01 OCTOBER 2020"... the Israeli Victory Is Nearly
Complete." Amira Hass
"Twenty years later, the Israeli victory is nearly complete: The well-planned armed robbery
of Palestinian land goes on daily unhindered. The model that Israel created in Gaza is being
copied in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and translated into something akin to "Pales
of Settlement" which, as long as they don't show signs of fury and rebellion, are of no
interest to the Jews in Israel, the supreme ruler." Amira Hass
Author Bio: Amira Hass is the Haaretz correspondent for the Occupied Territories. Born in
Jerusalem in 1956, Hass joined Haaretz in 1989, and has been in her current position since
1993. As the correspondent for the territories, she spent three years living in Gaza, which
served of the basis for her widely acclaimed book, "Drinking the Sea at Gaza." She has lived in
the West Bank city of Ramallah since 1997.
--------------
Yet further evidence of the actual paucity of my knowledge of Israel is the sad truth that I
had never heard of Amira Hass until I noticed this article in Haaretz today. The daughter of
two survivors of the Shoa, one Sephardi and the other Ashkenazi, she has clearly devoted her
life to truth telling in the matter of systemic Israeli abuse of the Palestinian people. She
has lived for long periods in Gaza and Ramallah. My. My. I am impressed. pl
In 2014 she was to attend a conference, but was quietly asked to leave Ramallah's Birzeit
University that enforces an institutional law banning Israeli Jews from its campus, they
asked Amira Hass to leave. ....One of the university lecturers explained to Hass that "it is
important for students to have a safe space where (Jewish) Israelis are not entitled to
enter."
"If I had known about the existence of such a law, I wouldn't have come to the
conference," she wrote, adding, however, that she "did not take it personally" that she was
asked to leave for being an Israeli Jew.
"I understand the emotional need of Palestinians to create a safe space that is off-limits
to citizens of the state that denies them their rights and has been robbing them of their
land," Hass declared.
Our local university's library is named after James Michener, who is the author of the the
historical novel about the ship, The Exodus, and its relocation of Holocaust survivors to
Palestine.
I was fourteen when I first saw the gut-wrenching documentary of the Holocaust after
Hitler's attempt to eliminate all Jews.
At that age and time, I saw the resettlement of Jews into Palestine as a good thing
because of Hitler's attempt to eradicate Jews from Germany, and maybe the world if he had
won.
I am now, of course, quite conflicted about the issue in regard to Palestine. My own
ethnic group escaped Russia as their farms were being confiscated by the Bolsheviks and used
in the Bolsheviks' failed experiments of factory and communal farming.
Our families don't now long to return there. Russia had been "Mother Russia." America came
to be "The Good Stepmother."
I've come to the conclusion that since many of the Jewish people had lived for years
elsewhere for a long time, it is not necessarily their right to move back and upset things as
they are in Palestine now.
Christianity has now generally given up its old prejudices about the Jewish people's guilt
for Christ's crucifixion. We embrace the Old Testament as well as the New Testament and so
feel a closeness in some regard to the Jewish people. But that does not mean we should always
support them in this effort to reshape Palestine to their liking.
As a literature major I understood that "the wandering Jew" theme in Western literature
came about because for a long time Christians blamed the Jews for Christ's crucifixion.
Times and myths and beliefs have a way of evolving. The people of Israel need to accept
the new era and find a way to live peacefully with the Palestinians.
I had the pleasure of meeting Amira in Jerusalem. She is truly most the most courageous of
the Israeli journalists sympathetic to the Palestinians. In fact, she lived in the occupied
territories at one point. Perhaps she still does.
With respect, Diana Croissant, Exodus, "the film and novel by Leon Uris on which it was
based," is fiction calculated to appeal to emotion, particularly the emotions of a 14 year
old.
Over the years, Hollywood has produced Booster shots to keep those impressions alive and
active; a kind of vaccine that wards off infections that might lead you or others to
view present behavior of Israeli zionists toward Palestine and wonder whether the leopard
might have had those nasty spots all along.
Have you challenged the narrative based on the images implanted in a 14 year old? Do you
still think that "Hitler attempted to eliminate the Jews?"
My son's mother always joked that whenever the US govt. pressured the Israelis to take
their knee off the Palestinian neck, all the networks would show "Exodus" again.
On another note, it's ironic that Israel has carte blanche from the United States to pursue
the creation of "Bantustans" in occupied territory. While South Africa tried that (and would
have succeeded) but they failed due to international pressure and I think we know that
"International pressure" comes from the United States first and foremost. Not OK for white
South Africans to have an apartheid state. but quite OK for Israeli Jews to do it to Arabs.
Now South Africa will soon be "Weiss Menschenrein". What a strange world we live in where
it's only contradictory if you think it is.
From comments: "Y ou can buy anything you want, you can do anything you want, you can run
naked in public, you just can't say or write what you want, which will soon turn into not being
able to even think what you want, as soon as the authorities can determine what you're
thinking."
Reminds me of the treatment of Mordechai Vanunu, the Jewish nuclear scientist who spilled
the beans about Israel's nuclear bomb program. He was kidnapped from a foreign country by the
Mossad and sentenced to 18 years in jail for treason, mostly spent in solitary confinement
and under conditions of duress. He was released in 2004 but not permitted to leave Israel.
He's been arrested and jailed numerous times since his release and may still be in prison
after a May, 2020 arrest.
It doesn't matter who or what you are. Criticize Jews, Judaism or the Zionist Entity and
your goose is cooked.
"We are in a European-style system where freedom of speech is framed by rules. For a
time, I thought this system was possible but now I'm receding to the view that the best
situation is that of the American system's First Amendment "
No it isn't.
The American system is devolving to its logical conclusion: In a few more years all
platforms and avenues of political, cultural, and economic speech will be private. Once
safely locked into the loving arms of the international plutocrats, the "American system"
will be a memory, punctuated by a handful of Luddites who hung on to ancient mimeographs and
pass out leaflets in the last remaining public parks. At best.
[
Editor's
Note
:
This was a strange story to see pop up out of nowhere, so one has to ask the proverbial question, "Why
now?" And for that I come up blank – other than maybe the outside chance that the captain of this sub recently died and cannot
be interviewed.
Heaven only knows that the Zios have a closet full of murder horrors they have committed for which the truth door remains
nailed shut. But it was the use of the term "within his operational orders" that triggered me publishing this on VT.
And here is the reason why. Let us wonder if some other country's submarine commander had
sunk a boat of Jewish refugees because he though Jewish terrorists were escaping – like the Irgun for example – which even
included some future Israeli presidents who were Irgun members.
Do you not think a great howl would arise from the global Jewish community, which I doubt will happen here? I will try to find
more background in the Israeli news on how this got published and to see if it has had a ripple effect inside Israel, other
than possibly among the Left at Gush Shalom.
But I felt those whose lives were snuffed out that day and hidden away under the Zionist blanket of, "Oh well, doo doo happens
sometimes", deserved a little more than the "within operational orders" moral dodge. Maybe a monument should be built in the
victims' honor with their names inscribed, along with the Israeli captain's name and the wonderful "within operational orders"
quote.
Maybe then we could get a dialogue going as to the feasibility that all the Holocaust monuments should have such a quote put
on them. After all, the record has been public that the Allied bomber command in Britain once fretted about the mental health
of its air crews over the huge number of civilians being killed in the big city raids.
A palliative notice was sent out to them all, absolving them from any personal
responsibility on the dubious grounds that, due to the civilian support for the Nazi regime that was prolonging the war and
thus causing more deaths, the mass slaughter of civilians in large cities would make them turn on the Nazi regime to end the
war sooner and thus save lives. Left out of the missive was any mention of the one third of the German population that had
voted for the Kaiser.
I am not kidding. The high command is on the record for this and of course, not one in a million persons know about it today.
I bumped into the historical data by chance while I was reading some history.
Will this get much play in the corporate media? I doubt it, but I sure hope I am wrong.
Note there are no key words to search for to find this article – not the name of the sub, its captain, not even the name of
the ship sunk. This is a little game for publishing the story, while making sure that it quickly becomes as buried online as
the original story did. Gosh, who would want to do something like that?
Jim
W. Dean
]
Jim's
Editor's Notes
are solely crowdfunded via
PayPal
Jim's work includes research, field trips, Heritage TV Legacy archiving & more. Thanks for helping.
Click
to donate >>
Israeli
Dolphin sub
– First published
November
23, 2018
–
" within his operational orders."
Israel has officially admitted that its military ordered a deadly
attack on a Lebanese ship carrying refugees during the regime's invasion of the country more than three decades ago.
An Israeli submarine fired missiles at the refugee ship in northern Lebanon in the summer of 1982, killing 25 refugees and
foreign workers on board, the Israeli Channel 10 reported on Thursday, after the regime lifted a 36-year-old gag order on the
incident.
The report said that the commercial ship, carrying dozens of Lebanese refugees to Cyprus, apparently tried to take advantage
of a brief ceasefire and flee the area.
But an Israeli Navy Gal-type submarine, which was following the ship for about an hour after leaving Tripoli, said the report,
had fired torpedoes at the boat and killed the refugees and foreign workers.
It alleged that the submarine's captain, identified as Maj. A, had
mistakenly ordered the attack because he was convinced that the ship was carrying Palestinian fighters.
Ten years later, Israel said it had launched an investigation into the incident. The probe, however, ruled that the captain
had made a mistake, but that he was within his operational orders.
Israeli
armored personnel carriers are seen near a mosque on the outskirts of the Lebanese capital of Beirut, on June 16, 1982.
The Palestinians and the Lebanese never realized that the boat was sunk by the Israelis.
The Israeli regime has waged three wars on Lebanon -- in 1982, 2000, and 2006. It has also carried out assassinations in the
Lebanese territory.
The Lebanese resistance movement, Hezbollah, which was founded in the 1980s following the Israeli invasion and occupation of
southern Lebanon, has since helped the army defend Lebanon both in the face of foreign aggression, including in the 2000 and
2006 wars, and against terrorism.
Lebanon and Israel are technically at war due to the latter's occupation of the country's Shebaa Farms since 1967.
Commentary by Dr.David Duke –The outspoken former Israeli Gilad Atzmon is perhaps the
bravest and clearest thinking person of Jewish descent in the world. In a sense, music is truth
in that music composes freely from the soul. A man evolved in the freedom and truth of music,
may have a head start in philosophical honesty as well.
Mr. Atzmon has the perception to both see the 'gorilla in the room' and the courage to
expose it.
There are a number of Jews who claim to be anti-Zionist, but the vast majority of the
anti-Zionist Jews shield and protect the Jewish tribalism that empowers Zionism. By defending
Jewish tribalist power, the anti-Zionists actually help Zionism. They deny and cover up Jewish
tribalist supremacy over the politics and media a finance of the Globalist world.
They say they oppose some of the policies of Israel, but they ardently deny the Jewish
networking and Jewish ethnic tribalism that makes Zionism possible.
The Council of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations illustrates this principle.
It is an organization of 50 extremely powerful and well-financed Jewish organizations, most
with global reach. Some are hard core racist, Jewish supremacist fanatics. A few are what you
would think are more liberal minded. But, every group in the Council are united in one
thing: the specific tribal interests of the Jewish people. Every thing they is based on a clear
and supreme dedication to what is best for Jews, period. It is clear in their mission
statements, which are there for all to see.
Every one of the 50 organizations calls itself Zionist and supports the Zionist
State of Israel. That, of course, is the same Zionist State that ethnically cleansed the
Palestinian people. Every one of them continues to support Israel even though it continues to
ethnically cleanse, attack, bomb and torture the Palestinian people.
The AJC, or American Jewish Committee is a perfect example of that elemental ethnic
supremacism. It proclaims itself as the most powerful "Jewish advocacy" organization on Earth.
That's "Jewish advocacy."
The fifty membership organizations boast of their political influence, their media influence
and their financial influence. The fifty organizations are not simply 50 Jewish organizations
that support Zionism, they are the fifty most powerful and influential Jewish organizations
that exist in the Jewish community! They are Zionist every one.
So the inescapable reality is that the organized Jewish community is synonymous with the
promotion of Zionism.
They love to display the leaders of the Western World such as Obama and Romney and Cameron
and Hollande and Merkel coming to them begging for their approval. They boast of the political
and financial and media elite of the world rolling out the red carpet for these Zionist,
tribalist fanatics.
The so-called anti-Zionist Jewish organizations are hardly a tiny blip on the radar screen,
a few toothpicks floating in the flotsam next to the Queen Mary.
And all of these tell us adamantly tell us that it is not Jewishness, not Jewish Tribalism
that is the problem, but simply Zionism. They call it "anti-Semtic" to point out that organized
Jewish power enables the Zionist crimes.
Actually, the fact that some ostensibly "anti-Zionist" organizations even exist, no matter
how minor their Jewish support, serves a great purpose in the effort of the Zionists to deflect
the Zionist problem from the Jewish establishment. It is not Jews they scream, it is just the
Zionists!" But Zionist Jews dominate the Jewish community and through this tribalism they
dominate all of us.
They say that Zionism has nothing to do with Jewishness. Gilad Atzman reminds us, though,
that Jewish symbols are all over the Zio weapons of mass destruction: the attack planes, tanks
and bombs of the admittedly Jewish state!
They fail to mention that practically every synagogue in the world overtly upports the
Jewish State, and they support Jewish supremacism in the Diaspora.
Occasionally we hear about a few Jewish synagogue that actually work against the Zionist
State. In reality, once again, that synagogue is a microscopic toothpicks floating next to the
Queen Mary of organized Jews and Judaism. And not one of them dares to admit the supremacist,
misanthropic teachings of Torah and Talmudic Judaism. No synagogues on earth oppose the Jewish
networking and supremacism that empowers the core of Zionism.
They all teach that Jews are eternal victims, and that Jews must network and support each
other, that Jews must support Jewish interests and their fellow Jews in every endeavor, and
they know that such tactics of Jewish unity will lead to domination of any divided entity over
time. So the foster the politics and culture of division.
So if anyone, Jew or Gentile, is truly anti-Zionist, he must oppose Jewish Supremacism,
Jewish tribalism, as well as the Jewish supremacy over the politics, media and finance of
America and the Western World.
Anyone, Jew or Gentile, who does not oppose the Jewish tribalist domination, in effect
supports the evils and crimes of the Zionist State. The crimes of Jewish tribalism go far
beyond the evils of Israel. They fuel the Ziowars that have cast the world into terrorism,
torture and hate. The Jewish supremacist moguls of media support every kind of violence,
degeneracy, drug culture, pornographic degeneration and the dissolution of the highest human
values. They have through their tribalist financial combines stolen trillions from the American
people, the European peoples and the whole world. They have, through their media, covered up it
all up.
And anyone who tries to cover up and deny Jewish tribalist supremacism has to be seen
clearly as an agent of Zionism and the ZioGlobalist crimes against humanity.
Jewish extremism and supremacism existed long before Zionism, and Zionism itself cannot
triumph without the Jewish matrix of power in media, finance and politics.
Despite having been raised and having lived in a very liberal environment, I eventually
realized, with pain, that certain groups of people are simply unable to live together without
making each other miserable, sooner or later.
One group must clearly dominate the other. Any detente is temporary and mere
appearance.
Finally, I must recall that in France explicit advocacy of French ethno-nationalism is
illegal, but since February 2019 the French State considers that anti-Zionism (opposition
to Jewish ethno-nationalism) is hate speech.
As I've repeatedly pointed out, in response to the events during WWII, Jewish Supremacist
Organisations developed the following formulation:
ethno-nationalism => fascism => genocide
To ensure Never Again!, the most that Westerners can aspire to is a country based on the
principle of civic-nationalism.
As a result, "blood and soil" is out and "multiculti" is in.
France, however historically important & still powerful in many areas, is becoming a
joke- along with UK- because of its anti-national policy of oppressing their own people as
such. No country has ever survived if they favored racial or ethnic minorities at the expense
of its core, fundamental people...
How do you say Assange in French? Welcome to the Bankster controlled Nation State system..
everywhere it is the same.. they impose copyright and patent laws and give the monopolies
those laws create to their friends.
The major global markets are composed of corporations whose balance sheets represent 90%
intangible asset and 10% tangible that change since 1955 where the ration was 14% intangible
and 86% tangible.. This switch explains the growing divide in wealth between the haves and
the have nots. and in France the power that goes with that wealth seems to be
controlling.
You should probably change "Zionists" to "financial oligarchy" in the comments below.
Zionists in a narrow sense are far right nationalist with Jewish supremacy idea fix. Like most
far right nationalists they are fanatics of the wrong idea. Financial oligarchy is way more
dangerous entity. It is more like mafia, or, worse, intelligence agency. So only to the extent
they intersect Zionism represents a real danger to the American people.
Zionists have controlled America since 1913 when they fastened their privately owned FED
and IRS on the people and then came the wars and debt all for the benefit of the zionist
banking cabal and with this came the slavery of the American people...
The United States invaded Afghanistan, did not capture or kill Osama bin Laden due to
its own incompetence,
Just why would they capture or kill Osama bin Forgotten? The FBI stated that he wasn't on
their most wanted list, because there was no proof he was involved in 9/11. No, it wasn't
incompetence, it was the plan. the Al Qaeda boogie man Osama was much more valuable alive,
even though he died in 2001.
Not that foreign policy is high priority for most of the USA electorate, but still it looks
like some potential Trump voters do not approve this message.
That's why many of them probably will not vote for Trump in 2020, or will not vote at all
because there is no difference in this area between Trump and Biden: you can call the same
Zionist cutlet with two different names. but it is still the same cutlet.
People voted in Trump to be a protector of workers and lower middle class against financial
oligarchy. Instead, they got "Ziotrump", a marionette of Israel lobby who is first and foremost
the protector of Israel, MIC and the billionaire class.
The question is: Is Zionism an official ideology of the USA ruling elite? Zionism as any far right nationalism has it pluses
and minuses, but why this important decision is not discussed?
Notable quotes:
"... I like being energy independent, don't you? I'm sure that most of you noticed when you go to fill up your tank in your car, oftentimes it's below two dollars. You say how the hell did this happen? While I'm president, America will remain the number one producer of oil and natural gas in the world. We will remain energy independent. It should be for many many years to come. The fact is, we don't have to be in the Middle East, other than we want to protect Israel. We've been very good to Israel. Other than that, we don't have to be in the Middle East." ..."
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is ..."
For many years the security framework in the Middle East has been described as a bilateral
arrangement whereby Washington gained access to sufficient Saudi Arabian oil to keep the energy
market stable while the United States provided an armed physical presence through its bases in
the region and its ability to project power if anyone should seek to threaten the Saudi
Kingdom. The agreement was reportedly worked out in a February 1945 meeting between
President Franklin D. Roosevelt and King Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, just as World War 2 was drawing
to a close. That role as protector of Saudi Arabia and guarantor of stable energy markets in
the region later served as part of the justification for the U.S. ouster of the Iraqi Army from
Kuwait in 1991.
After 9/11, the rationale became somewhat less focused. The United States invaded
Afghanistan, did not capture or kill Osama bin Laden due to its own incompetence, and, rather
than setting up a puppet regime and leaving, settled down to a nineteen-years long and still
running counter-insurgency plus training mission. Fake intelligence produced by the neocons in
the White House and Defense Department subsequently implicated Iraq in 9/11 and led to the
political and military disaster known as the Iraq War.
During the 75 years since the end of the Second World War the Middle East has experienced
dramatic change, to include the withdrawal of the imperial European powers from the region and
the creation of the State of Israel. And the growth and diversification of energy resources
mean that it is no longer as necessary to secure the petroleum that moves in tankers through
the Persian Gulf. Lest there be any confusion over why the United States continues to be
involved in Syria, Iraq, the Emirates and Saudi Arabia, President Donald Trump remarkably
provided some clarity relating to the issue when on September 8 th
he declared that the U.S. isn't any longer in the Middle East to secure oil supplies, but
rather because we "want to protect Israel."
The comment was made by Trump during a rally in Winston-Salem, N.C . as part of a
boast about his having reduced energy costs for consumers. He said " I like being energy
independent, don't you? I'm sure that most of you noticed when you go to fill up your tank in
your car, oftentimes it's below two dollars. You say how the hell did this happen? While I'm
president, America will remain the number one producer of oil and natural gas in the world. We
will remain energy independent. It should be for many many years to come. The fact is, we don't
have to be in the Middle East, other than we want to protect Israel. We've been very good to
Israel. Other than that, we don't have to be in the Middle East."
The reality is, of course, that U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East has been all about
Israel for a very long time, at least since the presidency of Bill Clinton, who has been
sometimes dubbed the first Jewish president for his deference to Israeli interests. The Iraq
War is a prime example of how neoconservatives and Israel Firsters inside the United States
government conspired to go to war to protect the Jewish State. In key positions at the Pentagon
were Zionists Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith. Feith's Office of Special Plans developed the
"alternative intelligence" linking Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda and also to a mythical nuclear
program that was used to justify war. Feith was so close to Israel that he partnered in a law
firm that had an office in Jerusalem. The fake intelligence was then stove-piped to the White
House by fellow neocon "Scooter" Libby who worked in the office of Vice President Dick
Cheney.
After the fact, former Secretary of State Colin Powell also had something to say about the
origins of the war, commenting that the United States had
gone into Iraq because Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld bought into the neoconservative
case made for doing so by "the JINSA crowd," by which he meant the Israel Lobby organization
the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs.
And if any more confirmation about the origins of the Iraq War were needed, one might turn
to Philip Zelikow, who was involved in the planning process while working on the staff of
Condoleezza Rice. He said "The unstated threat. And
here I criticize the [Bush] administration a little, because the argument that they make over
and over again is that this is about a threat to the United States. And then everybody says:
'Show me an imminent threat from Iraq to America. Show me, why would Iraq attack America or use
nuclear weapons against us?' So I'll tell you what I think the real threat is, and actually has
been since 1990. It's the threat against Israel. And this is the threat that dare not speak its
name, because the Europeans don't care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And
the American government doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it's not a
popular sell."
So here is the point that resonates: even in 2002-3, when the Israel Lobby was not as
powerful as it is now, the fact that the U.S. was going to war on a lie and was actually acting
on behalf of the Jewish State was never presented in any way to the public, even though
America's children would be dying in the conflict and American taxpayers would be footing the
bill. The media, if it knew about the false intelligence, was reliably pro-Israel and helped
enable the deception.
And that same deception continued to this day until Trump spilled the beans earlier this
month. And now, with the special security arrangement that the U.S. has entered into with
Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, the ability to exit from a troublesome region
that does not actually threaten American interests has become very limited. As guarantor of the
agreement, Washington now has an obligation to intervene on the behalf of the parties involved.
Think about that, a no-win arrangement that will almost certainly lead to war with Iran,
possibly to include countries like Russia and China that will be selling it military equipment
contrary to U.S. "sanctions."
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that
seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is[email protected] .
Excellent synopsis of the situation. And if we look into the founding of Israel, we find
it was founded by war profiteers. This would explain why peace has been so "elusive". It has
been relentlessly dodged. "War Profiteers and the Roots of the 'War on Terror'" https://warprofiteerstory.blogspot.com/p/war-profiteers-and-roots-of-war-on.html
This declaration is against the will of the American people. Hawkish policies of this
nature, that endanger the American lives should be confirmed by a referendum of the people.
Of course that would be logical step in a democracy but USA is not a democracy but a diktat
of backroom unellected ruling clique.
990. Jews are the scapegoats for all the deficiencies of low-IQ whites just as whites are
the scapegoats for all the deficiencies of low-IQ non-whites. Let me explain how that
works.
Why do we observe Jews at the forefront of many cutting-edge industries? (for example the
media/arts and financial industries are indeed rife with them). The low-IQ answer is, of
course, a simplistic conspiracy theory: Jews form an evil cabal that created all these
industries from scratch to "destroy culture" (or at least what low-IQ people think is
culture, i.e. some previous, obsolete state of culture, i.e. older, lower culture, i.e.
non-culture). And, to be sure, there is a lot of decadence in these industries. But, in an
advanced civilization, there is a lot of decadence everywhere anyway! It's an essential
prerequisite even! So it makes perfect sense that the most capable people in such a
civilization will also be the most decadent! The stereotype of the degenerate
cocaine-sniffing whoremonging or homosexual Hollywood or Wall Street operative belongs here.
Well, buddy, if YOU were subjected to the stresses and temptations of the Hollywood or Wall
Street lifestyles, maybe you'd be a "degenerate" too! But you lack the IQ for that, so of
course you'll reduce the whole enterprise to a simplistic resentful fairy tale that seems
laughable even to children: a bunch of old bearded Jews gathered round a large table planning
the destruction of civilization! Well I say enough with this childish nonsense! The Jews are
simply some of the smartest and most industrious people around, ergo it makes sense that
they'll be encountered at or near all the peaks of the dominant culture, being
overrepresented everywhere in it, including therefore in its failings and excesses! This is
what it means to be the best! It doesn't mean that you are faultless little angels who can do
no wrong, you brainless corn-fed nitwits! There's a moving passage somewhere in Nietzsche
where he relates that Europe owes the Jews for the highest sage (Spinoza), and the highest
saint (Jesus), and he'd never even heard of Freud or Einstein! In view of all the
immeasurable gifts the Jewish spirit has lavished on humanity, anti-semitism in the coming
world order will be a capital offense, if I have anything to say on the matter. The slightest
word against the Jews, and you're a marked man: I would have not only you, but your entire
extended family wiped out, just to be sure. You think you know what the Devil is, but he's
just the lackey taking my orders. Entire cities razed to the ground (including the entire
Middle East), simply because one person there said something bad about "the Jews", that's how
I would have the future! Enough with this stupid meme! To hell with all of you brainless
subhumans! You've wasted enough of our nervous energy on this stupid shit! And the same goes
to low-IQ non-whites who blame all their troubles on whites! And it's all true: Jews and
whites upped the stakes for everybody by bringing into the world a whole torrent of new
possibilities which your IQ is too low to handle! So whatcha gonna do about it? Are you all
bark, or are you prepared to bite? Come on, let's see what you can do! Any of you fucking
pricks bark, and we'll execute every motherfucking last one of you!
Honestly, I like way better out in the open like this. Now there is no reason to worry
about all the other BS excuses, it's all on the table.
So now, as a public, we have been informed; so what are we going to do about it? Or are
they so confident about their position that they know they can announce it to he world openly
and be sure that there will be zero consequences?
Protector, personal armies, saboteurs, financiers, assassin's, propagandists, liars,
thieves, rapists, slavers, and that is just for starters – which includes inside and
outside of the former country called the USA.
No, you are wrong. The problem with the 'industriousness' is that it is characterized by
the principle of profit before all, no matter how immoral the activity. People who do that
don't care about a civilized society and should not be able to reap the benefits of one.
Also high IQ isn't exemplified by trickery, lying, subverting and eroding the morals of
the host society.
The US is not only the protector, but has been the enabler of the mafia from the
start.
Chaim.Weizman and Nathan Sokolow approach the British with a dirty deal. The Zionists
offer to use their international influence to bring the US into the war on Britain's
side, while undermining Germany from within. The price that Britain must pay for U.S.
entry is to steal Palestine from Ottoman Turkey (Germany's ally) and allow the Jews to
settle there. Zionist agitated anti-German propaganda was unleashed in the US while the
Zionists and Marxists of Germany begin to undermine Germany's war effort from within.
Wilson establishes the Committee on Public Information (CPI) for the purpose of
manipulating public opinion in support of the war.
-M.S. King, The Bad War, p 50.
Similar scenario for "WW2" which was little more than a continuation of the previous
biggie. They really ought to be known as the One World Wars since they were obviously part
of the plan for the world to be dominated by the International mafia through such creations
as the League of Subjects and the United Slave Nations with the capitol at Tel Aviv.
Yes, Dr. Giraldi, you hit the nail on the head again.
However, the problem is that most White Middle Class Americans, are satisfied and fully
compliant with this situation where the USA is a Megalethon Vassal and Servile State
for the poor little Israeli state .
Also, let us be honest with ourselves, Blacks and other minorities on more occasions do
dare to speak out on this issue, only to get trounced upon by the MSM and silence and
snickers by the stay safe White American Middle Class. Do you ever find a Main Line
White Politician speaking up for America's interests and placing them first vis a vis our
best little ally ??? Only when it comes to Afro or the Hispanic – Americans
sticking their heads up a little does Middle White Americana get all worked up and
emotionally charged.
The White Middle Class and most certainly the well moneyed Corporate Class of America,
does not mind giving away huge transfers of their tax dollars, national debt, high
technologies, military hardware, and even their uniformed sons and daughter, upon command
from the likes of Trump and their political opportunists managing the country (Rep and Dem
alike). Serving and making America serve the Greater Zio Agenda for their ME and Global
domination has become the norm and unquestionable. Try raising this issue at a dinner party
and see how many people role their eyes and turn their heads away.
I doubt that the RU followers here, who seem more bent on street brawling with the false
bogeymen like BLM and ANTIFA, are the ones that will stand up to the in your face
take over of WDC by AIPAC and the Israel First Crowd, including front man Trump for the
Kushner-Bibi WH.
Let us not forget the thieving and scamming Sunday preachers who tell them it is great
to be in full service of the Zio (Jewish Talmudic based) domination agenda– as it has
become a direct ticket to a Raptured Heaven . Jesus for them was been thrown under
the bus long ago or strangely converted into a gun machine toting Israeli nut case
extremist settler, clearing the land and villages of the indignies children and
all.
Let us be frank, some elements of the America First Jewish intelligentsia are more
likely to call out and the whorishness ( extremes only) of the Washington's ZOG policies
than Middle Americana, who dare not risk their creature comforts, Game Time or corporate
positions.
As the old adage goes, you get the Government That You Deserve .
Are you all bark, or are you prepared to bite? Come on, let's see what you can do! Any
of you fucking pricks bark, and we'll execute every motherfucking last one of you!
Well your tribe has been incredibly effective at genocide and mass murder on an
unprecedented scale of barbarism in the past, and I have no doubt you remain just as
capable of such barbarity and cruelty today. Your rant makes that very clear.
Too bad the high IQ does not seem to correlate in a positive way with morality.
But thanks for the warning! Trust me, many of us are quite aware of your
capabilities.
The only reason Trump "spilled the beans" about how we are in the Middle East to protect
Israel and not to keep oil flowing is to get himself reelected and nothing else. As to war
with China, Zuckerberg alone would be able to bribe the administration in particular, and
both the parties in general, with his extra billions to keep them out of the war being that
he has married a chink, er, Chan. All will be back to business as usual after the election
at least, for four more years.
It means Netanyahu is the de facto president of the US.
Not quite. He is much more powerful than that. The entire Congress of the United States
stands and applauds when he arrives to speak. They would never do that for Trump, or any
president. The fear of being unpersoned keeps them in line.
@Ugetit
endence and freedom but things actually became more messy. Also the "hated" Russian
Romanovs were got rid off, Russia pushed under Communist Jewish dictatorship. Also the
destruction of the Caliph, imagine a united Turko-Arab Empire, no way Israel would have
survived that. Even T.E. Lawrence who helped the Arabs fight the Turks was totally
disappointed with the behaviour of his own Zionist controlled government. He was going to
speak to the British people about the great betrayal to the Arabs and being a war hero they
would have listened to him. But before he could do so he met with an "accident" while
riding his motorcycle. Yeah, very convenient.
@sethster
re good at gathering Nobel Prizes, which is best arranged by jury-rigging and
string-pulling thanks to their talent for networking, but no so good as making real
inventions. In Israel proper the mean Jewish IQ, 94, is not only disappointing but a few
points below even the Palestinian one. Spiritually the Jews have no longer been a chosen
people for ages and most of the intellectual development they knew from about 1850 onwards
was due to their being emancipated en masse from rabbinical authority, not by conforming to
it : now that are falling back under an even worse collective authority with Zionism they
are reversing the intellectual gains they once made.
Back in the second half of the 80s the big war games were all IRAQ IRAQ IRAQ!!1! There
was a strong push from all the interagency pukes with their dotted-lines reports to Langley
– to aim at Iraq, and to suppress any practical considerations that might interfere
with this very lucrative debacle. We watched these moles countering evidence and analysis
with declamatory bullshit they made up. Way back then CIA had decided. April Glaspie's
headfake sprung a trap set in Kuwait by the NOCs infesting Bechtel. That
horizontal-drilling rhubarb was years in preparation.
Iraq was one big war with three phases: beating up on the Iraqi armed forces; ten years
of blowing shit up; the occupation.
It turned out great. CIA got money-laundering nirvana, a chaotic zone where they could
ship pallets of money around. They got an arms entrepot that lasted 20 years.They got a
great network of sites for the torture gulag, with secure impunity – when Iraq tried
to accede to the Rome Statute in 05, the CIA torturers were on the spot to nip it in the
bud. The tame jihadi boogeymen the torture camps produced were invaluable in creating
Rumsfeld's "terrorist corridor" in the Sahel and justifying the P2OG and the Pan-Sahel
Initiative. That put AFRICOM garrisons, US-trained warlords, and CIA torture sites in one
of the most diplomatically recalcitrant regions of the world:
So turn that frown upside down! Your old bosses got a lot out of that charlie
foxtrot.
@sethster
re all conceived and started by Gentiles Henry Ford is a great example and he knew Jews
quite well. The only industries , as you call them, that Jews are involved in are
leech enterprises financial corporations are excellent examples of leech enterprises. The
financial products they contrive are methods to extract value from productive
industries.
A large percent of Jews are devoted obsessed with gaining wealth and power from the efforts
of others which is the reason for their inordinate involvement in the Deep State and also
for the abject loathing by many Gentiles throughout the ages.
Whether the truth is hidden or now out in the open doesn't matter to a people so stupid
as to believe the Creator's offspring walked, eat and crapped on this little planet 2k
years ago.
Exhibit B of their stupidity: Electing Trump (and more than a few of his
predecessors).
The NWO won't come to America as Greta Thunberg marching ahead of the Democrats in Mao
suits under LGBTQ and GND banners and tumbrels of Christians headed for the guillotine, but
as one transnational compliance regime after the other enacted by treaty, such as mandatory
bi-annual vaccinations with largely inefficacious vaccines carrying not just behavior
modifying chemicals and sterilants as adjuvants, but DNA-altering horrors. Anyone want to
argue the threats posed by these DNA- or mRNA-modifying vaccines made from, among other
things, insect DNA?
Some think it's over the top to talk about the NWO that's on the horizon as a
Sino-Judaic, world-hegemonic NWO, but the United States government is itself already little
more than a collection of compliance regimes in service to International Jewry. The 29
standing ovations from a Congress afraid to be the first to stop clapping for a kitchen
cabinet salesman-turned-Caesar made that clear enough. The rest of the story, like the
nonsense that Congress and DJT are voluntarily protecting Israel, is eyewash for
fools when International Jewry owns them all like the trained seals who perform in the
Central Park Zoo.
The Holy Rollers were never going to bail from Trump after the embassy move to
Jerusalem. Jews on the other hand are likely not amused about such a revelation. So his
words were unlikely about the election.
@lavoisier
nd stern conversation, "For me, the new Germany exists only in order to ensure the
existence of the State of Israel and the Jewish people." He's a brilliant intellectual
and a thoughtful politician, and we don't need to worry – he won't give up his
existential friendship so easily. And certainly not because of Bennett or his colleague
Orit Strock, the party whip.
A very symbolic photo posted by the Israel Defence Forces' Twitter account, in the tweet
linked to by user Talha
It is time to be more honest. A foreign war that the US loses may be the only way out of
the political, moral and social impasse that currently afflicts the US. The forces that
control the US government need to be removed and that seems increasingly unlikely to arise
from simply domestic opposition.
It took World War II to remove Adolf Hitler from power in Germany. Why should anyone
expect anything less to change the government of the United States? The US wants a war with
Russia and China. Perhaps it is best that it be granted one? Let's see some articles on this
proposition.
The odd thing is how so many Jews still support immigration despite the fact that a lot of
the immigrants are (from the Jewish/Zionist perspective) at best indifferent to Israel and at
worse outright hostile and want it gone.
Or perhaps they realise democracy is a sham and the Jewish elite have got their backs?
Hence their plans to mongrelise Europeans nations don't really conflict with their Zionist
ambitions.
One thing is for sure, when things start to get hairy in the West, all Jews will have a
nice First World ethnocracy to move to.
Trump's greatest contribution to the US/World might be exposing the naked ambition and
evilness of the Ziocons. Before Trump, Ziocons lurked in the background as puppet masters,
with their many plans obscured behind "diplomacy" and propaganda like "freedom" and "human
rights", now thanks to Trump they are showing their true colors. Trump has managed to expose
to the whole world including all our allies who is really running America and the extent they
will go to destroy their perceived "enemies" to achieve world domination -- the end justifies
the means. It is making our allies esp. Europe think twice about their alliance with
JU.S.A.
Trump's greatest contribution to the US/World might be exposing the naked ambition and
evilness of the Ziocons. Before Trump, Ziocons lurked in the background as puppet masters,
with their many plans obscured behind "diplomacy" and propaganda like "freedom" and "human
rights", now thanks to Trump they are showing their true colors. Trump has managed to expose
to the whole world including all our allies who is really running America and the extent they
will go to destroy their perceived "enemies" to achieve world domination -- the end justifies
the means. It is making our allies esp. Europe think twice about their alliance with
JU.S.A.
You must have been misinformed if you think that "Germany sold Israel submarines". Not
really as you can find out from the link bellow. The first two submarines were donated and
the third was "hawkered" for about half the production cost.
@anon
the empire starts WW3, e.g. the "big one" at Yellowstone, which will do so much damage as to
make it impossible for the evil empire to continue it's pursuit of world domination and
control.
I do think it is game over for quite a while in the West regarding opposition to Israel.
Israel may collapse or have to come to the table or something due to some game changer in the
Middle East, but I don't see it happening due to lack of support from the West anytime
soon.
@Realist
d on him and tried to remove him from office. This is actually the greatest political scandal
in American history, yet nothing will be done about it. The magic negro will never face any
consequences and he and his ugly wife will remain free to race bait for another 30 years
unimpeded.
Trump and the GOP allowed the covid hoax to wreck the economy and allowed massive riots to
go on for many months. They allow the left to run wild while whites live under
anarcho-tyranny.
If Trump wins, which is likely, he will just go right back to blabbing about how much he
loves blacks and mexicans and gays and you will never hear another word about white
people.
@restless94110
p> Obama fired many upper level military and replaced them with leftist cucks.
Besides Trump not getting rid of people he should have gotten rid of, he hired a shitload
of scum, neocons, Goldman alums, etc., people who were obviously not going to promote his
America First agenda.
From the looks of it he never intended to make good on any of his promises.
And as Ann Coulter says, immigration is really the only thing that matters. Trump didn't
deport the 30 million illegals that don't belong here. He didn't do anything about birthright
citizenship, E-verify, etc.
We still face the very same demographic disaster as before.
I don't think anyone was actually trying to remove him from office (they could've added
his war crimes and violations of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations to the
impeachment charges if they were serious about removing him). Most likely it's all
political theater to fool the people who need and/or want to be fooled.
This is a charade designed by the Deep State to distract any thought that both
parties are just two sides to the Deep State coin.
@Robert
Dolan did get rid of some military, he clearly didn't get rid of the right people.
You seem to think it's easy. It's not obviously.
I like Ann, but she is hysterical. Yet that is ok in a journalist/editorialist. Her
function is to keep pushing. And she is doing that.
But Trump is moving at his own speed based on his own instincts. Meaning it might be
faster for some, slower for others. Coulter is not able to understand that. But she does not
have to. I still read her. And then I analyze her as a person in fear that the wall won't be
built.
Looks to me like Ann is wrong. It's just not happening quickly enough for her.
@Harold
Smith s and neocons to key positions in his government; and he is totally ineffectual in
defending free speech and the rights of the historic American nation to defend itself against
racist blacks and a Jewish dominated injustice system.
It is really sad that there are so many individuals who still believe Trump is on our side
when he has failed so miserably to keep the promises he was elected upon.
Of course Biden is a demented corruptocrat and the Democrats are pure evil, but Trump is
an unprincipled moron incapable of keeping his promises.
Sad. Very sad that our nation has deteriorated to such an extent that so many people cling
to a deluded belief that Trump is somehow a great leader serving the American nation.
"If at any time the United States believes Iran has failed to meet its commitments, no
other state can block our ability to snap back those multilateral sanctions," Pompeo
declared in a statement posted on his official Twitter account on Sunday evening.
The top US diplomat was referring to the avalanche of sanctions Washington has been hellbent
on slapping on Tehran after the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) overwhelmingly rejected
the US resolution to extend a 13-year arms embargo against the Islamic Republic past October
earlier this week.
The humiliating defeat , which saw only one member
of the 15-nation body (the Dominican Republic) siding with the US, while China and Russia
opposed the resolution, and all other nations, including France and the UK, abstained, did not
discourage Washington, which doubled down on its threat to hit Iran with biting sanctions.
... ... ...
"Of course other states can block America's ability to impose multilateral sanctions. The
US can impose sanctions by itself, but can't force others to do it," Nicholas Grossman,
teaching assistant professor at the Department of Political Science, University of Illinois,
tweeted.
"That's what 'multilateral' means. Is our SecState really this dumb?" Grossman asked.
Daniel Larison, senior editor at the American Conservative, suggested that Pompeo might
be having a hard time grasping the meaning of the word 'multilateral'.
Some argued that Pompeo could not be unaware of the contradictory nature of his statement.
Dan Murphy, former Middle East and South Asia correspondent for the Christian Science
Monitor, called it "one of the most diplomatically illiterate sentences of all time."
"I guess the end game here is [to] alienate the rest of the world even further to feed his
persecution complex?" Murphy wrote.
John Twomey, 16 August, 2020
Explanation. What Pompeo understands and what many others can't grasp is that the US
decides if their sanctions are "multilateral" because the USA speaks for all other countries
whether they like it or not.
My Opinion, 17 August, 2020
Reminiscing of his shady past as a new CIA recruit he said. "We lied, we cheated and we stole". Apparently, Mikey didn't
do all too well in his literature classes, either and that's why the most suitable candidate from zionists perspective.
"... He thinks the Palestinians will accept permanent helot status? Maybe so... But is that something we should relish? ..."
"... And what of Syria? What of Syria? Evidently Trump considered murdering President Assad two years ago. Is he going to abandon regime change now? is he going to abandon the policy of Pompeo and Jeffries? ..."
"... My guess is that the acceptability for Helot status of Palestinians will depend on how much worse it is compared to the status of Palestinian equivalents elsewhere. Syria and Lebanon certainly look far less attractive. ..."
"... Also, from my admittedly limited experience, Palestinians aren't exactly homogenous, Gaza =! West Bank. ..."
"... If the Israelis are smart (and I think they are), they will continue to exploit Palestinian disunity by not having one helot status but several, with privileges to repress and boss around the lesser helots (perhaps even some less desirable Israelis) awarded to the higher helots. ..."
"... The neocons have been firmly ensconced in ME policy since Reagan. At least Trump made a little bit of lemonade. Nothing earth shattering IMO but moved the ball forward 10 yds and away from own goals under the so-called experts & strategists of the past decades. ..."
"... Support for Israel and its maximalist dreams has always been bipartisan. ..."
"... The colonel has a much more realistic take on this: the intention is to co-opt the Arab states into forcing the Palestinians to accept permanent helot status. Not quite slaves but closes to it. ..."
"... There would be many ways to describe that, but I suspect "peace plan" would rank amongst the less accurate ones. ..."
"... I also remember when the Trump admin killed the Gen. Suleimani late last year the same people also touted it a national security success. This is shameful pattern. ..."
"... Just because Jared Kushner, Berkowitz (Kushner's mini-me), David Friedman and the Zionist anti-American paid shills of Christians United For Israel et.al put Israel's interest first does not make it a success for American interests abroad. Trump does not know two things about the ME. He just obeys orders from this outside 'advisors' when it comes to ME policy. ..."
"... When I read that " If you look at relatively successful integration/assimilations in history, jointly overcoming something that was threatening to both typically ranked pretty highly as a cause." I think that The Islamic Republic of Iran is what is being offered or used as that cause. ..."
"... But if the present and future Israelis believe this means that the total advantage is totally theirs to press, then present and future Palestinians will continue searching for ways to make their unhappiness felt. But that outcome would not be Trump's fault. That outcome would be the majority-likudnic Israelis' choice. ..."
"... the problem with "outside in" strategy is that implies that if conditions are bad enough for the Palestinians, they will agree to any deal Trump can force down their throats. Instead, Palestinians have been offered terrible deals since 2000 (ie., a state that is never going to be a real state with permanent Israeli control over its borders, air space, and water tables ..."
"... The smarter plan is to acknowledge that the Zionists killed the Two-State Solution, and Palestinians might as well push this into an anti-Apartheid struggle. ..."
It is clear that the heat has gone away in the fabled "Arab Street" over the issue of
Israel. If that were not so, the rulers would not have dared to do this. That being so ... It
will be very interesting to see how many people from these two countries go to Israel to
visit holy sites like the al-Aqsa Mosque. There have not been many religious tourists from
Egypt and Jordan. This is what the Israelis call pilgrims. Trump thinks that he can bring
Saudi Arabia into such a deal? Good! Let's see it. He thinks that Iran can be brought into
such a deal? Wonderful! Let's see it.
He thinks the Palestinians will accept permanent helot status? Maybe so... But is that
something we should relish?
And what of Syria? What of Syria? Evidently Trump considered murdering President Assad
two years ago. Is he going to abandon regime change now? is he going to abandon the policy of
Pompeo and Jeffries?
I suggest that security should be very tight on airline flights from Bahrein and the
UAE.
I suspect this has less to do with peace and more to do with lining up a coalition against
Iran. He's signing peace deals at the white house the same day he not only threatens Iran for
a make believe assassination plot against our South African Ambassador, but admits he wanted
to assassinate Assad.
He's making a big mistake though if he thinks Iranians will behave and respond similarly
to the Arabs, and they are certainly not North Koreans.
He's being frog marched into a war with Iran while his ego is being stroked under the
guise of a Nobel peace prize.
What say about Alastair Crooke's "Maintaining Pretence Over Reality: 'Simply Put, the
Iranians Outfoxed the U.S. Defence Systems'" at Strategic Culture Foundation?
