requirements.

Australia’s acquisition of the first of three second-hand SSNs were to bridge the submarine gap, as talk about a US-led war on China continues.

US Democratic congressperson Joe Courtney told The Sydney Morning Herald on March 12 the US was struggling with its own shipbuilding capacity, meaning promises to Australia were being deprioritised.

Production downturn
Courtney said that the downturn in production “will remove one more attack submarine from a fleet that is already 17 submarines below the navy’s long-stated requirement of 66”.

The US needs to produce 18 more submarines by 2032 to be able to pass one on to Australia.

After passing laws permitting the transfer of nuclear technology, the deal is running a year at least behind schedule.

Greens Senator David Shoebridge said on X that “When the US passed the law to set up AUKUS they put in kill switches, one of which allowed the US to decide not [to] transfer the submarines if doing so would ‘degrade the US undersea capabilities’”.

Pat Conroy, Labor’s Defence Industry Minister, retorted that the government was confident the submarines would appear.

The White House seems unfazed; it would have been aware of the problems for some time.

Meanwhile the USS Annapolis, a US nuclear-powered submarine (SSN) has docked in Boorloo/Perth.

AUKUS still under way
Regardless of whether Australia acquires any nuclear-powered vessels, the rest of the AUKUS deal, including interoperability with the US, is already underway.

Andrew Hastie, Liberal Party spokesperson, confirmed that construction at HMAS Stirling will start next year for “Submarine Rotational Force-West (SRF-West)”, the permanent US-British nuclear-powered submarine base in WA, which is due to be completed in 2027.

SRF-West includes 700 US army personnel and their families being stationed in WA. If the second-hand nuclear submarines do not materialise, the US submarines will be on hand.

SRF-West may also serve as an alternative to the five British-designed AUKUS SSNs, slated to be built in Kaurna Yerta/Adelaide over coming decades.

Australia respects the Pentagon’s warhead ambiguity policy, meaning that any US military equipment stationed here could be carrying nuclear weapons: we will never know.

Shoebridge said on March 13 he was entering a hearing to decide where the AUKUS powers can dump their nuclear waste. Local waste dumps are being considered, as the US and Britain do not have permanent radioactive waste dumps.

The waste to be dumped is said to have a low-level radioactivity. However, as former Senator Rex Patrick pointed out, SSNs produce high-level radioactive waste at the end of their shelf lives that will need to be stored somewhere, underground, forever.

‘Radioactive waste management’
The Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Bill 2023, tabled last November, allows for the AUKUS SSNs to be constructed and also provides for “a radioactive waste management facility”.

The Australian public is spending US$3 billion on helping the US submarine industrial base expand capacity. An initial US$2 billion will be spent next year, followed by $100 million annually from 2026 through to 2033.

The Pentagon has budgeted US$4 billion for its submarine industry next year, with an extra US$11 billion over the following five years.

The removal of the Virginia subs, and even the AUKUS submarines from the agreement, would be in keeping with the terms of the 2014 Force Posture Agreement, signed off by then prime minister Tony Abbott.

As part of the Barack Obama administration’s 2011 “pivot to Asia”, the US-Australia Force Posture Agreement allows for 2500 Marines to be stationed in the Northern Territory.

It sets up increasing interoperability between both countries’ air forces and allows the US unimpeded access to dozens of “agreed-to facilities and areas”.

These agreed bases remain classified.

US takes full control
However, as the recent US overhaul of RAAF Base Tindall in the NT reveals, when the US decides to do that it takes full control.

Tindall has been upgraded to allow for six US B-52 bombers that may be carrying nuclear warheads.

US laws that facilitate the transfer of Virginia-class submarines also make clear that as Australia is now classified as a US domestic military source this allows the US privileged access to critical minerals, such as lithium.

Paul Gregoire writes for Sydney Criminal Lawyers where a version of this article was first published. The article has also been published at Green Left magazine and is republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

In an escalation of tensions, the Biden administration has deployed thousands of U.S. Marines and sailors to the Middle East in order to deter Iran from seizing oil tankers and other commercial ships near the Strait of Hormuz. The move comes after the Navy said Iran tried to seize two commercial oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman last month, after seizing dozens more since 2019. Iran responded by equipping its Navy with drones and missiles. “It’s really baffling to see why we’re taking such immense risks that could bring the U.S. into war for achieving things that are of little value when it comes to peace and stability in the region or U.S. interests in the region,” says Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, who says the Biden administration is risking a new war for stronger relations with Saudi Arabia. He argues the Biden administration has made critical mistakes in its relations with Iran by continuing Trump administration-era maximum-pressure sanctions.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

A Marine charged with taking part in the January 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol was transferred into a highly sensitive intelligence assignment at the headquarters of the National Security Agency after the violent attempt to overturn the 2020 election results, Marine Corps officials have acknowledged. The Marine confessed to his role in the Capitol riot last summer during a security clearance interview, but was not charged until last month.