My guess is that the acceptability for Helot status of Palestinians will depend on how
much worse it is compared to the status of Palestinian equivalents elsewhere. Syria and
Lebanon certainly look far less attractive. The other issue is the degree with which Arab
elites can "reroute" Anti Israeli into Anti Iranian sentiments on the Arab street.
Also, from my admittedly limited experience, Palestinians aren't exactly homogenous, Gaza
=! West Bank.
If the Israelis are smart (and I think they are), they will continue to exploit
Palestinian disunity by not having one helot status but several, with privileges to repress
and boss around the lesser helots (perhaps even some less desirable Israelis) awarded to the
higher helots.
I think this will be fairly hard though. Various Historical, religion and cultural issues
specific to the situation make it quite hard for Arabs to actually assimilate into Israeli
society. There is also a lack of a unifying foe to unite against. If you look at relatively
successful integration/assimilations in history, jointly overcoming something that was
threatening to both typically ranked pretty highly as a cause.
The neocons have been firmly ensconced in ME policy since Reagan. At least Trump made a
little bit of lemonade. Nothing earth shattering IMO but moved the ball forward 10 yds and
away from own goals under the so-called experts & strategists of the past decades.
The TDS afflicted media couldn't bear that some lemonade was made. Wolf Blitzer
interviewing Jared Kushner was all about pandemic nothing about the implications or process
to having couple gulf sheikhs recognize Israel. The fact is that these gulf sheikhs only paid
lip service to the plight of the Palestinians in any case. This formalizes what was reality.
The "Arab Street" have always been a manifestation of whatever were powerful manipulations.
The manipulators have been coopted in the current lemonade making. In any case Bibi must be
very pleased. He didn't have to give up anything in his difficult domestic political
predicament.
The arabs simply do not care anymore, from Morocco to Oman. Their spirit totally broken by
the "Arab spring", youth disillusioned and jobless. The only dream left for most is to ape
the western lifestyle. The others are fighting in wars.
I can see one of two futures, a Clean Break: Securing the Realm-style one in which all of the arabs live life as helots under the
thumb of a Greater Israel. This would bring relative economic prosperity to most of the
helots.
I think I see the flaw in this article: ..."If that turns out to be the case and this
maneuver succeeds in ultimately bringing about a two state solution for Israel and the
Palestinians,"...
Surely you don't believe that these maneuvers are intended to bring about a Palestinian
state?
The colonel has a much more realistic take on this: the intention is to co-opt the Arab
states into forcing the Palestinians to accept permanent helot status. Not quite slaves but
closes to it.
There would be many ways to describe that, but I suspect "peace plan" would rank amongst
the less accurate ones.
One running theme that I have been seeing from the former so-called neocon critics and ME
wars opponents (Michael Scheuer comes to mind) is their uncontrollable exhilaration for any
terrible so-called F.P. 'success' that the Trump admin achieves in the ME.
I also remember
when the Trump admin killed the Gen. Suleimani late last year the same people also touted it
a national security success. This is shameful pattern.
Just because Jared Kushner, Berkowitz
(Kushner's mini-me), David Friedman and the Zionist anti-American paid shills of Christians
United For Israel et.al put Israel's interest first does not make it a success for American
interests abroad. Trump does not know two things about the ME. He just obeys orders from this
outside 'advisors' when it comes to ME policy.
It it exactly what it is. Israel normalized relations with the most notorious
dictatorships and wants to implement Pegasus spying program and wide-scale surveillance
(among other nefarious things) in UAE and Bahrain. How is that a success for America? America
should stay out of these Israeli-first trouble making schemes and stay neutral or out of
there.
Let me tell you what a F.P. success is, OK? It would have been a huge success if America
was able to lure Iran into its orbit to fend of the Chinese communists out of the region and
out of our lives and have a stronger alliance with regards to its upcoming Cold War with
China.
It would have been successful for America to balance China out with Iran, India,
Turkey and Afghanistan, and not let China to invest billions in Haifa port (close to U.S.
military forces there) a major hub of its Belt and Road initiative and a huge blow to U.S.
new Cold war effort against China.
Think about it.
Allow me to raise a few points: first of all , every single one of these brutal backward
Arab dictatorships has had low key but crucial relations with Israel since the Cold War and
they just made it open, Big deal! Second, this joyfulness for a hostile anti-american country
is quite sad for two reasons:
1. that Larry touts it as a success for America, which is
anything but a success for America. It is a success for Bibi and Trump's evangelical/zionist
sugar daddies to cough up some Benjamins for Trump's campaign and his GOP/Likudniks. I guess
nowadays our judgement is so clouded and inverted that MAGA and MIGA are considered
inseparable.
2. The delusion that dems are bitterly angry and anti-Israel (because they are
anti-Trump) and therefore it automatically becomes an issue of partisan support for Trump and
whatever he does. This idea is so absurd that I won't get into it. Dems were the first to
congratulate Israel.
I would like Larry to tell me what he thinks of H.R. 1697 Israel Anti-Boycot Act which
punishes American citizens for practicing their god-given 2nd Amendment rights. or the 3.8
billion of aid, or the the gifting of Golan heights to Bibi? Are these big foreign policy
success too?
What the Arab-Israeli normalization means:
*The U.S. wants out of the ME to focus on China, a wet dream that Israel favors especially
post Cold War. It does not want secular, (semi) democratic sovereign states around it, and if
anyone pays attention close enough they do whatever they can to prevent any kind of political
reform and change of government to occur among Arab nations. Israelis are staunch supporters
of Saudi, Bahraini, UAE, Jordanian, and Egyptian dictatorships in the MENA region.
Israel
will now be better positioned to roll-back any kind of grassroots reform in the ME with the
help of their now openly pro-Israeli Arab rulers by directing policies to these backward
rulers to divest from human development and political reform and instead invest more in
security, tech, surveillance.
This trend also explains Israeli constant opposition to the
Iran Deal, which would have had further ramifications for political reform and accelerated
weakening of Hardliners in Tehran and a better position for America to pivot to China with
the help of a moderated Iran. Israel does not want a powerful democratic nation near its
borders, and especially not in Iran. Just take a look at Israel's neighbors and tell me how
many of them are democratic and friendly with Israel and how does Israel behave when there
are secular Arab democratic states around it?
There is a developing coalition of powerful states as a reaction to the Arab-Israeli
normalization that observers call "the rejectionists". They are, Turkey, Qatar, Pakistan
(impending), Malaysia (impending), Iran, and EU (impending).
It is true that Iran has now a target on its back and if it were smart, it would try its
best to develop some kind of alliance with the secular democratic humanists in EU to try to
remove itself from isolation, save what is left of the Iran Deal, and try to isolate and
condemn Israelis, Arab dictators and their cohorts internationally and through diplomacy back
portraying them as illiberal and anti-democratic or similar things. Although I am not too
hopeful that Iran is be able to do this for a number of obvious reasons.
This Arab-Israeli normalization is a MIGA (Make Israel Great Again) vision of very
tightly controlled development for the MENA region and extremely' special' attention has been
given to the cyber tech development (call it surveillance) to control the 'Arab Street' from
social revolt and the prevention of next rounds of Arab Springs, which again goes back to
Israel's long-standing regional doctrine of propping pro-U.S. and now pro-Israeli Arab
dictatorships in the region.
In the end, it's all just tribal superstition. Logically a spiritual absolute would be the
essence of sentience, from which we rise, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which we
fell.
The fact we are aware, than the myriad details of which we are aware.
One of the reasons we can't have a live and let live world is because everyone thinks their
own vision should be universal, rather than unique. So the fundamentalists rule.
The reason nature is so diverse and dense is because it isn't a monoculture.
Irrespective of our technology, we are still fairly primitive, in the grand scheme of
things.
When I read that " If you look at relatively successful integration/assimilations in
history, jointly overcoming something that was threatening to both typically ranked pretty
highly as a cause." I think that The Islamic Republic of Iran is what is being offered or
used as that cause.
If this all ends up in the longest run leading to today's and tomorrow's Israelis
accepting the lesser Israel that Rabin ended up deciding would be necessary for a
lesser-but-still-real Palestine to emerge as a real country resigned with both resigned
enough to that outcome that they would tolerate eachother's separate independence over the
long term, then this will go somewhere good.
But if the present and future Israelis believe this means that the total advantage is
totally theirs to press, then present and future Palestinians will continue searching for
ways to make their unhappiness felt. But that outcome would not be Trump's fault. That
outcome would be the majority-likudnic Israelis' choice.
To have a two state solution Israel will have to leave enough of Palestine without Jewish
settlement for there to be room for another state. Their actions show that they have no
intention of doing that.
Larry: the problem with "outside in" strategy is that implies that if conditions are bad
enough for the Palestinians, they will agree to any deal Trump can force down their throats.
Instead, Palestinians have been offered terrible deals since 2000 (ie., a state that is never
going to be a real state with permanent Israeli control over its borders, air space, and
water tables)
The smarter plan is to acknowledge that the Zionists killed the Two-State Solution, and Palestinians might as well push
this into an anti-Apartheid struggle. The gerontocracy that rules the PA will soon pass away. The younger generation of
Palestinians are much more sophisticated.
As a trial lawyer, I see this type of behavior all the time. If you offer someone
essentially nothing, they lose nothing by rejecting it. The Arab dictators will not be around forever. And before Camp David, the Palestinians
have suffered far worse than they are suffering now.
In short: "We Jews know that Arabs (Palestinians) will never, ever voluntarily give up
hope of resisting Jewish demands, and Jews will never stop with Jewish demands: that all of
Palestine become Jewish.
Since 'voluntary' will not work, only force -- an Iron Wall -- will suffice.
Jabotinsky defines "Iron Wall" as the enforcement capacity of an outside power:
"we cannot promise anything to the Arabs of the Land of Israel or the Arab countries. Their
voluntary agreement is out of the question. Hence those who hold that an agreement with the
natives is an essential condition for Zionism can now say "no" and depart from Zionism.
Zionist colonization, even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in
defiance of the will of the native population. This colonization can, therefore, continue
and develop only under the protection of a force independent of the local population
– an iron wall which the native population cannot break through. This is, in toto,
our policy towards the Arabs. To formulate it any other way would only be hypocrisy.
Not only must this be so, it is so whether we admit it or not. What does the Balfour
Declaration and the Mandate mean for us? It is the fact that a disinterested power
committed itself to create such security conditions that the local population would be
deterred from interfering with our efforts."
Be aware that Benjamin Netanyahu's father, Benzion, was Jabotinsky's administrative
assistant, then replacement, in New York; that Bibi is very much heir to the ideological
fervor of Jabotinsky & of Benzion; and that Benzion and Benjamin laid out the blueprint
for the GWOT at the Jerusalem Conference July 4, 1979 https://www.amazon.com/International-Terrorism-Challenge-Benjamin-Netanyahu/dp/0878558942
Trump plays only a walk-on role in this carefully scripted 150 year old zionist drama.
"there isn't a lot of difference between KSA and these fiefdoms of uae and bahrain.." A
total crock. you obviously have never been to either of these places.
Who within the Deep state is supporting the riots? This is the question. Antifa would not
last a a couple of months, if all repressive power of the state fall on the head of its
brainwashed children of the middles class, who constitute the majority of it members. All members
probably are well known to FBI and the organization was infiltrated long ago.
America went through its own bout of Dionysian intoxication in the days following May 25,
when a Minneapolis cop by the name of Derek Chauvin knelt on the neck of a 46-year-old Black
man by the name of George Floyd, causing his death. Corrupted by 66 years of bad education,
America's Black Lumpenproletariat erupted in an orgy of rioting that brought the rule
of law to an end in many of America's large cities. As of this writing, Antifa, a group which
Donald Trump has designated a domestic terrorist organization, is still in control of a
six-square block section of downtown Seattle, which they have designated the "Capitol Hill
Autonomous Zone." In Minneapolis, the town where the rioting started, their Pentheus, Mayor
Jacob Frey, was denounced by one of the Bacchant women who spoke in the name of Black Lives
Matter after he refused to defund the Minneapolis police department. Frey was not torn limb
from limb, but he was expelled from the crowd and had to take refuge with the police he was
ordered to defund.
The race riots of May and June 2020 were only the latest installment of what might be called
the regime of governance by crisis which began four years ago, when the Deep State decided to
do whatever was necessary to depose Donald Trump. That campaign began with Russiagate, followed
by the impeachment, followed by the hate speech campaign of 2019 which sought to ban "unwanted
content" from the Internet, followed by the Covid-19 pandemic. What united all of these crises
was oligarch unhappiness with the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States
and a desire to replace the institutions of representative government with ad hoc committees of
crisis managers masquerading as scientific experts and/or aggrieved minorities.
By now it should be obvious that the racial narrative writes itself whenever a Black man
dies at the hands of a white cop. Floyd's body was still warm when the mainstream media took up
the story which had already been written and declared him a saint, complete with halo and
wings. In reality, Floyd was a violent felon who died with traces of fentanyl and cocaine in
his system, but the BBC described him as someone who "was simply trying to live life as any
other American, in search of betterment in the face of both personal and societal challenges."
[1] He then
became "the latest totem of the ills that plague the country in 2020." After growing in wisdom,
age, and grace, Floyd's life suddenly "took a different turn, with a string of arrests for
theft and drug possession culminating in an armed robbery charge in 2007, for which he was
sentenced to five years in prison." Missing from the BBC account was any mention of Floyd's
incarceration, drug dealing, violence against pregnant women or his role as a porn star,
[2] but no one
needed to tell a graduate of America's public school system that he was witnessing the latest
installment of the ongoing saga of American racism in action.
... ... ...
Both sides of the racial conflict which George Floyd's death ignited were controlled by
Jews. The ADL has consistently played a double game by condemning the racial violence that
their training seminars have created. According to the Democratic Socialists of America, "The
police violence happening tonight in Minneapolis is straight out of the IDF playbook," adding,
"US cops train in Israel." [20] After
the death of George Floyd, the ADL, eager to avoid any association with the violence their
police seminars wrought among Blacks, tweeted: "As we continue to fight for justice for
#GeorgeFloyd, we also need to fight for justice for #BreonnaTaylor, who was murdered in her own
home by police. We need justice for everyone who has been a victim of racist policing &
violence." [21]
At the same time that the ADL was demanding justice for George Floyd, they made no mention
of the death of Iyad Hallaq, an autistic Palestinian man who was gunned down after pleading for
his life while on the way to his special education class in occupied East Jerusalem. [22] The
Electronic Intifada, which did mention Hallaq's death, then singled out the Anti-Defamation
league as "a major player in the industry of bringing US police junkets to Israel for
'counterterrorism' and other kinds of joint training." [23]
Docile Negroes at traditionally Jewish organizations like the NAACP routinely get praised
for their work against racism, but as soon as Black Lives Matter began its Black solidarity
with Palestine campaign, the Israeli government and its lobbies in America attempted to disrupt
the Black Lives Matter movement in retaliation. In 2018 Al Jazeera's documentary The
Lobby -- USA revealed how The Israel Project "pulled strings behind the scenes to
get a Black Lives Matter fundraiser at a New York City nightclub canceled." [24]
So on the one hand we have American policemen being trained to treat their fellow citizens
in the same way that Israelis treat Palestinians, including the knee holds that will subdue and
sometimes kill them. This explains the white cop side of the equation. But on the other hand,
we have George Soros funding Black Lives Matter and the insurrections which follow incidents of
police brutality as the black side of the equation. Taken together both Jewish-funded groups
perpetuate the cycle of increasing violent racial conflict in America, while remaining all the
while invisible.
Black Lives Matter was a reincarnation of the Black-Jewish Alliance, which began with the
founding of the ADL after the lynching of Leo Frank and has continued to this day, with
time-outs taken for the World Wars of the 20th century. Shortly after World War II, Louis
Wirth, a Jewish sociologist from the University of Chicago began implementing his plan to
"integrate" housing in Chicago. When Chicago's ethnic neighborhoods understood that
"integration" was a euphemism for ethnic cleansing, riots ensued, beginning with the Airport
Park riots of 1947 and culminating in the arrival of Martin Luther King in Marquette Park
almost 20 years later. As one more indication that Black Lives Matter was the reincarnation of
the Black-Jewish Alliance, Alicia Garza, one of the founders of Black Lives Matter, was born in
1981 to a white Jewish father and a Black mother.
Black Lives Matter was funded by George Soros to promote race war in the United States, but
BLM also promoted sexual deviance, another cause dear to the heart of the world's most
prominent Hungarian Jewish philanthropist. In their recently published manifesto, BLM situates
its attempt to be "unapologetically Black in our positioning" within a matrix of sexual
deviance, including attempts "to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk," by
disrupting "the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure" and putting in its place a
"queer-affirming network." [25]
If that jargon sounds familiar, it's because it stems from the university gender studies
programs which provide the matrix from which groups like BLM and Antifa get both their ideas
and their recruits. The ultimate cause of the uprising which took place in city after city in
the wake of George Floyd's death was bad education. Beginning in the late 1980s, literature
departments had been taken over by "tenured radicals" who have used critical theory, derived
from thinkers like Foucault, Derrida, and Gramsci, to undermine the validity of all structures
of authority. This essentially Nietzschean transvaluation of all values transferred moral
superiority to anyone who could claim oppression according to oligarchic endorsed categories
like race and gender, allowing the tenured radicals to take over one department after another
and, more importantly, allowing the proliferation of new departments, invariably ending in
"studies," as in gender studies, which drove the traditional liberal arts from academe turning
traditional universities into Maoist inspired re-education camps. The takeover of academe
reached its bitter culmination when Antifa led groups of disaffected, badly educated young
people, who were aware of nothing more significant than their grievances, into the streets in
what became an uncanny replication of the Chinese cultural revolution of 1966. One of the most
unlikely leaders of that revolution in China was an American Jew from Charleston, South
Carolina by the name of Sidney Rittenberg.
The academic pedigree of Rittenberg's successors became apparent when Antifa warlord Joseph
Alcoff got apprehended in Philadelphia in 2017 for assaulting a group of Hispanic Marines.
Alcoff's arrest shed light on one of the main figures in a society that remained literally
faceless because of their habit of wearing masks at the protests they disrupted by their
violence. Alcoff, who was known as the leader of Antifa in Washington, DC, was the child of
radical academics and had co-authored an academic paper with his mother Linda Alcoff in Volume
79 of Science and Society in the special issue on "Red and Black: Marxist Encounters
with Anarchism," entitled "Autonomism in Theory and Practice." [26] Radical
theory in the mind of Linda Alcoff led to violent praxis in the life of her son. As with Black
Lives Matter, the ADL has played a double game with Antifa, condemning its tactics while at the
same time defending it against accusations that it was morally equivalent to the "white
supremacists" it attacked in the streets of Charlottesville in 2017.
Continuity between the generations was made possible by the Jewish revolutionary spirit. The
fact that Alcoff was a Jew got suppressed in virtually every mainstream account of his
activity, [27] which
sanitized his communist connections by linking him to the Democratic Party through figures like
Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters. Alcoff was more forthright when he spoke in his own voice,
saying on one Youtube video, "I'm a Communist, motherf***er," before spitting into the camera.
[28]
Christians for truth portrayed Alcoff as "a self-styled modern-day Leon Trotsky" and attributed
the suppression of his ethnic identity to the fact that "Antifa's political manifestations are
funded by the billionaire Jew, George Soros." [29]
Andy Ngo, who was severely beaten by Antifa thugs in Portland in the wake of the 2016
presidential election, claims that "prominent media figures and politicians glamorize and even
promote Antifa as a movement for a just cause. CNN's Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon have defended
Antifa on-air. Chuck Todd invited Antifa ideologue Mark Bray onto Meet the Press to
explain why Antifa's political violence is "ethical." [30] Ngo goes
on to mention Joseph Alcoff as one of the most visible figures in what is otherwise a
clandestine organization, and claims that he had access to Democrat Representative Maxine
Waters in 2016. [31] He also
mentions Adam Rothstein, who is associated with the Rose City Antifa group which assaulted him
in 2016. Rothstein conducted a series of "secret lectures" at a Portland bookstore where local
recruits learned how to "heckle" opponents and make them "look ridiculous, make them feel
outnumbered," and convinced that the "Trump thing is gonna go by the wayside." [32]
Armed with political clout of this magnitude, Antifa can easily overwhelm local police
forces, which is what happened in Portland in 2016. The result is that "city government and
police lack the political will to protect citizens." What happened in Seattle in 2020 with the
creation of the "Capital Hill Autonomous Zone" was only the logical conclusion to what began in
Portland in 2016 and spread all over the Pacific Northwest, "where Antifa is especially
active." In its attempt to destabilize and destroy the nation state and its sovereign borders,
Antifa drew support from "mainstream progressive politicians, such as Rep. Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez, who normalize hatred of border enforcement and sovereignty as such." [33]
Antifa has continued to be successful in disrupting local government and thwarting police
attempts to bring them under control because it is a Jewish organization which can always count
on favorable press from the Jewish-controlled mainstream media, which renders the connection
invisible. The same cannot be said for the Jewish press, which cites Antifa's Jewishness with
thinly-disguised ethnic pride.
When Donald Trump referred to Antifa as a terrorist organization, the Israeli newspaper
Ha'aretz came to their defense, "Trump's Attacks on Antifa Are Attacks on Jews."
[34]
According to an article which appeared in the Forward , Antifa activism "is an
affirmation of Jewish identity, both religious and secular" [35] which
stretches all the way back to 1897 with the founding of Bundism, which "sought to organize the
working-class Jews of Russia, Poland, and Lithuania." [36] After
members of a specifically Jewish Antifa group defaced a plaque in New York City honoring the
president of Vichy France Philippe Petain, they left a note which defended the rationale behind
their act of vandalism:
With Monday's actions, Jewish antifascists and allied forces have served notice that fascist
apologism will not be tolerated in our city in 2019; that anti-Semitic ideology and violence
will be confronted with Jewish solidarity and strength; and that the Holocaust will be
remembered not only with sadness and grief but also with righteous anger and action: 'We will
never forget. We will never forgive.' [37]
In the final analysis, Antifa is a Jewish organization in the same way that Bolshevism and
Neoconservatism were Jewish political movements. Not every member of Antifa is a Jew, but Jews
invariably find their ways into leadership roles in places like Portland, Washington, DC, and
even in China, as was the case during the Cultural Revolution of 1966, because they have an
advantage over non-Jews in embodying the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit which is the hidden
grammar of all revolutionary movements.
Interesting article, not the least surprising the Usual Suspects are playing both sides.
Like WW2?
One picky point is the Yanez shooting, the victim did have a gun, he had a permit for it.
He didn't show his hands and died with his hand near the gun. This was the one his GF put out
on Facebook Live to it incited two police massacres right away, the one everybody knows about
in Dallas (where they killed the shooter with a robot bomb) an another in Louisiana.
I'm a witness the SF Bay Area as a model of the racial obsession/gender bending schemes.
What a mess the place is–the signature of the Left-wing establishment that runs the
place is how the education system fails to fulfill the simple market demands for labor in
their own locale, at the high end Silicon Valley runs on Indian/Pakistani B-1s and at the
other the booming (until now) construction business runs on mostly imported Hispanics.
They spend more per pupil than the rest of the world and the whole system runs on
immigration.
I couldn't finish this article after reading this garbage:
"Floyd was a violent felon who died with traces of fentanyl and cocaine in his system"
It was announced two weeks ago that he had a lethal dose. His toxicology report was
finally made public and shows that he had a lethal dose of the dangerous pain killer fentanyl
in his system. This caused his lungs to fill with fluid, which explains why he told arriving
cops "I Can't Breath" and did not cooperate as he was delusional and dying. The cops wrestled
him to the ground and cuffed him as he died from a fentanyl overdose. Floyd would have died
right there even if the cops had not shown up.
This is why coroners wait for toxicology results before declaring the cause of death, but
in this case he bowed to political pressure and announced his death was caused by the knee to
the neck. This news is so big that our corporate media, which has promoted the riots, refuses
to air the truth. Details can be read here.
https://spectator.org/minnesota-v-derek-chauvin-et-al-the-prosecutions-dirty-little-secret/
In fair and normal world, the accused cops would be immediately freed and rehired with a
bad mark for Chauvin using an improper neck hold. Let's see what happens, but I don't expect
justice.
Floyd said "i can't breathe" several times BEFORE he was put on the ground. The cops did
nothing wrong and were trying to help him. It's all another monstrous media lie like the
mueller report and jussie smollett and rayshard brooks and the covington kids and bubba
wallace and the KY gun range video.
The American Deep State can destroy anti-fa if it wanted. Hunting down all the leaders of
this terrorist organization is not that hard. But of course the American Deep State will not
do so because anti-fa is a branch of the deep state, just like how Hollywood and the media
are (& have been for a long time) arms of the American (Globalist) deep state.
This is one of Jones' many indispensable articles. The opening alone is required reading
of anyone slightly bothered by what is going on. Dionysius sparks sexual revolution, and it
leads to debauched riot and murder and then to either social collapse or else brutal
tyranny.
The American Left and the Neocons both demand tyranny, as brutal as possible. They serve
anti-Christ.
It is either Christ and Christendom or the chaos of anti-Christ.
If Jones would realize that the Novus Ordo Mass and Vatican II are at best impotent before
Dionysius and return to Tradition, he could serve much better.
It cannot be repeated too much: we live in the Anglo-Zionist Empire 2.0. The first phase
of Anglo-Zionist Empire was the British Empire. The Brit WASP Empire spread philoSemitism
across the globe: cultural Zionism that was the inherent fruit of Anglo-Saxon Puritanism,
which was a Judaizing heresy that was the final and most defining part of Modern English, and
Anglophone Protestant, culture.
The reality is that we are in the eyes of the Anglo-Zionist Empire's elites what Irish
Catholic were to archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell and what Palestinians are to Israelis. They
wish us exterminated or made serfs forever, and the base reason predates Freud, Darwin, Marx
and the French Revolution. It is Judaizing heresy birthing monsters to war against historic
Christianity and peoples who have any legacy in the building and maintenance of Christendom
and therefore do not serve Zionism.
WASP culture serves Zionism and always will.
When Kevin McDonald realizes all of that and the necessary inferences, his work will
become worth the effort.
There's a sure way to curb the influence that certain (((individuals))) have on American
culture and politics; it's called the "wealth tax." It's a tax on the assets of the rich and
also on foundations set up to circumvent the inheritance tax. Both Bernie Sanders and
Elizabeth Warren proposed a wealth tax but it is not included in Biden's platform. Instead,
he's proposed raising the maximum income tax rate to 39.6%. There are lots of loopholes that
individuals can utilize to reduce their income tax obligations. It won't stop their meddling
in social and political affairs. Only a very stiff wealth tax (at least 10% per year) will
curb their meddling.
Imagine for a moment that there is a foreign government that receives billions of dollars a year in "aid" and other benefits from
the United States taxpayer. Consider beyond that, the possibility that that government might take part of the money it receives
and secretly recycle it to groups of American citizens in the United States that exist to maintain and increase that money flow
while also otherwise serving other interests of the recipient country.
That would mean that the United States is itself subsidizing the lobbies and groups that are inevitably working against its own
interests. And it also means that U.S. citizens are acting as foreign agents, covertly giving priority to their attachment to a
foreign country instead of to the nation in which they live.
I am, of course, referring to Israel. It does not require a brilliant observer to note how Israel and its allies inside the U.S.
have become very skilled at milking the government in the United States at all levels for every bit of financial aid, trade
concessions, military hardware and political cover that is possible to obtain.
The flow of dollars, goods, and protection is never actually debated in any serious way and is often, in fact, negotiated
directly by Congress or state legislatures directly with the Israeli lobbyists. This corruption and manipulation of the U.S.
governmental system by people who are basically foreign agents is something like a criminal enterprise and one can only imagine
the screams of outrage coming from the
New
York Times
if there were a similar arrangement with any other country.
The latest revelation about Israel's cheating involves subsidies that were paid covertly by Israeli government agencies to groups
in the United States which in turn took direction from the Jewish state, often
inter
alia
damaging genuine American interests. The groups involved failed to disclose the payments,
which
is a felony
.
They also failed to register under the terms of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, which mandates penalties for groups
and individuals acting on behalf of foreign governments.
In particular, FARA mandates that the finances and relationships of the foreign affiliated organization be open to Department of
the Justice inspection. It states that "any person who acts as an agent, representative, employee, or servant, or otherwise acts
at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal." Those who fail to disclose might be penalized
by up to five years in prison and fines up to $250,000.
Israel's various friends and proxies, uniquely, have been
de
facto
exempt from any regulation by the U.S. government. The last serious attempt to register a major lobbying entity was
made by John F. Kennedy, who sought to have the predecessor organization to today's American Israel Public Affairs Committee
(AIPAC) comply with FARA. Kennedy was killed before he could complete the process.
To be sure, the U.S. government has recently been aggressive in demanding FARA registration for other nations as well as for
Americans working for foreign powers. There have been
several
prominent FARA cases
in the news.
Major Russian news agencies operating in the U.S. were compelled to register in 2017 because they were funded largely or in part
by the Kremlin. Also, as part of their plea deals, the former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former National Security
Advisor Michael Flynn both conceded that they had failed to comply with FARA when working as consultants with foreign
governments.
A leading recipient of the Israeli government's largesse has been the Israel Allies Foundation (IAF), which has a presence in 43
countries worldwide, though it is registered in the U.S. as a
non-profit
.
It received a grant of $100,000 from Israel's Strategic Affairs Ministry in 2019, part of the $6.6 million that was doled out to
eleven American organizations in 2018-9.
Israel Allies particularly uses Lawfare to target the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which has a
large and growing presence on university campuses. Effective lobbying by IAF in the U.S. has resulted in more than half of all
states passing legislation that bans or limits the BDS activity while legislation that would criminalize organizations working
against Israel has also been moving through congress. IAF has been directly involved in drafting such legislation and has more
recently been pushing for new laws that would legally define criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism.
The Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs initially, in 2015-7, tried to give money openly to diaspora organizations but found
that many American Jewish groups, to their credit,
would
not take it
due to concerns over FARA and being accused of "dual loyalty." So, the Ministry created an ostensibly
non-government "public benefit company" cut-out to distribute the cash in a more secretive fashion. The mechanism was given
the
operational name Concert.
Concert's sole purpose was to provide money to diaspora advocacy groups that would work primarily against BDS and other efforts
to delegitimize the Jewish state. Concert had an independent board, but its activity of directed by the Strategic Affairs
Ministry's director-general.
Concert's internal documents are predictably vague in describing the activities that it was funding, and one might assume that
they are purposely misleading. They refer to "defensive and offensive" actions, on "corporate responsibility," "the digital
battlefield," and regarding "amplification units" that would provide "support for organizations in a pro-Israeli network."
The intention was to improve Israel's image due to the widespread and completely accurate perception that its human rights record
is among
the
worst in the world
. Concert was created to serve as a mechanism to be exploited where situations prevailed that "require an
'outside the government' discussion with the different target audiences [and] provide a rapid and coordinated response against
the attempts to tarnish the image of Israel around the world."
Interestingly, one of the most recognizable recipients of Concert funds was Christians United for Israel (CUFI), America's
largest pro-Israel group, which received nearly $1.3 million in February 2019 to pay for several 10 week-long "pilgrimages" to
the Holy Land. Each pilgrimage involved thirty "influential Christian clerics from the U.S." who were clearly propagandized while
they were in the Middle East. Other large disbursements went to predominantly Jewish student groups, presumably to provide them
with both resources and necessary training to oppose campus critics of Israel.
The simple way to deal with the massive and illegal Israeli influencing operations that are being directed against the United
States would be first of all to deduct every identifiable dollar that is being spent by the government of Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu to empower supporters in America from the $3.8 billion plus that Israel receives each year directly from the U.S.
Treasury. Israel would not be concerned if the United States were to recover a paltry $10 million or so, but it would definitely
send a message.
And then one might follow-up by requiring all the Israeli proxies that together make up the Israel Lobby to register under FARA.
One might start with AIPAC, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP)
but there will be many, many more before the work is done. And CUFI, for sure. The fundamentalist Christian head cases that place
Israel's interests ahead of those of their own country finally need to have their bell rung.
There is a tendency on the part of major Jewish groups in the United States and in Europe to
discover what they describe as anti-Semitism wherever one turns. Last month, a statue of the
well-known and highly respected 18 th century French writer and political
philosopher Voltaire
was removed from outside the Académie Française in Paris. Voltaire was a
major figure in the "Enlightenment," during which what we now call science and applied
rationalism challenged the authority of the church and the King.
The statue had recently been vandalized by the French version of Black Lives Matter (BLM)
because Voltaire had reportedly invested in the French East India Company, which engaged in the
triangular trade between Europe, Africa and the New World. The commodities included Africans
who were destined to become slaves in the European colonies. Beyond that Voltaire, a man of his
times, believed blacks to have "little or no intelligence" and also considered Jews to be born
"with raging fanaticism in their hearts."
Voltaire was reportedly much admired by Hitler, so perhaps it would not be off base to
suggest that in France, where the Jewish community is extremely powerful while Africans are
not, it was Voltaire cast as the anti-Semite that consigned his statue to a government
warehouse never to be seen again. By that reasoning, one expects that the world will soon have
a ban on the music of Richard Wagner and Ludwig van Beethoven as they too were admired by
Hitler.
The idea that someone can change history by ignoring aspects of it means that school
textbooks are being rewritten at a furious pace to make sure that there is overwhelming
coverage of the holocaust and black achievement. Also, the erasing of monuments is being
pursued with singular intensity in the United States, where the Founding Fathers and other dead
white males are being one by one consigned to the trash heap. Doing so, unfortunately, also
destroys the learning experience that can be derived from using the monuments as visual
mechanisms for confronting and understanding the mistakes made in the past. A commission set up
by the mayor of the District of Columbia has, for example,
compiled a hit list of monuments and commemorations that must be either removed, renamed or
placed into "context." It includes the Jefferson Memorial and the Washington Monument. The name
"Columbia" is, of course, certain to be changed.
Interestingly, Jewish groups in the United States have been in the forefront in supporting
BLM's apparent mission to upend what used to pass for America's European-derived culture.
Ironically, that culture includes free speech, democracy and mercantilism, all of which have
greatly benefited Jews. The narrative is, of course, being wrapped around the common cause
of blacks and Jews together fighting against the alleged white nationalists who are being
blamed by the media for much of the violence taking place even when videos taken at the scenes
of the rioting definitely show nearly all black mobs doing the arson and looting.
And blacks who are skeptical of the Jewish role are quickly put in their place, as was
Rodney Muhammad of Philadelphia, who was
removed from his executive position with the NAACP after expressing skepticism about all
the Jewish friends that blacks suddenly appeared to be acquiring, quoting an observation often
attributed to the now disgraced Voltaire on a Facebook entry, "To learn who rules over you,
simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."
The lead organization in shaping the acceptable narrative is the Anti-Defamation League
(ADL), which promotes itself as "Fighting Hate for Good." In other words, anyone on the other
side of the narrative is by definition a "hater." ADL apparently advertised an online
discussion topic for August 28 th , shortly after the shooting incident in Kenosha
Wisconsin that killed two white men and injured a third. The headline reads "Why all white
American middle schoolers must publicly condemn the Anti-Semitic murders by white supremacist
Kyle Rittenhouse."
If the ad is indeed genuine, one notes immediately that the killings are being framed as
anti-Semitism without any actual evidence to suggest that anything like that was involved or
that the shooter knew the religion of those who were confronting him. All three of the
"victims" are described as BLM supporters, which they apparently were, but it ignores the fact
that they were also Antifa activists and all three had
criminal records involving violence . One of them, Joseph Rosenbaum, is, to be sure Jewish,
and
also a pedophile , and the other two might also be Jews if ADL is correct, but that does
not seem to have been material in what took place. Credible accounts of the shooting suggest
that Rittenhouse was attacked by the three,
one of whom, Grosskreutz, had a gun, and was being beaten on his head with Huber's sidewalk
surfboard. He responded in self-defense.
And ADL is not alone in its defense of BLM. More than six hundred Jewish groups have signed
on to a
full page newspaper ad supporting the movement. The ad says "We speak with one voice when
we say, unequivocally: Black Lives Matter" and then goes on to assert "There are politicians
and political movements in this country who build power by deliberately manufacturing fear to
divide us against each other. All too often, anti-Semitism is at the center of these
manufactured divisions."
So, once again, it is all about the perpetual victimhood of Jews. That Jews constitute the
wealthiest and best educated demographic in the United States would seem to suggest that they
are especially favored, which they are, rather than targeted by raging mobs of hillbillies.
More than 90% of discretionary Department of Homeland Security funds goes to protect Jewish
facilities and the Department of Education and Congress are always prepared to create new rules
protecting Jews from feeling "uncomfortable" in their occasional interactions with critics of
Israel.
Jews largely think and vote progressive, which is part of the reason for aligning with
blacks even though rioting and looting is likely to affect them more than other demographics as
many of them might still have businesses in the cities that are most likely to be hit. But
there is also a much bigger reason to do so. Many blacks in BLM as well as progressive white
supporters were beginning to suggest that the movement should broaden its agenda and recognize
inter alia the suffering of others, to include the Palestinian people. A strong show of
support from Jewish groups, backed up by what one might presume to be a flow of contributions
to the cause, would presumably be a way of nipping that sentiment in the bud just as Jewish
donors to the Democratic Party were able to block any language in the party platform
sympathetic to the Palestinians.
It is of course the ultimate irony that Jewish groups are very sensitive to the suffering of
blacks in the United State while at the same time largely ignoring the
war crimes and other devastation going on in Israel and Palestine at the hands of their
co-religionists. The beating and shooting of unarmed and unresisting Palestinians, to include
children, the destruction of the livelihoods of farmers, and the demolition of homes to make
way for Jewish settlers is beyond belief and is largely invisible as the Jewish influenced U.S.
media does not report it. It is, simply put, genocide. And on top of that, Israel has been
bombing defenseless civilians in Gaza nearly daily of late, attacking and destabilizing Lebanon
and Syria, and also conniving with American Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to go to war with
Iran.
It should not be surprising if black groups would be suspicious of the motives of the Jewish
organizations that suddenly seem to want to be friendly. When Rodney Muhammad was removed from
his position with the NAACP in Philadelphia, Jonathan Greenblatt, the head of ADL, tweeted
"Credit to Executive Committee of Philly NAACP & National NAACP for taking action here. We
hope this will enable new opportunities for collaboration as the local Black & Jewish
communities can do more to fight against hate & push for dignity of all people."
Greenblatt has been a leader in the fight to criminalize both criticism of Israel and also
the free speech being exercised by supporters of the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and
Sanctions movement (BDS). For him, "dignity of all people" clearly does not include
Palestinians or even anyone who peacefully supports their cause.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a
more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is[email protected] .
It took balls for Carlson to have Anya Parampil on his show last night. He has had her on
before, so he knows what she is like she tells it like it is. He will get shit for that.
I don't think he agrees with everything she said but agrees with some of it.
The New York Timesreports on the
resignation of Brian Hook, who will be replaced by none other than Elliott Abrams:
Mr. Hook will be succeeded by Elliott Abrams, a conservative foreign policy veteran and
Iran hard-liner who is currently the State Department's special representative for
Venezuela.
As the administration's special envoy, Hook had no success in gaining support from other
governments for the "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran. His brief stint as a negotiator
with our European allies yielded nothing, and when he was trying to negotiate with them Trump
famously had no idea who
he was . He mostly served as one of the administration's leading
propagandists .
Last year he came under fire from the State Department's Inspector General for his role in
the
mistreatment of Sahar Nowrouzzadeh , who was the target of political retaliation at the
department on account of her support for the JCPOA and at least partly because of her Iranian
heritage.
Hook is described in the Times ' report as a "survivor," but they neglect to
mention that the reason he has survived so long in the Trump administration is his cowardice
.
Perhaps the most bizarre thing about the coverage of Hook·s resignation is that it
is framed as somehow undermining the chances of diplomacy with Iran.
It wasn't Steele's MI-6 dodgy dossier ... the dirt on candidate Donald Trump was initiated
by Republican billionaires Paul Singer e.a. to get Bush III elected president ... failed so
the clan supported Rubio ... at last resort the dossier was "sold" to Democrats and HRC.
" Prior to Biden's intervention, progressives in the party had secured agreement to include
the word for the first time in the Democratic platform.
Ultimately, the section on Israel included more robust language defending the rights of the
Palestinians to a state. It also condemned the boycott Israel movement.
The platform included a number of victories for progressives on domestic issues, including
closing the wage gap and climate change. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, whom Biden, the former
vice president, defeated in the primaries, is working closely with Biden to shape party policie
s." Times of Israel
--------------
I guess Bernie lost this one. He is famously indifferent to Israel. That is consistent with
his internationalist socialist (at best) orientation. We have to remember that he and his
lovely wife went to the USSR for their honeymoon. Biden is completely one sided on the
Israel/Palestine issue. I know that from personal observation of him at a range of about six
feet. pl
Bernie will lose every single " this one" step by step. The Catfood Democrats in charge of
the convention will go out of their way to humiliate the Berniecrats, the Sanderistas and the
Bitter Berners.
I'm not sure how we will end up voting, but . . . we will remember in November.
how does this stack up next to trumps slavish devotion to israel?? it seems like a race is
on by all to appear the most devoted to israel... something is very wrong with this picture..
either my glasses are out of focus, or the picture is surreal for an outside observer of usa
foreign policy. as it applies every 4 years around election time..
IMO Biden is devoted to Israel in a simple minded way typical of the man. Trumpy is IMO
cynically courting Zionist money and influence and doesn't really give a s--t about
Israel.
COL,
Joe Biden seems to be shifting his stance on many issues. I'm curious why his views on Israel
aren't changing. He used to be pro-law enforcement and pro-union; this seems to have
changed.
My cynical inner voice is saying "wait a bit, his stance on Israel will change before
November."
"MO Biden is devoted to Israel in a simple minded way typical of the man. Trumpy is IMO
cynically courting Zionist money and influence and doesn't really give a s--t about
Israel."
Aren't they both courting the money?
Biden doesn't want you to know about it. How naive' of him!
Donald doesn't give a s--t if you know or not.
james, this devotion to israel doesn't just apply every four years in Washington. It
applies on practically every day of every year. On the rare day when there's an exception,
such as Obama's lame-duck abstention from a 2016 UNSC condemning Israel's occupation, all
hell breaks loose.
I believe that the bland American support of Israel regardless of whatever Israel does has
contributed to a grave weakening of American support for international law. After all, if
it's OK for Israel to attack, invade, occupy other countries then why is it a big deal if we
do it?
This bland support of Israel is quietly but heavily enforced by political money and the
press.
Bernie is typical of those who've spent decades in DC. When push comes to shove he's with
the establishment. Most recent example being absent on the vote to significantly amend the
Patriot Act. His non-voting enabled the status quo of authoritarianism.
IMO Biden is devoted to Israel in a simple minded way typical of the man. Trumpy is IMO
cynically courting Zionist money and influence and doesn't really give a s--t about
Israel.
Posted by: turcopolier | 08 August 2020 at 02:58 PM
No fan of Biden, but consider me perplexed.
There surely must have been an easily traceable 'Resistance' in the Democratic Party base
against US 99% pro-Israel legislation over the last two decades. It never made it unto the
upper decision layers, true.
In the GOP too? ... Tea Party GOP resistance was always strong on Defense and Israel.
But wouldn't those party members maybe 'internationalist socialist (at best) orientation',
worse communists, antifa even, maybe?
IMO Biden is devoted to Israel in a simple minded way typical of the man.
You feel if I used my FOIA rights I would find that Biden heavily resisted the Obama admin
December 2016 activities, but did not succeed, which then triggered the Flynn and Kushner
activities at the UN in Dec. 2016?
Why did Trump hire all these neocons, and don't forget that other warmonger, David
Wurmser, who was hired by Trump, the psychopath who 'designed' the disastrous Second Iraq
War
Why did Trump hire all these neocons, and don't forget that other warmonger, David
Wurmser, who was hired by Trump, the psychopath who 'designed' the disastrous Second Iraq
War.
It probably has NOTHING to do with "3-D chess" but more to do with all the Zionist money
backing Trump or perhaps even bailing out Trump's failed businesses.
Trump, failed miserably in the casino business, so is it a coincidence that a neocon
zionist Las Vegas casino billionaire financed Trump's election campaign, and that all those
neocon zionists were hired by Trump?
Is that why Trump is so scared to death about releasing his tax returns, because those tax
returns might expose a LOT of unsavoury money flows...? 😉
HedgeJunkie , 15 hours ago
I guess the swamp is draining Trump.
Kinskian , 15 hours ago
Trump is a clumsy and transparent Zionist stooge.
PT , 14 hours ago
Gotta admit, if you're going to have a Zionist stooge then you are better off having a
clumsy and transparent one.
Pliskin , 9 hours ago
You're all idiots!
Can't you see that this is just another multi-dimensional chess move to 'drain the swamp'
by filling the swamp with swamp creatures!
Genius move...pure 'stable' genius move!
Bokkenrijder , 10 hours ago
"No Difference Between John Bolton, Brian Hook Or Elliott Abrams": Iran FM
Trump: "I'll hire the best people and drain the swamp." 🙄
What Trump meant was: I'll hire neocons and war criminals and continue the US Empire and
funnel more money to the MIC.
Thank you Trumpturds!
saoirse1981 , 6 hours ago
America is and has been, ruled by a moronic kakistrocracy from time immemorial. Trump and
the imbeciles he surrounds himself with are, all simultaneously, suffering from the
"Dunning-kruger" effect, well known in psychology...( although being stupid to the point of
idiocy, they imagine themselves to be the brightest stars in the universe ). They believe
thay have the mental capabilities and the military might to take on Iran or China, or both.
America has got accustomed to blitz-bombing defenceless countries back to the stoneage or
inciting "regime change" by bribing Judas characters as their henchmen. Neither of these
options will work here. Whilst engaged in perpetual war around the planet, America itself
became parasitised by the biggest leech of all, the squatter in Palestine. This bringer of
evil, now controls America completely and is both metaphorically and physically sucking her
dry, her collapse is imminent so the threat she poses deteriorates daily.
needtoshit , 8 hours ago
It's high time the USA would cease to bully the entire world on behalf of the occupied
strip of land paid for in money and blood by the USA themselves, and named israel.
5 play_arrow
To Hell In A Handbasket , 8 hours ago
I heard a statement in the early 80's, I don't know by whom, but they said "The President
might change, but foreign policy stays the same" It was one of those frown of the eyes, deep
thought moments, where I tried to make sense of the statement at the time, but still thought
in terms of Left VS Right, where I listened and believed in words over deeds.
hugin-o-munin , 13 hours ago
How much will it take for people to realize that Trump is a puppet?
I keep hearing how he is fighting the deep state and how infinitely better he is compared
to Hillary etc. Why is it so hard for people to admit they were conned? All Presidential
candidates are carefully chosen to portray what the vast majority of people want to hear and
Trump is no different. He was chosen to play the role of the outsider who was to clean house.
Mainstream media are playing their part of the charade and people bought it hook line and
sinker.
Even the current smoke and mirrors show between the Democrats and Republicans bickering
endlessly seems to draw enough attention for people to stay engaged and distracted. The
characters Trump appoints should be enough for most to see what he is doing - perpetuating
the US Empire's push towards total global domination. He never had the intention of ending
wars or locking anyone up. Draining the swamp? He is filling it yet people can't even see
that which is right in front of them.
Does Trump even have a plan for how to handle a failing USD? It seems he does everything
possible to distance the US from the world by acting more and more like a crazed emperor
clinging on desperately to something that is nothing but a fake illusion. Die hard followers
keep providing him a long list of excuses and explanations as he continues on. He is destined
to finish off the US economically and unlike the calls claiming that the Democrats are going
to steal the election it is the opposite way around. Joe Biden as contender is such a big
joke that Trump couldn't lose even if he wanted to. The trajectory is set, the US will soon
go through a financial destruction the likes of which the world has never seen and it will
destroy the lives on billions.
Why is he going down this path? Partly because it is inevitable but mostly because those
in power today want to remain in power when everything reboots. The same parasites calling
the shots today want to be on top of whatever comes next. Using Trump is how they plan to do
it. The fake outsider leading the fake battle against the 'swamp' has the perfect alibi to
bring in the new dystopian system of total control that they've always wanted. There will
only be a small window of time and opportunity for people to avoid this but it requires that
they can see through all the smoke screens and mind games. When the USD implodes soon there
will be a new currency rolled out perhaps digital but equally phony that will not last more
than a year and that is when awake people need to break free. Good luck to us all.
Michael Norton , 14 hours ago
I will live long enough to watch all the old NWO guard and jackals of the establishment
drop dead of old age. For that I am grateful.
Bokkenrijder , 4 hours ago
KEY ARCHITECT OF 2003 IRAQ WAR IS NOW A KEY ARCHITECT OF TRUMP IRAN POLICY
I would argue that no one compares with the extreme evilness of abrams-look at his record
in latin america, covering up, defending, denyingm massacres of civilians which were vioe to
the extreme, mass machine gunning of civilians, mass rapes by local armiess and defended by
abrams. Look at his face if that does not reflect evil, I do not know what does.
@Sokrates who represents the district called home by the Chappaqua Hillbillies, aka Bubba
and the Hildabeast. There was a rumor that after HRC was coronated, she and the First Laddy
would force Nita to resign so the lovely and charming Chelsea Hubbell could replace her in
Congress. A Chappaqua residence had already been purchased for the kids to make the whole
thing kosher, with funds that I assume were extorted from some Third World shithole by the
matriarch during her run as Secretary of State.
However, I imagine if Ms. Lowey has secured $19 million per day in funding for
Our Greatest Ally (TM), her seat in the House is secure. Hell, she may soon replace Mario's
boy Andrew.
You make some good points. Now, seriously, do you have any insights as to why the Dems,
the FBI (especially Strzok) and the deep state harbor such overweening animosity toward him,
enough to launch soft coup attempt after soft coup attempt for four years straight? Starting
with say the attempt to subvert the Electoral College. What puzzles me is that it started
before anyone suspected how pro-Israel he was and many of his opponents, like Schiff and
Nadler, seem even more pro-Israel.
"... After reading Dallek's book, I came to realize that there exists a completely parallel, un-elected power structure in Washington (AKA "The Deep State") which is able to ignore and completely bypass our elected officials at will when the need arises. ..."
"... It was also at this point that I realized the ultimate beneficiary of Watergate might have been Israel. ..."
@zard he
help of supporters of Israel in the military, the Washington bureaucracy and Congress.
After reading Dallek's book, I came to realize that there exists a completely parallel,
un-elected power structure in Washington (AKA "The Deep State") which is able to ignore and
completely bypass our elected officials at will when the need arises.
It was also at this point that I realized the ultimate beneficiary of Watergate might have
been Israel.
It was also at this point that I realized that "Deep Throat" could only have been the
supremely treacherous Kissinger,"The only indicted co-conspirator".
I put these comments on the open thread about the same time b started this one
https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1289724554982629377
The Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria signed a deal to market oil to
US-based Delta Crescent Energy LLC "with the knowledge and encouragement of the White
House."
Trump a few months back "We've kept the oil". Well, he hasn't had a problem hanging onto
it and getting an American company involved.
The Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria signed a deal to market oil
to US-based Delta Crescent Energy LLC "with the knowledge and encouragement of the White
House."
Posted by: Peter AU1 | Aug 2 2020 14:35 utc | 2
Very likely the Kurds were under pressure from Trump, and the act wasn't voluntary. It's
not even the Kurds' oil to sign a deal on (except one well). We'll see whether the
operation actually succeeds. At the moment, everybody is waiting to see whether Trump is
re-elected in November. Signing a piece of paper now is of no significance.
"... Panorama allowed these claims to go unchallenged, even though with a little digging it could have tapped sources inside Labour who were already compiling what would become the leaked report, presenting a very different view of these self-styled "whistleblowers". ..."
"... The BBC also failed to talk to Jewish Voice for Labour , a group of Labour party members supportive of Corbyn who challenged the way the Jewish Labour Movement had manipulated the definition of antisemitism in the party to harm Palestinian solidarity activists. ..."
"... And the BBC did not call as counter-witnesses any of the anti-Zionist Jews who were among the earliest victims of the purge of supposed antisemites by Labour's apparent "whistleblowers". ..."
"... One of the key damaging, "gotcha" moments of the campaign was an interview with the veteran BBC interviewer Andrew Neil in which he repeatedly asked Corbyn to apologize for antisemitism in the party, as had been supposedly exposed by Panorama. Corbyn's refusal to respond directly to the question left him looking evasive and guilty. ..."
"... With the rest of the media amplifying the Panorama claims rather than testing them, it has become the accepted benchmark for judging the Corbyn era. The show has even been nominated for a Bafta award, the British equivalent to an Oscar. ..."
"... Shortly after the program aired, Corbyn's team disputed the Panorama narrative , saying it had contained "deliberate and malicious misrepresentations designed to mislead the public". They also described the "whistleblowers" as disaffected former staff with "political axes to grind". ..."
New leader Keir Starmer spurns two chances to clear Jeremy Corbyn's name, preferring instead
to pay damages to former staff
By Jonathan Cook
" Information Clearing
House " - Jeremy Corbyn, the former left-wing leader of Britain's Labour party, is once
again making headlines over an "antisemitism problem" he supposedly oversaw during his five
years at the head of the party.
This time, however, the assault on his reputation is being led not by the usual suspects
– pro-Israel lobbyists and a billionaire-owned media – but by Keir Starmer, the man
who succeeded him.
Since becoming Labour leader in April, Starmer has helped to bolster the evidence-free
narrative of a party plagued by antisemitism under Corbyn. That has included Starmer's refusal
to exploit two major opportunities to challenge that narrative.
Had those chances been grasped, Labour might have been able to demonstrate that Corbyn was
the victim of an underhand campaign to prevent him from reaching power.
Starmer, had he chosen to, could have shown that Corbyn's long history as an anti-racism
campaigner was twisted to discredit him. His decades of vocal support for Palestinian rights
were publicly recast as a supposed irrational hatred of Israel based on an antipathy to
Jews.
But instead Starmer chose to sacrifice his predecessor rather than risk being tarred with
the same brush.
As a result, Labour now appears to be on the brink of open war. Competing rumors suggest
Corbyn may be preparing to battle former staff through the courts, while Starmer may exile his
predecessor from the party.
Rocketing membership
Corbyn's troubles were inevitable the moment the mass membership elected him Labour leader
in 2015 in defiance of the party bureaucracy and most Labour MPs. Corbyn was determined to
revive the party as a vehicle for democratic socialism and end Britain's role meddling overseas
as a junior partner to the global hegemon of the United States.
That required breaking with Labour's capture decades earlier, under Tony Blair, as a party
of neoliberal orthodoxy at home and neoconservative orthodoxy abroad.
Until Corbyn arrived on the scene, Labour had become effectively a second party of capital
alongside Britain's ruling Conservative party, replicating the situation in the US with the
Democratic and Republican parties.
His attempts to push the party back towards democratic socialism attracted hundreds of
thousands of new members, quickly making Labour the largest party in Europe. But it also
ensured a wide-ranging alliance of establishment interests was arrayed against him,
including the British military , the corporate media, and the pro-Israel
lobby.
Politicized investigation
Unlike Corbyn, Starmer has not previously shown any inclination to take on the might of the
establishment. In fact, he had previously proven himself its willing servant.
As head of Britain's prosecution service in 2013, for example, his department issued
thinly veiled threats to Sweden to continue its legal pursuit of Wikileaks founder Julian
Assange, who had sought political asylum in London's Ecuadorean embassy, even as Swedish
interest in the case waned.
With his background in realpolitik, Starmer appears to have grasped quickly the danger of
being seen to share any common ground with Corbyn – not only should he pursue significant
elements of his predecessor's program, but by challenging the carefully crafted establishment
narrative around Corbyn.
For this reason, he has refused to seize either of the two chances presented to him to
demonstrate that Labour had no more of an antisemitism problem than the
relatively marginal one that exists more generally in British society.
That failure is likely to prove all the more significant given that in a matter of weeks
Labour is expected to face the findings of an
investigation by the UK's Equality and Human Rights Commission.
The
highly politicized watchdog body, which took on the probe into Labour while
refusing to investigate plentiful evidence of an Islamophobia problem in the Conservative
party, is expected to shore up the Corbyn-antisemitism narrative.
Labour has said
it will readily accept the Commission's findings, whatever they are. The watchdog body is
likely to echo the prevailing narrative that Corbyn attracted left-wingers to the party who
were ideologically tainted with antisemitism masquerading as anti-Zionism. As a result, or so
the argument goes, Jew hatred flourished on his watch.
Starmer has already declared " zero
tolerance " of antisemitism, but he has appeared willing – in line with pro-Israel
lobbyists in his party – to
conflate Jew hatred with trenchant criticism of Israel.
The barely veiled intention is to drive Corbynite members out of Labour – either
actively through suspensions or passively as their growing disillusionment leads to a mass
exodus.
By distancing himself from his predecessor, Starmer knows no dirt will stick to him even as
the Equality Commission drags Corbyn's name through the mud.
Sabotaged from within
Starmer rejected the first chance to salvage the reputations of Corbyn and the wider Labour
membership days after he became leader.
In mid-April, an 850-page internal party report was leaked, stuffed with the text of lengthy
email exchanges and WhatsApp chats by senior party staff. They showed that, as had long been
suspected, Corbyn's own officials worked hard to sabotage
his leadership from within.
Staff at headquarters still loyal to the Blair vision of the party even went so far as to
actively throw the 2017 general election, when Labour was a hair's-breadth away from ousting
the Conservatives from government. These officials hoped a crushing defeat would lead to
Corbyn's removal from office.
The report described a "hyper-factional atmosphere", with officials, including then-deputy
leader Tom Watson, regularly referring to Corbyn and his supporters as " Trots " – a reference to Leon
Trotsky, one of the leaders of a violent Communist revolution in Russia more than a century
ago.
Corbynites were thrown out of the party on the flimsiest
pretexts , such as describing those like Blair who led the 2003 attack on Iraq as
"warmongers".
But one early, favored tactic by staff in the disciplinary unit was to publicize
antisemitism cases and then drag out their resolution to create the impression that the party
under Corbyn was not taking the issue seriously.
These officials also loosened the definition of antisemitism to pursue cases against
Corbyn's supporters who, like him, were vocal in defending Palestinian rights or critical of
Israeli policies.
This led to the preposterous situation where Labour was suspending and expelling anti-Zionist
Jews who supported Corbyn on the grounds that they were supposedly antisemites, while
action was
delayed on dealing with a Holocaust denier.
The narrative against Corbyn being crafted by his own officials was eagerly picked up and
amplified by the strong contingent of Blairites among Labour
legislators in the parliament, as well as by the corporate media and by Israel lobbyists
both inside and outside Labour.
Effort to bury report
The parties responsible for leaking the report in April did so because Labour, now led by
Starmer, had no intention of publicizing it.
In fact, the report had been originally compiled as part of Labour's submission to the
Equality and Human Rights Commission, effectively giving Corbyn's side of the story against his
opponents.
But once Corbyn stepped down, the party bureaucracy under Starmer
preferred to shelve it . That decision meant there would be no case for the defense, and
Corbyn's opponents' claims would go unchallenged.
Once leaked, Starmer stuck to his position. Rather than use the report as an opportunity to
expose the ugly campaign against Corbyn and thereby question the antisemitism narrative,
Starmer did his level best to bury it from sight.
He
vowed to investigate "the circumstances in which the report was put into the public
domain". That sounded ominously like a threat to hound those who had tried to bring to light
the party's betrayal of its previous leader.
Rather than accept the evidence presented in the leaked report of internal corruption and
the misuse of party funds, Starmer
set up an inquiry under QC Martin Forde to investigate the earlier investigation.
The Forde inquiry looked like Starmer's effort to kick the damaging revelations into the
long grass.
The British media gave the leaked report – despite its earth-shattering revelations of
Labour officials sabotaging an election campaign – little more than perfunctory
coverage.
Labour 'whistleblowers'
A second, related chance to challenge the Corbyn-antisemitism narrative reached its
conclusion last week. And again, Starmer threw in Labour's hand.
In July last year – long before the report had been leaked – the BBC's prestige
news investigation show Panorama set out to answer a question it posed in the episode's title:
"
Is Labour Antisemitic? "
The program presented eight former staff as "whistleblowers", their testimonies supposedly
exposing Corbyn's indulgence of antisemitism. They included those who would soon be revealed in
the leaked report as intractable ideological enemies of the Corbyn project and others who
oversaw the dysfunctional complaints process that dragged its heels on resolving antisemitism
cases.
The Panorama program was dismal even by the low standards of political reporting set by the
BBC in the Corbyn era.
The show made much of the testimony of pro-Israel lobbyists inside the Labour party
belonging to a group called the Jewish Labour Movement. They were not identified –
either by name or by affiliation – despite being given the freedom to make anecdotal and
unspecified claims of antisemitism against Corbyn and his supporters.
The BBC's decision not to name these participants had nothing to do with protecting their
identities, even though that was doubtless the impression conveyed to the audience.
Most were already known as Israel partisans because they had been exposed in a 2017
four-part al-Jazeera undercover documentary called The Lobby. They were filmed colluding with
an Israeli embassy official, Shai Masot, to bring down Corbyn. The BBC did not identify these
pro-Israel activists presumably because they had zero credibility as witnesses.
Nonetheless, a seemingly stronger case – at least, at the time – was made by the
eight former Labour staff. Their testimonies to the BBC suggested they had been hampered and
bullied by Corbyn's team as they tried to stamp out antisemitism.
Panorama allowed these claims to go unchallenged, even though with a little digging it could
have tapped sources inside Labour who were already compiling what would become the leaked
report, presenting a very different view of these self-styled "whistleblowers".
The BBC also failed to talk to Jewish Voice for Labour , a group of Labour
party members supportive of Corbyn who challenged the way the Jewish Labour Movement had
manipulated the definition of antisemitism in the party to harm Palestinian solidarity
activists.
And the BBC did not call as counter-witnesses any of the anti-Zionist Jews who were among
the earliest victims of the purge of
supposed antisemites by Labour's apparent "whistleblowers".
Instead, it selectively quoted from an email by Seumas Milne, Corbyn's chief adviser, to
suggest that he had interfered in the disciplinary process to help antisemites avoid
suspension.
Proper context from the BBC would have revealed that Milne had simply
expressed concern at how the rule book was being interpreted when several Jews had been
suspended for antisemitism – and that he had proffered his view only because a staff
member now claiming to be a whistleblower had asked for it.
This section of the Panorama show looked suspiciously like entrapment of Milne by Labour
staff, followed by collusion from the BBC in promoting their false narrative.
Flawed
reporting
Despite these and many other
serious flaws in the Panorama episode, it set the tone for subsequent discussion of the
"antisemitism problem" in Labour.
The program aired a few months before a general election, last December, that Corbyn lost to
Boris Johnson and the ruling Conservative party.
One of the key damaging, "gotcha" moments of the campaign was an interview with the veteran
BBC interviewer Andrew Neil in which he repeatedly asked Corbyn to apologize for antisemitism
in the party, as had been supposedly exposed by Panorama. Corbyn's refusal to respond directly
to the question left him looking evasive and guilty.
With the rest of the media amplifying the Panorama claims rather than testing them, it has
become the accepted benchmark for judging the Corbyn era. The show has even been nominated for a Bafta
award, the British equivalent to an Oscar.
Shortly after the program aired, Corbyn's team
disputed the Panorama narrative , saying it had contained "deliberate and malicious
misrepresentations designed to mislead the public". They also described the "whistleblowers" as
disaffected former staff with "political axes to grind".
Ware and seven of the former staff members who appeared in the program launched a
defamation action against the Labour party.
After the internal report was leaked in April, the legal scales tipped decisively in
Labour's favor. Starmer was
reportedly advised by lawyers that the party would be well-positioned to defeat the legal
action and clear Corbyn and the party's name.
But again Starmer preferred to fold. Before the case could be tested in court, Starmer
issued an apology
last week to the ex-staff members and Ware, and paid them a six-figure sum in damages.
Admitting that "antisemitism has been a stain on the Labour Party in recent years", the
statement accepted the claims of the ex-staff to be "whistleblowers", even capitalizing the
word to aggrandize their status.
It
said : "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the
Whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad
faith, malice and lying."
Threat of bankruptcy
With typical understatement, Corbyn said he was "disappointed" at the settlement,
calling it a "political decision, not a legal one". He added that it "risks giving
credibility to misleading and inaccurate allegations about action taken to tackle antisemitism
in the Labour party in recent years."
Starmer's decision also preempted – and effectively nullified – the Forde
inquiry, which was due to submit its own findings on antisemitism in Labour later in the
year.
Many in the party were infuriated that their membership dues had been used to pay off a
group of ex-staff who, according to the leaked report, had undermined the party's elected
leader and helped to throw a general election.
But in what looked disturbingly like a move to silence Corbyn, Ware said he was consulting
lawyers once again about launching a legal battle, personally against the former Labour
leader, over his criticism of the settlement.
Mark Lewis, the solicitor acting for Ware and the whistleblowers, has said he is also
preparing an action for damages against Labour on behalf of 32 individuals named in the
leaked report. Among them is Lord Iain McNichol, who served as the party's general secretary at
the time.
Lewis reportedly intends to
focus on staff privacy breaches under the Data Protection Act, disclosure of private
information and alleged violations of employment law.
Conversely, Mark Howell, a Labour party member, has initiated an action against Labour and
McNichol
seeking damages for "breach of contract". He demands that those named in the leaked report
be expelled from the party.
He is also reported to be considering referring named staff members to the Crown Prosecution
Service under the 2006 Fraud Act for their failure to uphold the interests of party members who
paid staff salaries.
This spate of cases threatens to hemorrhage money from the party. There have been warnings
that financial settlements, as well as members deserting the party in droves, could
ultimately bankrupt Labour .
Corbyn to be expelled?
Within days of the apology, a crowdfunding campaign raised more
than £280,000 for Corbyn to clear his name in any future legal actions.
Given his own self-serving strategy, Starmer would doubtless be embarrassed by such a move.
There are already
rumors that he is considering withdrawing the party whip from Corbyn – a form of
exile from the party.
Pressure on him to do so is mounting. At the weekend it was
reported that ex-staff might drop the threatened case over the embarrassing revelations
contained in the leaked report should Starmer expel Corbyn.
Quoting someone it described as a "well-placed source", the Mail on Sunday newspaper set out
the new stakes. "Labour says they have zero tolerance to anti-Semitism. Zero tolerance means no
Corbyn and no Corbynistas," the source said.
Starmer has committed to upholding " 10 Pledges "
produced by the Board of Deputies – a conservative Jewish leadership organization hostile
to Corbyn and the left – that places it and the pro-Israel lobbyists of the Jewish Labour
Movement in charge of deciding what constitutes antisemitism in the party.
Selective
concern
Starmer's decision about who can serve in his shadow cabinet is a reminder that the storm
over Corbyn was never about real antisemitism – the kind that targets Jews for being
Jews. It was a pretext to be rid of the Corbyn project and democratic socialism.
Starmer quickly pushed out the last two
prominent Corbynites in his shadow cabinet – both on matters related to criticism of
Israel.
By contrast, he has happily indulged the kind of antisemitism that harms Jews as long as it
comes from members of his shadow cabinet who are not associated with Corbyn.
Starmer
picked Rachel Reeves for his team, even though earlier this year she tweeted a tribute to
Nancy Astor, a supporter of Hitler and notorious antisemite. Reeves has refused to delete the
tweet .
And Steve Reed is still the shadow communities secretary, even though this month he referred
to a Jewish newspaper tycoon, Richard Desmond, as a "
puppet master " – the very definition of an antisemitic trope.
Starmer's "zero tolerance" appears to be highly selective – more concerned about harsh
criticism of a state, Israel, than the othering of Jews. Tellingly, Starmer has been under no
serious pressure from the Jewish Labour Movement, or from the media or from Jewish leadership
organizations such as the Board of Deputies to take any action against either Reeves or
Reed.
He has moved swiftly against leftists in his party who criticize Israel but has shrugged his
shoulders at supposed "moderates" who, it could be argued, have encouraged or glorified hatred
and suspicion of Jews.
But then the antisemitism furor was never about safeguarding Jews. It was about creating a
cover story as the establishment protected itself from democratic socialism.
Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His books include
"Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East"
(Pluto Press) and "Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair" (Zed Books).
His website iswww.jonathan-cook.net.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.
With some tweaks for technique, the same method bragged about by Bill Browder as "The
Hermitage Effect", and if truth be known, a similar method to those of venture capitalists
everywhere. Nobody has time to wait anymore for a company's stock to take off, and guess
right so that you are ahead of the curve – investors want to be rich nownownow, and
venture capitalists have learned you can make your own luck. Browder billed himself as an
'activist investor', because his claim was that he was actually doing the company a favour,
trying to help it succeed with western governance procedures and transparency and all that.
He would identify a company which he assessed was undervalued, and then begin a whisper
campaign against it – the bosses were on the take, lots of merchandise going out the
back door, cooking the books to conceal the losses, bla, bla, bla. The company's stock would
fall, and Hermitage would buy in when it felt the government's attention had been attracted
and it would try to save the company. Government investigation, some management changes and
maybe a government contract or some orders. Confidence returns, stock goes up, Browder rakes
in the cash and virtuously claims to have saved the company's bacon, when it was his
destabilizing efforts that made it shaky in the first place.
Singer is more like Richard Gere's billionaire capitalist in "Pretty Woman" – buying
up companies, busting them up, stripping off the salable assets and selling the husk; a
real-life example would be Mitt Romney.
Fewer care now about finding a cure for a wasting disease, or discovering a boundless
source of cheap and clean energy – the American Dream now is Getting Rich. Maybe it
always was – although I fancy I remember a bit more altruism, perhaps I am only
deluding myself with pleasant those-were-the-days fantasies. At any rate, corporations and
for-profit entities now seem much bolder about causing widespread ruin right out in the open,
and likewise seem to be rewarded for it by moving up the ranks of Most Profitable Companies,
which seems more and more the only measure of success.
If America did not have its giant military, there would be no reason to fear it, be wary
of offending it or even to pay very much attention to it. It is starting to slide over the
edge, but you still have to be cautious about its tail snaking up out of the pit and taking
you down with it.
----his erratic response to this pandemic,
---- his pathetic non-response to this globalist/deep state color revolution,
----his continued reliance on anti-white and anti-American Israelis like Kushner,
----his apparent willingness to grant amnesty for criminal Mexicans and
----go along with idiotic GOP calls to end relief for those thrown out of work, etc,
etc.
Sorry, none of these have any traction with 2020 Trump supporters. Trump is 2020 by
entirely different yardsticks. The first one is Trump is not Joe Biden and he is not a
Democrat. There are other positives as well. Sorry you can't see them.
But "covid" is not going to take Trump down because "covid" exposed the failings of the
deep state and Democrat state leadership more than anything else. Medicare for All, after
this string of Fauci and CDC stunts, is DOA.
----his continued reliance on anti-white and anti-American Israelis like
Kushner,
Sorry, none of these have any traction with 2020 Trump supporters.
What is interesting is that why pathetic Zionist stooge Kushner really discredits and drags
down Trump, Trump pro-Zionist stance is now slightly more understandable and, may be, even
slightly more acceptable than before BLM/Antifa riots.
What would you do if a minority does not want to integrate and asks for an undeserved
preferential treatment? And which stages riots increasing social tension and wantonly looting
and destroying property (that's what "peaceful protesters" during "summer of love" actually
do ) .
Grant Smith discusses the Israel lobby's deep involvement in the U.S. economy, this time as
regards the American firms in the business of promoting Israeli interests, who have recently
received large sums of money through special coronavirus relief programs. Smith
cross-referenced the list of companies receiving such aid with pro-Israel lobbying groups from
his previous research, finding a great deal of overlap, particularly among the recipients of
large "loans" (which under certain circumstances don't even need to be repaid). These firms
include the Zionist Organization of America, Friends of the IDF and the Israeli American
Council, among others. Smith hopes that bringing this type of influence to light will also help
Americans understand the Israeli government's unjust and inhumane subjugation of the
Palestinian people, and the many ways that our government enables it.
Discussed on the show:
"Israel Lobby Orgs Grab Covid-19 CARES Act Funds for Itself, IDF Facilities, and Sketchy
Israeli Companies" (
Antiwar.com )
This is again about AIPAC dual loyalty. "Do as I say, not as I do." You iether support shadow
apartheid (and there are probably cases when this is the only option, when the minority launches
a armed struggle against the majority and is supported by external forces) or you do not.
But talk is cheap. Several Israeli and Jewish human rights groups have called out AIPAC and
others for their duplicity.
+972 Mag – an independent, nonprofit website run by Israeli and Palestinian
journalists – recently posted an article entitled, "U.S. Jews are standing up for Black
lives. Why aren't we doing so for Palestinians?" The article boldly declared,
[T]here is a glaring problem with the way many mainstream American Jewish organizations
are responding to this critical moment: they have not applied the same values-based approach
to Palestinian rights and Israeli state violence as they do to U.S. police violence. Because
of this inconsistency, the responses of many Jewish groups to the current events in the
United States seem hollow at best, and self-serving at worst For many, this dissonance makes
it harder to take Jewish commitments to racial justice in the U.S. seriously, while the same
groups strenuously work to uphold similar systems of oppression in Palestine-Israel.
It is essential that we speak out with equal zeal and righteous indignation against
Israeli state violence and for justice for Palestinians.
IfNotNow, a Jewish organization that supports many (but not all ) Palestinian rights,
chided AIPAC for claiming solidarity with the Black community: "At what point in time was AIPAC
ever committed to equality, freedom, or justice?" ( AIPAC , the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee, is one of the major Israel advocacy
organizations in the U.S.)
These responses are a stark reminder: if a group wants to have credibility today, its
standards had better match the signed solidarity statement that bears its name. The larger and
more influential an organization, the more ardent its efforts must be.
It's not enough to be part of the solution – don't simultaneously be part of the
problem.
"... Trump's problems among college-educated whites have drawn much attention during his presidency. What's new is declining support among non-college educated whites, where he holds only a 19-point lead. He won that demographic by 37 points in 2016. And his declining support among this key constituency is pronounced in six battleground states, with only 16 percent of non-college educated whites backing him. In October, his lead among them was 24 points. In 2016, Trump won these battleground voters by 26 points. ..."
White voters are turning away from President Trump. That assessment includes his invaluable
working-class white base
. But Trump has only himself and his campaign to blame for the bad news contained in the latest polls. While America burns, his
campaign's only plan seems to be wooing black voters by tweeting that
Joe Biden
is the "real" racist. Trump seems unable to do anything about the riots or the
devastation
wrought by
coronavirus . The latest poll numbers should knock some sense into the president. He seems to be responding a little lately,
but he's going to lose the election if he sticks to
Jared Kushner 's agenda and
doesn't fight like the candidate
we
elected in 2016.
The latest polls from The New York Times poll lay bare the ugly truth.
Trump's problems among
college-educated
whites have drawn much attention during his presidency. What's new is declining support among non-college educated whites,
where he holds only a 19-point lead. He won that demographic
by 37 points in 2016. And his declining support among this
key constituency is pronounced
in six battleground states, with only 16 percent of non-college educated whites backing him. In October, his lead among them was
24 points. In 2016, Trump won these battleground voters by 26 points.
Funny thing is, those voters aren't defecting to Biden's camp, either; their support for him has increased by just 1 since October.
The Times describes them as "
white voters with more
conservative attitudes on racial issues," which likely means they think Trump has not delivered the promised nationalist agenda.
One voter told the Times's Cohn he's disappointed with
Trump
's not cracking down
on the rioters and shutting down the economy because of the
Chinese
Virus pandemic. He'll still vote for Trump, but without much enthusiasm.
Older whites are also jumping ship. In six battleground states, Trump and Biden are about even among whites 65 or older. Trump
won them by nearly 20 points in 2016. The Times
attributes that decline to the president's coronavirus response and his "tone" [
Trump Faces
Mounting Defections From a Once-Loyal Group: Older White Voters , by Alexander Burns and Katie Glueck, June 28, 2020].
That picture of Trump's America hardly inspires confidence.
The only positive for Trump is that Biden has roughly the same non-white support that
Hillary Clinton had in 2016
. But that's not exactly great news, either, given the campaign's focus on painting Biden as the "real" racist. The message is
having zero effect on non-whites. The Times : Biden leads by 74 points among blacks and by 39 points among Hispanics [
Biden
Takes Dominant Lead as Voters Reject Trump on Virus and Race , by Alexander Burns, Jonathan Martin and Matt Stevens, June
24, 2020].
A tweet from Trump campaign manager
Brad
Parscale last week illustrates the idiocy. Parscale attacked Biden for working with
Strom Thurmond to impose harsh sentences
on crack dealers. He claimed this legislation targeted blacks and Trump is fixing the "problem"
Unhappily, Parscale is not alone. Official Republican and Trump campaign accounts regularly tweet cringeworthy statements about
Confederate monuments and criminal justice reform.
Democrats seem to have forgotten that Pres. Trump has led the way on innovative criminal justice reform.
He signed the FIRST STEP Act & established the Presidential Commission on Law Enforcement & the Admin. of Justice -- which
aims to improve relations between the public & police.
Who, exactly, are these messages for? If they're intended to win the black vote, they're failing. If they're meant to soothe white
suburbanite concerns about Trump's alleged "racism," they're failing. If they're meant to excite Trump's working class white base,
again, they're failing.
Parscale
set
out the agenda for the Trump campaign in a January interview with Lou Dobbs: the economy and healthcare. When Dobbs asked about
immigration, the campaign manager replied that they didn't need to worry about it because "we already have [immigration patriots
as] voters." Other issues, he claimed, will bring in new voters.
The Son-in-Law
in Chief might wish to consult the polling data to verify that claim.
Parscale is taking a lot of heat lately for the poor messaging and the
Tulsa rally's underwhelming attendance . Reports suggest Parscale is on his way out as part of a major campaign shake-up. Maybe,
but he's not the ultimate problem.
Jared Kushner and the Republican establishment are setting Trump's agenda and message, Parscale merely carries it out. And frighteningly,
as Politico reported, Kushner "who effectively oversees the campaign from the White House, is expected to play an even more
active role" [ Trump admits
it: He's losing , by Alex Isenstadt, June 27, 2020].
Trump recently tweeted an ad that suggests he might ditch the awful messaging. It pins the current chaos on Democrats and the
Left and states they want to burn America to the ground.
It's a powerful, take-no-prisoners video with the same message that helped Trump win in 2016 and might just re-energize his base
in time for Election Day.
Yet tough talk alone won't win back Trump's base. He must act . Signs are improving there, too..
Over the weekend, he tweeted several wanted
pictures of statue vandals. Four leftists were hit with federal charges for attacking the Andrew Jackson statue in DC [
Justice Department Charges 4 Over Attempt to Topple Andrew Jackson Statue In D.C. , by Jason Slotkin, NPR , June
28, 2020]. Putting left-wing criminals behind bars sends the right message and might stifle the unrest. And again, he's helping unemployed
Americans with
the immigration ban for the rest of the year. Nearly two-thirds of Americans support it, according to the latest polling.
Trump must show Americans that the Chinese Virus threat is decreasing, the economy is recovering, and law and order is being restored.
Tweets about money for black colleges, Biden's tough-on-crime bills, and or his long-ago cooperation with "segregationists" won't
do.
Trump must make this election about order versus chaos and put Democrats on the side of the rioters and the radicals in Antifa
and Black Lives Matter.
You guys at VDare are always very hopeful, and I like that. I've read of some of the moves that the President has made, such
as the ones you state here (on immigration and some justice for Cult-Revolutionalists). However, these things never seem to be
part of any coherent, consistent strategy of any sort.
Perhaps President Trump is not a strategist and can't think in that manner. He definitely has no specific principles or moral
compass, or any kind of damn compass. This is why he listens to his son-in-law Kushner, who is out to destroy the country like
the rest of them.
I agree with the one guy you mentioned (who replied to Mr. Cohn). There's no choice on who to vote for anyway, not matter how
much Trump screws up. But then, all this happening is not going to be settled at the voting booth anyway
Yeah, Trump comes off like a used car salesman with high pressure tactics. But who can vote for dugout Joe who hides in his
basement avoiding complex questions? Apples Oranges ?
Trump is done. Kushner is nothing more than an Israeli plant. They know that Biden is just like Pelosi and she and Joe would
kill every white person in America if Israel wanted. The entire Congress is owned by Israel. Trump is done. Obama's "Third Term"
more accurately described as Coup d'etat setup with the Deep State and Obama's Jewish friends left from his administration destroyed
Trump on the first day of his tenure.
Trump can't stop putting his foot in his mouth. He abandoned White America and no matter what he did for the Blacks including
money for their universities made no difference. No matter how many jobs he created it didn't count because these mongrels don't
want jobs they want free stuff. Obama did nothing for blacks except destroying many middle class blacks but it doesn't matter.
Blacks are tribalistic gang bangers and as Obama their Lord taught them only see color.
Trump is done and so is America. The Jews always win no matter who is president. You better start arming yourself because you
are not going to believe what is going to happen when Biden wins. In Washington D.C. today Blacks were rioting against Target
because they call the police when blacks steal stuff. You can't make this up and the Jewish controlled media just laughs at us.
Ok, but what if Trump were to say Dems are the real racists ? Wouldn't that win the Black vote? Forgive me, gallows
humor.
It's truly pathetic the people Trump surrounds himself with. His instincts always seemed good, but apparently he can't implement
a damn thing. At least all this is showing conservatives how rotten the leadership of all their hallowed institutions are (FBI,
military, police, etc).
"... The faked focus on Russian "meddling" could have been to divert any talk of election "meddling" away from Israel's truly vast "meddling". (The Israelis routinely distract by accusing others of their own crimes.) ..."
If we "follow the money", Hillary's campaign was financed by the Israelis. An honest post
mortem on her loss would have focused attention on the huge influence of Israeli money on
American elections.
The faked focus on Russian "meddling" could have been to divert any talk
of election "meddling" away from Israel's truly vast "meddling". (The Israelis routinely
distract by accusing others of their own crimes.)
The Israelis control both the DNC and the
corporate media, so "Russiagate" could roll on virtually evidence-free. Fox was allowed to
criticize the "Russiagate" attack on Trump, but only to keep the kabuki conflict boiling.
Neither side ever mentioned Israel's "meddling", or in any way criticized Israel. To the
contrary, Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity even agreed that Netanyahu would be a great American
president.
So why did Israeli asset John Bolton just attack Trump, after Trump has given Israel so
much, including assassinating Soleimani?
Maybe it's Trump's refusal to launch Israel's next war? Maybe they don't really trust
Trump? Maybe because on 9/11 Trump said he didn't believe planes could have brought down the
twin towers, and that explosives must have been involved? Could Trump be in a deadly dance
with the Israelis, riding a tiger?
"... "Sheldon Adelson is the puppet master who is pulling the strings of Donald Trump, [Secretary of State] Mike Pompeo, and what's his name the ambassador, Greenberg, I think his name is," Waters said, and went on to describe Adelson as a "right-wing fascist racist bigot." ..."
"... Waters said Adelson, a major donor to Trump's Republican party and his election campaign, "believes that only Jews, only Jewish people, are completely human and everybody else on Earth is there to serve them." ..."
"... "Unfortunately this crazy, crazy, crazy guy is also incredibly rich and has the tiny little prick of Donald Trump in his pocket." ..."
Screen capture from video of Pink Floyd co-founder Roger Waters during an interview with
Hamas-affiliated Shehab News Agency, June 20, 2020. (Twitter) Musician Roger Waters has said
that US Jewish billionaire Sheldon Adelson is pulling the strings of the Trump administration,
and claimed that Israel is training US police forces how to kill black people using the
technique of kneeling on the necks of their victims, which he said was developed by the Israel
Defense Forces as it "murders Palestinians."
Rogers, a co-founder of Pink Floyd and an outspoken critic of Israel who has been branded an
anti-Semite by the ADL , told the Hamas terror group-affiliated Shehab News Agency on Saturday
that Adelson believes only Jews are "completely human" and referred to US Ambassador to Israel
David Friedman as "Greenberg."
Excerpts from the interview were published Sunday by the Washington-based Middle East Media
Research Institute watchdog.
"Sheldon Adelson is the puppet master who is pulling the strings of Donald Trump, [Secretary
of State] Mike Pompeo, and what's his name the ambassador, Greenberg, I think his name is,"
Waters said, and went on to describe Adelson as a "right-wing fascist racist
bigot."
US
President Donald Trump pats Las Vegas Sands Corporation Chief Executive and Republican mega
donor Sheldon Adelson on the arm before speaking at the Israeli American Council National
Summit in Hollywood, Florida, December 7, 2019. (Patrick Semansky/AP)
Waters said Adelson, a major donor to Trump's Republican party and his election campaign,
"believes that only Jews, only Jewish people, are completely human and everybody else on Earth
is there to serve them."
"I'm not saying Jewish people believe this; he does and he is pulling the strings," Waters
continued, and claimed Adelson further believes that "everything will be good with the world if
there is a Greater Israel which takes up the whole of historic Palestine and the Kingdom of
Jordan."
"Unfortunately this crazy, crazy, crazy guy is also incredibly rich and has the tiny little
prick of Donald Trump in his pocket."
Musician Roger Waters on Hamas-Affiliated News Agency: Crazy Puppet Master Adelson Has
Donald Trump's Tiny Little Pr*ck in His Pocket; Israelis Teach U.S. Police How to Murder
Blacks pic.twitter.com/0JUQuwsvhB
Turning to the death of George Floyd, a black man who died in Minneapolis when a police
officer kneeled on his neck after he was already in custody, Waters said it was "a technique
invented by the IDF."
"The Israelis invented (the method), 'let's kill people by kneeling on their necks'," he
claimed. "That is an Israeli technique taught to the militarized police forces of the USA by
Israeli experts who the Americans have been flying over to the United States to teach them how
to murder blacks because they've seen how efficient the Israelis have been at murdering
Palestinians in the occupied territories by using those techniques, and they are proud of it.
The Israelis are proud of it."
"Zionism is an ugly stain, and it needs to be gently removed by us," he said later during
the interview.
Floyd's death prompted anti-racism protests across the US.
Bassist and vocalist Waters is known for publicly harassing artists scheduled to visit
Israel or perform here. In 2013, the Anti-Defamation League branded
Waters an anti-Semite, having previously defended him from that characterization.
Responding to comments Water made in an interview with Counterpunch magazine comparing
Israeli treatment of the Palestinians to Nazi Germany, the ADL said "anti-Semitic conspiracy
theories" have "seeped into the totality" of the former Pink Floyd frontman's views.
"Judging by his remarks, Roger Waters has absorbed classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theories,
and these have now seeped into the totality of his views," Abraham H. Foxman, the then-National
Director of the ADL, told The Times of Israel at the time. "His comments about Jews and Israel
have gotten progressively worse over time. It started with anti-Israel invective, and has now
morphed into conspiratorial anti-Semitism."
Added Foxman: "How sad that a creative genius could become so perverted by his own
narrow-minded bigotry."
Stuart Winer is a breaking news editor at The Times of Israel.
Trump is at fault for hiring him to appease the Zionist lobby. We all knew the guy was a
warmonger and a scumbag. It's not a surprise. Trump surrounds himself with the worst
people
The self-appointed Deep State has pretty much thwarted him (Trump) and his voters.
Posted by: bob sykes | Jun 17 2020 20:55 utc | 11
Trump thwarted Trump. Before he got elected, Trump mentioned his admiration of Bolton more
than once. Voters of Trump elected a liar and an incoherent person -- at time,
incomprehensible, a nice bonus. But it is worth noticing that Trump never liked being binded
by agreement, like, say, an agreement to pay money back to creditors, or whatever
international agreement would restrict USA from doing what they damn please.
Superficially, it is mysterious why Trump made an impression that he wants to negotiate
with North Korea with some agreement at the end. Was he forced to make a mockery from the
negotiation by someone sticking knife to his back?
Some may remember that Trump promised to abolish Affordable Care Act and replace it with
"something marvelous". The latest version is that he will start thinking about it again after
re-election. If you believe that...
Granted, Trump is more sane than Bolton, but just a bit, unlike Bolton he has some moments
of lucidity.
In conclusion, I would advocate to vote for Biden. If you need a reason, that would be
that Biden never tweets, or if he does, it is forgettable before the typing is done. Unlike
the hideous Trumpian productions.
"men fit to be shaved," Tiberius, on Bolton and Friedman.
he is the best & brightest we have. when a dreadful mouth is called for. his insights
into the Trump WH are probably as deep as his knowledge of VZ, Iran, Cuba, etc. he's a useful
idiot, a willing fool. like Trump, he's the verbal equivalent of the cops on the street, in
foreign "policy." another abusive father figure
reading the imperial steak turds - an American form of reading the tea leaves or goat
livers or chicken flight or celestial what have you. an emperor craps out a big hairy one
like Bolton and the priests and hierophants and lawyers and scribes come for a long, close up
inspection and fact-gathering smell of another steaming pile of gmo-corn-and-downer-cow-fed,
colon cancer causing, Kansas feed-lot raised, grade A Murkin BEEF. guess what they in their
wisdom find? Trump stinks.
Introduction: Questions about the official World War Two death figures increasingly mount.
Where are the proofs for these numbers? Where are the bodies? Did people just vaporize into
thin air–as some believe, going up in smoke through tall chimneys?
Two responsible figures have recently and publicly added their voices to the question of six
million Poles murdered (ostensibly by Nazis) between 1939 and 1945.
One is the last communist head of state for Poland from 1985-90, Wojciech Jaruzelski.
Speaking to a journalist for Izvestia (Russian daily newspaper), he said, rather
tongue-in-cheek, that he cannot understand how the Polish population exploded between 1946 and
1970, and then leveled off to become stagnant from 1990 till today. He humorously remarked that
there had to have been "a strong aphrodisiac" to lead to the birth of millions of new Poles
because "in the grocery stores there had been only vinegar and millions had died even after the
war."
The other is Dr. Otwald Mueller, a well-known German researcher, whose remarkable letter
appeared on October 17, 2009 in two American German-language newspapers, the New Yorker
Staatszeitung and the California Staatszeitung .
In his letter, Dr. Mueller discusses the six million figure that was widely reported during
the September 1st, 2009 conference, held at Gdansk (Danzig), Poland, marking the 70
th Anniversary of the beginning of what was to expand into World War Two.
A translation of his letter appears below, followed by a survey of actual mass graves that
have been found and excavated to date that physically reveal flesh-and-bone victims of
WWII.
Dr. Mueller writes:
On the occasion of Poland's victory celebration at Danzig/Gdansk, September 1, 2009,
you could read in the press the following statements:
1) Die Welt (German newspaper "The World"), September 2, 2009: "?beginning of WW II, 6
million victims in Poland, half of them Jews? ."
2) Daily Gazette (Schenectady, N.Y.), September 2, 2009: " .Poland alone lost 6 million
citizens, half of them Jews?"
[The Associated Press (AP) supplies news to nearly all newspapers in the US. That means
those news stories were published in nearly all US newspapers.]
3) Catalyst, Journal of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, Number 6,
July-August 2009: "Six million Polish citizens were killed in the Holocaust – three
million of them were Catholics".
An important chart
There exists an important Polish population chart. It marks a pre-war Polish population
of 29.89 million people, and for the year 1946 a population of 23.6 million. The difference
is of approximately 6 million, or 21% of the total population. The chart seems to prove the
statement of "6 million" ? but, on the contrary, it contradicts it.
On page 413 of the book "Poland: It's People, It's Society, It's Culture" by Clifford
Barnett, HRAF Press, New Haven, CT 1958, the following figures are marked at chart #1: For
the year 1950, a population of 24,533,000; for the year 1955, a population of
27,544,000.
Where are the losses? They turned into gains, because –
For the years 1946 to 1950: a gain of 5.5%. For the years 1950 to 1955: a gain of
15.5%.
That shows in a significant way how Polish history – better Polish fairy tales
– works.