Following his alleged participation in the 2021 insurrection, Sgt. Joshua Abate, a special communication signals analyst, was assigned to the Marine Cryptologic Support Battalion, which acts as a liaison between the Marines and the NSA at Fort Meade. The transfer into the liaison unit after the Capitol riot placed Abate inside one of the most sensitive facilities in the entire U.S. government.

From left to right, Micah Coomer, Joshua Abate, and Dodge Dale Hellonen are seen inside the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021.

Still: The Intercept/ITN, Getty Images

Related

▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​

This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by James Risen.

The Kamandag 6 war games, which involve about 2,550 U.S. Marines and 630 Filipino counterparts from the marines and navy, run through Oct. 14. The joint force comprises the largest combined number of troops from the longtime defense allies participating in a military exercise since President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. took office in June.

The exercise is not only a two-way collaboration between the U.S. and the Philippines but an effort to engage allies Japan and South Korea, whose participation is crucial “in a volatile security environment,” Philippine Navy chief Rear Adm. Caesar Bernard Valencia said during an opening ceremony on Monday.

The drills are unfolding against the backdrop of tensions in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait.

“I hope that we will continue to stand together as allies and partners, armed with the commitment to uphold the values and the principles of freedom, democracy and a rules-based order in the Indo-Pacific,” Valencia told reporters.

“I look forward to these opportunities that we have in this training exercise as we continue to collaborate in addressing collective security concerns in the region and world-wide.”

Drills will be held in the western island province of Palawan that faces the South China Sea, and in Batanes, a province on Luzon island that lies across the Luzon Strait from Taiwan, according to a news release on the U.S. Marines’ website. At the same time, Japan Ground Self-Defense Force members will host American Marines in similar training exercises on Hokkaido island.

Kamandag will include a combined live-fire exercise in central Luzon featuring aircraft and High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, as well as amphibious operations along the island’s eastern and northern coasts, the news release said.

“Kamandag” means “Cooperation of the Warriors of the Sea.”

Valencia said the joint exercises would deliver a “platform where nations or participants or observers alike can express their commitment to regional peace and stability.”

The exercises are taking place amid Chinese military expansionism in the South China Sea, where Beijing is locked in territorial disputes with the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan. Beijing claims historical rights to much of the region, including waters reaching rivals’ shores.

“Exercises like the Kamandag allow us to work together multi-laterally, not only to enforce our commitments to our partner nations, but also to expand our regional relationships. Exercise Kamandag also prepares for a wide-range of challenges protruding (from) traditional security threats on the global scale and non-traditional security concerns such as disaster response operations through a series of field and combined interoperability exercises,” Valencia said.

During the 12-day exercise scores of personnel from the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force and Korean armed forces will serve as observers and are expected to participate in disaster response drills.

Rear Adm. Derek Trinque, the exercise director on the U.S. side, said the joint drills “will help us carry on this important work together, to ensure our nations’ defense and preserve peace in the region.”

Trinque said the drills would help both forces “to be more prepared to address real-world challenges.”

He said U.S. armed forces enjoy partnerships with like-minded nations across the Indo-Pacific region.

“While it’s always a privilege for us to work bilaterally with the Philippines, with Japan, with the Republic of Korea, when we can bring our allies and partners together, if we can be part of that then we are pleased to do so,” he said.

“As the admiral (Valencia) stated, this is bilateral and the forces of Japan and Korea are observing this year. We are here on the invitation of the Philippines and so if in the future we have opportunities to work multilaterally, then we welcome that from the United States, but we would never try to tell the Armed Forces of the Philippines how they run their exercise,” Trinque said.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Luis Liwanag and Jojo Riñoza for BenarNews.

Senior government and military leaders from the United States, New Zealand, Australia and Japan are in Honiara to mark the 80th anniversary of the World War II Battle of Guadalcanal.

Minister of Defence Peeni Henare is leading the New Zealand delegation along with Secretary of Defence Andrew Bridgman and the Commander of the Joint Forces Rear Admiral James Gilmour.