Caption: (by author) Between 1931 and 1946 there is a large loss of population, which
neatly adds up to six million Polish citizens, or 21%. We must keep in mind that 31% of
Poland's population was of non-Polish origin � one million were German, as you can see
from names of cities like Stettin, Gruenberg and Breslau. It also included 7 million
Ukrainians, Belarusians, Lithuanians, and 3 million Jews. Even so, between the postwar years
of 1946 to 1955, the lost population is gained back again – minus 2 million. By 1950,
there is a gain of 908,000 in 4 years. And by 1955, an additional gain of 3,011,000 in 5
years! Can these be new births over deaths? No. They are more likely an "adjustment"- a more
accurate accounting than was done before. This increase cannot be from Germans, Ukrainians or
Lithuanians who returned to Poland, because Poland today is one of the most ethnically
homogenous nations in the world. Are they not Poles, who either returned from the East, where
they had fled, or never left?
Truth in regard to history The declaration by the chairman of the
German-Polish Bishop's Conference on the occasion of the 70th Anniversary of the beginning of
WW II states: "The church will definitely take steps against such inadequate handling of
historical truth. We recommend and encourage an intensive dialog which always includes being
ready to listen to the other side."
The German Bishop's conference unfortunately did not comply, so far, with its own
directives. They did indeed "listen carefully" to their Polish partners and accepted all
Polish historical interpretations without ever questioning or correcting. It is an outrageous
way to violate historical truth when the author of that chart names the cities of Allenstein,
Danzig, Koeslin, Stettin, Gruenberg, Breslau, Oppeln – in the provinces of East
Prussia, Pommerania and Silesia – as "Polish cities."
The declaration of the bishop's conferences reads: "Seventy years ago, on September 1,
1939, German forces started their attack against Poland." (Tagespost, 27 August 2009, page 5)
Thus the second world-war began. How truthful is that declaration? In reality, Stalin also
started his attack against Poland with his Soviet Red Army on September 17, 1939. Hitler and
Stalin together started a local war which ended after 6 weeks. Well, Stalin might have just
said "Nyet" and Hitler would have stayed home. Stalin was not forced to sign a pact with
Hitler. Stalin gained 51% of pre-war Poland.
One violates the truth in dealing with history when one identifies the Germans expelled
from the German East provinces as "Polish victims."
The German Bishop's conference should consider it their task to urge the Polish Bishops
to see that those Polish historical distortions are corrected.
In pre-war Poland, millions of Ukrainians, White Russians, Lithuanians, Ruthenians and
others were living. How did they become Poles? No newspaper report tells the story.
April, 1920 – 22 years before Hitler [invaded the SU] – the Polish Army
under Pilsudski started the victorious campaign against the Soviet Union.
On May 7, 1920, General Rydz-Smigly occupied Kiev.
At the peace treaty of Riga, March 21, 1921, Poland gained vast Ukrainian and White
Russian territories with a population of about 11 million.
Did anyone have any doubts that the Soviet Union would sooner or later retake those
regions? That happened in August 1939 with the Hitler-Stalin pact. Why did the bishops not
mention that? Why did the German newspapers, so eagerly interested in historical truth, not
report it? All the guilt is loaded on one side; the others carry no guilt at all.
Bush's America attacked Iraq on March 20, 2003. No Third World War started because no
one wanted one.
Katyn
Up to June 7, 1943, the Wehrmacht excavated and identified, as well as possible, 4143
Polish officers murdered by the NKVD. (Louis Fitzgibbon: Katyn – A Crime without
Parallel, Scribner's Sons, New York 1971)
If it were correct that 3 million Polish Catholics were murdered, as the Catalyst
journal states, one must have found in Poland about 750 mass gravesites of the same size
during the past 65 years (3,000,000 divided by 4000=750), each with circa 4000 dead. Or 1500
mass gravesites, each with 2000 corpses. It is not known if even one of those mass gravesites
has been found. If they would have found only one, journalists from all over the world would
have been invited to come and visit. All newspapers would have published terrible pictures
and stories for weeks. But did we not indeed find one such gravesite – at Marienburg in
East Prussia, now called Malbork by the Poles? Yes, but they were German deaths, and not
Poles. Now, one can convincingly say that argument also contradicts the thesis of the 6
million.
A ray of hope on that topic
Maybe the search for historical truth progresses slowly. In the Maerkische Allgemeine
Zeitung (German newspaper), August 28, 2009, one can read the following headline: "The
numbers-to-date of victims are incorrect – 70 years after the start of the war,
scientists are searching for facts." Warsaw: "The numbers of victims of WWII are to a great
extent wrong. That is known among specialists and expert historians. Most of the figures are
too high: 20 million deaths in the Soviet Union, 6 million deaths in Poland, 2 million among
the German expellees. For political reasons, the numbers were increased after the war.
Reparation negotiations were already carried on during the war. High loss numbers justified
high reparations requests from the Germans–"today we know most of the figures entered
into that game then are wrong " and: " the historian Mateusz Gniastowski came to the
conclusion that the losses of ethnic Poles had to be corrected from 3 million to 1.5 million
."
Bartoszewski talks With the headline, "No restitution for Jewish property,"
the Junge Freiheit (German magazine) of 28 August, 2009, reports the following: "Wladyslaw
Bartoszewski, ex-Polish secretary for foreign affairs, vehemently denied any restitution
payments for Jewish properties by Poland."
Bartoszewski: "Of the 3.5 million Polish Jews, nearly 2 million lived in the Ukraine
and White Russia of today." A very interesting statement – naturally, they became, in
October 1939, Soviet citizens and were never again Polish citizens.
The consequence? Regardless what did happen to those people between 1939 and 1945
– whether they survived or were killed – they could not be counted as "Polish
victims" but belong to the victim chart of the Soviet Union. Otherwise they are counted
twice.
Final conclusion: According to the statement of Bartoszewski alone, the number of the
alleged 6 million Polish losses must be reduced already by 3.5 million (1.5+2). The Poles
have no right to count German, Jewish, Ukrainian losses as their own. The 6 million number of
WW II Polish deaths do not comply with serious historiography. ~
1) Clifford Barnett: "Poland – its people – its society – its
culture" HRAF Press. New Haven, Conn. Survey of World Cultures,1958
2) German-Polish declaration of the chairman of the Bishops Conference on occasion of
the 70 th anniversary of the beginning of WWII. "The reconciliation between our
nations is a gift." (Die Versoehnung zwischen unseren Nationen ist ein Geschenk). Die
Tagespost, 27.6.2009. Page 5
3) Gerhard Frey: Antwort an Warschau (response to Warsaw} FZ – Verlag (publisher)
2009
4) Louis FitzGibbon: Katyn–A Crime without Parallel. Scribner's Sons, New
York.1971
5) Maerkische Allgemeine ( a German newspaper w 29.8.2009; "Geschichte:Die bisherigen
Opferzahlen sind falsch" (History: The present loss figures are wrong)
6) Junge Freiheit (Young Freedom): Keine Entschaedigung fuer juedisches vermoegen (No
redemption for Jewish property) 28.8 2009
~End of translated letter ~
How many survivors are counted as both survivors and victims because of the chaotic movement
of peoples, boundaries and rulership – giving inflated numbers of victims? This is a
common error, which seems to be purposely overlooked.
We have a right to ask where are the remains of the three million Catholics murdered by the
German Nazis. The only known mass grave of Poles was the work of the Soviet Red Army, led by
the NKVD, in the Katyn Forest in Soviet Russia. Long blamed on Germany, the responsibility for
this genocidal act is now placed where it belongs. Ironically, the only mass gravesites found
on Polish territory have been of German civilians. There are not even any mass graves of Poles
– Catholic or Jewish – on the grounds of the famous concentration camps. No buried
ashes either.
Let's take a look at what mass gravesites have been found, and what they contain.
MASS GRAVES IN MARIENBURG CONTAIN GERMAN CIVILIANS
In the previously German city of Marienburg, now named Malbork, Polish workers digging a
foundation for a future hotel across from the Marienburg Castle, in October 2008, came upon a
mass of human bones and skeletons. By December, about 470 individuals had been found, none of
whom could be identified. A German organization dedicated to caring for German war graves sent
a representative to attend the digging. By April 2009, the number of dead had climbed to 2000.
When further discoveries were ruled out, the dead totaled 2116: 1001 women, 381 men, 377
children and 357 not identified.
At Marienburg, a pit full of human bones, but "We aren't finding any personal objects, no
glasses, no gold teeth and above all, no clothing," said Zbigniew Sawicki, Malbork
archaeologist.
Other mass graves stemming from World War II have been found around Malbork. In 1996, 178
corpses were discovered on the grounds of Marienberg/Malbork Castle. In 2005, specialists
exhumed the bones of 123 more, including five women and six children, from a trench. All are
believed to be Germans.
In the case of this latest and largest mass grave (2008), no clothing, eye glasses or gold
teeth were found. It thus appears that they were completely stripped before they were killed.
The skeletons that were laying on top had bullet holes in their heads, indicating they may have
dug the grave and put the dead in it before they themselves were added.
The Germans who did survive were forced to leave the city. The relevant authorities in the
newly established Polish district announced proudly on November 3, 1947, that the Marienburg
area was "almost 100 percent purged of Germans." (Spiegel, Jan. 23, 2009, "Death in
Marienburg: Mystery Surrounds Mass Graves in Polish City.)
On August 17, 2009, 108 coffins with the remains of the 2116 victims of war atrocities which
took place in Marienburg in early 1945, were buried elsewhere, at the Volksbund War Memorial
Cemetery near the village of Neumarkt, close to the old Hansa city of Stettin, in former
Pommerania. The highest dignitaries attending were the German ambassador to Poland and bishops
from both nations.
Czechs have not claimed massacres from the war – other than the 173 men of the village
of Lidice, who were executed for harboring the murderers of Reichs Protector for
Bohemia-Moravia, Reinhard Heydrich, as an example to those who would cooperate with the Czech
underground (considered by the Germans as an illegal terrorist organization).
Still, there was great desire to retaliate following the retreat of the German Wehrmacht and
the arrival of the Soviet Red Army and NKVD. Postelberg/Polstoloprty and Saav/Zatec, two towns
northwest of Prague, saw brutal massacres of at least 2,000 Sudeten Germans in the space of a
few days in June 1945.
The largest mass grave contained 500 bodies and had been known since an inquiry into it in
1947. After that, in August 1947, other mass graves were secretly dug up and 763 bodies were
removed and cremated. But there still remained more.
Meanwhile, documents in Postoloprty were classified as confidential and disappeared into
Interior Ministry archives. Today, a majority of Czech residents in these towns admit the
massacre, but do not want to talk about the case and oppose building any memorial structures at
the gravesites. ( Der Spiegel , "Czech
Town Divided over How to Commemorate 1945 Massacre," Hans Ulrich Stoldt, Nov. 4, 2009)
There was also the Bruenn/Brno Death March, which began late on the night of May 30, and the
Aussig/Usti nad Labem Massacre on July 31, 1945–both majority German towns in the same
area of Northwestern Bohemia. Basing their decision on the Potsdam Agreement, the Czech
"National Committee of Brno" announced the expulsion of 20,000 ethnic Germans, mostly women,
children and elderly (the adult men were all POW's), and forced them to march 56 kilometers
south to the border of Austria. Once there, however, the Soviet authorities refused to allow
them to cross, so they were marched back into internment. Many died and are buried along the
way; up to 8000 perished in the terrible conditions before the survivors were released.
The Usti massacre was triggered by an explosion at an ammunition dump. Though the cause of
the explosion had not been determined, ethnic Germans were beaten, bayonetted, shot or drowned
in the Elbe River, where most still remain in their watery grave.
No mass graves of Jews have ever been found on Czech soil.
SLOVENIA: THE KILLING FIELD OF EUROPE
Over 100,000 people fell victim to summary executions on Slovenian soil immediately after
the end of the second world war. These were suspected Nazi collaborators and opponents of
communism – murdered by Tito's Yugoslav federal army or by Slovenian civil authorities
and the Communist secret police, OZNA.
"The killings that took place here have no comparison in Europe. In two months after the
war, more people were killed here than in the four years of war," said Joze Dezman , a
historian who heads the government Commission for Concealed Mass Graves.
A task force of the police and state's prosecutor's office has exhumed 12 mass graves and
filed two criminal complaints, with no indictments so far, according to the Slovenian Press
Agency, March 20, 2008.
A particularly gruesome discovery was the mummified remains of approximately 300 pro-Nazi
soldiers from Croatia and Slovenia in a mining shaft in Huda Jama.
"Gassed to death: 300 lime-covered victims of Yugoslavia's communist regime found in mass
grave," by Graham Gurrin, 3-11-09, Mail Online, UK.
They are thought to have been killed with gas because there are no visible signs of wounds.
Piles of military shoes were found at the entrance. "It seems that the victims had to undress
and take off their shoes before they were killed," said Joze Balazic, of the Institute for
Forensic Medicine in Ljubljana. The bodies were found in an underground passage some 400 meters
from the cave entrance, in good condition because they had been covered in lime and the cave
had been hermetically sealed with several walls of concrete separated by layers of barren soil.
(Javno, 3-4-09, Translation: Karmen Horvat)
Photos: Unclothed skeletons wearing shoes appear to have died in agony in a mass grave in
Huda Jama, Slovenia. Positions indicate there was movement before the victims expired (they
were buried alive). ( photos no longer
available )
THIS IS WHERE THE WAR WAS ENDING
Slovenia was part of the former Yugoslavia. Dezman said, "These killings took place in
Slovenia because this is where the war was ending: this is where the iron curtain was
anticipated, this is where refugees found themselves at the end of the war."
He also says that "due to the short time frame, the number of victims, the method of
execution and their sheer extent, the reprisal killings of suspected Nazi collaborators and
other opponents by Communist authorities in Slovenia could be compared to the biggest crimes of
Communism, as well as Nazism, anywhere." (Slovenian Press Agency, March 20, 2008)
Another historian, university professor Mitja Ferenc , has unearthed more than 570
hidden grave sites from World War II. His digs have cracked a psychological barrier in Slovenia
and sparked new political debate about the sins of that war, wherein thousands of Germans,
Croatians and others on the losing side were killed.
In 1999 he found 1,179 skeletons in a trench near the city of Maribor, where a road by-pass
was being constructed.
[The department of highways pressed to continue the road works, and the (left-wing)
government in Ljubljana ?had no objections, although very likely, thousands of corpses were
still hidden in the trench. Present investigations revealed that there are at least 15,000,
possibly more than 20,000 corpses. The tank trench was suitable for mass killings, it was big
enough to line up pow�s and civilians, shoot them with machine guns and cover the
corpses with earth. Frankfurter Allgemaine, "Slovenia: Massacres after the War," by
Karl-Peter Schwarz, 10-16-06. ]
Slovenian forensic experts investigate the site discovered in 1999 by Slovenian highway
workers near Maribor, where 1,179 skeletons were found in a World War II-era trench. It's
believed up to 20,000 are actually buried along this stretch of roadway.
In 2007 a new dig began nearby in the Tezno Forest – it's believed as many as 15,000
dead lie in this spot of timberland. Military gear indicates they were Croatians and
Germans.
"My point is to find out what's out there. Without excavation, there is no way to
know ," said Ferenc.
BRITISH DECEIT; STILL NO OFFER OF REGRET
The Queen pictured with Yugoslavian president Josip Tito, front left, in 1978 after hosting
him at Buckingham Palace. Behind are Prime Minister Lord Cardiff and Prince Philip. Tito was
supported by the British in the war, and its representatives turned thousands of fleeing
German, Croat, Slovene and Cossack forces back to Tito's partisans in 1945, knowing they would
be killed.
In May 1945, German troops and Croatians were trying to reach Austria in order to surrender
to the British rather than Tito's brutal fighters. Tens of thousands of Slovenes, Serbs,
Cossacks, Romanians and others joined the frantic flight.
Tamara Griesser-Pecar writes in A people divided. Slovenia 1941-1946. Occupation,
Collaboration, Civil War, Revolution (Publisher: Boehlau Verlag, Wien 2003) that all
Yugoslavs of German ethnic background were declared outlawed by the "Anti-Fascist Council of
National Liberation of Yugoslavia" (AVNOJ). Those who survived the horror of the labor camps
were expelled from the country.
She speaks of the 60,000 Croatian soldiers and civilians who were massacred on Slovenian
soil. Thousands vanished, to be found in recent times as skeletons bound at the wrist with
wires. Not all were German sympathizers, but Catholics and other anti-communists fighting what
they considered a civil war.
There were also the 25,000 Cossacks and 2000 Domobranci Slovenians who were part of the
German army retreating in early May to the valleys of Kaernten in southern Austria, where they
surrendered to the British who, promising they were being sent to Italy, forced them into
locked railroad cars that instead went directly to the waiting Soviets in Styria and the Tito
partisans at the Austrian border–certain death at the hands of their enemies.
In the Gottschee Horn (Kocevski Rog), 12,000 Slovenians were murdered. In another pit near
Ljubljana, Croatians and Cossacks had been murdered – German prisoners were forced to
clean out this pit with a "horrible cadaverous smell" and thereafter were murdered
themselves.
Mitja Ferenc said Yugoslavia's communist authorities persistently refused to
acknowledge the executions had taken place and refused to tell relatives where the bodies were
buried. For almost 50 years, people were not allowed to visit the graves. Many of them were
destroyed by deliberate explosions or covered by waste. In some places, such as Celje, about 60
km (35 miles) east of Ljubljana, parts of towns were built on them.
"The evidence is being gathered but the fact is that most evidence has been systematically
destroyed in the past ," Joze Dezman said.
Typifying the ongoing attitude of the communists is 85-year-old Janez Stanovnik, a partisan
fighter as a teenager who held high government positions under communism.
"I'm not proud of what happened in May and June 1945, but I am proud of what the partisans
did during the war," he said. "Is this really something another generation has to pay for
– or see used for political capital?" (Chicago Tribune, "Wartime heroes, sinful
secrets," Christine Spolar, Jan. 29, 2008)
IN UKRAINE, JEWS HUNT FOR BODIES
Sparked by all these discoveries, Jewish groups have undertaken to discover their own mass
graves in the Ukraine and Russia, which they claim to be the "killing fields" of World War
II.
But for all the hundreds of thousands of Jews who are claimed to have been murdered here by
the Nazi Einsatzgruppen, no remains have shown up in any large numbers. [The
Einsatzgruppen were special SS task forces whose job was to protect the German fighting
forces from behind-the-front attacks by the local population and communist partisan
fighters.]
But it is suspicious that little to no excavation is taking place to verify the number of
bodies or to identify whether they are Jews or not, or how they were killed. The search parties
and excavation teams are made up entirely of Jews, without government or neutral parties
involved.
For instance, according to an article at Y-Net News, an Israel-based internet site,
published Sept. 8, 2006, a secret private mission called "Kaddish for Ukraine's Jews," chaired
by Yehuda Meshi Zahav, began looking for mass graves of Jews massacred during the Second World
War. This mission was initiated by the Jewish Congress and French historian/priest Patrick
DesBois (author of Holocaust by Bullets ), with the help and funding of the national
holocaust museums in Paris and Washington D.C.
Around Sept. 1, 2006, this mission uncovered what they say are hundreds of Jewish skeletons
in a Ukrainian forest next to the city of Lvov.
They say they used metal detectors to detect bullets. When the metal detectors went off,
they began digging and, at two meters down, sculls and skeletons began to surface. They say
they counted hundreds and most were children . They say they recovered
German-manufactured bullets marked with the years 1939 and 1941.
This "find" has been widely publicized in world media as a "holocaust" mass grave, yet no
tests have proven the remains to be Jewish, or the perpetrators to be Germans. It is
assumed.
We know the Soviets killed thousands of Ukrainian and Polish anti-communist nationalists
before retreating from this area in 1941. There were also terrible massacres of Poles by
Ukrainians and Ukrainians by Poles before and especially during WWII (over the disputed region
of Volhynia) 1 . After the war, there were fights between Ukrainians and Russians in the
part of Ukraine that Russia got from Poland.
The Kaddish delegation has estimated that 1800 Jews were buried here–even though they
did not excavate and count all the bones. The Ukrainian authorities have agreed to recognize
the area as a Jewish burial site , which means the bones can stay where they are. The Kaddish
delegation performed a religious ceremony and erected a memorial monument in a matter of two
weeks after the announcement of the discovery was made! This kind of haste is usually the mark
of a desire for non-investigation.
JEWS GET CONTROL OF ANOTHER GRAVESITE
Another site that has received a great deal of attention is Gvozdavka, a village in southern
Ukraine, near Odessa, where another group of rabbis insist thousands of Jews are buried. It was
found by chance in the spring of 2007 when workers digging to lay gas pipelines discovered
human bones.
As soon as the bones were discovered, the Jewish community in Odessa requested the
authorities to cease construction work.
Israeli rabbis "help" to excavate a mass grave they claim to have discovered in Ukraine.
(Reuters photo)
According to a story in Haaretz, June 6, 2007, "Mass WWII-era Jewish grave found near
Odessa," Rabbi Abraham Wolf announced that the authorities had also agreed to give the
Jewish community ownership of the land so it could build a monument commemorating the
victims.
Odessa chief rabbi Shlomo Baksht revealed their plans to fence off the site and erect a
monument to the victims that same year!
In a follow-up story 8 days later in Haaretz (June 14, 2007, "Israeli Rabbis help excavate Holocaust-era
mass grave" , it's reported that a dozen rabbis were on the scene – 3 of whom were
Holocaust scholars from Israel, others from the U.S. – and "spent several hours hunting
for bones, which they immediately shoveled back into the ground."
In the follow up article, it's reported that Vera Kryzhanivska, who heads the village
council, said it would soon discuss a request to hand over control of the meadow to Jewish
groups.
Some Jewish community leaders complained that villagers didn't show enough respect for the
dead. "How could people just walk past the grave and do nothing?" said Ilia Levitas, the head
of Ukraine's Jewish Council. "Where is their Christian mercy?"
* * *
Since these two finds in 2006 and 2007, there have been no more claims of mass graves of
Jews. As we know, there are no substantial remains of either bodies or ashes discovered at the
concentration camp sites of Treblinka, Belzec, Sorbibor, Chelmo or Auschwitz-Birkenau, all in
Poland. The killing-by-bullets of Jews that supposedly took place in the Ukraine is not showing
up in any new mass graves, even though Father Patrick DesBois continues to search. He finds a
few bodies here and there.
What are we to think? When it comes to Germans and their allies massacred and thrown into
pits, we have masses of evidence compiled by official government agencies, even when they are
resistant to do so. When it comes to Poles, Ukrainians and other Slavic ethnic groups, we don't
find them buried in mass graves by the Nazis. When it comes to Jews, we have only the word of
Jewish delegations that thousands of Jews are buried in mass graves that they refuse to
excavate.
As Mitja Ferenc, the Slovenian history professor, remarked of his own discoveries: "Without
excavation, there is no way to know."~
1) "The Soviets, having enlarged Soviet Ukraine to the west, deported tens of thousands of
the Volhynian elites, mostly Poles, to Siberia and Kazakhstan. These actions ceased only when
the Germans invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941." And "The 1943 decision of Ukrainian
nationalists to cleanse (Volhynian Poles) was [ ] based upon news of the Soviet victory at
Stalingrad" (with the expectation of the end of German occupation). "Ukrainian partisans killed
about fifty thousand Volhynian Poles and forced tens of thousands more to flee in 1943." Later
the Poles turned the tables on the Ukrainians. (From "The Causes of Ukrainian-Polish Ethnic
Cleansing 1943," Timothy Snyder, Yale University, 2003)
– A classic example of what Carolyn Yeager writes about, here's all that was found
at Sobibor, where 250,000 Jew remains are said to exist. Of these there is no proof of even
the age of the skeletons, whether they were even Jews, whether they were even murdered. Yep,
the "holocaust" narrative is that bogus.
– Sobibor, mass grave where 250,000 Jew remains are said to exist
Lack of evidence is not the evidence of absence. Lack of Jewish mass graves which nobody is
really looking for because it is not really permitted, ostensively for religion reasons, can
not give the answer to the missing Jews providing that there is such a question. Jews are
missing only in the Holocaust deniers' minds. Normal people will agree that the official
number of 6,000,000 is might be too high and that rather three to four million Jews died
during WWII and they are not missing because they are dead.
Mystery of the Missing Americans
There are 2.6M deaths per year in the US. 50% (1.3M) are cremated. 1/3 of ashes are
buried at cemeteries, 1/3 are kept at home and 1/3 are scattered. This means that every
year in the US ashes of 430k people are scattered into environment. The 1/3 kept at homes
will be scattered into the environment sooner or later so the number of scattered ashes
will be circa 800k per year. In 5 years it is 4M people. In 20 years it 16M people. In 40
years it is 32M people.
In last 40 years 32M people vanished w/o a trace. How would you go about proving it to
Holocaust deniers that 32M people in American died and that they were not teleported to
Venus? There are no graves. No exhumations. Nobody even try to find the answer. Wally of
CODOH would not accept any documentation because he would claim it was forged. He would not
accept any witness statement because he would claim that all so-called witnesses lie. The
claim that 32M Americans in last 40 years died and were cremated can't be proven. Wally
must be right that 32M of Americans were teleported to Venus.
Furthermore, can you imagine the absurdity of cremations? The conspirators want us to
believe that they cremate the corpses while charging for shaving the corpses and applying
make up and dressing them up in their Sunday's best. Why would they do it if they allegedly
cremate the bodies and plan to throw away the ashes? That does not make sense. For some
reason they want them bodies to look good on Venus.
Otoh the question of missing Germans or the question of atrocities committed against
Germans can be
tackled by searching mass graves. There is no prohibition against excavating of non Jewish
graves. For example why nobody tried to confirm James Bacque's hypothesis by searching sites
of Eisenhower's POW camps in Germany? If one million or more died there, the graves should be
easy to find. Say, 1,000 graves with 1,000 bodies each. Find at least one.
The Jews have a long Talmudic tradition of lying victimhood.
Consider the typically ridiculous self-reports of victimhood in tractate Gittin 57b of the
Torah, the 4 BILLION (yes, BILLION) Jews killed by the Romans [Gittin 57b claims
Vespasian killed "four hundred thousand myriads" = 400,000 x 10,000 = 4 BILLION] and the
64 MILLION Jewish children skewered and burned in scrolls by the Romans in one city
alone [Gittin 58a claims "400 synagogues" each with "400 teachers" and "400 pupils" for each
teacher" = 400 x 400 x 400 = 64 million]. http://www.halakhah.com/gittin/gittin_57.html#PARTb
http://www.halakhah.com/gittin/gittin_58.html
Truly as Jesus said, children of the Father of Lies and Murder. John 8:44
This article seems eerily similar to Gunnar Heinsohn's revision of 1st millennium history
based on stratigraphy – no layers for a historical period of civilization, then that
history is false or fake. 700 phantom years are missing and the collapse of the Roman period
seems to thus have occurred circa 930 AD, and not 700 years before.
Given the sensitivity of the topic in this article, I limit comment to the idea that
proscriptive dogma is invariably used to bury facts and to keep them buried. Whether
proscriptive dogma is used in ignorance based on false beliefs, or is official policy remains
moot. But propaganda 101 is to always accuse your opponents of your own crimes.
"Juedische Allgemeine": the destruction of Poles as a nation was never planned
https://www.dw.com/pl/juedische-allgemeine-zagłada-polaków-jako-narodu-nigdy-nie-była-planowana/a-50041291
Lesser cites numbers given by historians Feliks Tych and Mateusz Gniazdowski, according to
which in the occupied territories Germans murdered over 90 percent of Polish Jews and from
five to seven percent of ethnic Poles. "In absolute numbers, they were three million Jews
and about 1.4 million ethnic Poles," he writes. In 1947, at the behest of Jakub Berman, a
member of the PZPR Central Committee Political Bureau, the number of victims "was
arbitrarily rounded to 6 million or 22 percent of the pre-war population. The idea was that
Polish Christians would not feel discriminated against as victims of Polish Jews. Berman
also hoped that this operation would stop the venomous anti-Semitism in the country,
"writes the author.
There are many geographical inaccuracies in this article – eg the author thinks that
Bruenn is near Aussig. They seem to have a very sketchy understanding of the ethnic fabric of
Eastern Europe both before and after WWII and I would therefore caution anyone to accept
their findings or conclusions.
"When it comes to Jews, we have only the word of Jewish delegations that thousands of Jews
are buried in mass graves that they refuse to excavate."
Well, story telling and theatrical exaggeration seems to be in their blood, especially the
latter.
It's even commemorated in a song about their most important empire, Hollywood:
"Hooray for Hollywood! Where you're 'terrific' if you're even good . "
Take the exaggerations with a grain (or truckload) of salt, and let's all just pray the
horrors visited upon the hapless Europeans (and everyone else) during WW2 are never
repeated
The War on Knowledge , Truth and Common Sense will go on until the honest researchers get
finished with their work. But the Enemies, that wish No sharing of knowledge, truth etc. are
many and work very hard at spreading the lies and cover-ups. If the bullets found in these
trenches are known to be German made ,plus the date of origin, then maybe we could be told
what Pharma company supplied the gaz for all the other proclaimed deaths – the dates
and where the chemicals were produced , would be appreciated – also. I thought it was a
very good article.
If it were correct that 3 million Polish Catholics were murdered, as the Catalyst journal
states, one must have found in Poland about 750 mass gravesites of the same size during the
past 65 years (3,000,000 divided by 4000=750), each with circa 4000 dead. Or 1500 mass
gravesites, each with 2000 corpses.
It is not known if even one of those mass gravesites has been found
At the end of 1944, the Germans, obliterating the crime, burned most of the corpses
. In the Szpęgawski Forest, as many as 7,000 people could have died, approximately 2400
names were established. In the cemetery there are 32 mass graves in one complex and 7 graves
500-1000 m away.
Slightly off topic,but also interesting:After the war,13.3 million Germans were deported from
Poland,Chekoslovakia and Hungary,but only 7.3 million actually arrived in Germany,mostly
women,children and old people.6 million Germans had disappeared.Many of those were sent to
Russia for forced labour.
-first post-war German chancellor Konrad Adenauer in a speech in Bern,Switzerland,March
23,1949.
This has to be one of the most risible, amateurish rubbish masquerading as Holocaust
revisionism.
The title says -Some Answers to the Mystery of the "Missing Jews" – and whoa
3/4″s of the article is about post WW2 Communist atrocities, did you think that the
Stalin & Beria combine would spare anybody associated with the Nazis when they swept East
Europe? And the most Hilarious bit is that this dogs puke of an article completely ignores
the AR camps, how can you give answers about the missing Jews while ignoring the AR
camps.
Listen if you can't answer about what happened to those 'Missing Jews' of the AR camps
kindly shut up.
Shame on you Ron for publishing such amateur Rubbish here, if you want to go full
Revisionist publish Carlo Mattogno or Rudolf or some professional.
"Jewish groups have undertaken to discover their own mass graves in the Ukraine and
Russia, which they claim to be the "killing fields" of World War II."
What they're digging up is probably the remains of the millions of Ukrainians the
Bolshevik Jews murdered through forced famine in 1932 and the millions of Russian Christians
they slaughtered starting in 1917. Historical irony indeed.
There is no definitive history. More will come to light as research continues, or should I
say as long as it is allowed to continue?
In other words, Nazis were actually a good guys, while Soviet, Yugoslav communists were the
villains?You are counting Poles, Jews and Checks, while forgetting to count all the others,
like Gypsies, Russians, Serbs and other Slavs?
What an extraordinary article. Why are these facts not generally known? Yes, I am joking.
History is of course always written by the victors. And the Jews always seem to win
I don't understand why Jewish groups and their rabbis were given control of two mass grave
sites. Did the civil authorities conspire with the Jews to pretend the bodies were of Jews?
Or did the civil authorities know that if bodies were found when laying a pipeline that
they were certainly Jewish bodies?
Although mass graves of non-Jews were known to have been in those regions?
If skeletons are found I guess it's hard by examining them to know they were Jews. But why
was it assumed that they were?
And when the Jews wanted the pipeline work stopped, I suppose it would have stopped simply
because there were bodies there, whether Jewish or not.
I may have failed to understand the article. Or perhaps it omits relevant information.
Furthermore, can you imagine the absurdity of cremations?
Indeed, you had better struggle mightily, because in the year 2020 we have learned that
all of the crematories in Italy combined were unable to dispose of more than a few hundred
bodies per week. Struggle!
@Wally
Here's a suggestion; if you like poetry and read German, try Gertrud Kolmar. If you like
opera. read about Ottilie Metzger-Lattermann (one of the Kaiser's favorite singers). If you
like classical music, follow the career of Viktor Ullmann. Just these three for a start so
you can find out how peacefully they died. However, I have a strong feeling you would prefer
to deal in millions (or the lack of) instead of individual fates.
But let's see, how many Germans died at the Dresden bombings? None, because we can't find
their graves to count? The first victim of war is truth, numbers are almost always wrong or
difficult to estimate. Propaganda from one side is no different than propaganda for the other
side.
Thank you for this information. It is astonishing how much people aren't allowed to know.
Mass graves of Germans murdered by the communists, and many tens of thousands of Slovenians,
Croats and others who fought the communists. But socialist school teachers in Europe harp
endlessly about "gassed Jews".
Jews get control of found graves and immediately erect fences and memorials, without
excavation, declaring them Jews. "Proof that Jews were killed!" No mass graves of Jews ever
found at any of the concentration camps. The "einsatzgruppen" have been blamed for killing
Jews – of course the Jews hated them, as they were the ones tasked with beating down
communist attacks on German forces behind the front army.
Unz Review should concentrate on these factual stories, rather than Marxist fantasies by
people like "Eric Striker," who claims that "the Soviet Union would have worked if it had
been Germans instead of Slavs," and constantly makes excuses for socialists while making sure
you concentrate your anger about Black riots on conservatives. Unz Review should clean the
ranks.
@Reger
This article (like the comment section) is full of retarded trash. The Holocaust happened,
and the number of brutally murdered people has likely been officially under estimated,
and the only people denying the Holocaust are those with a serious learning disability and
poor attention span. I also suspect many of the people in the comment section (such as
GeeBee) are coping Jewish individuals.
Not just the missing jewish remains – misleading and skewing.
There is another nasty double standard re the victims of the well known German and other nazi
aligned Labour (concentration) camps.
How many on here have heard of Jasenovac?
It was a death camp – a real death camp.
So vile even the gestapo were sickened.
It was a Nazi Croatian mass murder camp where hundreds of thousands of allied Serbs, gypsies
and others died, suffering appalling torture and murder.
The Serbs – who NATO/US/UK mass murdered and bombed back to the stonage some 25 years
ago – died valiantly and like flies – tying up whole divisions of the
Germans.
In gratitude and on behalf of the islamic fundamentalist Saudi leaning KLA we repaid this
debt illegally attacked the Serbs – the only ethnic cleansing being some 700,000 Serb
refugees driven from their ancestral homes in the Krajina (20,000 more murdered because they
couldn't leave fast enough), over a quarter of a million of them out of their ancestral
homeland of Kosovo and many from Bosnia and other parts.
700,000 who lost it all.
Reparations due I think.
All illegal and to give radical islam a base in Southern Europe and build a massive USA base
– Camp Bondsteel.
Back to Jasenovac .
This was the most deadly and brutal camp of all.
Heard of it.
NO.
Few Jrewish victims so written out of history.
Just as have been the millions of non jews killed in the other camps.
The disabled etc – many catholics.
All written out as only Jews can be the victims.
Here are just a few of the links to Jasenovac.
And ask yourself why the silence on the suffering of the Serbians – huge numbers dying
fighting for we the allies – not as some groups, not fighting at all but
profiteering. https://jasenovac.org/what-was-jasenovac/
https://www.neweurope.eu/article/jasenovac-the-forgotten-extermination-camp-of-the-balkans/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0252563/
So why the silence – only one holocaust allowed?.
And Serbs are not members of that club.
And how many know that the Serbs have been completely vindicated and Milosevic declared an
innocent man of war crimes .
Murdered non the less in his prison http://johnpilger.com/articles/provoking-nuclear-war-by-media
One is the last communist head of state for Poland from 1985-90, Wojciech Jaruzelski.
Speaking to a journalist of Izvestia (Russian daily newspaper), he said, rather
tongue-in-cheek, that he cannot understand how the Polish population exploded between 1946
and 1970, and then leveled off to become stagnant from 1990 till today. He humorously
remarked that there had to have been "a strong aphrodisiac" to lead to the birth of millions
of new Poles because "in the grocery stores there had been only vinegar and millions had died
even after the war."
What the late General is referring to is the common trope that during communism (actually
socialism but I will leave that for another time) there was only 'musztarda i ocet' that is
mustard and vinegar on store shelves. It was a common accusation against the system as a
whole and Jaruzelski personally since he was an important part of the said system. On more
than one occasion he defended himself and his times by pointing out – sometimes in a
tongue-in -cheek fashion as in the quoted citation – that it could have not been so bad
if Poland's population growth is anything to go by (he sometimes pointed out other advances
but again I do not want to side-track here) as Poland indeed experienced a demographic
explosion. Of course this resulted in many problems, for example despite a program of massive
apartment block building – in virtually every Polish city and town you will see rows
and rows of such apartment blocks standing – there was a chronic housing shortage.
Thus with citing Gen. Jaruzelski's remarks in the context of Polish and Jewish victims of
German atrocities Ms. Yeager and her sidekick managed to make it to the very top of Unz
review's comic relief category. My sincere congratulations.
That was the funny part and here comes the more serious one.
Namely Ms. Yeager and her sidekick were kind enough to write: 'The only known mass grave
of Poles was the work of the Soviet Red Army, led by the NKVD, in the Katyn Forest in Soviet
Russia.'
Let me just point out, that mass graves with Polish victims of German mass executions were
located among other places at:
Palimiry, Las Sękocinski, Las kabacki, Laski and many, many others locations such as
for example Ponary (outside of Poland's post WW II borders in present-day Lithuania).
I do not know if Ms. Yeager and her sidekick are that ignorant in regard to the topic they
write about or if they deliberately lie, or alternatively there is some other explanation
– that however is of secondary importance. What is of primary importance is that what
they wrote is not factually correct.
One could go on dissecting Ms. Yeager's and her sidekick's writings however I have better
things to do on Sunday. Yet the above should suffice to put parts of their 'work' into the
category of comedies while others into that of falsities* – that in turn weighs heavily
on what to make of the rest.
*With one caveat though: hundreds of years of Drang nach Osten were indeed reversed in a
very short time at the end of WW II, sometimes in a brutal way. Thus there IS some truth in
what Ms. Yeager and her sidekick produced, this being in the category of an exception which
confirms the rule in regard to the rest.
@JohnPlywood
What is a 'coping Jewish individual' exactly? You are of course at liberty to suspect me of
being anything you like. But none of your suspecting will ever change me from being anything
other than a proud, thoroughbred Yorkshire Anglo-Saxon, who can trace both parents' lines
back for centuries with no trace of anything outside of our own fine, yeoman, Anglo-Saxon
bloodline.
My admittedly unusual 'take' on twentieth-century history arose from making a closer study
of it than I had hitherto stirred myself so to do, in the wake of having been obliged to take
early retirement at a convenient moment, in that it coincided with the appearance of much
hitherto unavailable information thanks to the burgeoning internet era. My prior studies had
by no means been trivial: I had taken modules in both War Studies and International Affairs
to degree standard while at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst.
At all events, I believe my current position to reflect a good deal more of the truth than
is contained in the 'official' history, and I can assure you that my epiphany in this regard
occasioned me the very keenest mental anguish at first. Not to put too fine a point on it, I
found my life-long beliefs turned upside down. Not at all a welcome development, but one that
intellectual honesty compelled me to accept.
@Ann Nonny
Mouse Don't be so cynical. Because the Jews acting collectively have never and can never
do anything wrong, it follows that any criticism of their collective behavior anywhere and at
any time, whether today or throughout history, is hate speech.
We also know from Freudian science that it arises from envy and that paranoid
guilt-projection plays no part in their condemnation of the Other. Laws to that effect
throughout Europe also provide scientific evidence that Jews never lie and, therefore, their
narratives of events taking place outside the laws of nature and not subject to rules of
logic or scientific method must be true.
So, Mr. Holocaust doubter, just maybe the rabbis, reaching into the pits, have discovered
miraculously intact passports, photos, and birth certificates as before, using the forensic
skills their agents displayed in the ashes of the Trade Center and Pentagon to locate paper
miraculously immune from fire, water, and the forces of explosion sufficient to render
concrete into dust.
And when the Jews wanted the pipeline work stopped, I suppose it would have stopped
simply because there were bodies there, whether Jewish or not.
I may have failed to understand the article. Or perhaps it omits relevant
information.
The omitted info is the following:
Ukraine is a US/Israel controlled nation since 2014.
Nuland's, a Jewish Zionist, world famous battle cry begin the Zionist coup and Zio rule of
Ukraine with these infamous words "F–k the EU."Poroshenko the first president of this
Zion colony was half Jewish.The second president Zelensky is Jewish.The Zionists in control
of this US/Israel colony are even afraid Shabbos Goy to take the presidency of their new
colony.
@HammerJack
It is true that India cremates millions per year, that is their tradition. However to attend
a Hindu cremation and to observe, really observe the logistics required to burn ONE body is
to realize the impossibility of German logistics to effectively do away with 6 million in
addition to fighting a war against multiple opponents.
One need not have a Doctorate in Maths. Just pick a modern City with 3 million
inhabitants, visit it and drive around it extensively and now imagine you will completely
decimate TWO (2) cities like it by killing and burning every single human being in them. The
infrastructure, transportation, human resources and material logistics required for such a
task are horrendous. At the same time you are fighting a major war against several nations, 2
with with almost unlimited manpower and industrial capacity. Toward the end of the war
Germany was fighting on 3 fronts, being bombed to smithereens and also battling partisans in
several countries AND also running their extermination program ??
It is one thing for 6 million families in India to cremate 6 million relatives. I find it
hard to believe that the staff in all the concentration camps would be up to this numerical
task AND make the bones and ashes of 6 million disappear completely.
I love a good ghost story but my powers of belief have their limit.
During my visit in August I myself observed the burning of bodies in a mass grave near
Kiev. This grave was about 55 m. long, 3 m. wide and 2½ m. deep. After the top had
been removed the bodies were covered with inflammable material and ignited. It took about
two days until the grave burned down to the bottom. I myself observed that the fire had
glowed down to the bottom. After that the grave was filled in and the traces were now
practically obliterated.
I just don't know where to start. Whole "article" is such a BS. OK, let's start from
beginning then:
Two responsible figures have recently and publicly added their voices to the question of
six million Poles murdered (ostensibly by Nazis) between 1939 and 1945.
"One is the last communist head of state for Poland from 1985-90, Wojciech Jaruzelski (
)"
LOL.
General Wojciech Jaruzelski. Head of military junta that took over power from Party in
1982, responsible for murdering dozens of people. Cold blood mass murderer, aparatchik, liar
and Soviet hardliner. Such a perfect "responsible figure"! And delicious cherry on top
– he most likely was "wtornik" too (it's margin note, I can explain meaning of this
term and whole story but only if somebody will be genuinly interested). During inteview with
Soviet, communist, cenzored newspaper. Said something. Wow! Groundbreaking news. Let's
rewrite all history books.
The other is Dr. Otwald Mueller, a well-known German researcher.
Right
Let's check this "researcher".
"Die Welt (German newspaper "The World"), September 2, 2009: "beginning of WW II, 6
million victims in Poland, half of them Jews ."
2) Daily Gazette (Schenectady, N.Y.), September 2, 2009: " .Poland alone lost 6 million
citizens, half of them Jews" ( )
An important chart
There exists an important Polish population chart. It marks a pre-war Polish population of
29.89 million people, and for the year 1946 a population of 23.6 million."
SO HE IS WELL-KNOWN GERMAN RESERCHER?
And his scientic research regarding even basic facts are based on bloody TABLOIDS? GERMAN
TABLOIDS? And he can not even "research" population chart for Poland?
ROTFL is not enough.
Are you mocking and insulting all Poles and Polish citizens who died during WWII? Or
perhaps all world's scientists and reserchers including half-baked and fully stoned first
year history course students? Do you think all your readers are complete idiots?
Facts: Republic of Poland population in 1938: Roughly 35 millions. NOT 29.89 millions. 35
MILLIONS.
Here any kind of discussion ends. I kindly ask all readers to check that one fact
yourself. Find Poland population before WWII. Got it? Now ask yourself: do you like to be
fooled like that? This "well-known German reasercher" (and Carolyn Yeager and Wilhelm
Kriessmann who published such a BS) lied to you about most basic fact. Cause they think that
you are absolute idiots. Are you?
Anyway. Just for fun let's verify very next "fact":
"There exists an important Polish population chart. It marks a pre-war Polish population
of 29.89 million people, and for the year 1946 a population of 23.6 million. The difference
is of approximately 6 million, or 21% of the total population. The chart seems to prove the
statement of "6 million" but, on the contrary, it contradicts it."
"and for the year 1946 a population of 23.6 million".
True.
"The difference is of approximately 6 million, or 21% of the total population."
The difference is approx. 11 MILLIONS, or 33% of the total population.
And yes. It was that bad. One third of total population lost (notice: LOST! Not all died.
Some publications did indicate that 6 millions died, it could be one of the reasons for
possible confusion regarding subject, among others)
Source: As for official count and confirmation of data I recommend Nuremberg Trials
protocols and final statements. It's all there. Again – if you are interested find
exact relevant data yourself, source provided.
"That shows in a significant way how Polish history – better Polish fairy tales
– works."
Yes. I do understand Otwald Mueller is absolutely hideous, abhorrent and disgusting
person.
Not only liar, not only completely fake "researcher" and real Nazi comforter and backer but
absolutely disgusting character too. No doubt about it. Still it's always good to know the
true, whatever it is.
Let's "reserch" just next fact. That will be simply very next sentence.
"We must keep in mind that 31% of Poland's population was of non-Polish origin one million
were German, as you can see from names of cities like Stettin, Gruenberg and Breslau."
We have to, we really have to keep in mind Otwald Muller is not only hideous person, liar
and fake researcher but also complete idiot. We are talking absolute moron who is willing to
lie about most basic facts, even when simpliest fact checking will expose him as a complete
fraud.
Now, I do not know exact ethnic population of Poland in given time. I can easily check it
but there is no point. Let's assume it was 31% of non-Polish, just for the sake of argument.
And let's assume 1 million were Germans.
"as you can see from names of cities like Stettin, Gruenberg and Breslau"
German science at it finest.
1. STETTIN is GERMANIZED name for Polish name SZCZECIN, not the other way around.
2. Same story with Wroclaw (for short period of time known as Breslau).
Exposing this german moron (and those behind him) is like kicking a puppy. I am sure he is
true vile character, he has very worst intentions for real victims of WWII and he is doing
his best to cover German crimes of WWII.
Still exposing him does fell like kicking a puppy.
And I am not going to waste more time exposing more of this BS "letter" and BS "article
anyway. Not unless somebody will be genuinly interested.
So one final note regarding lol very german cities of Stettin and Breslau:
My English isn't fluent so I explain it in simplest way I can. Szczecin is a name for
settlement built/established by Slavs (Wkrzanie) in VII century. It is old city and old name.
Yes, most of city dwellers were Germans from like XVI century to 1945. No it's not because
this city was build by Germans. It was taken by Germans (not Germany, it was Hanza, lol, it's
a long story, to cut it short – let's say Germans) centuries after it rose and they
changed name only a bit, to make it easier to pronounce. Germans don't do SZ and CZ
diphthtongs hence Stettin. It is as easy and simple.
BTW there is so much more to the story of Szczecin. Like city coat of arms ("Gryf" or
"Gryfin", eng. Griffin) and the fact even when citizens were mostly Germans, for 500 years
rulers where "Gryfici" native Poles of House of Griffin. Very old and noble family. House of
Griffin ended in XVII century, natural causes.
Breslau. It's even funnier. Again. Breslau is germanized name for Polish city.
And again. Fascinating story but let's keep it short. First settlement then town, then
city. Slavs, Poles, Poles. One of most important Polish cities. First name recorded?
Vuartizlau. 1133. In Thietmar's Chronicle.
Now if you are not familiar with Thietmar then just a brief: Thietmar of Merseburg,
German, bishop, historician. Kudos to him for good effort in writing down city name as
similar to way it was spoken as posssible. Vuartizlau gives a lot of hints regarding, well,
many things.
Serbian ideology is chock full of lies. For instance, lunatic Serbian ideologues
(Milojević, Lukin Lazić, Pjanić Luković, Deretić), from the 1870s to
the 2010s, have claimed that:
* Mesopotamians are actually Serbs
* Siberia got the name from Serbs (S-b-r..well, it's like S-r-b)
* half (at least) of Egyptian pharaohs & Roman emperors were Serbs
* Jesus was a Serb
* Homer, Aristotle etc. wrote in Serbian
* all Slavs are actually Serbs, as well Germans etc.
* all ancient civilizations, except yellow races (Egypt, Mesopotamia, India, Rome, Greece,..)
were Serbian
* etc. etc.
As far as WW II is considered, official censuses from 1931. (the last census in Royalist
Yugoslavia) and from 1948. (the first in Communist Yugoslavia) show that there are c. 700,000
more Serbs in all of Yugoslavia- and 3,500-14,000 less Croats, despite annexation of Croatian
areas formerly held by Fascist Italy (Istria, Rijeka, 5 islands with exclusively Croatian
population).
So, Serbs who are supposedly the greatest victims in ex-Yu WW II show a growth in absolute
numbers by 700,000 & Croats who are supposedly perpetrators, or lesser victims- are
diminished in absolute numbers by 14,000 (despite adding a significant Croatian-only
territory)?
The whole Yugoslav & Serbian narrative about WW II is one big, fat lie.
@Ann Nonny
MouseI don't understand why Jewish groups and their rabbis were given control of two
mass grave sites. Did the civil authorities conspire with the Jews to pretend the bodies were
of Jews?
Ukraine has a Jewish president and a Jewish prime minister. The current regime was
installed following a coup organised by their Jewish cousins in the USA. Fewer than 1% of the
population is Jewish – but this is a democratic government after all.
Politicians and journalists who don't toe the line are shot. The victims never seem to be
Jewish. Here is the latest one only a few weeks ago – May 22. I doubt if it made the
MSM anywhere.
@padre
Anyone who ever fought in a war will tell you there are no good guys, no side is right while
the other is wrong. All war is atrocity on both sides sometimes deliberate sometimes just
sheer revenge. To experience the reality of a battlefield, before, during and after is to try
to survive under the most terrible conditions physically and emotionally intact.
As I tell any young man who would lend me an ear. There is no glory and honour in war.
These are words the politicians use to provoke youth to wash their dirty laundry while they
chill in nice comfortable and safe homes licking up the finest wines and foods. The youth get
to eat any cheap shit they feed you, in a hole, with assorted vermin, without a bath or
change of clothes for at times several days, most times defecating and peeing in your pants
from necessity or sheer terror. Why nourish and nurture a man who may have a life expectancy
of a few hours ?
I dont look at war movies. They are all bullshit. I passed the TV once when my son was
looking at one such movie. The actors all look so clean and well groomed. An artillery shell
landed and some of them somersaulted as if they had bounced on a trampoline and then landed
all intact. That is Hollywood! The reality ? When a heavy shell lands among men they
disappear. You might find a leg with the boot still attached. A discerning person may say
"Yeah, that is Billy's leg. I remember because the boot had such and such a mark carved on
it". But the rest of Billy is nowhere to be found. Its called "Missing in Action"
During and after a war, civilians may wax about humanity, peace and love and goodwill to
all men, who was good and who were the criminal types but those classifications do not exist
on a battlefield or in a war. Even God is nowhere in sight, what would he be doing there
anyway ?
And if God has made himself scarce who or what is good and who and what is bad ?
Jews are missing only in the Holocaust deniers' minds.
Were there ever two better lines written to illustrate the hate that Jews have for
non-Jews and the disrespect that Jews have for the minds of non-Jews?
"Keep searching goy, lack of evidence that you are a murderer does not mean that you are
not"
"Lack of hard evidence of your crimes and our victimhood is only lack of evidence in your
mind".
What a lunatic.
Completely representative of your people.
Wonder no longer why you people draw so much animosity.
Normal people will agree that the official number of 6,000,000 is might be too high and
that rather three to four million Jews died during WWII and they are not missing because
they are dead.
"Normal people will agree"
Who is this, a member of the special needs Hasbara team? Using condescending rhetoric that
is so rudimentary and ineffective that it is given to the short bus participants to make
noise? Is today also the field trip to the yeshiva, where you will read from the torah like a
real Jewish boy?
No one "normal" would agree with your any of your self-interested logic after reading the
lines that I prior highlighted. In fact, "normal people" would reflexively investigate the
opposite position.
In fact, "normal" people would and do discount the entire story after it came out, as
admitted by Jews themselves, that Simon Wiesenthal invented the additional 5 million
non-Jewish dead for sympathy. And that lie was put forward as true for decades.
You people don't lose "part credit" or "part credibility" for that lie. You lose it all.
And that's before we get to the rest of the proof against Holocaust logic.
You are inveterate liars, mass murderers, willing oppressors, and thieves.
Even when Jews LIE it is only to bring joy into the world. Take one Herman Rosenblat who
wrote, "Angel At The Fence," describing his time in a concentration camp during WWII. Good
ole Herman was making the talk show circuit with his book and there were plans for a movie,
UNTIL, it was found out that good ole Herman Rosenblat had made the whole story up, it was a
LIE. The nice Jewish boy, Herman, had Doprah Pigfrey calling his book the greatest love story
of all time. teehee. When caught in a LIE, Herman said he was only guilty of trying to bring
joy into the world.
Jews are such a caring people. Jews are champions of human rights for everyone and they
always seem to take joy in their role as their brother's keeper. Here was a Jewish man who
did not seek fame nor money, no sir, his concern was bringing joy into the world through a
book. Jews can teach humanity so much. Jews have suffered so much. And don't let Jewish
power, money, and influence fool you, or their role in the pornography business or other
seedy occupations, Jews are people of the Book, and the pillars of the community. Jews have
championed the fight against White racism and civil rights for Blacks, they are tireless
workers for truth, justice and the American Way just like Superman. Go Jews.
Fallacious. Taurus excretus cerebus perplexus – and we all know which party
throws most of the BS in the perverse hope of obfuscation – they just can't help
themselves. Then see 33.Anonymous[506]. rgds
Keep in mind how many tons is 1,00,000 people. If the average weight of 1,000,000 people was
135 pounds then the total weight of that 1 million is 135,000,000 lbs. Divide that by the
number of pounds in 1 ton which is 2,000lbs and you get 67,500 tons of human remains. Now how
the hell do you hide that much human remains of one million people much less 6 million.
@utu
Always remember that the other pertinent truth is that the Jews were guilty of everything
that the Germans accused them of.
As is well-evidenced by what Jews support, control, and how they otherwise act as a
political group today.
The Jews are no different than Al Qaeda. They merely work to hurt outsiders with lies
about their identities and motivations, their control of the press, their influence on the
culture, and their perfidious political actions once embedded in governments. Instead of with
literal IEDs.
Jewish goals are parallel to the goals of Al Qaeda, with much better results.
That the Jewish and Islamic religions share virtually all of their theological DNA is not
a coincidence.
@GeeBee
True that jews always seem to win but the fact is they cant lose one major war or they are
done forever. Israel cant lose one war or she is done. Arabs can lose 10 wars and the come
back for another one someday. If Hitler would have won jews would have been done.
@Ann Nonny
Mouse I know the place they are discussing and you have to remember Odecca has always
been a heavy Jewish city. But only when it suits their best interests. In this case –
getting more free land and calling out the Orthodox folks . Even goes back to the Khazarian/
Pecheneg times, when they chose to be Jews because the Ottomans in the south and the Rooskies
in the north were pressing them to be either Islamic or Orthodox. Of course they chose the "
chosen ones religion" for their slave trade and usury / theft trade. The normal
Russians/Crimeans that I know that are jews are way cool folks – they even have family
is Israel but no big ego. Just normal Russians.
@utu In
justice, absence of evidence is absence of evidence and has been for thosand of years
everywhere, except for ancient Egypt . If you cannot provide evidence, the accused is
innocent. This is called presumption of innocence.
Very good thinking that adds up to nothing more than:
The original statement is that "absence of proof is not proof of absence," which simply
means that a lack of proof for something doesn't, in and of itself, prove that the thing is
false. But lack of evidence for something is most definitely evidence that the thing in
question may be false, especially when there should be evidence for that thing.
But beyond the silly proof you offer that the absence of evidence is proof of presence,
the answer to your question about how one would prove that those whose ashes disappeared had
really died is easily answered by death certificates, cremation records, and evidence of
funerals or memorial services that were held, and announcement about the death of the
deceased.
But even your notion that the ashes of the holocaust victims would have been as scattered
as would be the case of cremated remains scattered throughout the United Statges by relatives
is absurd with rerspect to holocaust victims who were all allegedly killed in very confined
geographic spaces and whose ashes the Germans certainly did not bother to scatter throughout
Europe to hide them as your example of relatives scattering the ashes of relatives throughout
the country would have them do.
That you would even provide this example to substantiate the holocauset reveals the
absurdity of your claiming it happened as claimed. Had it happened on the scale claimed,
there would be massive evidence of it just as the examples provided in the article about the
mass graves of real victims that have been found.
Indeed, given the millions killed in the fighting on the Eastern Front there should be
endless examples of mass graves first of the millions of Russians killed during the German
advance the Germans almost certainly buried in mass graves as the Russians did likewise of
the Germans killed during the Russian advance.
So where is the evidence?
An easy place to look as Babi Yar where 30,000 Jews were reportedly murdered in a very
specific site. Why has no one looked to prove it with the evidence of the bodies?
@utu
– You really should know what you're talking about before you speak. Remember, it is your "Holocaust Industry" which claims that such immense human grave sites
exist in known locations, not Revisionsts.
– Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the laughable
'holocaust' storyline is the message.
– The millions of other deaths you cite are not based upon the ridiculous
"holocaust" claims of enormous numbers of people dying in highly centralized locations in
which, again, the locations are supposedly known.
– As for military deaths, I remind that that there are cemeteries all over
Europe.
– There have been many, many attempts to find the alleged huge mass graves in
which many millions have been supposedly dumped. Those attempts failed miserably, as I
demonstrated about Sobibor in the first comment in this thread.
@Reger You
say "many geographical inaccuracies in this article" and you cite one. Indeed, the one you
cite is an error – Bruenn/Brno is not in the "same area of Northwestern Bohemia" as is
Aussig/Usti nad Labem. Brno is in the south.
I will correct this on my website, so thank you for bringing it to my attention. But it is
certainly not weighty enough to undermine the rest of the article, which is based on
newspaper accounts from the time. Since that time, no new diggings of any consequence have
been undertaken. The will to do so, by those in authority, is not there.
@Bardon
Kaldian Croat Ustaša killed thousand of Serbs, it's well documented, do you deny
that?
This is supposedly from a Gestapo report, if true it's quite damning, it's not a source
that would want to incriminate their own allies:
Increased activity of the bands [of rebels] is chiefly due to atrocities carried out by
Ustaše units in Croatia against the Orthodox population. The Ustaše committed
their deeds in a bestial manner not only against males of conscript age, but especially
against helpless old people, women and children. The number of the Orthodox that the Croats
have massacred and sadistically tortured to death is about three hundred thousand
(I have no dog in this fight, but have more sympathy for Serbs than for Croats because of
the way the have been treated by the U.S. Empire recently).
@Grahamsno(G64)
The AR camps and complete lack of forensic evidence at each of them is mentioned. I can see
why the focus is on Auschwitz because if Jews brought more attention to Treblinka it would be
obvious how fake the whole thing is.
@skrik
Dear Sir, it is inappropriate to quote oneself they say thus I will refer you back to my
original comment which you were kind enough to comment yourself. Sufficient to say I pointed
out that Ms. Yeager and her sidekick made fools out of themselves with their choice of Gen.
Jaruzelski's quote and have a nonchalant attitude towards facts when it comes to mass graves
of German atrocities victims.
In this context I can not help but also to point out that it is not the first time Ms.
Yeager wrote nonsense and not the first time to I call her out on that either.
Thus if anyone here is a peddler of taurus excretum it is Ms. Yeager who has a proven
track record of being one.
For this reason when she occasionally gets something right it is similar to a broken clock
showing the right time every twelve hours.
"Let the dead bury their dead". Instead of harping on such issues with a discussion that
never ends and is rather pointless, Europeans would do better to focus on the future and
reproduce more. Of course, "Holocaust denial" and similar speech criminalization laws would
have to go too, it's time, soon there will be no survivors alive, and it will hopefully be
forgotten like all wars. There's no need to keep talking about this things forever, let's
forgive and forget, and think about the future. If Europe becomes majority African and Arab
in the next 100 years, then what's the point of discussing what flavour of white killed which
flavour of white? It won't matter anymore I mean non-whites are already toppling Churchill
statues, and Churchill was until recently an "anti-fascist" and a hero of both leftists and
neo-cons.
".. .the only people denying the Holocaust are those with a serious learning
disability and poor attention span .. ."
and those poor, deluded people who prefer to have evidence , and not just
Hollywood films created by people with an agenda to push and a story to sell!
@Reger
Individual fates?
Anything to do with the Hollow-co$t narrative is suspect. What kind of "death camps" have
hospitals for internees? What kind of "death camps" have scrip for prisoners to spend at a
canteen? What kind of "death camps" have orchestras and theaters for internees? Why would
"death camps" record marriages and births? The Olympic size swimming pools and soccer fields
for internees at "death camps" were there, obviously, as another form of mass murder by
forcing the internees to swim until they drowned or run until they collapsed.
How about the individual fates of the women and children burned to death in the incendiary
bombing of Hamburg and Dresden, or the deaths of 1600 civilians who drowned when the Ruhr
Valley dams were bombed? More teenage girls named Anne died in one night of allied bombing
than ever died in concentration camps.
To paraphrase David Irving, more people died in the back seat of Ted Kennedy's car than in
homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz. It is indeed, unfortunate that people died, but the
Jewish "leadership" declared war on Germany in 1933. The deaths of the three people you named
is on their hands for scheming against the legitimate government of Germany.
Curious that the fanatical record keeping Nazis have no record of the amount of coke
needed to burn the numbers of alleged victims cremated at concentration camps. Meanwhile, the
Soviet archives released camp records are in line with the Red Cross estimates and Bletchley
Park transcripts. Obviously, they are all lying and Yad Vesham is correct.
@RT Grow
up. You are not in the court. You are not even in the court of public opinion. You are among
the Holocaust denial retards. You are one of them actually.
@Curmudgeon
I beg your pardon? There is a good chance I have more first-hand experience with socialism
(as Realsozialismus) then you have experience with anything at all.
* during 1918-1939 period, Yugoslavia was basically a softer version of Greater Serbia,
with all nations-except Slovenes- oppressed. Close to 400 Croats & ca. 2000 Muslims had
been killed by Serbian paramilitaries & government forces during "peaceful" period in the
1920s & 1930s. The turning point was assassination of Croatian leader Stjepan Radić,
a sort of Croatian Gandhi, by a Serb nationalist in Yugoslav parliament in 1928. This
convinced some Croats that any Yugoslavia was insufferable, and the most influential among
them was future Poglavnik/"Leader" Ante Pavelić, who emigrated & founded a
revolutionary terrorist organization ustaše (ca. 200-300 people).
* after the collapse of Yugoslavia in the April war 1941, situation in Croatia &
Bosnia and Herzegovina was something like a vacuum. No Croatian politician wanted to become
the head of state patronized by Nazi German authorities, but at the same time there was a
sense of jubilation: Croats got independent (in theory) country, after decades of Serbian
oppression. In this vacuum, Pavelić was installed by Hitler and Mussolini as a kind of
puppet. In this country, ca. 50-60% were Croats & more than 30% were Serbs (the rest were
Bosnian Muslims, considered to be Croats).
* Pavelić assumed power on April the 10th 1941. But even a week before that, Serb
paramilitaries had started killing Croats & some 200-400 people were killed in the
interregnum. After he had been installed, Pavelić actually dissolved parliament &
established a dictatorship; Croatia was crippled & many vital areas, especially in
Dalmatia, were given to Mussolini's Italy. Also, he introduced racial laws for Jews &
started to persecute Serbs- both as a revenge for their participation in royalist Yugoslavia
period terror & their atrocities during interregnum. In next few months perhaps 5-20,000
Serbs were killed by ustaše in various areas of NDH/Independent State of Croatia.
Basically, it was a terrorist regime & most Croats disapproved of it, but were
expecting to get rid of ustaše in some future & retain statehood under democratic
circumstances. So, Croats wanted a truly independent country.
* Serbs, being persecuted (along with Jews & Gypsies) rebelled on a massive scale in
the last quarter of 1941 & many areas of NDH had become virtually defunct. This resulted
in further Pavelić's dependence to Hitler. On the other hand, communist partisans, led
by a Croat, Josip Broz Tito, after their defeat in Serbia fled with remnants of their army to
the NDH territory. There, they found refuge among Serbs, while many of them defected to
royalist Četniks led by Serbian colonel Mihailović. Četniks had killed, during
1941, ca. 12-15,000 Muslim & Croat civilians, mostly in the eastern Bosnia regions.
From 1941-1945 there was a civil war in all of Yugoslavia, with various factions fighting
for different aims. In Croatia, more Croats had been coming to partisans, especially after
1943 (fall of Italy) & thus partisans became a respectable force. For instance, Croatia
had 5 partisan corpses (4 of them with clear Croatian majority), while Slovenia had 2, Bosnia
& Herzegovina 2, Serbia proper 2 etc.
* in may 1945, war was over & partisans had won. But, in 2- 6 weeks after the end of
war, they committed mass atrocities, killing ca. 80,000-130,000 Croatian soldiers &
civilians, perhaps 10,000 Serbian Četniks & up to 4,000 Slovenian white guards.
Modern unbiased historical investigations have dispelled many myths, especially those re
number of victims in Yugoslavia & NDH in particular. In sum, in all of Yugoslavia, ca.
500,000 Serbs had died unnatural deaths & this included some 300,000 Serbs in NDH. Of
these, perhaps over 100,000 had been killed by ustaše, while others died of typhoid,
were killed by Germans, Četniks etc. Among Croats, ca. 200- 250,000 died of unnatural
causes, virtually all of them in NDH on various sides. Percentage-wise, the biggest losses
were among Bosnian Muslims, over 80,000.
@utu
Bottom line is that the whole existing Jewish Holocaust narrative is not supported by the
evidence. And any competent detective would spot the inconsistencies and contrary evidence in
the overall narrative and conclude that either the witness is fabricating and embellishing
what actually happened, or very simply is lying.
That's not the same thing as saying no Jews were killed in Europe, or that I'd want to be
Jewish and in Europe in WWII. (Hell, I wouldn't have wanted to be anywhere in Europe during
WWII period!) Rather, it's very clear that everybody was killing everybody else in
those places and at that time based on ethnicity, nationality, politics, being on the losing
side or what have you, including plain old greed, and that nobodies' hands were clean.
Warfare will do that.
That, and the subsequent coverups, denials and spinmeistering over the years by all actors
concerning massacres and reprisals, large scale thefts, organized starvations and ethnic
cleansing are more over embarrassment and concerns about reputations than anything else.
Likewise, the claiming of this, that or the other mass grave as your own is just as much
about economic advantage and fortune seeking as it is about validation.
Enough! It was 80 odd years ago. Learn about what happened, all that happened and why,
and to all peoples who were present, without favour given to an influential (for now) few.
Resolve that it was monstrous for all, and resolve that it ought not to happen again. And
then move on.
@peacewalker
This sort of opinion is as childishly chauvinistic now as it was in 1850, 1920, 1939 and
1990. Did you know that Eastern Germany has been only given to the Poland for temporary
administration by the Soviets? Notwithstanding the weird actions of the people in power in
the FRG, Poland's borders are defined by international law by the provisions of the Treaty of
Versailles to which Poland was a signatory party.
@GMC " The
normal Russians/Crimeans that I know that are jews are way cool folks – they even have
family is Israel but no big ego. Just normal Russians."
Nonsense. Jews are not Russians, period. Different ethnic group, different loyalties.
Given a brouhaha, you'll see which group they side with.
Bottom line is that the whole existing Jewish Holocaust narrative is not supported by
the evidence. And any competent detective would spot the inconsistencies and contrary
evidence in the overall narrative and conclude that either the witness is fabricating and
embellishing what actually happened, or very simply is lying.
This is stupid. It is very easy to calculate upper & lower limits of losses of various
European peoples during WW2, just by feeding the computer with pre-war & post-war census
data and taking into account border changes.
True, some figures overlap & there is a significant standard deviation for some
numbers. But, generally, overall picture is rather well established.
Nonsense, low IQ person. The burden of proof is on the person making the existential
claim, not on the person questioning it. I suggest opening a basic critical thinking book at
some point in your life.
Fact is that the evidence for the deliberate murder of 6,000,000 Jews is almost entirely
missing, apart from 'confessions' obtained under torture and the claims of self-interested
parties who stand something to gain.
Add to that any number of oddities.
– Official reports from the Red Army indicating that the area around Treblinka was
pastoral and undisturbed, contrasting with eyewitness accounts (by Jews) of skulls being
strewn everywhere.
– Red Cross records mentioning nothing of a mass murder campaign costing millions of
lives.
– Putin's comments that the Soviets transferred millions of Jews out of Poland
– The number of compensation claims registered with the German government reaching the
4 million mark, when the Nazis estimated the total number of Jews in Nazi occupied territory
was smaller than this.
– The physical impossibility of outdoor cremation of millions of people using barbeques
made from train rails and stacks of wood (which magically worked, even in the snow and
rain).
– The lack of cross examination at the Nuremburg tribunal.
It smells mightily of a Jewish fantasy enabling them to guilt trip the Germans, cover up
British war crimes, and justify the theft of Arab land.
Obviously the holocaust must be fake or there wouldn't be laws against researching it, or
disputing different aspects of it. Historical events that happened have no laws forbidding
questioning or debating them. We can argue over how many died at Stalingrad, or in Hiroshima.
We can question the number who starved in the Potato Famine, or from Smallpox in American
Indian tribes. But one so-called "historical" event must never be questioned? Ridiculous. The
fact that laws force one to believe in it, makes me doubt it completely.
@Grahamsno(G64)
I asked Ron Unz to put the title "Some Answers to the Mystery of the "Missing Jews" on the
article; the original title is the sub-title you see here. I think it's perfectly justified
– note the word "Some." Not 'The answer' or 'An answer', but only 'Some answers', which
in retrospect over the last 10 years it does provide. If the communists murdered thousands
and hundreds of thousands of Eastern European peoples, as you say, doesn't that impact the
WWII death toll and the "missing jews"?
Holocaust believers like yourself have never been able to show the existence of the
remains of those millions of bodies you say the German's killed. In light of that it's
amazing anyone can still defend this cult of death.
That explains why you are reduced to personal insult, ad hominem and distractions like
"what about the AR camps," instead of explaining why only Axis forces have been unearthed in
mass graves since the war's end, and no Allied forces. That includes no Jews.
Also, FYI (and others), "Revisionism" is not something dictated from above by certain
"professionals" but is individual works by individuals who study various aspects of history
and put their work out there for scrutiny. Not something you are capable of appreciating, I
know. So far, you have said nothing that debunks this article that is based on documented
reality.
Jews are missing only in the Holocaust deniers' minds.
Jews historically have had no homeland and thus feel no attachment or sentimental value to
the lands upon which they live. It is therefore not that hard to speculate that once news of
the evil Nazis approaching reached them that they packed up and moved further east or west to
avoid getting mixed up in the actual fighting.
We see this mentality at full effect even today when millions of whites and blacks are
sent around the world to kill, maim and occupy foreign nations while the jews who profit from
it all stay at home in their million dollar mansions and closed off ghettos demanding to be
given the best of the special treatment for their eternal victimhood.
Lack of evidence is not evidence of abscence-but is rather objective evidence of the
non-existence of such a claim or cause of which one has been supportive or others forced to
accept as truth.
@utuGrow up. You are not in the court. You are not even in the court of public opinion. You
are among the Holocaust denial retards. You are one of them actually.
Poor little utu – is he a Jew terrorist – or one of the feeble-minded
gentiles, who falls for the Stockholm Syndrome Jew victim "six-million" lie. He is clearly on
the wrong side of history.
As is abundantly clear from this article and its comments – many if not most of
central Europe's ethnic peoples experienced group murder. 55,000,000 people died during WWII.
Jews where just one tribe of many.
Instead of forgiving and healing all – the Jews have grabbed all the sick
"victimhood glory" for themselves and used it as a cudgel to do even more killing in the
Middle East.
Maintaining the "six-million" lie has cost America its cohesion and Western idealism
– we are divided today into identity groups warring with each other -- all to maintain
terroristic Jew political control, aimed at sustaining the "six-million" lie. Anyone who
dares to disagree with the Jew lie – is terrorized and ostracized from society.
So what is it for little utu – Jew terrorist or fool?
A fool can intellectually grow – a morally poor Jew who supports "the lie" is
hopeless.
@Robjil
Judging by the aggressive theft of Ukraine farmland for pennies on the dollar by Chabad,
instrumentalized by Nuland's lackeys at the Dept of State, and the consequent dispossession
of Ukrainian farm people à la Palestinians in Palestine, my guess is that Israel intends
to use the Ukraine as the "breadbasket" of the JWO in Europe, just as a de-industrialized
United States, with its white population exterminated, will become the JWOs breadbasket in
the Western Hemisphere.
His aggregate numbers (in Table 2 on p. 10) are consistent with the numbers from the
Jewish Virtual Library. But what's curious are the numbers for Eastern Europe (i.e. Imperial
Russia/Soviet Union and Poland primarily) The American population exploded between 1880 and
1939. That's the well-known turn-of-the century influx. It's safe to assume that about 5M of
the American number was due to immigration (applying a reasonable 0.5% growth rate to the
1880 population), and that it was mainly from Eastern Europe. That would mean that the stock
of Eastern European Jews grew from 5.7M in 1880 to about 8.2M+5M = 13.2M in 1939, an
annualized growth rate of 1.4%. This is simply not believable, given the chaos afflicting
Eastern Europe during this time period. If we apply the 0.9% growth rate claimed for world
Jewish inter-war population by the JVL (probably high but not absurdly so) to the 5.7M
Eastern European stock, and subtract off the 5M that emigrated to America, we get an Eastern
European Jewish population in 1939 of around 4.7M, which is at least 3.5M less than commonly
claimed. (It was probably even less than 4.7M, given emigration to Palestine.) World Jewish
population in 1939 was probably around 16.7M-3.5M = 13.2M, not 16.7M, implying Jewish losses
during the war of around 2.2M. This number is consistent with German documentation re. the AR
camps, Auschwitz, and the EG shootings, as well as Red Cross documentation about the Western
camps. It's highly likely that both the Soviet and Polish 1939 numbers were exaggerated by at
least 1M each. The numbers for the eastern part of the old Austro-Hungarian empire should
also be viewed skeptically. (The 1931 Polish census claiming over 3M Jews is well-known, but
there was a 1921 census claiming 2M Jews; there is no way the Polish Jewish population grew
at a 4% annualized rate in that decade.)
Hitting the holohoax (oops I mean "holocaust™") head-on doesn't work because of the
jew-controlled media which has declared "holocaustianity™" to be the new worldwide
"state religion" from which no dissension from its "orthodoxy" is permitted.
The only way to counter "holocaustianity™" is to point out the scientific and
engineering impossibility of every "holocaust™" claim.
Let's look at a number of claims that have been made and have been ingrained in
"holocaust™" orthodoxy:
-- using "bug spray" (Zyklon B) as an execution agent (ha ha)
-- "gas chambers" with ordinary wooden doors, not gas-tight doors
-- "gas chambers" with no means to ventilate the chambers after "operation"
-- "gas chamber" chimney not connected to anything
-- "blood spurting out of the ground" for weeks and months
-- "crematoria stacks with visible flames" (not possible) crematoria burn clean
-- "thousands of bodies cremated per day" (not possible)
-- "multiple bodies" in one "muffle" to "speed up" operations
-- "lampshades, soap and shrunken heads", oh my
-- "the ability to tell when jews are being cremated by the smell or color of smoke"
-- "claimed burial grounds not being permitted to be disturbed" per jewish "law"
NONE of these claims are possible or valid and can be easily debunked using sound scientific
and engineering principles.
I have been thrown out (asked to leave) those "jewish freak shows" called
"holocaust™"museums for merely attempting to point out these facts.
@jbwilson24It smells mightily of a Jewish fantasy enabling them to guilt trip the Germans, cover up
British war crimes, and justify the theft of Arab land.
Say jbwilson24 -- did you kill any Jews -- I didn't!
Hmm -- then why are we being held guilty? 98% of everybody alive today was not even living
during the war. Yet, the Jews act like we are ALL guilty for WWII.
Using a vile false guilt trip, the Jews have seized power over the West.
We are coming to understand this ploy – human nature does not like lies – it
rebels.
p.s. Jew use of the Stockholm Syndrome, rules the West. (terror first – claim
victimization second)
Why do you write "Polish historical interpretations" knowing that after WWII this so called
'Polish' regime was infested by (appointed) Stalin Jews and few Polish commies with
suspicious past? *
*During Poland's partition many Jews bought for cents on dollar or acquired (for
snitching) names, estates and noble titles of Polish patriots shipped to Siberia.
Jan 30, 2016 Operation Reinhard: The Murder of Polish Jewry
How did the horror of the Nazi death camps evolve? Auschwitz didn't just sprout from the
ground one day. There was an "evolution" of the murder machinery, and a cast of diabolical
characters most people have never heard of.
@trickster
But than all Hitler was stupid, because he did not figure out that eventually will come to
that.
All Germans were so stupid that they did not know that number of roads in Ukraine and Russia
that in case of rain did not change to mud holes could be counted on fingers.
And even those were no match of via Apia of ancient Rome.
@peacewalker
Impressive your information about the origin of Stettin and Breslau. But as far as I can see
through a fast look at wikipedia, what you say seems to be at least a bis misleading. The
history seems to be quite complicated with really lot of changes. They say about Breslau that
the "Wandalenstamm der Silinger" (a German tribe) settled there between the 4 and 5 Century
and Slavs came about 1 or 2 centuries later. Much later there was a Polish domination.
Breslau was destroyed by the Mongols in 1241 and after that rebuilt by German settlers. In
1261 Breslau received the right of cityship (? Stadtrecht) by the German city of Magdeburg.
The history of Stettin is even more complicated, but wikipedia says that it was founded by
the fusion of German and Polish settlements ("Die Stadt Stettin entstand aus einer
pomoranischen und zwei benachbarten deutschen Siedlungen" = The city Stettin has originated
from a pomoranian and two neighbour German settlements).
Let me just point out, that mass graves with Polish victims of German mass executions
were located among other places at:
Palimiry [sic], Las Sękocinski, Las kabacki, Laski and many, many others locations
such as for example Ponary (outside of Poland's post WW II borders in present-day
Lithuania).
Why hasn't the general public heard of these incredible mass graves? Except for a little
commotion at Palmiry and Ponary, they are Polish fiction. The Germans assembled an
international team of experts to exhume the Katyn graves and publish their findings. The
Poles kept their exhumations, if there were any, all in the family.
Palmiry massacre, Wiki – "After the war, the Polish Red Cross , supported by
the Chief Commission for the Investigation of German Crimes in Poland (pretty sure
this is Soviet), began the search and exhumation process in Palmiry. The work was carried out
between 25 November and 6 December 1945, and later from 28 March until the first months of
summer 1946. Thanks to Adam Herbański and his subordinates from the Polish Forest
Service , who in the years of occupation were risking their own lives to mark the places
of execution, Polish investigators were able to find 24 mass graves. More than 1700 corpses
were exhumed, but only 576 of them were identified. Later Polish historians were able
to identify the names of another 480 victims.[17][50] It is possible that some graves still
lie undiscovered in the forest near Palmiry.[11]
Ponary massacre, Wiki – "The total number of victims by the end of 1944 was between
70,000 and 100,000. According to post-war exhumation by the forces of Soviet 2nd
Belorussian Fron t the majority (50,000–70,000) of the victims were Polish and
Lithuanian Jews from nearby Polish and Lithuanian cities, while the rest were primarily Poles
(about 20,000) and Russians (about 8,000).[2]
(No more information on this Polish-created page about the exhumation/identification process.
It goes straight to the more extensive commemoration/memorial monuments section.) Then ends
with:
"The murders at Paneriai are currently being investigated by the Gdańsk branch of the
Polish Institute of National Remembrance [1] and by the Genocide and Resistance
Research Center of Lithuania .[27] The basic facts about memorial signs in the Paneriai
memorial and the objects of the former mass murder site (killing pits, tranches, gates,
paths, etc.) are now presented in the webpage created by the Vilna Gaon State Jewish
Museum."
This why the general public doesn't know of these sites – they have not been
legitimately vetted. Yale's Timothy Snyder is a big believer though.
The sad thing is that the Final Solution to the Jewish problem has not yet been achieved.
I mean the problem of the presence of non-Jews in the world, a major problem for the Jews.
Not finally solved yet, but getting close.
There have been some great achievements since earliest times. One was Moses's great
success in tricking the stupid Midianites a number of times before finally exterminating
them, as recounted between Exodus Ch. 2 and the end of Numbers. Another was Joshua bar Nun's
fabulous achievement exterminating most of the Canaanites. For the time, the greatest
achievement bar none!
But the great achievement of the Jewish Dark Age of 200–400 AD, the killing of 6
million Jews by the Jews, the 6 million Hellenistic Jews by the Talmudic Jews, outshines
everything to date. Done at a time when the world population was tiny!
That must be done, the killing of non-Talmudic Jews must be done, as Maimonides wrote a
few centuries later. But the best subsequent achievement seems to have been the killing of
about a million non-Talmudic Jews in Iberia, greater Spain. Maybe fewer. Many escaped the
peninsula. Many Karaites survived. Or some did, count unclear.
So far, at least till 1948, and since the Cyrene massacres of the 2nd century, stopped by
the Romans, they have not had the power to kill non-Jews in any large numbers, could only
encourage wars among them. And undermine their society with their lobbying skills and
organized financing. But they are immensely powerful today in America and Europe. The Final
Solution may be close.
@Bardon
Kaldian Serbian lies are only matched by coatian lies (jews/muslims lies are out of
competition simple because they belive they can say anything to non-jew/non-muslim and do a
right thing).
Serbian lies can't change fact that every single sentence from Bardon post is one big fat
lie.
Hints: census from 1931 counted people by religion(ortodox, catolics, muslims, ), census from
1948 counted serbs, croats, slovenians, montenegrins, macedonians and 'minorities'. Muslims
are counted as serbian or croatians. He can't even say those numbers for current croatian
territory (hint: about 90k serbs less than ortodox and 300k croats more than catolics,despite
200k croats killed or expelled by comunists)
Counting persons with serious mental problems with zero influence as 'serbian ideologues' is
just fun.
@Curmudgeon
said:
"What kind of "death camps" have hospitals for internees? What kind of "death camps" have
scrip for prisoners to spend at a canteen? What kind of "death camps" have orchestras and
theaters for internees? Why would "death camps" record marriages and births? The Olympic size
swimming pools and soccer fields for internees at "death camps""
– Here's more info. on the big one in the "holocaust"narrative, so called "death
camp / extermination camp" Auschwitz
[MORE]
– An "extermination camp" where thousands of Jews chose to stay behind when
the Germans left.
– An "extermination camp" where most of the inmates, more thousands, chose to
leave WITH the Germans.
– An "extermination camp" where 1,500,000 human remains supposedly exist, but in fact
no such remains exist.
– An "extermination camp" where many Jews gave birth.
– An "extermination camp" where the absurdly alleged homicidal 'gas chambers' could
not have worked as alleged, as proven repeatedly, scientifically impossible.
– An "extermination camp" where fake 'gas chambers' were "reconstructed" AFTER THE
WAR.
– An "extermination camp" where detailed aerial photos of the period show nothing
that is alleged to have been happening.
– An "extermination camp" where there are even obvious, laughable attempts to tamper
with aerial photos that make a mockery of the fake story.
see:
– Auschwitz war time aerial photos, tampered with to fit the fake story ,
ex.:
Drawn in 'Auschwitz Jews being marched to gas chambers', ON A ROOF . –
An "extermination camp" where there are countless Jew "survivors", yet the fake narrative
says 'the Germans tried to kill every Jew they could get their hands on.'
-An "extermination camp" where so called "survivors" say the most impossible and
conflicting things that do not hold up to scrutiny, would be laughed out of a legit court
of law.
This is stupid. It is very easy to calculate upper & lower limits of losses of
various European peoples during WW2, just by feeding the computer with pre-war &
post-war census data and taking into account border changes.
But it is precisely the border changes for those countries and population movements
occurred within those areas that makes it difficult if not impossible to determine with any
accuracy what population changes within the area those borders include at different times
mean. It is, obvious, is ity not, that the "Poland" of 1939 is not the "Poland" of 1946, is
it not? And that it's ridiculous to draw any DEFINITIVE conclusion based on the ethnic group
distribution included within the boundaries of those "countries" between those periods,
especially when Russians moved substsantial numbers out of the area they occupied from 1939
to 1941, and then Germans were moved out of areas that became Polich after WWII, etc., etc.
and also moved people into and out of those areas when no one really knows the NUMBERS
INVOLVED.
It's years ago since I lookeed at the numbers Hillsberg cited, but I remenber dismissing
them at the time because they look conjectural at best.
@Carolyn
Yeager There are two ancient Slavic tribes Czechs and Moravian s. Capital of Czechs is
Praha (Prague)
Capitol of Moravian s is Brno. Slovaks at one time were part of Great Moravian empire.
Morava is east of Czechia, (As is its capital Brno, and not south as you claim.)
Slovakia is East of Moravia.
Morava is river and the tribe was named after river. River Morava joins Danjub
at Slovakia.
@peacewalker
said:
"I just don't know where to start. Whole "article" is such a BS. OK, let's start from
beginning then"
– Let's start with you actually reading the article.
– Then show us the millions upon millions of human remains that are said by those
like you to be in specific, known locations.
– After that, tell us how the absurd 'Nazi gas chambers' supposedly worked.
– Your cited sources give no proof.
It's curious that people like yourself actually want the alleged millions to be dead.
You should be happy to hear that millions of your brethren were not murdered.
"In the case of this latest and largest mass grave (2008), no clothing, eye glasses or gold
teeth were found. It thus appears that they were completely stripped before they were
killed." My German mother and her family began fleeing west in the last months of the war.
They lived in the German city Brieg (now called Brzeg under Polish rule). It's close to the
bigger city Breslau (now called Wroclaw under Polish rule). She was captured near Pilsen
(known as Plzen under Czech rule). The Red Army arrived. My mother was part of a group of
women being held and the women were forced to strip naked and they were humiliated. This is
what my crying mother told me roughly about 40 years ago. She was not raped. She's gone now
and despite this sad story was an upbeat and generally happy person. The Americans were also
there. I believe they took the area first and then withdrew and turned the area over to the
Russians and Czechs. My mother was able to escape and eventually settled in Bavaria for
several years before moving to the USA. If there are numerous cases of victims being
stripped, I wonder if this could be tied to a particular army or nationality. Or was it was
done by more than one army or nationality?
@the
shadow I agree. From my reading the transfers of population for reasons of ethnicity,
colonisation (eg of the Wartheland), slave labour, not to mention the theft of 'aryan'
children from Poles made for total confusion at the end of the war. The stories of witnesses
always mention fellow victims from all parts of Europe and people travelling in all
directions.
Re the numbers I can only repeat the wise quip of Christopher Isherwood in an argument about
the number of victims; he said to his opponent: 'What are you? In real estate?"
Why not just say Mahatma Austrian Hitler left no victims, including 20s-30s-40s Germans
(400,000 to 600,000 by most accounts, murdered by the NSDAP) and espouse, more important,
Germans were the only victims in WW2? Go for it!
The NSDAP brought God to Austria, Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, Memel, Denmark. Norway,
Luxembourg, Belgium, France, Netherlands, Greece, Yugoslavia, Crete, North Africa, USSR,
etc.? Hitler was quite the evangelist. God (in that hymnal) is named Adolf. A deity without
territorial aspirations but nonetheless great coincidental appetite and digestive ability.
And with a post-war score to settle with German Churches.
"I go the way that Providence dictates with the assurance of a sleepwalker" ("Ich
gehe mit traumwandlerischer Sicherheit den Weg, den mich die Vorsehung gehen
heißt") -Adolf Hitler 15 Mar 1936 Munich
He "sleepwalked" Germany into catastrophic World War, then attacked an ally in what became
a winter campaign 1941-42 lacking winter uniforms and operational gear. Incompetence
paramount. Nothing to do with Jews, though by all counts – as in Poland –many
were murdered (sorry Carolyn).
"The war against Russia is an important chapter in the struggle for existence of the
German nation. It is the old battle of the Germanic against the Slav peoples, of the
defense of European culture against Moscovite-asiatic inundation, and the repulse of Jewish
Bolshevism. The objective of this battle must be the destruction of present-day Russia and
it must therefore be conducted with unprecedented severity. Every military action must be
guided in planning and execution by an iron will to exterminate the enemy mercilessly and
totally. In particular, no adherents of present Russian-Bloshevik system are to be
spared."
– Generaloberst Erich Hoepner, Orders to 4th Panzer Group Commanders in advance of
Barbarossa 2 May 1941 [Burleigh 'The Third Reich' p. 521]
A year later at Stalingrad 42-43, same problems, Hitler doubled-down plus some.
"The Führer commands that on entering the city the entire male population should
be eliminated since Stalingrad, with its convinced Communist population of one million, is
particularly dangerous."
– Adolf Hitler to Sixth Army 2 Sep 1942 [Beevor 'The Second World War' p.356]
Genocide? There you have cold hard fact.
There's more Carolyn. It's against Germans! 9 Nov 1942 Hitler orders 150,000 artillery and
transport horses in Sixth Army be sent several hundred kilometers to the rear, ostensibly to
save transporting fodder to the front. It deprives all unmotorized (75% of 6th Army forces)
divisions of mobility. Ten days later Soviets launch "Operation Uranus', a 'Kesselschalcht'
encirclement worthy of Bismarck and von Moltke.
By 23 Nov 1942 the Sixth Army is cut-off in pocket, destined to starve and freeze as
Hitler orders "Sixth Army stand firm in spite of temporary encirclement". His solution to the
crisis is to designate the Sixth Army "Fortress Stalingrad" and order (24 Nov) holding the
front "whatever the circumstances". No clarity on food, munitions, medical care or strategic
relief. None comes.
Germans knew better.
"I am beyond caring. Two of my brothers were sacrificed in Stalingrad and it was
quite useless. And here we have the same."
–Soldat to SanUff [Senior Medical Officer] Walter Klein, Kampfgruppe Heintz, Field
Dressing Station near St-Lô, Normandie 26 Jul 1944 [Beevor 'D-Day' p.353]
That's the legacy you (Ron and Carolyn) embrace? Good luck!
@anonlb
Dumb (my advice- don't mess with someone who knows what he's talking about. You'll turn out
to be a laughing stock ).
In 1931 census people were counted by religion & language. The South Slavic "language"
was a bizarre official combination of the Slovene, Croat & Serbian (no one then, except
Croatian linguist Stjepan Ivšić, had recognized Macedonian language). Other
languages like Hungarian, German, Italian, Slovak, Czech, Albanian were clearly the languages
of those peoples. So, one could clearly distinguish between Croats, Serbs, Bosnian Muslims ..
by simply looking at their religion & mother tongue (in that case, weird
"Sloveno-Croato-Serbian").
During the Communist census in 1948, people just said what they were, nationally.
Catholics- if not Slovene speaking- were Croats; Orthodox were either Serbs, Montenegrins or
Macedonians (there were preserved censuses from 1931, so one could monitor county
fluctuations of population); BH Muslims were mostly "Yugoslavs undetermined" (some of them
said they were either Croats or Serbs, due to political pressures, but in next 2-3 decades
were simply written out of this census).
Also, there were tiny minorities of Catholic Serbs (ca. 8,800) and Orthodox Croats
(9,300)- but they don't mean anything, in comparison with these millions.
So, if you try to argue, rather use convincing arguments than a hysterical blather.
@the
shadow Virtually all modern works on victimology had taken into account borders shifts so
that victims (or potential victims) couldn't be counted twice (or thrice). It is reflected
even in such a wishy-washy source as Wikipedia.
Morava is east of Czechia, (As is its capital Brno, and not south as you claim.)