The New Zealand High Commissioner to Solomon Islands, Jonathan Schwass, said New Zealanders from the army, air force and navy “served with distinction in the Solomon Islands between 1942 and 1945”.

• READ MORE: Solomon Islanders in World War II: An indigenous perspective
• LISTEN: RNZ Pacific Waves audio flashback from the 75th anniversary

“As WWII starts to slip beyond living memory, it is important that we continue to honour people of all nationalities who served and who died here,” he said.

Schwass said the remembrance ceremonies being organised this weekend showed that they were not forgotten.

A series of commemoration events start today.

Schwass said they were a reminder that the ties between New Zealand and Solomon Islands went back far into the past.

Solomon Scouts and CoastWatchers Trust chair Sir Bruce Saunders said filming the stories of those who served the US Marine Forces when they landed on Guadalcanal on 7 August 1942 was under way.

He said Solomon Islands students did not know their own history and he hoped to change that.

More than 25,000 soldiers died in the battle including dozens of Solomon Islanders.

Sir Bruce said the stories of their grandfathers and their role in saving their country needed to be passed down.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The discovery of many civilian bodies lying dead in the Ukrainian city of Bucha this week has brought out more Western rhetoric of horror, disgust, anger and fury at the Russian invasion of Ukraine and has renewed calls for more sanctions against Russia, more weapons to the Ukrainians and calls for Putin to be put on trial as a war criminal.

That’s a strong response to war and those responsible for starting a military invasion of a sovereign state.

Let’s shift the focus to Iraq in 2003 for a moment.

• READ MORE: Bucha killings: ‘The world cannot be tricked anymore’

On the marches to protest against the US-UK-Australian-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 one of the chants used was “Never forget Fallujah!”.

So, for those that were too young to know, or now too old to remember, here are a few well-referenced paragraphs from Wikipedia about what happened when the US invaders attacked that city as part of an invasion of another sovereign state, Iraq.

The United States bombardment of Fallujah began in April 2003, one month after the beginning of the invasion of Iraq. In April 2003, United States forces fired on a group of demonstrators who were protesting against the US presence. US forces alleged they were fired at first, but Human Rights Watch, who visited the site of the protests, concluded that physical evidence did not corroborate US allegations and confirmed the residents’ accusations that the US forces fired indiscriminately at the crowd with no provocation.

Seventeen people were killed and 70 were wounded.

Further killings
In a later incident, US soldiers fired on protesters again; Fallujah’s mayor, Taha Bedaiwi al-Alwani, said that two people were killed and 14 wounded. Iraqi insurgents were able to claim the city a year later, before they were ousted by a siege and two assaults by US forces.

These events caused widespread destruction and a humanitarian crisis in the city and surrounding areas. As of 2004, the city was largely ruined, with 60 percent of buildings damaged or destroyed, and the population at 30–50 percent of pre-war levels.

At least one US battalion had orders to shoot any male of military age on the streets after dark, armed or not. In violation of the Geneva Convention, the city’s main hospital was closed by Marines, negating its use, and a US sniper was placed on top of the hospital’s water tower.

On November 13, 2004, a US Marine with 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines, was videotaped killing a wounded combatant in a mosque. The incident, which came under investigation, created controversy throughout the world.

The man was shot at close range after he and several other wounded insurgents had previously been left behind overnight in the mosque by the US Marines. The Marine shooting the man had been mildly injured by insurgents in the same mosque the day before.

On November 16, 2004, a Red Cross official told Inter Press Service that “at least 800 civilians” had been killed in Fallujah and indicated that “they had received several reports from refugees that the military had dropped cluster bombs in Fallujah, and used a phosphorus weapon that caused severe burns.”

On 17 May 2011, AFP reported that 21 bodies, in black bodybags marked with letters and numbers in Roman script, had been recovered from a mass grave in al-Maadhidi cemetery in the centre of the city.

Blindfolded, legs tied
Fallujah police chief Brigadier General Mahmud al-Essawi said that they had been blindfolded, their legs had been tied and they had suffered gunshot wounds. The Mayor, Adnan Husseini said that the manner of their killing, as well as the body bags, indicated that US forces had been responsible.

Both al-Essawi and Husseini agreed that the dead had been killed in 2004. The US Military declined to comment.

There were no sanctions against the US, UK and Australia, there were no US soldiers, military leaders or politicians held to account. There were no arms sent to help the Iraqis facing overwhelming odds in their fight against the US and its allies.