The article is mentioning Czechoslovakia , not the Czech Republic (note the map),
and only in relation to the treatment of its German citizens in 1945-6. There is nothing
inaccurate in my comment that you're referring to; Brno is definitely in the south of the
country compared to Usti.
@maz10 I'd
doubt it. The biggest fraud about socialism was the promotion of Marxism (communism) as being
socialism. I'm not saying Marx didn't have followers, but the majority of his contemporaries
rejected his state owns all views as being totalitarian. Communism is the obverse side of the
coin of finance capitalism. Both seek to concentrate wealth into the hands of a few –
relatively speaking.
Clifford Douglas, who invented the Social Credit movement, worked closely with the Guild
Socialists in Britain. While ultimately rejecting their views, he recognized that they
weren't interested in state ownership, were not opposed to competition, but were opposed to
finance controlling production and trade. By the way, Douglas was opposed to finance
capitalism as well.
I repeat: your local co-op is socialist. Every member has an equal say through the single
share allowed to be purchased; the board of directors is elected by the membership; the
profits shared are based on your participation level; and it competes with privately owned
businesses, including corporations.
@utuHere is an excerpt (one of MANY) from the Jewish press showing that Jewish American groups
have long tried to stop the U.S. Congress from recognizing the genocide committed against
Christian Armenians by Turkey:
Every year on April 24, the day that Armenians commemorate the killings, a resolution
calling for the use of the controversial term is proposed in Congress and then beaten back.
Some Jewish groups claim credit for ensuring that such a resolution never passes.
Jewish advocacy groups, including the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs,
the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, B'nai Brith and American Jewish Committee
"have been working with the Turks on this issue" for more than 15 years, said Yola Habif
Johnston, director for foundations and community outreach at Jinsa. "The Jewish lobby has
quite actively supported Turkey in their efforts to prevent the so-called Armenian genocide
resolution from passing," she said.
Showdown Set in 'Genocide' Debate
Rebecca Spence, The Jewish Daily Forward
Sept. 2, 2006
1. STETTIN is GERMANIZED name for Polish name SZCZECIN, not the other way around.
2. Same story with Wroclaw (for short period of time known as Breslau).
What's your point?
New York was New Amsterdam before the British took over. Strasbourg was Strasburg before
Louis XIV annexed Alsace and Lorraine. Istanbul was Constantinople before the Muslims decided
to change the name. Novgorod was an East Norse settlement. At one time, the Baltic was a
"Swedish lake" and Poland was occupied by the Swedes with a Swedish king sitting in Poland.
In the mists of time, Jerusalem was Uru-shalem before the chosenites arrived from Yemen.
Borders and place names have changed through out the recorded history of mankind. Poland now
claims famous Germans were Polish. Nikolaus Kopernikus, the famous German astronomer, is now
called Mikolaj Kopernik. He lived in Thorn (now Torun'), never spoke a word of Polish, and
published his works in Latin.
The Poles were happy to be Chamberlain's dupes in starting a war with Germany, and ramped
it up with the ethnic cleansing of Germans in the German territories it occupied after
the November 11, 1918 Armistice was signed. When war starts, no ones hands are clean, but the
Poles, like the chosenites continue to play the victim.
For those that have looked at the movement of people from the late 20s to 1939, it would not
stand up to a 10 minute audit. It is obvious to me, and written by H.G. Wells in his book
"The Shape of Things to Come" that the Dazig corridor was built to start the war as Polish
and Soviet troops, and it is well documented, were killing ethnic Germans since 1938. This
was considered a brilliant move by Wells of the Wilson Administration who wiped out 60-70
million, no only due to war but the fact that it was the US out of Ft. Riley which is
documented in the Wichita Observer to be the first place that ever ha this flu of which
almost 10% died.
It is known that the US created the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks through NYC with Schiff,
Baruch, Warburg, Kuhn, Loeb, Harriman and others) and also set up through the War Industries
Board, by a Jewish Marrano named Samuel Bush to load the Lusitania up with "small" munitions
of which Cunard was warned as were documents not to go on the ship as the US had been
supplying the filth ridden UK with weapons but was all but defeated and Germany offered a
peace plan that was beneficial to all. The Balfour Declaration, (Read "History of Zionism
1600-1918" by Nahum Sokolow and you will find in the forward that Arthur Balfour was also a
Marrano which is pointed out specifically), was enough for the monied interests of the US to
put America into war by lies. Benjamin Freedman's speech at the Willard hotel sums it up
well.
The US, USSR, UK and China are all tied together and all are oligarch with a fraudulent
opposition as one can figure out when reading "Red Symphony" of Rothschild. All nations are
nothing more than corporations that have gone into receivership and are owned as assets just
as recently stated by the central banks and the monetization of all creation. Those that have
no reverence for all living things and respect for life or planet except for their love of
money that their contempt for creation represents is now off the charts as all institutions
are corrupt.
Bias of Priene – all men are wicked and most are evil. That was a statement of one
of the greats, of the 7 sages and has now come to a point where all life may disappear in a
few years through poisoning every aspect of life and the list is long, geoengineering,
medicine/vaccine/pharmaceuticals, big ag, idiocy in programming – (listen to JFK
condemn amusement and the need for a well informed society), no limits of committing
atrocities to life itself as the web of life is hanging by a thread. Education, think tanks,
NGOs, government leaders they all are evil and are backed up by a putrid judicial system.
@Carolyn
Yeager You are funny! And I do not need to take a look at the map. You do!
If you make a right angle triangle from Usti nad labem and Brno you do find out you will
find out that distance from Usti to Brno is twice as long eastward than southward.
So you are in error.
Authors claimed they can not find any example of documented mass grave of polish
citizens.
What the authors said is, "The only known mass grave of Poles was the work of the Soviet
Red Army, led by the NKVD, in the Katyn Forest in Soviet Russia. Long blamed on Germany, the
responsibility for this genocidal act is now placed where it belongs. Ironically, the only
mass gravesites found on Polish territory have been of German civilians."
What you provided in Comment 11 ( http://lasszpegawski.pl/in-english/%5D is not
documented, it's only stories. Have these alleged graves been officially exhumed and the
remains counted and examined? It doesn't say so.
This one at the INR about Dachau is another Polish nothing-burger. By putting forth these
nonsense pages as evidence of the atrocities you claim, you only make yourself a laughing
stock.
@Petermx
Strange story. Sorry to hear of your mother's humiliation but what you write makes no sense
to me. What was your mother doing in Plzen at the end of the war? Captured by whom? There was
no Red army in Plzen and American troops left in November 1945. If your mother was supposedly
fleeing west then she would have landed in Dresden where most refugees from Wroclaw went but
not in Plzen. Caroline Yeager and you have obvious deficiencies in geography, which is a
strong indications that most of the stories, ventilated here, are simply made up.
@Curmudgeon
Kopernik did not have a even a drop of German blood in him. And he was not an astronomer.
He was a polish monk. He did study the solar system as a hobby.
He was first who did claim that all planets rotate around the Sun.
Galileo did only confirm the Koperniks theory only one hundred years after .
Galileo did have already a telescope. Kopernik did not!
@Petermx
Thanks for sharing your story, Peter. There is nothing that moves me and shakes me up more
than stories of the German expellees as they trudged and fled to the West in those terrible
months. I'm so glad your mother made it and lived to have you, tell you her story, and have a
good life. Such strength. I did some radio broadcasts with a certain Andreas Wesserle whose
family left German Slovakia and reached Bavaria, where they suffered terrible living
condition and had practically no food for several years. And they were better off than most!!
The stories he tells are shocking.
You might enjoy hearing him tell of this time with his family; he is one of my favorite
guests ever! So smart, and such a good storyteller! https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-dr-andreas-wesserle-german-holocaust-1944-46 https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-devastated-germany-1946-52
I know the Americans were the first to reach Pilsen. And both they and the British felt
they owed Uncle Joe practically anything he asked for! I don't know the answer to your
question about stripping, but I think it was pretty common, in order to take all the
valuables. Every piece of clothing was valuable in those times, plus eyeglasses, false teeth,
anything like that.
@animalogic The only thing the Jews were doing quite well in
Europe/US/Canada/Australia/NZ without all these Muslim and other non-white immigrants, with
no friction with the rest of the population. There were really no threats to them or their
presence and they were easily taking over all the top positions in media, politics, business,
academia. Was it getting dangerous for them in any way at the time before the flood gates
were opened to the Muslims and others? And surely more Jews have now been killed in the West
by Muslims (has anyone counted how many Jews were victims of Islamic terrorist attacks, as
usually the numbers are not broken down by ethnicity/religion?) than since WWII until the
Muslims appeared on the scene. Probably there are even more attacks on them by the extreme
right as of late because they're seen as importing Muslims. Earlier it was the extreme left
terrorists that were attacking Jews more (e.g. Red Army Faction). And as the Muslim numbers
grow, anti-semitism will grow too so I don't think that by importing Muslims they will be
safer than they were before. You really need to demonstrate that there were threats to their
presence in the West before the flood of the immigrants. Can you?
Now Jews actually wanting the above, not to feel safer but to create the opposite
situation, and drive more of their own into Israel for their Greater Israel project, or just
to boost their own numbers against the rising Arab Israeli population inside Israel, could be
another line of reasoning. And perhaps trying to get as many Muslims out of Arab countries to
aid Israel's expansion is yet another, but I don't think importing Arab immigrants will help
to depopulate their countries of origin in any way since their reproduction rate is high.
Or maybe even wanting the imported Muslim terrorism and their other crimes, including sex
crimes against whites, to make it unsafe for whites and garner more sympathy for the Jews and
solidarity with Israel for being in a similar situation and having the same enemy. So
importing Muslims to generate Islamophobia among whites may be the most valid reason if we
accept that there is a Jewish conspiracy behind Muslim immigration, rather than some other
reasons. Sure Jews are involved in the immigration project, but is it deliberate or just
because they're involved in everything and in positions to do so?
Medea Benjamin
and Nicolas J. S.
Davies Posted on
May 29, 2020 May 28, 2020 On May 6th, President Trump vetoed a
war powers bill specifying that he must ask Congress for authorization to use military
force against Iran. Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign of deadly sanctions and
threats of war against Iran has seen no let-up, even as the U.S., Iran and the whole world
desperately need to set aside our conflicts to face down the common danger of the Covid-19
pandemic.
So what is it about Iran that makes it such a target of hostility for Trump and the neocons?
There are many repressive regimes in the world, and many of them are close US allies, so this
policy is clearly not based on an objective assessment that Iran is more repressive than Egypt,
Saudi Arabia or other monarchies in the Persian Gulf.
The Trump administration claims that its "maximum pressure" sanctions and threats of war
against Iran are based on the danger that Iran will develop nuclear weapons. But after decades
of inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and despite the US's politicization of
the IAEA, the Agency has repeatedly confirmed that Iran does
not have a nuclear weapons program.
If Iran ever did any preliminary research on nuclear weapons, it was probably during the
Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, when the US and its allies helped Iraq to make
and use chemical weapons that killed up to 100,000 Iranians. A 2007 US
National Intelligence Estimate , the IAEA's 2015 " Final Assessment on Past and
Present Outstanding Issues" and decades of IAEA inspections have examined and resolved every
scrap of false evidence of a nuclear weapons program presented or fabricated by the CIA
and its allies.
If, despite all the evidence, US policymakers still fear that Iran could develop nuclear
weapons, then adhering to the Iran Nuclear Deal (JCPOA), keeping Iran inside the
Non-Proliferation Treaty, and ensuring ongoing access by IAEA inspectors would provide greater
security than abandoning the deal.
As with Bush's false WMD claims about Iraq in 2003, Trump's real goal is not nuclear
non-proliferation but regime change. After 40 years of failed sanctions and hostility, Trump
and a cabal of US warhawks still cling to the vain hope that a tanking economy and widespread
suffering in Iran will lead to a popular uprising or make it vulnerable to another U.S.-backed
coup or invasion.
United Against a Nuclear Iran and the Counter Extremism Project
One of the key organizations promoting and pushing hostility towards Iran is a shadowy group
called United Against a Nuclear Iran (UANI). Founded in 2008, it was expanded and reorganized
in 2014 under the umbrella of the Counter Extremism Project United (CEPU) to broaden its
attacks on Iran and divert US policymakers' attention away from the role of Israel, Saudi
Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other US allies in spreading violence, extremism and chaos
in the greater Middle East.
UANI acts as a private enforcer of US sanctions by keeping a " business registry " of hundreds of companies
all over the world – from Adidas to Zurich Financial Services – that trade with or
are considering trading with Iran. UANI hounds these companies by naming and shaming them,
issuing reports for the media, and urging the Office of Foreign Assets Control to impose fines
and sanctions. It also keeps a checklist of companies that have signed a
declaration certifying they do not conduct business in or with Iran.
Proving how little they care about the Iranian people, UANI even targets pharmaceutical,
biotechnology, and medical-device corporations – including Bayer
, Merck , Pfizer , Eli
Lilly , and Abbott Laboratories
– that have been granted special US humanitarian aid licenses.
Where does UANI get its funds?
UANI was founded by three former US officials, Dennis Ross, Richard Holbrooke and Mark
Wallace. In 2013, it still had a modest budget of $1.7 million, nearly 80% coming from two
Jewish-American billionaires with strong ties to Israel and the Republican Party: $843,000 from
precious metals investor Thomas
Kaplan and $500,000 from casino owner
Sheldon Adelson . Wallace and other UANI staff have
also worked for Kaplan's investment firms, and he remains a key funder and advocate for
UANI and its affiliated groups.
In 2014, UANI split into two entities: the original UANI and the Green Light Project, which
does business as the Counter Extremism Project. Both entities are under the umbrella of and
funded by a third, Counter Extremism Project United (CEPU). This permits the organization to
brand its fundraising as being for the Counter Extremism Project, even though it still regrants
a third of its funds to UANI.
CEO Mark Wallace, Executive Director David Ibsen and other staff work for all three groups
in their shared
offices in Grand Central Tower in New York. In 2018, Wallace drew a combined salary of
$750,000 from all three entities, while Ibsen's combined salary was $512,126.
In recent years, the revenues for the umbrella group, CEPU, have mushroomed, reaching $22
million in 2017. CEPU is secretive about the sources of this money. But investigative
journalist
Eli Clifton , who starting looking into UANI in 2014 when it was sued for defamation by a
Greek ship owner it accused of violating sanctions on Iran, has found evidence suggesting
financial ties with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
That is certainly what
hacked emails between CEPU staff, an Emirati official and a Saudi lobbyist imply. In
September 2014, CEPU's president Frances Townsend emailed the UAE Ambassador to the US to
solicit the UAE's support and propose that it host and fund a CEPU forum in Abu
Dhabi.
Four months later, Townsend emailed again to
thank him , writing, "And many thanks for your and Richard Mintz' (UAE lobbyist) ongoing
support of the CEP effort!" UANI fundraiser Thomas Kaplan has formed a
close relationship with Emirati ruler Bin Zayed, and visited the UAE at least 24 times. In
2019, he gushed to an interviewer that the UAE and its despotic rulers
"are my closest partners in more parts of my life than anyone else other than my wife."
Another email from Saudi lobbyist and former Senator Norm Coleman to the Emirati Ambassador
about CEPU's tax status implied that the Saudis and Emiratis were both involved in its funding,
which would mean that CEPU may be violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act by failing to
register as a Saudi or Emirati agent in the US
Ben Freeman of the Center for International Policy has
documented the dangerously unaccountable and covert expansion of the influence of foreign
governments and military-industrial interests over US foreign policy in recent years, in which
registered lobbyists are only the "tip of the iceberg" when it comes to foreign influence. Eli
Clifton calls UANI, "a fantastic case study and maybe a microcosm of the ways in which American
foreign policy is actually influenced and implemented."
CEPU and
UANI's
staff and advisory boards are stocked with Republicans, neoconservatives and warhawks, many of
whom earn lavish salaries and consulting fees. In the two years before President Trump
appointed John Bolton as his National Security Advisor, CEPU paid Bolton
$240,000 in consulting fees. Bolton, who openly
advocates war with Iran, was instrumental in getting the Trump administration to withdraw
from the nuclear deal.
UANI also enlists Democrats to try to give the group broader, bipartisan credibility. The
chair of UANI's board is former Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman, who was known as the most
pro-Zionist member of the Senate. A more moderate Democrat on UANI's board is former New Mexico
governor and UN ambassador Bill Richardson.
Norman Roule, a CIA veteran who was the National Intelligence Manager for Iran throughout
the Obama administration was paid $366,000 in
consulting fees by CEPU in 2018. Soon after the brutal Saudi assassination of journalist
Jamal Khassoghi, Roule and UANI fundraiser Thomas Kaplan met with Crown Prince Mohammed Bin
Salman in Saudi Arabia, and Roule then played a leading role in articles and on the
talk-show circuit whitewashing Bin Salman's repression and talking up his superficial "reforms"
of Saudi society.
More recently, amid a growing outcry from Congress, the UN and the European Union to ease US
sanctions on Iran during the pandemic, UANI chairman Joe Lieberman, CEPU president Frances
Townsend and CEO Mark Wallace signed a
letter to Trump that falsely claimed, "US sanctions neither prevent nor target the supply
of food, medicine or medical devices to Iran," and begged him not to relax his murderous
sanctions because of COVID-19. This was too much for Norman Roule, who tossed out his UANI
script and told the Nation ,
"the international community should do everything it can to enable the Iranian people to obtain
access to medical supplies and equipment."
Two Israeli shell companies to whom CEPU and UANI have paid millions of dollars in
"consulting fees" raise even more troubling questions. CEPU has paid over $500,000 to Darlink,
located near Tel Aviv, while UANI paid at least $1.5 million to Grove Business Consulting in
Hod Hasharon, about 10% of its revenues from 2016 to 2018. Neither firm seems to really exist,
but Grove's address on UANI's IRS filings appears in the Panama Papers as that of Dr. Gideon
Ginossar, an officer of an offshore company registered in the British Virgin Islands that
defaulted on its creditors in 2010.
Selling a Corrupted Picture to US Policymakers
UANI's parent group, Counter Extremism Project United, presents itself as dedicated to
countering all forms of extremism. But in practice, it is predictably selective in its targets,
demonizing Iran and its allies while turning a blind eye to other countries with more credible
links to extremism and terrorism.
UANI supports
accusations by Trump and US warhawks that Iran is "the world's worst state sponsor of
terrorism," based mainly on its support for the Lebanese Shiite political party Hezbollah,
whose militia defends
southern Lebanon against Israel and fights in Syria as an ally of the government.
But Iran placed UANI on its own list of terrorist groups in 2019 after Mark Wallace and UANI
hosted a meeting at the Roosevelt Hotel in New York that was mainly attended by supporters of
the Mujahedin-e-Kalqh (MEK). The MEK
is a group that the US government itself listed as a terrorist organization until 2012 and
which is still committed to the violent overthrow of the government in Iran – preferably
by persuading the US and its allies to do it for them. UANI tried to distance itself from the
meeting after the fact, but the published program listed UANI as the event organizer.
On the other hand, there are two countries where CEPU and UANI seem strangely unable to find
any links to extremism or terrorism at all, and they are the very countries that appear to be
funding their operations, lavish salaries and shadowy "consulting fees": Saudi Arabia and the
United Arab Emirates.
Many Americans are still demanding a public investigation into Saudi Arabia's role in the
crimes of September 11th. In a court case against Saudi Arabia brought by 9/11 victims'
families, the FBI recently revealed that a
Saudi Embassy official , Mussaed Ahmed al-Jarrah, provided crucial support to two of the
hijackers. Brett Eagleson, a spokesman for the families whose father was killed on September
11th, told Yahoo News , "(This) demonstrates there was a hierarchy of command that's
coming from the Saudi Embassy to the Ministry of Islamic Affairs [in Los Angeles] to the
hijackers."
The global spread of the Wahhabi version of Islam that unleashed and fueled Al Qaeda,
ISIS and other violent Muslim extremist groups has been driven primarily by Saudi Arabia, which
has built and funded Wahhabi schools and mosques all over the world. That includes the King
Fahd Mosque in Los Angeles that the two 9/11 hijackers attended.
It is also well
documented that Saudi Arabia has been the largest funder and arms supplier for the Al
Qaeda-led forces that have destroyed Syria since 2011, including CIA-brokered shipments of
thousands of tons of weapons from Benghazi in Libya and at least eight countries in Eastern
Europe.The UAE also
supplied arms funding to Al Qaeda-allied rebels in Syria between 2012 and 2016, and the Saudi
and UAE roles have now been reversed in Libya, where the UAE is the main supplier of
thousands of tons of weapons to General Haftar's rebel forces. In Yemen, both the Saudis and
Emiratis have committed war crimes .
The Saudi and Emirati air forces have bombed schools, clinics, weddings and school buses, while
the Emiratis
tortured detainees in 18 secret prisons in Yemen.
But United Against a Nuclear Iran and Counter Extremism Project have redacted all of this
from the one-sided worldview they offer to US policymakers and the American corporate media.
While they demonize Iran, Qatar, Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood as extremists and
terrorists, they depict Saudi Arabia and the UAE exclusively as victims of terrorism and allies
in U.S.-led "counterterrorism" campaigns, never as sponsors of extremism and terrorism or
perpetrators of war crimes.
The message of these groups dedicated to "countering extremism" is clear and none too
subtle: Saudi Arabia and the UAE are always US allies and victims of extremism, never a problem
or a source of danger, violence or chaos. The country we should all be worrying about is
– you guessed it – Iran. You couldn't pay for propaganda like this! But on the
other hand, if you're Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates and you have greedy, corrupt
Americans knocking on your door eager to sell their loyalty, maybe you can.
"... In reality, the part left out of the story is that the phone call to Kislyak on December 22, 2016, was made by Flynn at the direction of Jared Kushner, who in turn had been approached by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu had learned that the Obama Administrating was going to abstain on a United Nations vote condemning the Israeli settlements policy, meaning that for the first time in years a U.N. resolution critical of Israel would pass without drawing a U.S. veto. Kushner, acting for Netanyahu, asked Flynn to contact each delegate from the various countries on the Security Council to delay or kill the resolution. Flynn agreed to do so, which included a call to the Russians. Kislyak took the call but did not agree to veto Security Council Resolution 2334, which passed unanimously on December 23 rd . ..."
"... The phone call made at the request of Israel was neither benign nor ethical as the Barack Administration was still in power and managing the nation's foreign policy. At the time, son-in-law Jared Kushner was Trump's point man on the Middle East. He and his family have extensive ties both to Israel and to Netanyahu personally, to include Netanyahu's staying at the Kushner family home in New York. The Kushner Family Foundation has funded some of Israel's illegal settlements and also a number of conservative political groups in that country. Jared has served as a director of that foundation and it is reported that he failed to disclose the relationship when he filled out his background investigation sheet for a security clearance. All of which suggests that if you are looking for possible foreign government collusion with the incoming Trumpsters, look no further. ..."
"... And it should be observed that the Israelis were not exactly shy about their disapproval of Obama and their willingness to express their views to the incoming Trump. Kushner went far beyond merely disagreeing over an aspect of foreign policy as he was actively trying to clandestinely subvert and reverse a decision made by his own legally constituted government. His closeness to Netanyahu made him, in intelligence terms, a quite likely Israeli government agent of influence, even if he didn't quite see himself that way. ..."
"... Kushner's actions, as well as those of Flynn, would most certainly have been covered by the Logan Act of 1799, which bars private citizens from negotiating with foreign governments on behalf of the United States and also could be construed as a "conspiracy against the United States." But in spite of all that the investigation went after Flynn instead of Kushner. As Kushner is Jewish and certainly could be accused of dual loyalty in extremis , that part of the story obviously makes many in the U.S. Establishment and media uncomfortable, so it was and continues to be both ignored and expunged from the record as quickly as possible. ..."
There are two stories that seem to have been under-reported in the past couple of weeks. The
first involves Michael Flynn's dealings with the Russian United Nations Ambassador Sergey
Kislyak. And the second describes yet another bit of espionage conducted by a foreign country
directed against the United States. Both stories involve the State of Israel.
The bigger story is, of course, the dismissal by Attorney General William Barr of the
criminal charges against former National Security Advisor General Michael Flynn based on
malfeasance by the FBI investigators. The curious aspect of the story as it is being related by
the mainstream media is that it repeatedly refers to Flynn as having unauthorized contacts with
the Russian Ambassador and then having lied about it. The implication is that there was
something decidedly shady about Flynn talking to the Russians and that the Russians were up to
something.
In reality, the part left out of the story is that the phone call to Kislyak on December 22,
2016, was made by Flynn at the direction of Jared Kushner, who in turn had been approached by
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu had learned that the Obama Administrating
was going to abstain on a United Nations vote condemning the Israeli settlements policy,
meaning that for the first time in years a U.N. resolution critical of Israel would pass
without drawing a U.S. veto. Kushner, acting for Netanyahu, asked Flynn to contact each
delegate from the various countries on the Security Council to delay or kill the resolution.
Flynn agreed to do so, which included a call to the Russians. Kislyak took the call but did not
agree to veto Security Council Resolution 2334, which passed unanimously on December 23
rd .
In taking the phone calls from a soon-to-be senior American official who would within weeks
be part of a new administration in Washington, the Russians did nothing wrong, but the media is
acting like there was some kind of Kremlin conspiracy seeking to undermine U.S. democracy. It
would not be inappropriate to have some conversations with an incoming government team and
Kislyak also did nothing that might be regarded as particularly responsive to Team Trump
overtures since he voted contrary to Flynn's request.
The phone call made at the request of Israel was neither benign nor ethical as the Barack
Administration was still in power and managing the nation's foreign policy. At the time,
son-in-law Jared Kushner was Trump's point man on the Middle East. He and his family have
extensive
ties both to Israel and to Netanyahu personally, to include Netanyahu's staying at the
Kushner family home in New York. The Kushner Family Foundation has funded some of Israel's
illegal settlements and also a number of conservative political groups in that country. Jared
has served as a director of that foundation and it is reported that he failed to disclose the
relationship when he filled out his background investigation sheet for a security clearance.
All of which suggests that if you are looking for possible foreign government collusion with
the incoming Trumpsters, look no further.
And it should be observed that the Israelis
were not exactly shy about their disapproval of Obama and their willingness to express
their views to the incoming Trump. Kushner went far beyond merely disagreeing over an aspect of
foreign policy as he was actively trying to clandestinely subvert and reverse a decision made
by his own legally constituted government. His closeness to Netanyahu made him, in intelligence
terms, a quite likely Israeli government agent of influence, even if he didn't quite see
himself that way.
Kushner's actions, as well as those of Flynn, would most certainly have been covered by the
Logan Act of 1799, which bars private citizens from negotiating with foreign governments on
behalf of the United States and also could be construed as a "conspiracy against the United
States." But in spite of all that the investigation went after Flynn instead of Kushner. As
Kushner is Jewish and certainly could be accused of dual loyalty in extremis , that part
of the story obviously makes many in the U.S. Establishment and media uncomfortable, so it was
and continues to be both ignored and expunged from the record as quickly as possible.
The
second story , which has basically been made to disappear, relates to spying by Israel
against critics in the United States. The revelation that Israel was again using its
telecommunications skills to spy on foreigners came from an Oakland California federal court
lawsuit initiated by Facebook (FB) against the Israeli surveillance technology company NSO
Group. FB claimed that NSO has been using servers located in the United States to infect with
spyware hundreds of smartphones being used by attorneys, journalists, human rights activists,
critics of Israel and even of government officials. NSO allegedly used WhatsApp, a messaging
app owned by FB, to hack into the phones and install malware that would enable the company to
monitor what was going on with the devices. It did so by employing networks of remote servers
located in California to enter the accounts.
NSO has inevitably claimed that they do indeed provide spyware, but that it is sold to
clients who themselves operate it with the "advice and technical support to assist customers in
setting up" but it also promotes its products as being "used to stop terrorism, curb violent
crime, and save lives." It also asserts that its software cannot be used against U.S. phone
numbers.
Facebook, which did its own extensive research into NSO activity, alleges that NSO rented a
Los Angeles-based server from a U.S. company called QuadraNet that it then used to launch 720
hacks on smartphones and other devices. It further claims in the court filing that the company
reverse-engineering WhatsApp, using an program that it developed to access WhatsApp's servers
and deploy "its spyware against approximately 1,400 targets" before " covertly transmit[ting]
malicious code through WhatsApp servers and inject[ing]" spyware into telephones without the
knowledge of the owners."
The filing goes on to assert that the "Defendants had no authority to access WhatsApp's
servers with an imposter program, manipulate network settings, and commandeer the servers to
attack WhatsApp users. That invasion of WhatsApp's servers and users' devices constitutes
unlawful computer hacking."
NSO, which is largely staffed by former (sic) Israeli intelligence officers, had previously
been in the news for its proprietary spyware known as Pegasus, which "can gather information
about a mobile phone's location, access its camera, microphone and internal hard drive, and
covertly record emails, phone calls and text messages." Pegasus was reportedly used in the
killing of Saudi dissident journalist Adnan Kashoggi in Istanbul last year and it has more
recently been suggested as a resource for tracking coronavirus distance violators. Outside
experts have accused the company of selling its technology and expertise to countries that have
used it to spy on dissidents, journalists and other critics.
Israel routinely exploits the access provided by its telecommunications industry to spy on
the host countries where those companies operate. The companies themselves report regularly
back to Mossad contacts and the technology they provide routinely has a "backdoor" for secretly
accessing the information accessible through the software. In fact, Israel conducts espionage
and influence operations both directly and through proxies against the United States more
aggressively than any other "friendly" country, which once upon a time included being able to
tap into the "secure" White House phones used by Bill Clinton to speak with Monica
Lewinsky.
Last September, it was revealed that the placement of technical surveillance devices by
Israel in Washington D.C. was clearly intended to target cellphone communications to and from
the Trump White House. As the president frequently chats with top aides and friends on
non-secure phones, the operation sought to pick up conversations involving Trump with the
expectation that the security-averse president would say things off the record that might be
considered top secret.
A Politicoreport
detailed how "miniature surveillance devices" referred to as "Stingrays" were used to imitate
regular cell phone towers to fool phones being used nearby into providing information on their
locations and identities. According to the article, the devices are referred to by technicians
as "international mobile subscriber identity-catchers or IMSI-catchers, they also can capture
the contents of calls and data use."
Over one year ago, government security agencies discovered the electronic footprints that
indicated the presence of the surveillance devices near the White House. Forensic analysis
involved dismantling the devices to let them "tell you a little about their history, where the
parts and pieces come from, how old are they, who had access to them, and that will help get
you to what the origins are." One source observed afterwards that "It was pretty clear that the
Israelis were responsible."
So two significant stories currently making the rounds have been bowdlerized and disappeared
to make the Israeli role in manipulating and spying against the United States go away. They are
only two of many stories framed by a Zionist dominated media to control the narrative in a way
favorable to the Jewish state. One would think that having a president of the United States who
is the most pro-Israel ever, which is saying a great deal in and of itself, would be enough,
but unfortunately when dealing with folks like Benjamin Netanyahu there can never be any
restraint when dealing with the "useful idiots" in Washington.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a
more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .
The new Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has apparently learned how to behave from the Corbyn
experience. He has been crawling on his belly to Jewish interests ever since he took over and
has even submitted to the counseling provided by the government's "Independent Adviser on
Antisemitism," a special interests office not too dissimilar to the abomination at the U.S.
State Department where Elan Carr is the Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating
anti-Semitism.
The adviser, Lord Mann, who like Carr is of course Jewish, has now insisted to Starmer that
the use of words like ''Zionist'' or ''Zionism'' in a critical context must be regarded as
anti-Semitism if Starmer wants to establish what he refers to as "comprehensive anti-racism"
within the Labour Party. Mann wants to confront what he refers to as "anti-Jewish racism" in
Britain, saying that "the thing Keir Starmer has to do is stick with the clear definition of
antisemitism, and not waver from that. The second thing he should do if he wants to really
imbed comprehensive anti-racism including antisemitism across the Labour Party – then the
use of the words Zionist or Zionism as a term of hatred, abuse, of contempt, as a negative term
– that should outlawed in the party."
Perhaps not surprisingly Lord Mann's comments came during an online discussion with the
Antisemitism Policy Trust's director Danny Stone, one of the major components of Israel's
powerful U.K. Jewish/Zionist Lobby. A majority of British Members of Parliament of both parties
are registered supporters of "Friends of Israel" associations, another indication of how Jewish
power is manifest in Britain and of how spineless the country's politicians have become.
Mann added: "If he does that, it gives him [Starmer] the tools to clear out those who choose
to be antisemitic, rather than those who do so purely through their ignorance as opposed to
their calculated behavior. I think he is seeing tackling antisemitism as one of those things
that will be shown to mark that he is a leader."
So, in Britain you are still presumably free to criticize Zionism, but not Israelis, as long
as you do not use the word itself. If you do use it in a critical way you will be one of those
presumably who will be "cleared out [of the Labour Party] for choosing to be antisemitic." Do
not be alarmed if similar nonsense takes hold in the United States, where already criticism of
Israel, such as it is, eschews the word Jewish in any context. Fearful of retribution that can
include loss of employment as happened to Rick Sanchez at CNN, the few who are bold enough to
criticize Israel regularly employ generic euphemisms like the "Israel Lobby" or "Zionism,"
ignoring the fact that what drives the process is ethno- or religious based. However one
chooses to obfuscate it, the power of Israel in the United States is undeniably based on Jewish
money, media control and easy access to politicians. When the friends of Israel in America
follow the British lead and figure out that the word Zionist has become pejorative they too
will no doubt move to make it unacceptable in polite discourse in the media and elsewhere. Then
many critics of the Jewish state will have no vocabulary left to use, nowhere to go, as in
Britain, and that is surely the intention.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a
more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org,
address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .
"... The explicit reference to Jerusalem appears later in the same document , in the context of communication between Stone and his unnamed contact in the Israeli capital. "On or about August 12, 2016, [NAME REDACTED] messaged STONE, "Roger, hello from Jerusalem. Any progress? He is going to be defeated unless we intervene. We have critical intell. The key is in your hands! Back in the US next week. How is your Pneumonia? Thank you. STONE replied, "I am well. Matters complicated. Pondering. R" The "he" is an apparent reference to Trump. ..."
"... Referring to the Israeli mentions in a report on the documents late Tuesday, the US website Politico noted: "The newly revealed messages often raise more questions than answers. They show Stone in touch with seemingly high-ranking Israeli officials attempting to arrange meetings with Trump during the heat of the 2016 campaign." ..."
"... Of course, this story is seen as a positive development from the Israeli (and evangelical) perspective because a Trump presidency was an essential part fulfilling an aggressive Zionist "wish list" which included moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, annexing the Golan Heights and the West Bank, and perhaps a major move against Iran in the second term. ..."
"... This story also explains why the jewish-controlled press saturated the airwaves with fake stories of "Russian" intervention in the election -- and why we will be seeing similar non-stop stories of "Chinese" intervention in the upcoming 2020 election in November. ..."
"... And Netanyahu hasn't wasted a second of Trump's presidency in expanding Israel's power, territory and influence. As one Jewish media pundit claimed , Donald Trump has been " the greatest president for Jews and for Israel in the history of the world." Trump has even bragged that he is so popular among Israelis that they would elect him Prime Minister if he ran. ..."
According to recently released FBI documents, Donald Trump's longtime confidant, Roger
Stone, who was convicted last year in Robert Mueller's investigation into ties between Russia
and the Trump campaign, was in contact with one or more apparently well-connected Israelis at
the height of the 2016 US presidential campaign, one of whom warned Stone that Trump was "going
to be defeated"
unless Israel intervened in the election :
The exchange between Stone and this Jerusalem-based contact appears in FBI documents made
public on Tuesday. The documents -- FBI affidavits submitted to obtain search warrants in the
criminal investigation into Stone -- were released following a court case brought by The
Associated Press and other media organizations.
A longtime adviser to Trump, Stone officially worked on the 2016 presidential campaign
until August 2015, when he said he left and Trump said he was fired. However he continued to
communicate with the campaign, according to Mueller's investigation.
The FBI material, which is heavily redacted, includes one explicit reference to Israel and
one to Jerusalem, and a series of references to a minister, a cabinet minister, a "minister
without portfolio in the cabinet dealing with issues concerning defense and foreign affairs,"
the PM, and the Prime Minister . In all these references the names and countries of the
minister and prime minister are redacted.
Benjamin Netanyahu was Israel's prime minister in 2016 , and the Israeli government
included a minister without portfolio, Tzachi Hanegbi, appointed in May with responsibility
for defense and foreign affairs. One reference to the unnamed PM in the material reads as
follows:
"On or about June 28, 2016, [NAME REDACTED] messaged STONE, "RETURNING TO DC AFTER
URGENT CONSULTATIONS WITH PM IN ROME. MUST MEET WITH YOU WED. EVE AND WITH DJ TRUMP THURSDAY
IN NYC."
Netanyahu made a state visit to Italy at the end of June 2016 .
The explicit reference to Israel appears early in the text of a May 2018 affidavit by an
FBI agent in support of an application for a search warrant, and relates to communication
between Stone and Jerome Corsi, an American author, commentator and conspiracy theorist. " On
August 20, 2016, CORSI told STONE that they needed to meet with [NAME REDACTED] to determine
"what if anything Israel plans to do in Oct," the affidavit states .
The explicit reference to Jerusalem appears later in the same document , in the context of
communication between Stone and his unnamed contact in the Israeli capital. "On or about
August 12, 2016, [NAME REDACTED] messaged STONE, "Roger, hello from Jerusalem. Any progress?
He is going to be defeated unless we intervene. We have critical intell. The key is in your
hands! Back in the US next week. How is your Pneumonia? Thank you. STONE replied, "I am well.
Matters complicated. Pondering. R" The "he" is an apparent reference to Trump.
The redacted material features numerous references to an "October surprise," apparently
relating to a document dump by Wikileaks' Julian Assange, intended to harm Hillary Clinton's
presidential campaign and salvage Trump's .
Referring to the Israeli mentions in a report on the documents late Tuesday, the US
website Politico noted: "The newly revealed messages often raise more questions than answers.
They show Stone in touch with seemingly high-ranking Israeli officials attempting to arrange
meetings with Trump during the heat of the 2016 campaign."
Mueller's investigation identified significant contact during the 2016 campaign between
Trump associates and Russians, but did not allege a criminal conspiracy to tip the outcome of
the presidential election.
This story first appeared last month, at the height of the COVID-19 plandemic, which
conveniently and not coincidentally allowed all the mainstream media in America to ignore
it.
Of course, this story is seen as a positive development from the Israeli (and evangelical)
perspective because a Trump presidency was an essential part fulfilling an aggressive Zionist
"wish list" which included moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, annexing the Golan Heights and
the West Bank, and perhaps a major move against Iran in the second term.
This story also explains why the jewish-controlled press saturated the airwaves with fake
stories of "Russian" intervention in the election -- and why we will be seeing similar non-stop
stories of "Chinese" intervention in the upcoming 2020 election in November.
We can only guess what further information about Israel's involvement in the election was
redacted from this FBI document, but there can be little doubt that the orders to help Trump
win came from the very top -- from Netanyahu himself.
And Netanyahu hasn't wasted a second of Trump's presidency in expanding Israel's power,
territory and influence. As one Jewish
media pundit claimed , Donald Trump has been " the greatest president for Jews and for
Israel in the history of the world." Trump has even bragged that he is so popular among Israelis that
they would elect him Prime Minister if he ran.
And even if the brain-dead American public found out about this Israeli intervention (i.e.,
"subversion of our democracy"), they would probably just shrug it off -- after all, Israel is
our "most trusted friend and ally,"
goyim .
Here's the best scenario: Trump wins re-election, and gives the neocons what they've been
egging for all along – WWIII, simultaneous war on all fronts, with Syria, Iran, Iraq,
Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine, China, Russia, Venezuela. Let's see the empire stretched so thin
it eventually craters and goes bankrupt. The only way to save America is for it to die in its
present form. When the country is completely bankrupt, when the people are so sick of war, then
maybe, just maybe, we will wise up, rise up and do a Mussolini on all the neocons who've been
killing this country from within since the days of Woodrow Wilson.
Top Biden advisor says Democrats will continue Trump's policy in Syria.
Tony Blinken says Biden would:
– Keep US troops in Syria
– Deny Assad oil
– Keep Idlib for rebels
– Refuse to negotiate w Damascus until US "effectuates more positive outcome"
Donald Trump's father and grandfather were connected to Jewish organized crime. Donald Trump
first got big on Twitter promoting the "birther" conspiracy theories about Obama which Trump
was getting from the Israeli Jew Orly Taitz. These conspiracy theories were designed to
demonize Obama for trying to end the sanctions on Iran and prevent a war.
Zionist Jews were quite aware that Donald Trump was their guy – he has always been
consistently popular in Israel. Zionist Jews knew that Donald Trump could give them everything
they wanted: takeover all of Jerusalem, annex the Golan Heights, and eventually annex Palestine
and ethnically cleanse the Palestinians – all going on right now with the support of
Trump and Jared Kushner's hand-picked Mike Pompeo.
Hey, Trump fans – Trump DID in fact "drain the swamp." He (well, Jared Kushner) fired
anyone who dared to oppose anything Israel wanted and replaced them with yes-men Zionist
flunkies.
How much longer till the MAGA-tard realize they were tricked?
This is almost certainly false and confusing the issue:
" In 1927 Frederick Trump was one of seven people in KKK cap and gown arrested in a near
riot."
Donald Trump's father was arrested during a riot at a Klan rally – but he almost
certainly wasn't "in KKK cap and gown" – it's far more likely he was the one rioting
AGAINST the Klan, as a member of the Jewish "Anti-fascist" terrorist group, which was a Jewish
Communist group then in the early stages.
Trump's uncle was a member of a Jewish fraternity and often claimed that his father was
Jewish, but that is probably false. Trump's grandfather supposedly owned brothels. Consider:
what kind of people own brothels, houses of prostitution, basically, human trafficking?
Organized crime.
Trump isn't Jewish, Trump's father wasn't Jewish and neither was his grandfather. What
Trump and his family is, is non-Jewish members of Jewish organized crime.
Why confuse the issue? Half of Trump's children and grandchildren are now either Jewish,
Israelis, or married to Jews and Israelis.
Trump and his entire family going back to his grandfather, are shabbos goyim.
Israel and the zionists in the ZUS government did the attack on the WTC and the pentagram and
blamed it on the Arabs to have the excuse to attack and destroy the middle east for Israel
and the neocons , to fulfill the Zionistd dream of a greater Israel.
America has been under zionist control since 1913, when the Zionists fastened their
privately owned central bank ie the FED and IRS on the American people, which are 2 of 10
planks of the communist manifesto and then came the unending wars all brought about by the
zionist influence in the ZUS government.
,,,read the book, The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed, can be had on Amazon.
Nixon is recorded as saying, "Any settlement will have to be imposed by both the US and the
Soviet Union". Yet, as he had told the Russian ambassador to Washington, "I don't want to
anger the American Jews who hold important positions in the press, radio and television".
The Jewish lobby has enormous influence on Congress. Nixon wanted to wait until he had won
his reelection and concluded the withdrawal of US forces from Vietnam and then he could face
down the Jewish lobby. Later he told the ambassador, "I will deliver the Israelis".
In one of his final acts in office, he ordered a complete cutoff of assistance to Israel.
It was not to be.
Darren Hiebert Someone already commented on the 1982 Oded Yinon plan, which is what has been
playing out for the past 30 years. Literally, the "balkanization" of the middle east into
ethnic/religious conclaves more easily overpowered in war, giving Israel regional hegemony of a
highly advanced weaponized Jewish minority amongst an overwhelming majority of iron age armed
Arabs/Muslims. This can't go on much longer and changes are coming.
Recently, we have seen the disturbing use of the term 'antisemite' to aggressively accuse those
that question the current Israeli agenda, and to shut down debate over the rights and freedoms
of the indigenous Palestinian people under more than 50 years of oppressive occupation and
illegal annexations. Zionism is equated with Judaism (which they are NOT), and disagreeing with
Zionism equates to antisemitism which will get you "escorted from the game". The voice of 98%
is much louder than the irritating whining of 2%. It's time we started using it
Talking of weaponization- "anti-semitism" is their best weapon. It just destroyed the only UK
politician with a semblance of humanity and genuine-ness, gave the Tories a majority win and
condemned the people in the UK to who knows how many more years of corporate feudarchy. (- i
have never supported any political party).
Charlotte Russe ,
A THEFT FROM THOSE WHO HUNGER
Instigating sectarian wars is a well-established way of balkanizing territories. It's what
Empires have been doing throughout history. In that regard, Britain and now the US is no
different, it's just following the footsteps of all past imperialist domains. What's
astonishing, is that the desire to vanquish and subjugate indigenous populations still exists
today. You'd think human nature would've evolved just a bit over the last 5,000 thousand
years. I guess not, since the West as well as the East are continuing the battle over
geostrategic hegemony.
"A Clean Break" as cited by Cynthia Chung sounds very much like the "Yinon Plan" which
refers to an article published in 1982 in the Hebrew Journal Kivunim entitled "A Strategy for
Israel in the 1980s." The article was published by the World Zionist Organization. It was
written by Oded Yinon.
The Yinon Plan is an early example of how political warfare in the Middle East would be
viewed in terms of sectarian divisions. Many believe it influenced the formulation of
policies adopted by George W. Bush and his Project for a New American Century (PNAC) gang.
The article predicted major political events in the Middle East since the 1980s, including
the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the overthrowing of Saddam Hussein, the Syrian Civil War and
the rise of the Islamic State.
It seems obvious, the Oded Yinon Plan was adopted during Bush's presidency as a way to
further American interests in the Middle East. In this context, Israel becomes an ancillary
US military base. However, before Bush we can't forget Jimmy Carter's National Security
Advisor Brzezinski who organized and funded the Mujahideen with the help of Osama bin Laden
to combat Soviet influence in Afghanistan. Saudi born Osama bin Laden was recruited during
the Soviet-Afghan war.
"With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan's ISI [Inter Services
Intelligence], who wanted to turn the Afghan jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim
states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined
Afghanistan's fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistan
madrasas. Eventually more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by
the Afghan jihad .. The Islamic "jihad" was supported by the United States and Saudi Arabia
with a significant part of the funding generated from the Golden Crescent drug trade."
https://www.globalresearch.ca/osama-bin-laden/5688305
The Mujahideen morphed into Al-Qaeda and then into ISIS–the rest is history
..Smiling Obama, expanded Bush's two wars into seven, recycling various terrorist groups
throughout the Middle East. Trump's 2016 campaign promise to remove troops from the Middle
East was a pipedream. Even the strategic shift towards a "Great Power Competition" has done
little to extract the US military from all the endless wars.
The US Empire has "800 formal military bases in 80 countries, a number that could exceed
1,000 if you count troops stationed at embassies and missions and so-called "lily-pond"
bases, with some 138,000 soldiers stationed around the globe ..
Here's an excerpt from a prescient speech given by Eisenhower to the American Society of
Newspaper Editors, in Washington D.C., on April 16, 1953. Eisenhower highlighted the cost of
continued tensions and rivalry with the Soviet Union:
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the
final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not
clothed.
This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the
genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is
this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each
serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some
fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of
wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000
people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of
threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."
"... A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm ..."
"... "the right to plunder anything one can get their hands on" ..."
"... "the UK and France in March 2011 which led the international community to support an intervention in Libya to protect civilians from forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi" ..."
n 1996 a task force, led by Richard Perle, produced a policy document titled A Clean
Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm for Benjamin Netanyahu, who was then in his
first term as Prime Minister of Israel, as a how-to manual on approaching regime change in the
Middle East and for the destruction of the Oslo Accords.
The "Clean Break" policy document outlined these goals:
Ending Yasser Arafat's and the
Palestinian Authority's political influence, by blaming them for acts of Palestinian terrorism
Inducing the United States to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq. Launching war against
Syria after Saddam's regime is disposed of. Followed by military action against Iran, Saudi
Arabia, and Egypt.
"Clean Break" was also in direct opposition to the Oslo Accords, to which Netanyahu was very
much itching to obliterate. The Oslo II Accord was signed just the year before, on September
28th 1995, in Taba, Egypt.
During the Oslo Accord peace process, Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu accused Rabin's
government of being "removed from Jewish tradition and Jewish values." Rallies organised by the
Likud and other right-wing fundamentalist groups featured depictions of Rabin in a Nazi SS
uniform or in the crosshairs of a gun.
In July 1995, Netanyahu went so far as to lead a mock funeral procession for Rabin,
featuring a coffin and hangman's noose.
The Oslo Accords was the initiation of a process which was to lead to a peace treaty based
on the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, and at fulfilling the "right of
the Palestinian people to self-determination." If such a peace treaty were to occur, with the
United States backing, it would have prevented much of the mayhem that has occurred since.
However, the central person to ensuring this process, Yitzak Rabin, was assassinated just a
month and a half after the signing of the Oslo II Accord, on November 4th, 1995. Netanyahu
became prime minister of Israel seven months later. "Clean Break" was produced the following
year.
On November 6th, 2000 in the Israeli daily Ha'aretz, Israeli Justice Minister Yossi Beilin,
who was the chief negotiator of the Oslo peace accords, warned those Israelis who argued that
it was impossible to make peace with the Palestinians:
Zionism was founded in order to save Jews from persecution and anti-Semitism, and not in
order to offer them a Jewish Sparta or – God forbid – a new Massada."
On Oct. 5, 2003, for the first time in 30 years, Israel launched bombing raids against
Syria, targeting a purported "Palestinian terrorist camp" inside Syrian territory. Washington
stood by and did nothing to prevent further escalation.
"Clean Break" was officially launched in March 2003 with the war against Iraq, under the
pretence of "The War on Terror". The real agenda was a western-backed list of regime changes in
the Middle East to fit the plans of the United Kingdom, the U.S. and Israel.
However, the affair is much more complicated than that with each player holding their own
"idea" of what the "plan" is. Before we can fully appreciate such a scope, we must first
understand what was Sykes-Picot and how did it shape today's world mayhem.
Arabian
Nights
WWI was to officially start July 28th 1914, almost immediately following the Balkan wars
(1912-1913) which had greatly weakened the Ottoman Empire.
Never one to miss an opportunity when smelling fresh blood, the British were very keen on
acquiring what they saw as strategic territories for the taking under the justification of
being in war-time, which in the language of geopolitics translates to "the right to plunder
anything one can get their hands on" .
The brilliance of Britain's plan to garner these new territories was not to fight the
Ottoman Empire directly but rather, to invoke an internal rebellion from within. These Arab
territories would be encouraged by Britain to rebel for their independence from the Ottoman
Empire and that Britain would support them in this cause.
These Arab territories were thus led to believe that they were fighting for their own
freedom when, in fact, they were fighting for British and secondarily French colonial
interests.
In order for all Arab leaders to sign on to the idea of rebelling against the Ottoman
Sultan, there needed to be a viable leader that was Arab, for they certainly would not agree to
rebel at the behest of Britain.
Lord Kitchener, the butcher of Sudan, was to be at the helm of this operation as Britain's
Minister of War. Kitchener's choice for Arab leadership was the scion of the Hashemite dynasty,
Hussein ibn Ali, known as the Sherif of Mecca who ruled the region of Hejaz under the Ottoman
Sultan.
Hardinge of the British India Office disagreed with this choice and wanted Wahhabite
Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud instead, however, Lord Kitchener overruled this stating that their
intelligence revealed that more Arabs would follow Hussein.
Since the Young Turk Revolution which seized power of the Ottoman government in 1908,
Hussein was very aware that his dynasty was in no way guaranteed and thus he was open to
Britain's invitation to crown him King of the Arab kingdom.
Kitchener wrote to one of Hussein's sons, Abdallah, as reassurance of Britain's support:
If the Arab nation assist England in this war that has been forced upon us by Turkey,
England will guarantee that no internal intervention take place in Arabia, and will give
Arabs every assistance against foreign aggression."
Sir Henry McMahon who was the British High Commissioner to Egypt, would have several
correspondences with Sherif Hussein between July 1915 to March 1916 to convince Hussein to
lead the rebellion for the "independence" of the Arab states.
However, in a private letter to India's Viceroy Charles Hardinge sent on December 4th, 1915,
McMahon expressed a rather different view of what the future of Arabia would be, contrary to
what he had led Sherif Hussein to believe:
[I do not take] the idea of a future strong united independent Arab State too seriously
the conditions of Arabia do not and will not for a very long time to come, lend themselves to
such a thing."
Such a view meant that Arabia would be subject to Britain's heavy-handed "advising" in all
its affairs, whether it sought it or not.
In the meantime, Sherif Hussein was receiving dispatches issued by the British Cairo office
to the effect that the Arabs of Palestine, Syria, and Mesopotamia (Iraq) would be given
independence guaranteed by Britain, if they rose up against the Ottoman Empire.
The French were understandably suspicious of Britain's plans for these Arab territories. The
French viewed Palestine, Lebanon and Syria as intrinsically belonging to France, based on
French conquests during the Crusades and their "protection" of the Catholic populations in the
region.
Hussein was adamant that Beirut and Aleppo were to be given independence and completely
rejected French presence in Arabia. Britain was also not content to give the French all the
concessions they demanded as their "intrinsic" colonial rights.
Enter Sykes and Picot.
... ... ...
Throughout the 1920s and 1930s violent confrontations between Jews and Arabs took place in
Palestine costing hundreds of lives. In 1936 a major Arab revolt occurred over 7 months, until
diplomatic efforts involving other Arab countries led to a ceasefire.
In 1937, a British Royal Commission of Inquiry headed by William Peel concluded that
Palestine had two distinct societies with irreconcilable political demands, thus making it
necessary to partition the land.
The Arab Higher Committee refused Peel's "prescription" and the revolt broke out again. This
time, Britain responded with a devastatingly heavy hand. Roughly 5,000 Arabs were killed by the
British armed forces and police. Following the riots, the British mandate government dissolved
the Arab Higher Committee and declared it an illegal body.
In response to the revolt, the British government issued the White Paper of 1939, which
stated that Palestine should be a bi-national state, inhabited by both Arabs and Jews.
Due to the international unpopularity of the mandate including within Britain itself, it was
organised such that the United Nations would take responsibility for the British initiative and
adopted the resolution to partition Palestine on November 29th, 1947.
Britain would announce its termination of its Mandate for Palestine on May 15th, 1948 after
the State of Israel declared its independence on May 14th, 1948.
A New Strategy for
Securing Whose Realm?
Despite what its title would have you believe, "Clean Break" is neither a "new strategy" nor
meant for "securing" anything. It is also not the brainchild of fanatical neo-conservatives:
Dick Cheney and Richard Perle, nor even that of crazed end-of-days fundamentalist Benjamin
Netanyahu, but rather has the very distinct and lingering odour of the British Empire.
"Clean Break" is a continuation of Britain's geopolitical game, and just as it used France
during the Sykes-Picot days it is using the United States and Israel.
The role Israel has found itself playing in the Middle East could not exist if it were not
for over 30 years of direct British occupation in Palestine and its direct responsibility for
the construction of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which set a course for destruction and
endless war in this region long before Israel ever existed.
It was also Britain who officially launched operation "Clean Break" by directly and
fraudulently instigating an illegal war against Iraq to which the
Chilcot Inquiry, aka Iraq Inquiry , released 7 years later, attests to.
This was done by the dubious
reporting by British Intelligence setting the pretext for the U.S.' ultimate invasion into
Iraq based off of fraudulent and forged evidence provided by GCHQ, unleashing the "War on
Terror", aka "Clean Break" outline for regime change in the Middle East.
In addition, the Libyan invasion in 2011 was also found to be unlawfully instigated by
Britain.
In a report
published by the British Foreign Affairs Committee in September 2016, it was concluded that
it was "the UK and France in March 2011 which led the international community to support an
intervention in Libya to protect civilians from forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi" .
The report concluded that the Libyan intervention was based on false pretence provided by
British Intelligence and recklessly promoted by the British government.
If this were not enough, British Intelligence has also been caught behind the orchestrations
of
Russia-Gate and the Skripal affair .
Therefore, though the U.S. and Israeli military have done a good job at stealing the show,
and though they certainly believe themselves to be the head of the show, the reality is that
this age of empire is distinctly British and anyone who plays into this game will ultimately be
playing for said interests, whether they are aware of it or not.
Zionism was founded in order to save Jews from persecution and anti-Semitism
Ever heard of Dumbo? He's a flying elephant.
The crusade in the ME will continue, with Israel the top dog until America's military
support is no longer there. Even without the Israeli eastern european invaders, the area is
primed for perpetual tribal warfare because the masses are driven by tribalist doctrines and
warped metaphysics dictated by insane and inhumane parasites (priests). It is the epicenter
of a spiritual plague that has infected most of the planet.
paul ,
There is complete continuity between the activities of Zionist controlled western countries
and those of the present day.
In the 1930s, there were about 300,000 adult Palestinian males. Over 10% were killed,
imprisoned and tortured or driven into exile. 100,000 British troops were sent to Palestine
to destroy completely Palestinian political and military organisations. Wingate set up the
Jew terror gangs who were given free rein to murder, rape and burn, in preparation for the
complete ethnic cleansing of the country.
We see the same ruthless, genocidal brutality on an even greater scale in the present day,
serving exactly the same interests. Nothing has ever come of trying to negotiate with the
Zionists and their western stooges – just further disasters. It is only resolute and
uncompromising resistance that has ever achieved anything. Hezbollah kicking their Zionist
arses out of Lebanon in 2000 and keeping them out in 2006. Had they not done so, Lebanon
would still be under Zionist occupation and covered with their filthy illegal
settlements.
They have never stopped and they never will. The objective is to create a vast Zionist
empire comprising the whole of Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria, and parts of Egypt,
Turkey, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. This plan has never changed and it never will. The Zionist
thieves will shortly steal what little is left of Palestine. But the thieving will not end
there. It will just move on to neighbouring countries.
The prime reason they have been able to get away with this is not their control of British
and US golems. It is by playing the old, dirty colonial games of divide and rule, with the
Quisling stooge dictators serving their interests. They have always been able to set Sunni
against Shia, and different factions against others. The dumb Arabs fall for it every time.
Their latest intrigues are directed at the destruction of Iran, the next victim on their
target list after Iraq, Libya and Syria. And the Quisling dictators of Saudi Arabia are
openly agitating for this and offering to pay for all of it. Syria sent troops to join the US
invasion of Iraq in 1991, though Iraqi troops fought and died in Syria in 1973 against
Israel. Egypt allows Israel to use its airspace to carry out the genocidal terror bombing of
Gaza.
All this is contemptible enough and fits into racist stereotypes of Arabs as stupid,
irrational, corrupt, easily bought, violent and treacherous. This of course does not apply to
the populations of those countries, but it is a legitimate assessment of their Quisling
dictators, with a (very) few honourable exceptions.
Seamus Padraig ,
Of course, Arab rulers who don't tow the Zionist line generally get overthrown,
don't they? And that usually requires the efforts/intervention of FUKUS, doesn't it? So you
can't really pretend that 'Arab stupidity' is the main factor.
Richard Le Sarc ,
The fact that, as the Yesha Council of Rabbis and Torah Sages declared in 2006, as Israel was
bombing Lebanon 'back to the Stone Age', under Talmudic Judaism, killing civilians is not
just permissible, but a mitzvah, or good deed, explains Zionist behaviour. Other doctrines
allow an entire 'city' eg Gaza, to be devastated for the 'crimes' of a few, and children,
even babies, to be killed if they would grow up to 'oppose the Jews'. Dare mention these
FACTS, seen everyday in Israeli barbarity, and the 'antisemitism' slurs flow, as ever.
Julia ,
" is that this age of empire is distinctly British"
.it takes some balls to make such an absurd statement and still expect to be taken
seriously. The US of course with its 800 military bases around the world and gifts of 40
billion a year to Israel has no opinion on the future of the Middle East. You would have us
believe that they are just humble onlookers, as a small bankrupt country tells them what to
do. We are being told that the CIA, the most formidable spy agency and manipulator of
countries in history, sits quietly by as the British and Israel tells the US what to do.
Absurd isn't it., Clearly the truth is that Israel is just another military base for the US
in the Middle East, easily the most important geopolitical region in the world. They fund it,
arm it, and protect it from all attacks, Israel does as it is told by the US for the most
part despite the pantomime on the surface.
Many on the far right like to hide US interests behind a wall of antisemitism that likes to
paint 'the jews' as an all powerful enemy but this is just cover for Israel's real
geopolitical roll as a US puppet.
Time and time again all we are seeing is attempt to write the US, the largest empire in the
history out of the news and out of the history books, like it is some invisible benign force
that has not interests, no control and does noting to forward it's interests and it's
empire.
''To find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticise."
I don't know about you, but I'm not 10 years old and I know I am looking at Empire and
it's power being flexed every day in every part do the world, especial in the parts of the
world that it funds with trillions of dollars.
Julia ,
" is that this age of empire is distinctly British"
.it takes some balls to make such an absurd statement and still expect to be taken
seriously. The US of course with its 800 military bases around the world and gifts of 40
billion a year to Israel has no opinion on the future of the Middle East. You would have us
believe that they are just humble onlookers, as a small bankrupt country tells them what to
do. We are being told that the CIA, the most formidable spy agency and manipulator of
countries in history, sits quietly by as the British and Israel tells the US what to do.
Absurd isn't it., Clearly the truth is that Israel is just another military base for the US
in the Middle East, easily the most important geopolitical region in the world. They fund it,
arm it, and protect it from all attacks, Israel does as it is told by the US for the most
part despite the pantomime on the surface.
Many on the far right like to hide US interests behind a wall of antisemitism that likes to
paint 'the jews' as an all powerful enemy but this is just cover for Israel's real
geopolitical roll as a US puppet.
Time and time again all we are seeing is attempt to write the US, the largest empire in the
history out of the news and out of the history books, like it is some invisible benign force
that has not interests, no control and does noting to forward it's interests and it's
empire.
''To find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticise."
I don't know about you, but I'm not 10 years old and I know I am looking at Empire and
it's power being flexed every day in every part do the world, especial in the parts of the
world that it funds with trillions of dollars.
Richard Le Sarc ,
The antithesis of the truth. It is US politicians who flock to AIPAC's meeting every year to
pledge UNDYING fealty to Israel, not Israeli politicians pledging loyalty to the USA. It is
Israeli and dual loyalty Jewish oligarchs funding BOTH US parties, it is US politicians
throwing themselves to the ground in adulation when Bibi the war criminal addresses the
Congress with undisguised contempt, not Israeli politicians groveling to the USA. The
master-servant relationship is undisguised.
Pyewacket ,
In Daniel Yergin's The Prize, a history of the Oil industry, he provides another interesting
angle to explain British interest in the region. He states that at that time, Churchill
realised that a fighting Navy powered by Coal, was not nearly as good or efficient as one
using Oil as a fuel, and that securing supplies of the stuff was the best way forward to
protect the Empire.
BigB ,
Yergin would be right. The precursor of the First World War was a technological arms race and
accelerated 'scientific' perfection of arsenals – particularly naval – in the
service of imperialism. British and German imperialism. The full story involves the Berlin to
Cairo railway and the resource grab that went with it. I'm a bit sketchy on the details now:
but Churchill had a prominent role, rising to First Lord of the Admiralty.
Docherty and Macgregor have exposed the hidden history. F W Engdahl has written about WW1
being the first oil war.
In 1996 a task force, led by Richard Perle, produced a policy document titled A Clean
Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm for Benjamin Netanyahu
No source link for this!
By the way 1996 was during the Clinton administration. Warren Christopher was secretary of
state and John Deutch was the Director of Central Intelligence . George Tenet was appointed
the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence in July 1995. After John Deutch's abrupt
resignation in December 1996, Tenet served as acting director.
Antsie, what are you going to deny next? The USS Liberty? Deir Yassin? The Lavon Affair?
Sabra, Shatilla? Qana (twice)? The Five Celebrating Israelis on 9/11?Does not impress.
What is hate? A feeling of intense dislike, but also something else. Coming to the
realization that one intensely dislikes something is the prelude to action against it. I need
to be clear on my meaning here. Contemporary propaganda saturation would have you believe that
hate "causes" violence and terrorism. This is a nonsense. Consult the work of any serious
terrorism expert and you won't find "hate" anywhere listed as a serious explanation for any act
of terrorism at any point in history.
Hate is primarily an understanding, and then a state of mind. One can find terrorism
motivated in small part by hate, but also by love, fear, confusion, desperation, tactical
consideration, religious enthusiasm, personal anguish, psychopathy, peer pressure, mental
illness, drug addiction, greed and even a combination of all of these things.
When I say that hate is primarily an understanding I mean that it shapes trajectories of
behaviour and conditions responses. Hate is not spontaneously self-creating. It doesn't arise
in a given man simply because that man is "bad." Hate arises in response to stimuli, some kind
of provocation. Hate always has a cause and an object. And the person at peace in their hatred
is someone willing to believe that he can ultimately overcome and defeat what he hates.
The Longest Hatred
Jews have described anti-Semitism as the "longest hatred." I disagree. It is clear to any
educated onlooker that Semitism itself, insofar as Semitism is defined as the behavioral
expression of the Jewish hatred of mankind, represents the oldest hatred in recorded history.
The interesting point here is that all Jewish examinations of what they perceive to be the
"longest hatred" are conspicuous in their avoidance of the issue of cause and object.
Hatred of the Jews is, for Jews, entirely spontaneous and self-creating. Hatred, a human
emotion, is often quarantined from reasonable human consideration and represented in Jewish
understanding as something not-quite-human -- a virus, a theological mutation, or a
psychological malfunction. Europeans in Jewish writings are quintessential haters insofar as
this involves Europeans giving themselves over to something entirely irrational and
inexplicable.
Unwilling to examine their own role as cause and object, or to look at their own hatreds in
the cold light of day, Jews promote the idea that hate itself, or at least hate among
Europeans, is always devoid of cause and object. The White man's hate is always spontaneous,
always irrational, always self-creating, always inexplicable. Ultimately, as we have seen, hate
in the European is "criminal."
If Semitism is, as I have argued, the true "longest hatred," then what is its cause
and object? Causes here are both internal and external to Jews. Judaism, the precise origins
of which will remain forever unknown and unknowable, commands a strict separation from other
humans and the formation of an ethnic caste above all others. It asserts an ultimate, cosmic
superiority, and permits the infliction of a lesser ethics upon presumed inferiors.
Jewish hate has arisen from time immemorial in the simple fact that other humans
(collectively lumped together simply as goyim ) refuse to accept this state of affairs,
and that they fail to indulge Judaism's dominance fantasy.
From the beginning of Judaism until the present day, Jews have encountered populations
who refuse to see Jews as their superiors. These non-Jewish populations have consistently
refused to be subjected to lesser treatment, and they have hated the Jews for attempting to
impose it upon them.
Jews have responded to this reactionary hatred with a further hatred of their own -- a
dishonest hatred that hides even from itself and postures as a morose remembering of past
injustices. The cycle continues endlessly, with Jewish hatred thus internally and perpetually
powered via the momentum of the past.
The lachrymose history of the Jews is in fact the story of frustrated attempts at
dominance, and although it presents as a tale of woe, it is in fact a hit-list for revenge.
Adam and Gedaliah Afterman have written of the Medieval period as a time in which Jews
cultivated a powerful theology/ideology of revenge for perceived wrongs perpetrated by host
populations.
Isn't it clear that this tale is a mere externalizing of deeper instincts? Isn't Jewish
culture and historiography the real "garment" upon which Jews name their "victims," thereby
paving the way for a future vengeance executed not by a deity but by the true object of Jewish
worship -- the Jews themselves? Every act of Jewish hate is therefore ultimately dishonest,
being predicated on false conceptions of vengeance (since the antagonistic Jews were never
truly wronged) and therefore incapable of being fulfilled.
Jewish hate does not act on immediate causes and objects, but on causes and objects from all
nations and from all time periods including the distant past and future. The contemporary
infliction of mass migration and cultural degradation on the United States is therefore part of
a scheme of vengeance that has its roots in ancient Rome, and in medieval Toledo, and in 1920s
Romania, etc. In this kaleidoscopic form of self-denial, Jews seek to fundamentally change your
nation not because they "hate" you, and certainly not because they love you, but because they
know only too well the dangers of the past. In the midst of such reasoning, their obvious
hatred is obscured even to many of their own number.
Hatred is only a psychological burden when it can't be fulfilled.
Hatred is only a psychological burden when the mind creates an obstacle that it can't
overcome. It can always just not make the obstacle, and move somewhere else. As the Chinese
saying goes "of the 36 strategems, the best one is flee".
Fear and the resulting hate are the weakest of human reactions. It is lowering yourself
away from the higher intellectual being that you are, to a base animalistic instinct. The
Buddhist does not 'forgive an enemy' – he simply does not see an enemy. Of course, this
requires an ideology that lacks the duality of 'good' and 'evil' – mind made and
limited concepts. And running away? That is often just the most rational response. Take the
fascism that is creeping in onto the west – stay and fight the state? Why? I've played
Russian roulette with my life before, between Russian roulette, and a life somewhere else, I
choose a life somewhere else.
A Buddhist sees someone acting violently just like someone who is physically crippled. A
mental condition that makes the individual less than what they could be. Why hate a
psychological cripple? Because they act on their intention – sure, that dooms them far
more than some genetic lottery. But it also gives them an out that a physical cripple doesn't
have. Hate does not allow for reform of that which can be reformed, and so it grants no
positive solution.
The current revolution in values
The no-hate practices of Stoics, Buddhists, Jains, Taoists, Christ's followers, is
millennia old. The revolution, if you ask me, is coming from the fact that the modern West
has cast off its shackles of Christianity (which is not Christ's message for the most part),
and taken to filling the void of atheism with some mixage of ancient and peaceful faiths.
That these people professing a metaphysical 'we are all One' are also atheists, makes them
very confused, so they act out with 'anti-hate'-hate. An intellectual dishonesty because they
are not intellectually honest with themselves.
Hate is a nihilist's solution (and you do quote that fool Nietszche more than once! )
– kill everyone whom I despise, and the world will be set right. But in doing so, you
become what you hate. I am reminded of the great old game Diablo, in enunciating this in
gamer format.
By preaching "a world without hate," Jews..
Samson option. Judaism preaches hate with respect to the Gentile, other than through false
advertising, like a wolf teaching sheep where to graze. That dumb spiritually yearning
atheists fall in line with the message is simply due to 'the fool is not the one that doesn't
know, but the one who does not want to know'.. Show these SJWs the Talmud, quote them
passages of the Old Testament – they will just brush it off with 'all faiths are the
same, they preach the same bullshit, have these same diatribes'.
Hate always has a cause and an object. And the person at peace in their hatred is
someone willing to believe that he can ultimately overcome and defeat what he hates.
Not that I will quote Spock or the Vulcans, but emotion, hate, fear – these things
do not help your rational reasoning process, that cognitive process which drives you towards
a solution to your problem. Emotion will instead cloud your thinking, throw an element of
chaos into it, and make you act before you think. Fine for the ape, beneath and damaging to
the human. This is no peaceful reflection, but reflectionary reaction – like a dumb
rock falling to Earth under the effect of gravity.
Durocher: "Take the Bible, for instance, which for the most part offers no injunction against
enmity, intense dislike, or revenge except in cases of silent resentment in fraternal,
co-ethnic, or communal relationships (Lev. 19:17, 1 John 3:15). The only exception in the
Bible is located within the "love thy enemy" section of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew
5:44) "
No, that's wrong.
While the Stoics thought it virtuous to love mankind, this was only because other men were
presumed to be rational creatures akin to oneself. For the Stoics, to love was not a virtue
in itself; it wasn't seen as some theological essence, and reason still held primacy. But
this all changed with the coming of Christianity, and its identification of Love with God
himself. You quote 1 John, but the wrong verse. It goes on to say, in 1 John 4:8, that "God
is love". But if God is love, then what does that make hate but the antithesis of God? Haters
then become an enemy of God, and are by definition devoid of any virtue. Thus, in the West,
the modern elevation of Love into the ultimate virtue, and the demonization of Hate, descends
directly from Christian theological thought. At the same time, in Christianity, reason is
devalued. Contra the Stoic position, man does not help himself through his own efforts, by
means of rational understanding, but rather through simple, child-like faith in Jesus, the
putative incarnation of Love. Jesus doesn't reason with anyone. He's no Socrates, looking for
truth. He simply proclaims that he IS the truth, the way, and the light (John 14:6). Reason,
evidence, and argument play no role whatsoever.
The overvaluation of Love in our own times can entirely be laid at the doorstep of
Christianity and its cultural residue. The necessary consequence of this overvaluation is the
demonization of Hate.
Hate is a natural emotion. We are born that way. Hating something or someone leads to fight
or flight. Flight is always preferable to fight, when possible.
Hating something because it exists is a waste of time. Hating something because it causes
you pain is natural. Human.
Outstanding essay by Andrew Joyce. Hate is not the world's worst evil. In fact, it's not evil
at all. This moral pretension is a post-Holocaust fairy tale.
The fraudulent 'anti-hate' campaigns that have arisen in America over the past 50 years
are all politically oriented and racially-motivated. Their objective is not the elimination
of 'hate', but the deligitimitisation of white identity, white cohesion, white advocacy, and
white continuity.
Ironically, to achieve these unadvertised goals, these camouflaged campaigns rely on
derision, division and defamation. In their wake are invidious double standards which not
only disadvantage white peoples, but elevate Jewish nationalism (Zionism). This artifice
tears at the very core of Western (white) civilization.
If you love justice and fairness; if you love your family and your people, you must hate
those responsible for this ongoing and detestable war of aggression.
"For the Buddhists, the soft, supple branch that bends with the fall of heavy snow is more
likely to survive winter than the brittle branch that resists and then snaps under increasing
weight. Giving way, if necessary, to enemies, was therefore viewed as a form of tactical
strength and a means to survival and happiness.
These positions are ultimately weak and evasive in my opinion, because they reject the
principles of overcoming obstacles and engaging in direct competition with opponents.
The Stoic and Buddhist approaches are therefore weak not simply because of their
superficial rejection of hatred, but because their rejections are themselves evidence of
intrinsic weakness in the rejector."
Yes, onward Christian soldiers I wrote something else after, but figured it would get lost
in translation and erased it. This is really pathethic stuff. The "great thinker" here writes
about Buddhism, yet is completely clueless what Buddhism reflects. I started reading this
article thinking it might have something useful to say, but realised the author is in the
same demented right wing rut the rest of the freakshow running the west for israel are. But
that's what israel wants for "deep thinkers" among their jailhouse bitches.
This is one of the smarter posts I've read on this site in a while. I've felt the same way
for a long time – hatred is a rational consequence of understanding what's happening to
white people. It seems that the only white people who can be truly alive these days are
absolutely boiling with this healthy, virile, and useful emotion. There are three options for
a white person: Deny that the white race is being dispossessed (deny the world), deny that
you hate this (deny the self), or accept hatred into your heart.
I think you make it too easy on yourself with the antizionism. By all means, hate Zionists
(I do!), but it's doing too much work in your analysis. The weakness and cowardice that's
destroying the west is an internal urge of Europeans, with Christianity as ultimate religion
of cucks (=deniers of the self). Let's not forget to knock back a nice tall glass of haterade
in honor of the pathetically weak and cowardly gentiles who have so diligently contributed to
our destruction over the decades.
Europeans everywhere will have resigned themselves to non-resistance and to a
psychological state in which successful opposition to the negative forces of contemporary
life becomes impossible.
Europeans appear less resigned than afraid. Fear squashes the ability to hate. It seems
counterintuitive but if you've done any police work you know it because you've seen it in
action.
Fear of poverty, of overcrowding, of losing our place in the world. And the iron triangle
of government, media, and education are adding now logs to the fire of fear daily.
@Badger Down The term
"semite" and all of its derivatives should apply only to true "semites". Most jews are not
"semites" at all but are eastern European Turkish interlopers who have no right to define
themselves as "semites".
True "semites" are those whose history places them in the Levant for the long
haul–Palestinians and other Arabs can properly be called "semites", unlike most eastern
European jewish "transplants".
It is long overdue for the record to be set straight on who is a "semite" and who is not
This article misses the mark. Should have included reference to the article "The Virtue of
Hate" in First Things magazine, February 2003, by Rabbi Meir Y. Soloveichik.
"... What's worse than a Sheldon Adelson bankrolling President Trump's 2016 election, leading to big payoffs for him in U.S.-Israeli policy and his own people (John Bolton), nested in the inner sanctum? What's worse than a Sheldon Adelson influencing U.S. trade policy in China, mostly because of his titanic casino interests in Macau? ..."
"... How about a Sheldon Adelson providing his elite security team as an interlocutor for covert, illegal CIA operations overseas. ..."
"... If you are still not persuaded, recall that Adelson was accused of working with the CIA at his casinos in Macau, providing a recruiting ground for agents so they could spy on Beijing. This was back in 2015, long before Trump's entrance onto the scene. ..."
"... Read the whole thing. Considering the powerful role Adelson has played in the White House it is worth taking seriously, whether you think Assange is deserves one's sympathy or not. ..."
New evidence shows nexus between the casino magnate's elite security team and U.S. targeting of Julian Assange. Chairman and chief
executive officer of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation Sheldon Adelson arrives ahead of the inauguration of the US embassy in Jerusalem
on May 14, 2018. (Photo credit should read MENAHEM KAHANA/AFP via Getty Images)
What's worse than a Sheldon Adelson bankrolling President Trump's 2016 election, leading to big payoffs for him
in U.S.-Israeli policy
and his own people (John Bolton), nested in the inner sanctum? What's worse than a Sheldon Adelson influencing U.S. trade policy
in China,
mostly because of his titanic casino interests in Macau?
How about a Sheldon Adelson providing his elite security team as an interlocutor for covert, illegal CIA operations overseas.
We reported here back in December that a Spanish company, UC Global, hired to provide security for the Ecuadorian embassy in
London, was reportedly pulling double duty for the CIA by installing a separate surveillance system in the building that streamed
and recorded Assange, his lawyers, and his visitors in every room, including the bathroom. This is clearly a breach of international
law, specifically on the inviolability of diplomatic premises
. The Grayzone has since obtained more court records and conducted numerous witness interviews that establish how insidious this
spy operation was, and how close Adelson's massive private security apparatus was to it.
At the embassy, visitors' phones were seized by UC Global guards, with passwords, SIM cards and International Mobile Equipment
Identity numbers copied. Embassy officials and at least one U.S. congressman were also secretly surveilled. More:
The ongoing investigation detailed black operations ranging from snooping on the Wikileaks founder's private conversations
to fishing a diaper from an embassy trash can in order to determine if the feces inside it belonged to his son. According to witness
statements obtained by The Grayzone, weeks after Morales proposed breaking into the office of Assange's lead counsel, the office
was burglarized. The witnesses also detailed a proposal to kidnap or poison Assange. A police raid at the home of Moralesnetted two handgunswith their serial numbers filed off along with stacks of cash.
One source close to the investigation told The Grayzone an Ecuadorian official was robbed at gunpoint while carrying private
information pertaining to a plan to secure diplomatic immunity for Assange.
Throughout the black operations campaign, US intelligence appears to have worked through Adelson's Las Vegas Sands, a company
that had previously served as an alleged front for a CIA blackmail operation several years earlier. The operations formally began
once Adelson's hand-picked presidential candidate, Donald Trump, entered the White House in January 2017.
The center of this tawdry tale is a status-seeking mercenary (Morales) who was clearly bedazzled to be working in "the first division,"
which is what he told his team after a trip to a security expo in Las Vegas in 2016.
Morales had just signed on to guardQueen Miri, the $70 million yacht belonging to one of the most high profile casino tycoons in Vegas: ultra-Zionist
billionaire and Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson.
This brought Morales into contact with Israeli-American named Zohar Lahav, "who personally recruited Morales, then managed the
relationship between the Spanish security contractor and Sands on a routine basis. After their first meeting in Vegas, the two security
professionals became close friends, visiting each other overseas and speaking frequently," according to Blumenthal.
During the spying operation, Lahav worked directly under Brian Nagel, the Director of Global Security for Las Vegas Sands.
A former associate director of the US Secret Service and cyber-security expert, Nagel was officially commended by the CIA following
successful collaborations with federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
After the election in 2016, newly inaugurated President Trump appointed Mike Pomeo his CIA chief. At this point Pompeo, as you
remember,
clearly made Assange a target for termination . The security scheme at the embassy, according to Blumenthal, kicked in from there.
With meticulous reporting, including a ton of witness testimony from former UC Global employees who saw what Morales was doing as
not only illegal, but selling "all the information to the enemy, the U.S.," Blumenthal pieces together a convincing case that Morales
was working on behalf of the CIA with the elite Sands' security apparatus not only as the go-between, but the expert assist.
Today, Morales faces criminal charges ranging from violations of Assange's privacy and the secrecy of his client-attorney privileges,
as well as misappropriation, bribing a government official, and money laundering. Morales has denied the charges.
If you are still not persuaded, recall that Adelson
was accused of working with the CIA at his casinos in Macau, providing a recruiting ground for agents so they could spy on Beijing.
This was back in 2015, long before Trump's entrance onto the scene.
Read
the whole thing. Considering the powerful role Adelson has played in the White House it is worth taking seriously, whether you
think Assange is deserves one's sympathy or not.
Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, executive editor, has been writing for TAC since 2007, focusing on national security, foreign policy,
civil liberties and domestic politics. She served for 15 years as a Washington bureau reporter for FoxNews.com, and at WTOP News
in Washington from 2013-2017 as a writer, digital editor and social media strategist. She has also worked as a beat reporter at Bridge
News financial wire (now part of Reuters) and Homeland Security Today, and as a regular contributor at Antiwar.com. A native Nutmegger,
she got her start in Connecticut newspapers, but now resides with her family in Arlington, Va.
Doesn't matter. Like Jeffery Epstein, Adelson is protected. Also the US doesn't recognize international law even exists.
I have long suspected that US tax money is sent to Israel, part of that is funnelled off and laundered through Adelson's casinos
and then used to buy influence in the US both directly but also through super pacs to make sure the US money to Israel never stops.
No one in Washington wants to put a stop to it because every one is getting paid.
Just to follow up on this. While there are millions of unemployed Americans, many of who can't pay their bills. The top priority
over in the senate is giving Israel $38B so every one can get paid by AIPAC in time for the elections.
This is while Israel is preparing to seize the rest of Palestine which will then require another massive US tax payer funded
hand out to build infrastructure and put military forces in there.
Over the past three years Donald J. Trump has delivered on his promise to be the "best
friend in Washington that Israel has ever had."
...That Trump was willing to highlight and promote a major pander to the Israel Lobby on the
very day he was inaugurated is more than just telling, it is bizarre.
Looks like Mueller barked to the wrong tree... And that was not accidental
Notable quotes:
"... The back story that's really significant here is that Mueller redacted evidence of Israeli interference in the U.S. election, and the Russiagate! scandal was a cover for that and other third-country meddling. Most of us here knew that a couple years ago ..."
Previously sealed FBI documents indicate close contacts between Israel and the Trump
campaign and that the Mueller investigation found evidence of Israeli involvement, but
largely redacted it.
Menifee, CA (IAK) -- Newly released FBI documents suggest that Israeli government
officials were in contact with the 2016 Trump presidential campaign and offered "critical
intel."
In one of the extensively redacted documents, an official who appears to be an Israeli
minister warns that Trump was "going to be defeated unless we intervene." He goes on to tell
a Trump campaign official: "The key is in your hands."
The previously classified documents were released in response to a lawsuit brought by the
Associated Press, CNN, the New York Times, Politico, and the Washington Post. The unsealed
documents suggest that rather than Russia, it was Israel that covertly interfered in the
election.
While all these media companies except one seem to have ignored the apparent Israeli
connection revealed in the FBI documents, Israeli media have been quick to jump on it.
Israel's i24 News reports:
Newly released documents from the FBI suggest that Roger Stone, a senior aide in the 2016
Trump campaign, had one or more high-ranking contacts in the Israeli government willing to
help the then-Republican Party nominee win the presidential election."
Israel's Ha'aretz newspaper reports:
Tantalizing hints" of "alleged clandestine contacts came to light in recent publication of
redacted FBI documents."
The Times of Israel (TOI) the first to report on this, states:
The FBI material, which is heavily redacted, includes one explicit reference to Israel and
one to Jerusalem, and a series of references to a minister, a cabinet minister, a minister
without portfolio in the cabinet dealing with issues concerning defense and foreign affairs,'
the PM, and the Prime Minister."
TOI points out: "Benjamin Netanyahu was Israel's prime minister in 2016," and reports
circumstantial evidence that the "PM" mentioned in the document refers to Netanyahu:
One reference to the unnamed PM in the material reads as follows: 'On or about June 28,
2016, [NAME REDACTED] messaged STONE, "RETURNING TO DC AFTER URGENT CONSULTATIONS WITH PM IN
ROME.MUST MEET WITH YOU WED. EVE AND WITH DJ TRUMP THURSDAY IN NYC.' Netanyahu made a state
visit to Italy at the end of June 2016."
TOI also notes that "the Israeli government included a minister without portfolio, Tzachi
Hanegbi, appointed in May with responsibility for defense and foreign affairs."
Ha'aretz also names Hanebi as the likely contact, and confirms that he "was in the United
States on the dates mentioned, attending, among other things, a roll out of the first Israeli
F-35 jet at a Lockheed Martin plant in Fort Worth, Texas."
The previously classified FBI affidavit says: "On or about August 12, 2016, [name
redacted] messaged STONE, "Roger, hello from Jerusalem. Any progress? He is going to be
defeated unless we intervene. We have critical intell. The key is in your hands! Back in the
US next week."
Another section of the affidavit states: "On August 20, 2016, CORSI told STONE that they
needed to meet with [name redacted] to determine "what if anything Israel plans to do in
Oct." (Corsi refers to Jerome Corsi, a pro-Israel commentator and author known for extremist
statements.)
Roger Stone, a longtime confidant of President Trump who worked on the 2016 campaign, was
convicted last year in the Robert Mueller investigation into alleged collusion between Russia
and the Trump campaign.
Stone has denied wrongdoing, consistently criticizing the accusations against him as
politically motivated. Numerous analysts have found the "Russiagate" theory unconvincing, and
the American Bar Association reported that Mueller's investigation "did not find sufficient
evidence that President Donald Trump's campaign coordinated with Russia to influence the
United States' 2016 election."
There have been previous suggestions that it was Israel that had most worked to influence
the election.
[MORE]
The back story that's really significant here is that Mueller redacted evidence of
Israeli interference in the U.S. election, and the Russiagate! scandal was a cover for that and
other third-country meddling. Most of us here knew that a couple years ago .
Mint Press has also reported on Israeli intelligence involvement/infiltration into critical
US defense networks as well as their strong presence in social media.
I'd be surprised if there was an election in recent decades that they weren't involved
in.
If Trump campaign people were actually soliciting Israeli help, that would be newsworthy and
probably criminal. But Mueller throwing the book at Stone and Corsi over BS and covering what
could actually be serious? That's twisted.
Laura Rozen
@lrozen
Profile picture https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1255347751153434624.html
Apr 29th 2020, 5 tweets, 2 min read
Stone arranged for meeting, but said in later email that a "fiasco" ensued after the
associate brought a foreign military officer along
Unroll available on Thread Reader
On Aug.20, 2016, CORSI told STONE they
needed to meet w/[ ] to determine "what if anything Israel plans to do in
Oct"courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco
huh courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco
(One PM in Rome on June 27 2016 was Netanyahu) mfa.gov.il/MFA/PressRoom/
Mint Press has also reported on Israeli intelligence involvement/infiltration into
critical US defense networks as well as their strong presence in social media.
I'd be surprised if there was an election in recent decades that they weren't involved
in.
If Trump campaign people were actually soliciting Israeli help, that would be newsworthy
and probably criminal. But Mueller throwing the book at Stone and Corsi over BS and
covering what could actually be serious? That's twisted.
@leveymg is reposted below, for those who want to read for themselves:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
for the
District of Columbia
In the Matter of the Search of
(Briefly describe the property to be searched
or identify the person by name and address)
INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE GOOGLE
ACCOUNT ,
)
Case: 1:18-sc-01518
Assigned To : Howell, Beryl A.
Assign. Date: 5/4/2018
Description: Search & Seizure Warrant
SEARCH AND SEIZURE WARRANT
To: Any authorized law enforcement officer
An application by a federal law enforcement officer or an attorney for the government requests
the search
of the following person or property located in the Northern District of California
(identify the person or describe the property to be searched and give its location):
See Attachment A.
I find that the affidavit(s), or any recorded testimony, establish probable cause to search and
seize the person or property
described above, and that such search will reveal (identify the person or describe the property
to be seized):
See Attachment B.
YOU ARE COMMANDED to execute this warrant on or before May 18, 2018 (not to exceed 14 days)
';$ in the daytime 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 0 at any time in the day or night because good cause
has been established.
Unless delayed notice is authorized below, you must give a copy of the warrant and a receipt
for the property taken to the
person from whom, or from whose premises, the property was taken, or leave the copy and receipt
at the place where the
property was taken.
The officer executing this warrant, or an officer present during the execution of the warrant,
must prepare an inventory
as required by law and promptly return this warrant and inventory to Hon. Beryl A. Howell
(United States Magistrate Judge)
0 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3103a(b), I find that immediate notification may have an adverse
result listed in 18 U.S.C.
§ 2705 ( except for delay of trial), and authorize the officer executing this warrant to
delay notice to the person who, or whose
property, will be searched or seized (check the awropriate box)
0 for __ days (not to exceed 30) 0 until, the facts justifying, the later specific date of
Date and time issued:
Judge 's signature
City and state: Washington, DC Hon. Beryl A. Howell, Chief U.S. District Judge
Printed name and title
Case 1:19-mc-00029-CRC Document 29-7 Filed 04/28/20 Page 1 of 35
AO 93 (Rev 11/13) Search and Seizure Warrant (Page 2)
Return
Case No.: Date and time warrant executed: Copy of warrant and inventory left with:
Inventory made in the presence of :
Inventory of the property taken and name of any person(s) seized:
Certification
I declare under penalty of pe1jury that this inventory is correct and was returned along with
the original warrant to the
designated judge.
Date:
Executing officer's signature
Printed name and title
Case 1:19-mc-00029-CRC Document 29-7 Filed 04/28/20 Page 2 of 35
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Cf erk, U.S. District & Bankrupicy
Gourts for tirn District of Columbl&
IN THE MATTER OF THE SEARCH OF
INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH
THE GOOGLE ACCOUNT
ORDER
Case: 1: 18-sc-01518
Assigned To : Howell, Beryl A.
Assign. Date: 5/4/2018
Description: Search & Seizure Warrant
The United States has filed a motion to seal the above-captioned warrant and related
documents, including the application and affidavit in support thereof ( collectively the
"Warrant"),
and to require Google LLC, an electronic communication and/or remote computing services
with
headquarters in Mountain View, California, not to disclose the existence or contents of the
Warrant
pursuant to !8 U.S.C. § 2705(b).
The Court finds that the United States has established that a compelling governmental
interest exists to justify the requested sealing, and that there is reason to believe that
notification
of the existence of the Warrant will seriously jeopardize the investigation, including by
giving the
targets an opportunity to flee from prosecution, destroy or tamper with evidence, and
intimidate
witnesses. See 18 U.S.C. § 2705(b)(2)-(5).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion is hereby GRANTED, and that the
warrant, the application and affidavit in support thereof, all attachments thereto and other
related
materials, the instant motion to seal, and this Order be SEALED until further order of the
Court;
and
Page 1 of2
Case 1:19-mc-00029-CRC Document 29-7 Filed 04/28/20 Page 3 of 35
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2705(b), Google and its
employees shall not disclose the existence or content of the Warrant to any other person (
except
attorneys for Google for the purpose of receiving legal advice) for a period of one year
unless
otherwise ordered by the Court.