There were no moves to charge George Bush (US President), Tony Blair (UK Prime Minister) or John Howard (Australian Prime Minister) for war crimes before the International Criminal Court.

Yes Vladimir Putin should be on trial at the International Criminal Court, but before he appears we should have seen George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard face the same charges first.

We should never forget Bucha — but we must never forget Fallujah either. The people of both cities deserve justice at the ICC. Let’s do all we can to hold them to account.

Incidentally, US President Joe Biden was pushing hard for the invasion of Iraq back in 2003. His hypocrisy now in condemning Putin is the stuff of legends.

Republished from The Daily Blog with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

McGrath, a retired Marine combat pilot, touted many of the same issues — health care and good-paying jobs — that Andy Beshear highlighted in ousting Republican incumbent Matt Bevin in last month’s election for governor. Beshear ran a “great campaign” that focused on issues that hit home for Kentuckians, McGrath said in a phone interview with The Associated Press.

Related Articles

“It absolutely gives us momentum because it shows that against an unpopular Republican incumbent, a Democrat can win,” McGrath said. “And we win by talking about those bread-and-butter issues that Kentuckians really care about.

“And that’s what I’m going to be talking about over and over again,” she said. “With Mitch McConnell, we’re not going to get any progress on these things.”

McGrath became the latest in a crowded field of candidates from both parties to file for McConnell’s seat. McGrath, who lost a hotly contested congressional race last year, has shown her mettle as a fundraiser, raking in nearly $11 million in her first few months as a Senate candidate, giving her a huge advantage over other Democratic candidates. McConnell has his own bulging campaign fund.

Another Democrat, Mike Broihier, also filed Friday as a U.S. Senate candidate. Broihier is a political newcomer with a broad resume as a Marine officer, farmer and small-town newspaperman.

Broihier also listed health care and the need for more good-paying jobs as key issues.

“Voters are energized,” he said in an interview, adding that the coalition that put Beshear in the governor’s office is “raring to go again” in the Senate race.

As the most powerful Republican in Congress, McConnell enters the race as a strong favorite in his pursuit of a seventh Senate term in 2020. The Republican senator touts his leadership position and his ability to deliver federal money for the Bluegrass State. This week, McConnell said he had a direct hand in securing $400 million for a new veterans hospital in Louisville, $25 million to fight Asian carp in western Kentucky and coal miner pension and health benefits.

McGrath tried to blunt that advantage of incumbency.

“Kentuckians know that his job is more than just bringing a check to Kentucky,” she said Friday. “Where is his leadership on saving health care? Where is he at with the rising cost of prescription drugs? Why hasn’t he done anything to stop the trade war that’s hurting farmers and businesses in Kentucky? Where’s he at with raising the minimum wage?

“It’s nice that he’s getting money for Kentucky, but the rest of the job is so important,” she added. “And it’s actually bigger and broader and he’s failing at all of these other things.”

McConnell campaign manager Kevin Golden fired back, saying: “Amy McGrath knows she can’t possibly make a cogent argument that she could do a fraction of the good Mitch McConnell does for Kentucky, so she’s left with this disjointed, half-baked justification for her candidacy that is simply not ready for prime time.”

McGrath said Friday she would work to strengthen the Affordable Care Act. She said she supports adding a public option to the health care law to give people “the choice of buying a government plan, much like I do as a military retiree.” She also stressed the need for action to lower prescription costs.

In another jab at McConnell, McGrath said she supports term limits. She said there’s “a real disconnect” between McConnell and “every day Kentuckians.”

On the issue of impeachment, McGrath accused McConnell of shirking his “constitutional duty.” She was referring to McConnell’s comments that there would be “total coordination” between the White House and the Senate over the upcoming presidential impeachment trial.

McGrath said it was premature to say whether she would support the president’s acquittal or conviction when the trial takes place. Senators should review the evidence and then make a judgment, she said.

Trump won Kentucky by a landslide in 2016 and will be a prohibitive favorite in the state next year when McGrath tries to dislodge McConnell. The Republican senator touts his close ties with Trump — from passing a tax overhaul to confirming conservative federal judges picked by the president.

But McGrath sees an opportunity to win over Trump supporters drawn to a political outsider.

“If you want more of the same, Mitch McConnell is your guy,” McGrath said. “He is the ultimate insider. He is the epitome of dysfunction in Washington. You can’t drain the swamp, as President Trump has touted doing, without getting rid of Mitch McConnell.”