Date 41/Y>lf
THE HONORABLE BERYL A. HOWELL
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 2 of2
Case 1:19-mc-00029-CRC Document 29-7 Filed 04/28/20 Page 4 of 35
AO 106 (Rev. 04/10) Application for a Search Warrant
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
In the Matter of the Search of
(Briefly describe the property to be searched
or identify the person by name and address)
for the
District of Columbia
MA\t !,
•'II·\! • ·r 2018
,,t,c,rk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
C . ,,gurt~ lar 1hli-•D1strlctof Gollf/nh]•
ase.1:18-sc-01518 ·'
Ass!gned To: Howell, Beryl A
INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE GOOGLE
ACCOUNT
)
)
)
)
)
)
Assign. Date: 5;412018 ·
Description: Search & Seizure Warrant
APPLICATION FOR A SEARCH WARRANT
I, a federal law enforcement officer or an attorney for the government, request a search
warrant and state under
penalty of perjury that I have reason to believe that on the following person or property
(identify the person or describe the
property to be searched and give ifs location):
See Attachment A.
located in the Northern District of _____ C,-_a-,.l"'if.=o,..rn~ia.._ __ , there is now
concealed (identijj, the
person or describe the property to be seized):
See Attachment B.
The basis for the search under Fed. R. Crim. P. 4 l(c) is (check one or more):
~ evidence of a crime;
ief contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed;
r'lf property designed for use, intended for use, or used in committing a crime;
D a person to be arrested or a person who is unlawfully restrained.
The search is related to a violation of:
Code Section
18 U.S.C. § 2
· et al.
The application is based on these facts:
See attached Affidavit.
r;/ Continued on the attached sheet.
Offense Description
aiding and abetting
see attached affidavit
D Delayed notice of __ days (give exact ending date if more than 30 days: ______ ) is
requested
under 18 U.S.C. § 3103a, the basis of which is set forth on the attached sheet.
~44 Reviewed by AUSA/SAUSA: Appbcant's signature
•Aaron Zelinsky (Special Counsel's Office) Andrew Mitchell, Supervisory Special Agent,
FBI
Printed name and title
Sworn to before me and signed in my presence.
Date:
City and state: Washington, D.C. Hon. Beryl A. Howell, Chief U.S. District Judge
Printed name and title
Case 1:19-mc-00029-CRC Document 29-7 Filed 04/28/20 Page 5 of 35
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MAY ·· ti 1018
Clerk, LLS. District & Bar1i
Laura Rozen
@lrozen
Profile picture https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1255347751153434624.html
Apr 29th 2020, 5 tweets, 2 min read
Stone arranged for meeting, but said in later email that a "fiasco" ensued after the
associate brought a foreign military officer along
Unroll available on Thread Reader
On Aug.20, 2016, CORSI told STONE they
needed to meet w/[ ] to determine "what if anything Israel plans to do in
Oct"courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco
huh courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco
(One PM in Rome on June 27 2016 was Netanyahu) mfa.gov.il/MFA/PressRoom/
@leveymg request for sealing of the record -- Case 1:19-mc-00029-CRC Document 29-7
Filed 04/28/20 Pages 3 to 35 for those who want to read for themselves:
Judge's signature
Hon. Bery[ A. Howell, Chief U.S. District Judge
Printed name and title
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Glcrk, LL$. District & Bar1kruptcy
Gourts tor tirn District of ColumtHa
IN THE MATTER OF THE SEARCH OF INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE GOOGLE ACCOUNT
Case: 1:18-sc-01518
Ass!gned To : Howell, BerylA Assign. Date : S/4/20 18
Description: Search & S izure Warrant
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A SEARCH WARRANT
I, Andrew Mitchell, having been first duly sworn, hereby depose and state as follows:
1. I make this affidavit in support of an application for a search warrant for
information associated with the following Google Account: (hereafter
the "Target Account 1"), that is stored at premises owned, maintained, controlled or
operated by Google, Inc., a social networking company headquartered in Mountain View,
California ("Google"). The information to be searched is described in the following paragraphs
and in Attachments A and B. This affidavit is made in support of an application for a search
warrant under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2703(a), 2703(b)(l)(A) and 2703(c)(l)(A)to require Google
to disclose to the government copies of the information (including the content of
communications) further described in Attachment A. Upon receipt of the information described.
in Attachment A, government"authorized persons will review that information to locate the items
described in Attachment B.
2. I am a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and have been since
2011. As a Special Agent of the FBI, I have received training and experience in investigating
criminal and national security matters.
3. The facts in this affidavit come from my personal observations, my training and experience,
and information obtained from other agents and witnesses. This affidavit is intended
to show merely that there is sufficient probable cause for the requested warrant and does
not set fotth all of my knowledge about this matter.
4. Based on my training and experience and the facts as set forth in this affidavit, there is
probable cause to believe that the Target Accounts contain communications relevant to
violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2 (aiding and abetting), 18 U.S.C. § 3 (accessory after the
fact), 18
U.S.C. § 4 (misprision of a felony), 18 U.S.C. § 371 (conspiracy), 18 U.S.C. §
1001 (making a
false statement); 18 U.S.C. §1651 (pe1jury); 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (unauthodzed access
of a protected computer); 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (wire fraud), 18 U.S.C. § 1349 (attempt
and conspiracy to commit wire fraud), , and 52 U.S.C. § 30121 (foreign contribution ban)
(the "Subject
Offenses"). 1
5. As set forth below, in May 2016, Jerome CORSI provided contact information for
that there was an "OCTOBER SURPRISE COMING" and that Trump, ''[i]s going to be defeated unless
we intervene. We have critical intel." In that same time period, STONE communicated directly
via Twitter with WikiLeaks, Julian ASSANGE, and Guccifer 2.0. On July 25, 2016, STONE emailed
instructions to Jerome CORSI to "Get to Assange" in person at the Ecuadorian Embassy and "get
pending WikiLeaks emails[.]" On August 2, 2016, CORSI emailed STONE back that,"Word is friend
in embassy plans 2 more dumps. One shortly after I1m back. 2nd in Oct. Impact planned to be
very damaging." On August 20, 2016, CORSI told STONE that they
needed to meet o determine "what if anything Israel plans to do in Oct."
1 Federal law prohibits a foreign national from making, directly or indirectly, an
expenditure or independent expenditure in connection with federal elections. 52 U.S.C. §
3012l(a)(l)(C); see also id. § 30101(9) & (17) (defining the terms "expenditure" and
"independent expenditure").
(the Target Account) is le Account, which
sed to communicate with STONE and CORSI.
JURISDICTION
6. This Court has jurisdiction to issue the requested warrant because it is "a court of
competent jurisdiction" as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 2711. Id. §§ 2703(a),
(b)(l)(A), & (c)(l)(A). Specifically, the Court is "a district court of the United State
(including a magistrate judge of such a court) ... that has jurisqiction over the offense being
investigated." 18 U.S.C.
§ 2711(3)(A)(i). The offense conduct included activities in Washington, D.C., as detailed
below, including in paragraph 8.
PROBABLE CAUSE
A. U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) Assessment of Russian Government Backed Hacking
Activity during the 2016 Presidential Election
7. On October 7, 2016, the U.S. Depa1tment of Homeland Security and the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence released a joint statement of an intelligence assessment of
Russian activities and intentions during the 2016 presidential election. In the report, the
USIC assessed the following, with emphasis added:
8. The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the
recent compromises of e mails frorri US persons and institutions, including from US political
organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and
WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and
motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures
Laura Rozen
@lrozen
Profile picture https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1255347751153434624.html
Apr 29th 2020, 5 tweets, 2 min read
Stone arranged for meeting, but said in later email that a "fiasco" ensued after the
associate brought a foreign military officer along
Unroll available on Thread Reader
On Aug.20, 2016, CORSI told STONE they
needed to meet w/[ ] to determine "what if anything Israel plans to do in
Oct"courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco
huh courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco
(One PM in Rome on June 27 2016 was Netanyahu) mfa.gov.il/MFA/PressRoom/
Pro-Samsung media outlets in South Korea came under fire from Jewish groups after
utilizing anti-Semitism to belittle Singer.
"Elliott is led by a Jew, Paul E. Singer, and ISS [an advisory firm that analyzed the
merger] is an affiliate of Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI), whose key
shareholders are Jewish. According to a source in the finance industry, Jews have a robust
network demonstrating influence in a number of domains," the South Korean financial
publication MoneyToday said last week.
Meanwhile, Mediapen, another local publication, asserted that "Jews are known to wield
enormous power on Wall Street and in global financial circles" and that it is a "well-known
fact that the US government is swayed by Jewish capital."
Jewish money, it reported, "has long been known to be ruthless and merciless."
@Nosquat
Loquat A letter to The New York Times. Saturday December 4, 1948 by Albert Einstein,
Hannah Arendt, Sidney Hook, et.al.
TO THE EDITORS OF NEW YORK TIMES:
Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly
created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely
akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and
Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai
Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.
The current visit of Menachem Begin, leader of this party, to the United States is obviously
calculated to give the impression of American support for his party in the coming Israeli
elections, and to cement political ties with conservative Zionist elements in the United
States. Several Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit. It
is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as
to Mr. Begin's political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the
movement he represents.
Before irreparable damage is done by way of financial contributions, public manifestations in
Begin's behalf, and the creation in Palestine of the impression that a large segment of
America supports Fascist elements in Israel, the American public must be informed as to the
record and objectives of Mr. Begin and his movement.
The public avowals of Begin's party are no guide whatever to its actual character. Today they
speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached
the doctrine of the Fascist state. It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its
real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the
future.
[Hide MORE]
Attack on Arab Village
A shocking example was their behavior in the Arab village of Deir Yassin. This village, off
the main roads and surrounded by Jewish lands, had taken no part in the war, and had even
fought off Arab bands who wanted to use the village as their base. On April 9 (THE NEW YORK
TIMES), terrorist bands attacked this peaceful village, which was not a military objective in
the fighting, killed most of its inhabitants (240 men, women, and children) and kept a few of
them alive to parade as captives through the streets of Jerusalem. Most of the Jewish
community was horrified at the deed, and the Jewish Agency sent a telegram of apology to King
Abdullah of Trans-Jordan. But the terrorists, far from being ashamed of their act, were proud
of this massacre, publicized it widely, and invited all the foreign correspondents present in
the country to view the heaped corpses and the general havoc at Deir Yassin.
The Deir Yassin incident exemplifies the character and actions of the Freedom Party.
Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of ultranationalism, religious
mysticism, and racial superiority. Like other Fascist parties they have been used to break
strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions. In their stead
they have proposed corporate unions on the Italian Fascist model.
During the last years of sporadic anti-British violence, the IZL and Stern groups inaugurated
a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community. Teachers were beaten up for speaking
against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them. By gangster methods,
beatings, window-smashing, and wide-spread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the
population and exacted a heavy tribute.
The people of the Freedom Party have had no part in the constructive achievements in
Palestine. They have reclaimed no land, built no settlements, and only detracted from the
Jewish defense activity. Their much-publicized immigration endeavors were minute, and devoted
mainly to bringing in Fascist compatriots.
Discrepancies Seen
The discrepancies between the bold claims now being made by Begin and his party, and their
record of past performance in Palestine bear the imprint of no ordinary political party. This
is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and
British alike), and misrepresentation are means, and a "Leader State" is the goal.
In the light of the foregoing considerations, it is imperative that the truth about Mr. Begin
and his movement be made known in this country. It is all the more tragic that the top
leadership of American Zionism has refused to campaign against Begin's efforts, or even to
expose to its own constituents the dangers to Israel from support to Begin.
The undersigned therefore take this means of publicly presenting a few salient facts
concerning Begin and his party; and of urging all concerned not to support this latest
manifestation of fascism.
ISIDORE ABRAMOWITZ,
HANNAH ARENDT,
ABRAHAM BRICK,
RABBI JESSURUN CARDOZO, ALBERT EINSTEIN,
HERMAN EISEN, M.D.,
HAYIM FINEMAN, M. GALLEN, M.D.,
H.H. HARRIS,
ZELIG S. HARRIS,
SIDNEY HOOK,
FRED KARUSH,
BRURIA KAUFMAN,
IRMA L. LINDHEIM,
NACHMAN MAISEL,
SEYMOUR MELMAN,
MYER D. MENDELSON, M.D.,
HARRY M. OSLINSKY,
SAMUEL PITLICK,
FRITZ ROHRLICH,
LOUIS P. ROCKER,
RUTH SAGIS,
ITZHAK SANKOWSKY,
I.J. SHOENBERG,
SAMUEL SHUMAN,
M. SINGER,
IRMA WOLFE,
STEFAN WOLFE.
Posted by b on April 8, 2020 at 7:43 UTC | Permalink
The Jpost article that b links to says that a million masks from China (donated by the US
Department of Defense) arrived in Tel Aviv on Tuesday night. But Israel should have already
had two million masks if this report from last weekend is correct: The shipment will include two million masks, landing in Israel on Monday morning, https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-april-4-2020/
So that appears to be three million masks from China, plus those seized from American
hospitals. Or are they fiddling the figures and pretending that those seized masks were
legally purchased in China?
It appears that Mossad and others have recently acquired about two surgical masks per
Israeli:
"5 April 2020,
(...)Last week, the Health Ministry said that security services and government ministries had
managed to obtain 27 ventilators and a hoard of other medical equipment from abroad.
Hebrew media reported that the Mossad intelligence service, which has been tasked with
securing medical equipment from abroad from unspecified countries amid worldwide shortages,
helped obtain 25,000 N95 respiratory masks , 20,000 virus test kits, 10 million
surgical masks , and 700 overalls for ambulance workers who usually carry out the initial
testing for the virus.
One million masks for the IDF.
Eat your heart out US Theodore Roosevelt and Guam.
US sailors right at the bottom of the Pentagon's priorities, thats for sure.
American military?.
Have one duty - die as required for Israel.
Including death by coronavirus by looks of things.....
More fool them.
Bloody hell. The Pentagon procures a million masks from China, then gives them to Israel -
when US doctors are running low in almost every city - not to mention that the military
itself has soaring coronavirus cases it can't handle.
You gotta know some rich Jewish corporate billionaire was behind that crap and Kushner was
just the conduit to get Trump to agree to it - probably in exchange for a big donation to
Trump's campaign.
If there was ever a country that deserved to be on the end of a US bombing campaign - it's
Israel - a racist, fanatical. colonialist, fascist, illegal terrorist state. Zionists - the
biggest scumbags on the planet. But instead the US bombs everyone else Israel doesn't
like.
But cheer up. Israel is a doomed nation. There is no way they can continue their path
forever, historically speaking. I suspect they won't exist within another fifty years.
They'll either be annihilated by their own nuclear weapons, or transformed into a bi-national
state that is no longer primarily Jewish. And I don't particularly care which.
The U.S. government's efforts to clean up Cold War-era waste from nuclear research and bomb
making at federal sites around the country has lumbered along for decades, often at a pace
that watchdogs and other critics say threatens public health and the environment.
Now, fallout from the global coronavirus pandemic is resulting in more challenges as the
nation's only underground repository for nuclear waste finished ramping down operations
Wednesday to keep workers safe.
Over more than 20 years, tons of waste have been stashed deep in the salt caverns that
make up the southern New Mexico site. Until recently, several shipments a week of special
boxes and barrels packed with lab coats, rubber gloves, tools and debris contaminated with
plutonium and other radioactive elements were being trucked to the remote facility from South
Carolina, Idaho and other spots.
That's all but grinding to a halt.
Shipments to the desert outpost will be limited for the foreseeable future while work at
the country's national laboratories and defense sites shift to only those operations
considered "mission critical."
Officials at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant warned state regulators in a letter Tuesday
that more time would be needed for inspections and audits and that work would be curtailed or
shifts would be staggered to ensure workers keep their distance from one another.
BTW, the Al Quds Post (aka Jerusalem Post to Zionists) has changed the headline on that
article to "Israel brings 1 million masks from China for IDF soldiers" Looks like the "New
York Purchasing and Logistics Division" is part of the Israeli Ministry Of War All The Time.
So the original was a nice story but fake news. Since there was no correction attached to the
new version, it could be that Washington/Tel Aviv reckoned that this was a step to far even
for Trump and the new version is the fake news.
- This news simply confirms again that the US, under Trump, has become more corrupt. But this
is a development that already started years, decades ago before Trump became president.
I think the possibility should be considered that Trump just made preexisting corruption
more visible rather than adding significantly to it. There are elaborate protocols and
circuitous speech that professional politicians learn to use to obfuscate the corruption and
make their own participation in that corruption seem not only acceptable but necessary or
even in the public interest. Trump is either ignorant of these protocols or he just doesn't
care.
Even with all this help (of which most go to the military sector), the Isreali economy can
barely keep itself afloat:
[...] inequality of income and wealth is huge in Israel, the second worst in the 36 nation
OECD group. The relative poverty rate for Haredim and Arabs (25% of the population) is near
50%, and even for other Israelis, it is higher than the OECD average. The gap in median
wage levels from skilled to unskilled; from Haredim/Arabs to others is huge - and yet the
former will constitute 50% of the population by 2060.
And this mask fiasco is the lesser problem for the American working class right now. A
significant portion of its people
is going hungry . That magic USD 1,200 check is not coming soon:
"the checks are not in the mail."
And the problem isn't just in the USA. The periphery of Western Civilization is also going
to suffer:
Germany's economy will shrink almost 10 per cent in the three months to June, according to
the country's top economic research institutes, the sharpest decline since quarterly
national accounts began in 1970 and double the size of the biggest drop in the 2008
financial crisis.
The shutdown of vast swaths of economic activity to contain the spread of the pandemic
is knocking 1.5 percentage points off French growth for every two weeks that it continues,
the Banque de France warned on Wednesday.
After more than three weeks in lockdown, French economic output is expected to have
fallen by the sharpest rate since the second world war, the central bank said, forecasting
that gross domestic product contracted 6 per cent in the first three months of the
year.
Get everyone you know to read "Against Our Better Judgment" by Alison Weir. Absolutely the
best short, supereasy read to open eyes of those who are unaware that they are unaware, I
promise. If you can afford to, buy copies to give away.
Very brief, "b", but one of your best posts. This is an unmitigated outrage. The arrogance of
the ruling class knows no bounds, and they are acting with impunity. Seems the ruling class
doesn't even care anymore how widely known it is that the US has little sovereignty.
@Revert Shia former US
Navy I would add that "God is not a real estate agent" and that Ashkenazic jews are into
judaism for the benefits that the ((tribe)) provides, nothing more.
Much of the world's criminality originates in israel, being the epicenter of the "white
slavery", child prostitution, financial schemes and scams, outright political assassinations
and murder, the leader in "false flag" operations, and many others.
All one has to do is examine israel's policy on extradition criminal jews will not be
extradited if they make it to israel.
Today's jews' claim to Palestine is a fraud perpetrated on the rest of the world.
@Wizard of Oz NO,
because I read the article not only at the site I left, but at others. In fact, the Mossad
has been almost gloating about their world-wide network that enables them to pull off these
capers. Guess that's a reference to Jewish 'sayanim' which are Jews living in other nations
that can be counted on to help Mossad agents who are in need of some shekels, or a hiding
place or maybe some strings pulled to get them out of trouble.
The word Sayanim is Hebrew for "assisters" or "collaborators". The term Sayanim itself
is plural, with a single one being a Sayan
Former Mossad officer Victor Ostrovsky, wrote extensively about activities of the
Sayanim, as has Gordon Thomas. "According Ostrovsky and Gordon Thomas, the sayanim provide
assistance of various kinds to Mossad officers operating in foreign countries. This
assistance can include facilitating medical care, money, logistics, and even overt
intelligence gathering. They can be judges, court clerks, expert witnesses, child
protective service workers, Assistant District Attorneys, police officers, or anyone with a
great degree of power over people's lives, and will do anything at the behest of Mossad
case officers (known as a katsa) for the State of Israel against its enemies or those
perceived to be unfavorable politically to Israeli policy." Sayanim are not paid and are
only reimbursed for their expenses.
Or maybe from the horse's mouth itself? Or should I say from the Golden Calf's mouth?
Mossad officer describes covert global battle to obtain ventilators at all
costs
"We are utilizing our special connections to win the race and perhaps do what the whole
world is doing -- lay our hands on stocks ordered by others," he said.
"At the time of the collapse of the Roman Empire, St. Augustine both revolutionized and
brought to a close antiquity's idea of freedom. A man was not a slave by nature or by law, as
Aristotle claimed. His freedom was a function of his moral state. A man had as many masters as
he had vices.
This insight would provide the basis for the most sophisticated form of social control known
to man.
Fourteen hundred years later, a decadent French aristocrat turned that tradition on its head
when he wrote that "the freest of people are they who are most friendly to murder." Like St.
Augustine, the Marquis de Sade would agree that freedom was a function of morals. Unlike St.
Augustine, Sade proposed a revolution in sexual morals to accompany the political revolution
then taking place in France."
@Greg
Bacon When I took an ancient history course in college, the history professor often
commented on about how barbaric the Old Testament was. Many Jewish students used to go to the
history office to complain. He talked about their complaining. He said what he said and it
was true what he said.
In his class, the three main cultures of the Mediterranean sea were the Greek, Roman and
Egyptian. All were great cultures. The little monster culture that produced no great artwork
or civilization is now our ruler for the past hundred years or so, 12.23.1913.
When one goes to museum with an ancient history collection, there is nothing much from
that little monster culture to see.
This monster culture is at the head of the western world, it destroying the western world.
This coronavirus game from the top Monster culture of the west is the last straw. People had
enough of this monster culture. The game is up.
China knows all this. So do many other cultures not ruled by this monster culture.
@Showmethereal
Greek and Roman culture did not have a sense of chosen-ness. Ending conflict and forgiveness
was an important given in their cultures. Chosen-ness does not allow for a concept of living
in peace with beings who are not chosen. The professor I mentioned talked a lot about the god
Yahweh in the Old Testament. Roman, Greek and Egyptian gods were not so barbaric as Yahweh in
the Old Testament.
Rome liked the concept of peace. Something that the ZioUS empire fears more than anything
on earth.
The term "Pax Romana," which literally means "Roman peace," refers to the time period
from 27 B.C.E. to 180 C.E. in the Roman Empire.
This 200-year period saw unprecedented peace and economic prosperity throughout the
Empire, which spanned from England in the north to Morocco in the south and Iraq in the
east. During the Pax Romana, the Roman Empire reached its peak in terms of land area, and
its population swelled to an estimated 70 million people.
The Olympiads are supposed to be a time of peace. In our ZioUS world, the opposite is done
many times. So many times the ZioUS uses it for games against Russia.
A truce (in Greek, ekecheiria, which literally means "holding of hands") was announced
before and during each of the Olympic festivals, to allow visitors to travel safely to
Olympia. An inscription describing the truce was written on a bronze discus which was
displayed at Olympia. During the truce, wars were suspended, armies were prohibited from
entering Elis or threatening the Games, and legal disputes and the carrying out of death
penalties were forbidden.
Here is what ancient Greece has given to the world.
The Classical Period produced remarkable cultural and scientific achievements. The city
of Athens introduced to the world a direct Democracy the likes of which had never been seen
hitherto, or subsequently, with western governments like Great Britain, France, and USA
emulating it a thousand years later. The rational approach to exploring and explaining the
world as reflected in Classical Art, Philosophy, and Literature became the well-grounded
springboard that western culture used to leap forward, beginning with the subsequent
Hellenistic Age. The thinkers of the Classical Greek era have since dominated thought for
thousands of years, and have remained relevant to our day. The teachings of Socrates, Plato
and Aristotle among others, either directly, in opposition, or mutation, have been used as
reference point of countless western thinkers in the last two thousand years. Hippocrates
became the "Father of modern medicine", and the Hippocratic oath is still used today. The
dramas of Sophocles, Aeschylus, Euripides, and the comedies of Aristophanes are considered
among the masterpieces of western culture.
"... Faced with Zionism at its most aggressive, most US presidents tend to mellow, discovering long-standing friendships among those who most infuriate them. But Sanders has talked of Palestinian suffering and dignity on numerous occasions – which neither Biden nor Warren have yet chosen to do on the campaign – and his contention that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) promotes "bigotry" aroused perhaps too much fury from the pro-Israeli lobby group ..."
"... Its boss, Howard Kohr, is well aware that neither Sanders nor Warren – nor, apparently, Biden, though we'll see about this -- had any interest in attending this year's AIPAC conference. His latest remarks, clearly directed at the man who could be America's first Jewish president, are worthy of serious examin ..."
"... Robert Fisk writes for the Independent , where this column originally appeared. ..."
And many American voters – save for pro-Israeli lobbyists, liberal Jewish groups and
disparate Muslim organisations – don't care a hill of beans about the fears of Israel and the Arabs. But both
Muslims and Jews in the region have been carefully studying what the three remaining Democrat
contenders have said about two-state solutions, Israeli colonies in the West Bank and the US
embassy, currently in Jerusalem courtesy of Donald Trump. It's time we did the same.
First of all, despair all ye who think the Democrats are going to reverse Trump's disastrous
transfer of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Those who believe that a Democrat
president will simply roll back on Trump's disastrous policies – not just over the
embassy but anywhere else in the Middle East – had better shake off their illusions.
History doesn't go backwards. None of the Democratic candidates would commit to reversing
Trump's embassy decision when asked; only Sanders spoke vaguely of returning it to Tel Aviv.
The rest chickened out by suggesting, rather outrageously, that the existence of the embassy in
Jerusalem would become part of future Israeli-Palestinian negotiations – something which
was never part of the original Oslo negotiations nor any UN resolution.
Elizabeth Warren announced in the South Carolina debate last month that the decision should
be left up to "Israel and Palestine" – presumably suggesting that the 'capital' of a
two-state solution was up to them, even though Bibi Netanyahu believes it's all wrapped up
– Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, full stop. And "Palestine", Warren should have been
aware, doesn't as a state actually exist.
"But it's not up to us to determine what the terms of a two-state solution are," quoth she.
" The best way to do that is to encourage the parties to get to the negotiating table
themselves." Repeatedly asked if she would move the embassy back to Tel Aviv, Warren equally
repeatedly said that "we should let the parties determine the capital." Later she rather eerily
referred to "capitals" – without explaining if she was thinking of a Palestinian
"capital" in the village of Abu Dis, the grim little solution that Madeleine Albright
half-heartedly supported two decades ago.
Sanders, of course, captured the imagination and fury of Arabs and Israelis (and Israel's
supposed friends in America) by his characterisation of Netanyahu as a "reactionary racist"
– a description he may now choose to soften. Faced with Zionism at its most
aggressive, most US presidents tend to mellow, discovering long-standing friendships among
those who most infuriate them. But Sanders has talked of Palestinian suffering and dignity on
numerous occasions – which neither Biden nor Warren have yet chosen to do on the campaign
– and his contention that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) promotes
"bigotry" aroused perhaps too much fury from the pro-Israeli lobby group .
Its boss, Howard Kohr, is well aware that neither Sanders nor Warren – nor,
apparently, Biden, though we'll see about this -- had any interest in attending this year's
AIPAC conference. His latest remarks, clearly directed at the man who could be America's first
Jewish president, are worthy of serious examin ation. "A growing and highly vocal and
energised part of the electorate fundamentally rejects the value of the US-Israeli alliance,"
he said. " The leaders of this movement say they support Israel's right to defend herself. But
every time Israel exercises that right, they condemn Israel."
Kohr wasn't referring here to BDS, the boycott, divest and sanctions movement which does
frighten Israeli leaders, but the increasingly worried men and women in America – young
Jewish liberals prominent among them – who are disgusted by the suffering faced by the
Palestinians in Gaza. Unafraid of Sanders' unwise use of the word "socialism" – which
used to be quite acceptable in Israel many years ago – they are searching, I suspect, for
a morality in international politics which the US regularly suspends when confronted by
Israel's colonial project in the West Bank.
"Israel cannot afford false friends," Kohr continued in a very clear assault on Sanders'
condemnation of the Israeli government and its now yet-again elected prime minister, an attack
he described as "demonising Israel". Last spring, Kohr spoke of the "intense hatred" of Israel
which, he contended, was moving from the margins to the centre of US politics. " Israel has
been able to count on its friendship with the United States," he now says.
But George W Bush and Obama "each understood that America's commitment to Israel's safety
must be consistent, it must be unequivocal [sic], and it must be dependable." In reality
– a quality often lost in any discussion of US-Israeli relations in Washington –
Obama was angered by Netanyahu's constant interference in US politics, his lone appeals to
Congress over the president's head and his absolute refusal to postpone or close down or
abandon the steady theft of Palestinian Arab land for Jewish colonies between Jerusalem and the
Jordan river. Kohr's reference to the necessity of America's "unequivocal" support is not quite
what he meant.
The correct word – had he dared to say it – would have been "uncritical". And
Sanders is not uncritical. In the strait-jacket, fearful debates which pass for serious
television discussion in the United States, condemnation of Israel and its grotesque occupation
of another people's land – if not splashed with accusations of antisemitism – is
regarded as off-limits, unacceptable, even immoral.
Sanders has broken this silly convention. And thus he must be dismissed as a "socialist'
(this is partly his fault, of course) and a "radical", a word which my elderly Dad would
probably have interpreted as a 'Bolshie'. Sanders is not a Bolshevik – though he
sometimes looks like one when he's on the stump – and his real threat to Israel is that
in the eyes of his supporters, he is honest, and seen to be honest. The fact that Sanders is
Jewish and represents the bravest of America's liberal Jewish community is all the more
frightening to Israel's right-wing supporters.
And so we come to Joe Biden, a man whom Netanyahu used to run rings around when Biden was
Obama's vice president. In 2010, the Netanyahu government blithely announced 1,600 new
settlement houses on occupied Palestinian land shortly after Biden's arrival on an official
visit to Israel. Huffily arriving 90 minutes late for dinner with Netanyahu, Biden condemned
the decision – and said no more. Four years later, addressing the Saban Forum, part of
the right-wing Brookings Institute, Biden spent much time condemning Iran, praising Obama's $17
billion financial support for Israel's military – which he calculated at $8.5 million a
day – and referring obliquely to the grave reservations which the Obama administration
had about Israel as "tactical disagreements", "tactical divides", "normal disagreements" and
"different perspectives".
Only at the very end of his 2014 peroration did Biden mildly condemn "expanding settlement
activity and construction and the demolition of homes of attackers [sic]" as
"counterproductive". He referred to "terrorist" attacks by Palestinians and "vigilante attacks"
by Jewish settlers. And that's pretty much what we can expect of a Biden presidency.
He might, conceivably, try to roll back Trump's destruction of the Iranian nuclear agreement
into which Obama put so much energy – but just as he will not commit himself to reversing
Trump's decision on the US embassy transfer to Jerusalem, he's likely to search for another
nuclear agreement to take the place of the Obama one – which, in his perverse and
hopeless way, is what Trump has been suggesting.
The trouble is that while former Democrat candidates are now ganging up to destroy Sanders'
chances of nomination – along with a significant portion of the US "liberal" press
– Trump, barring a virus-induced economic collapse, is unlikely to spend much time
worrying about a Biden candidacy.
Just as they prefer a "safe pair of hands" to protect the party, so the Democrat elite and
the "old" liberals fear the moral crusade upon which Sanders might embark – about health
and human rights just as much as the Middle East. Better to avoid conflict with Israel, too.
And that was Hilary Clinton's policy, wasn't it? And that's how Sanders went off the rails in
the last presidential election, finally asking his supporters to give their vote to Hillary, as
they shouted: "No! No! No!" Join the debate on
Facebook More articles by: Robert Fisk
Robert Fisk writes for the Independent , where this column originally
appeared.
A Jewish lawyer in New York City and nine members of his family have tested positive for SARS
CoV-2. His family is prominent and may have infected people at a large Bar Mitzva, a Jewish
university, a place of worship, and commuters on the subway to and from his law office.
Many of these exposed Jews attended the recent 2020 AIPAC jamboree. About 70% of the US
Congress also attended this AIPAC mass event, potentially making Washington DC a super
spreader locale. AIPAC issued a warning to all attendees to self quarantine. The state of
Israel has imposed mandatory quarantines for all returning attendees of the AIPAC conference.
Israel is mirroring the aggressive steps that China is taking to quell the epidemic as
currently 100,000 Israeli citizens are under quarantine.
https://www.trunews.com/stream/aipac-super-spreader-did-israeli-lobbyists-infect-u-s-congress-with-coronavirus
Failure to impose quarantines will likely result in to proliferation of the "L" form of
the "C" haplotype of SARS CoV-2. Countries where government medical officials must clear
their statements with uninformed political hacks face a more pronounced impact from this
outbreak. The proper approach is for politicians to have to clear their blather with health
professionals
by Helen
Buyniski , RT A notorious hedge-funder who's left a trail of broken companies (and
countries) in his wake has set his sights on ousting Twitter's Jack Dorsey. Users complaining
about new features should know the platform may never be the same. Elliott Management,
euphemistically called an "activist investor" by timid media who fear its legendary
founder Paul Singer, has reportedly snapped up a four percent ($1 billion) stake in Twitter,
nominating four directors to its board as the start of a bid to oust Dorsey. The hedge fund
supposedly resents the CEO dividing his attentions between Twitter, Square, and a six-month
move to Africa, believing Twitter is capable of churning out bigger profits. Like any good
hedge fund – so the narrative goes – they just want the value of the company to
increase (stock jumped seven percent on the news).
What this coverage leaves out – and what makes Twitter's plight more than the usual
business scrap – is Singer's history. A major Republican donor and huge booster for
Israel, he's also a notoriously ruthless businessman who embodies "vulture capitalism,"
leaving a trail of asset-stripped companies and even a few economically-ruined countries in his
wake over his insanely profitable career. Media coverage of Singer's interest in Twitter has
gone to great lengths to present his interest in the platform as "
strictly business-related ," however, and some conservatives have even gotten excited
by the thought that the neocon Singer will end the ideologically-motivated censorship they
claim to experience on the platform – but nothing could be further from
reality.
Here come the vultures
Fox News' Tucker Carlson profiled Elliott Management's strategy in December thus: "Buy a
distressed company, outsource the jobs, liquidate the valuable assets, fire middle management,
and once the smoke has cleared, dump what remains to the highest bidder, often in Asia."
Amid the financial crash of 2008, Elliott, with other hedge funds, acquired distressed US auto
parts supplier Delphi, took billions in bailout money from the Obama government (a transaction
the president's "auto-czar" compared to "extortion" ), then offloaded so many
jobs overseas that 25 factories were forced to close, putting tens of thousands of union and
white-collar workers out on the street, as well as slashing pensions. Elliott Management made
over $1 billion from the deal
.
When Singer's fund sinks its teeth into its prey, it does not let go, and most victims have
learned to give up and hope for a quick death. When Elliott bought an 11 percent stake in
outdoors retailer Cabela's, it began pushing for a sale of what was then a profitable company.
The management so feared Singer that it sold within a year, sending stock prices through the
roof but putting almost 2,000 people out of their jobs, setting off a downward spiral that,
Carlson says, "destroyed" Cabela's hometown of Sidney, Nebraska, whose residents feared
to even speak about the hedge funder on camera four years later. AT&T similarly ran for its
life when Singer's fund bit off a $3.2 billion stake of the company in September, acquiescing
to several demands within a month (and there's still time for the rest).
Those who don't acquiesce are guaranteed to suffer. After Elliott Management bought up a
chunk of its debt, the country of Argentina defaulted, holding out for 15 years on Singer's
attempts to collect. A 13-year legal battle ensued, during which Singer's fund seized an
Argentine naval ship to prove they were serious about getting paid. Then-president Cristina
Fernandez denounced the "Vulture Lord," but her replacement, Mauricio Macri, finally
agreed in 2016 to pay up – just in time for the threat of another
debt default .
Peru and Congo have similarly felt the sting of Elliott Management's tactics, having their
distressed debt snapped up and then weaponized against them in court. And even when Singer
doesn't win, his opponents lose. Korean electronics giant Samsung was able to fight off his
takeover efforts when he tried to block a move by the Lee family to consolidate their holdings,
but the bitter battle ended in a five-year prison sentence for company head Jay Y. Lee on
bribery
charges and the impeachment of South Korean president Park Geun-hye.
the
ideologically-motivated vultures, that is
Singer's corporate interests overseas don't stop at outsourcing to cut costs, however. He
founded an organization called Start-Up Nation Central to facilitate the transfer of huge
chunks of the US tech industry to Israel. The initiative seeks to counter the Boycott,
Divestment and Sanctions movement by making Israel essentially boycott-proof, and Singer has
accordingly used his billions to
push American tech firms into Israel – Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple
all have research and development centers there as of 2016. If he gets control of Twitter, the
company's US employees may be surprised to find their replacements speaking Hebrew, not
Chinese.
As for the conservatives who think Singer will defend them from Twitter censorship? Singer
was a hardcore anti-Trumper in 2015, backing Florida Senator Marco Rubio and funding the
prototype of the notorious Steele dossier. Former Trump campaign strategist Steve Bannon "
declared
war " on the billionaire in 2017 upon learning of his involvement. While Singer
financially backs Trump now, journalist Philip Weiss and others have suggested the hedge funder
"cut a deal with Trump on Israel," offering his support in exchange for Trump going
all-in on "protecting" the Jewish State.
Singer is the second-largest donor to the bloodthirsty think tank Foundation for Defense of
Democracies and also supports JINSA and the American Enterprise Institute – all
dyed-in-the-wool neocon groups cheerleading for war with Iran as they did in Iraq. If Trump's
"America-first" base thinks Singer is going to fight for their free speech on Twitter,
they're about to get a rude awakening. Anti-war voices on both sides of the spectrum will
likely find the censorship intensified to the point where they long for the days of mere shadow
banning.
Battle of the billionaires
Dorsey is prepared to stand and fight – for now. He announced on Thursday he'd put his
plans to live in Africa for six months on hold, supposedly due to the coronavirus epidemic.
Meanwhile, Dorsey's fellow tech tycoon Elon Musk has
pledged to help him fight the takeover, tweeting his support on Monday, and Twitter
employees pledged their support with the #webackjack hashtag.
Twitter users complaining about the "Snapchatization" of their beloved platform
should realize they're looking at something quite a bit more serious than the rollout of an
unpopular feature. Twitter, despite its numerous flaws, remains a vital communication channel
for many. Whatever lies ahead for the platform – a stripped-down MySpace-esque husk, a
megaphone for the never-Trump wing of the GOP, another addition to Israel's Silicon Wadi
– only one thing can be certain: it will be profitable for Elliott Management.
Subscribe to RT newsletter to
get stories the mainstream media won't tell you.
"... "Bolton is a longtime member of the failed Washington elite that Trump vowed to oppose, hell-bent on repeating virtually every foreign policy mistake the U.S. has made in the last 15 years - particularly those Trump promised to avoid as president," ..."
"... "It's important that someone who was an unrepentant advocate for the Iraq War, who didn't learn the lessons of the Iraq War, shouldn't be the secretary of state for a president who says Iraq was ..."
Senator Rand Paul said Tuesday in an
op-ed for Rare
that he would oppose President-elect Donald Trump's rumored selection of former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton as Secretary of State.
"Bolton is a longtime member of the failed Washington elite that Trump vowed to oppose, hell-bent on repeating virtually
every foreign policy mistake the U.S. has made in the last 15 years - particularly those Trump promised to avoid as president,"
Paul wrote citing U.S. interventions in Iraq and Libya that Trump has criticized but that Bolton strongly advocated.
Reports since have indicated that former New York City mayor and loyal Trump ally, Rudy Giuliani is being considered for the post.
The Washington Post's David Weigel
reports , "Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a newly reelected member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said this morning that
he was inclined to oppose either former U.N. ambassador John Bolton or former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani if they were nominated
for secretary of state."
"It's important that someone who was an unrepentant advocate for the Iraq War, who didn't learn the lessons of the Iraq
War, shouldn't be the secretary of state for a president who says Iraq was a big lesson," Paul told the Post. "Trump
said that a thousand times. It would be a huge mistake for him to give over his foreign policy to someone who [supported the war].
I mean, you could not find more unrepentant advocates of regime change."
@NoseytheDuke
Lol.the fact that you looked and missed it.The devil is in the details.Joyce wrote.Mark green cheered on.I called bullshit
"Although Singer was initially anti-Trump, and although Trump once attacked Singer for his pro-immigration politics ("Paul
Singer represents amnesty and he represents illegal immigration pouring into the country"), Trump is now essentially funded
by three Jews -- Singer, Bernard Marcus, and Sheldon Adelson, together accounting for over $250 million in pro-Trump political
money. In return, they want war with Iran"
Know what this called. Extortion .Same as Zelensky and Ukraine ..but it is going to end badly, it has to.
Don't be so quick on the "allegations of anti-Semitism against Democratic members of
Congress have done no lasting damage." I've observed an increasing number of Jewish leaders
recommending a further look at their support of Democrats & others recommending a switch
to the R's. Rabbis from GA to a deep blue northern state have made such suggestions.
Now we have NYC's Roger L. Simon, Dartmouth, Yale, Novelist, screenwriter, who
"experienced a political transformation in which he felt alienated from what he saw as the
excesses of the Left." On 12/12 Simon wrote "Trump Shows Himself a Better Friend to the Jews
Than Even Truman."
Excerpt: "Most Republican presidents were better than the Democrats, although the Jews vote
Democratic, one of the more perplexing ironies of our time. It's almost, though not quite,
like blacks voting Democratic, although Democratic policies have helped to eviscerate the
black family. Jews, at least, have done well, but in spite of, not because of, Democratic
policies."
Various pro-Jew stuff "and finally, [Trump's] new adaptation of the Civil Rights Act to
include the Jews. [which is criticized]. Do Jews deserve to be covered by a civil rights act?
[Hitler certainly thought not]. He just wanted them dead. Trump clearly wants them to live.
And thrive. Maybe it's because he has Jewish grandchildren. Who knows? But every Jew in
America should thank him for it. Unfortunately, they don't. Far from it. And that's, as Trump
himself would say, sad."
Realize that colleges discriminate against Jews. Standards are higher for their admission
to top US Universities as well as for Asians (Asians are suing & I love it). Left leaning
US universities, & most big ones are, are anti-Jewish while supporting Muslim Student
Associations behaving badly, including driving Jewish speakers from Campus.
A former anti-Trump Jewish neighbor has shifted to the extent he now says he likes most of
what Trump has done but complains Trump is not refined – Trump talks like a
construction worker. He's not committed to vote for Trump, but to tease him, I'm getting him
a "Trump 2020" Star of David Yarmulke for Xmas (He doesn't do Xmas, just a gift to a friend).
Far better way to influence than the Liberals apply to the rest of us. Antifa winning friends
& converts?
The success of Jews & Asians in America makes a lie of "white privilege." Asians &
Jews on average both do much better economically than white non-Jews. Calculations based on
white's not including Jews shows "white privilege" ain't as advantageous as presented. Our
nation's 2 poorest areas are one black & one white.
Yet, the liberal beatdown of whites continues against those "deplorable" and poor "smelly
Walmart shoppers" who voted for Trump. Liberal University Profs demand REQUIRED "white folks
bad" courses & several Universities already do that. US universities, America's forced
"Reeducation camps."
An OK white law student was kicked out of law school for posting a "It's OK to be white"
sign. For liberal universities, it ain't OK to be white – shame on you for being born.
It ain't OK to be Jewish. It ain't OK to be Asian.
VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRATS YOU WRETCHED WHITES! JEWS! ASIANS! Fess up your sins!
How dumb? Even our black citizens are turning away in increasing numbers. By no means a
majority, but a trend. Dems/Libs bring it on themselves with all their identity politics
& unrestrained hate of those unlike them.
Pompeo has just four terms in the House of Representives befor getting postions of Director of CIA (whichsuggests previous involvement
with CIA) and then paradoxically the head of the State Department, He retired from the alry in the rank of comptain and never participated
in any battles. He serves only in Germany, and this can be classified as a chickenhawk. He never performed any dyplomatic duries in
hs life and a large part of his adult life (1998-2006) was a greddy military contractor.
1. It mentions
that it aimed at "deterring future Iranian attack plans". This however is very vague. Future is not the same as imminent which is
the time based test required under international law. (1)
2. Overall, the statement places far greater emphasis on past activities and violations allegedly commuted by Suleimani. As such
the killing appears far more retaliatory for past acts than anticipatory for imminent self defense.
3. The notion that Suleimani was "actively developing plans" is curious both from a semantic and military standpoint. Is it sufficient
to meet the test of mecessity and proportionality?
"This discussion is frankly irrelevant. Trump is assured of re-selection because he's
appeased the only two constituencies that matter: the military industrial complex and the
zionist lobby. "
No you forgot the other constituencies that will vote for him. Namely the dumb ass stupid
rednecks , and the as stupid evangelist.
"... If you hang around for a while you might notice patterns to the comments. The anti-semitic comments typically occur to derail commentary about the articles. And articles that you might want to share with family/friends/co-workers/etc but won't because you don't want those other folks to judge you based on the comments on the articles. ..."
"... Agent provocateurs abound. ..."
"... Consequently, these agencies employ the services of so-called "Digital Media Specialists," whose job it is to disrupt, discredit and smear legitimate websites, in order to diffuse the efficacy of the information disseminated on those websites. ..."
"... Creating a profile of an anti-Semitic, hateful racist ****, is the first order of business for DSMs. Then posting vile, off-topic comments incorporating these hateful views is step two. ..."
"... Perhaps you should try applying a filter when reading comments here. The legitimate members of this forum are intelligent, articulate people who are well schooled in history, politics, some in law and most can discuss current events intelligently without resorting to hateful epithets. ..."
If you hang around for a while you might notice patterns to the comments. The anti-semitic
comments typically occur to derail commentary about the articles. And articles that you might
want to share with family/friends/co-workers/etc but won't because you don't want those other
folks to judge you based on the comments on the articles.
Agent provocateurs abound.
You are mature enough to handle free-speech, right?
Shifter_X , 5 hours ago
I don't think your stay here will be very happy, if you are unable to discern the genuine
posts here from the plants. It is in MSM's interest and that of the powers that be, to
discredit websites that do not tow the company line and which host stories and information
that disclose truth.
Consequently, these agencies employ the services of so-called "Digital Media Specialists,"
whose job it is to disrupt, discredit and smear legitimate websites, in order to diffuse the
efficacy of the information disseminated on those websites.
Creating a profile of an anti-Semitic, hateful racist ****, is the first order of business
for DSMs. Then posting vile, off-topic comments incorporating these hateful views is step
two.
All it takes from there is some gullible cluck to believe that these posts are actually
representative of the website's membership and voila! A wrap-up smear, done. (Nancy Pelosi
explained that term, you can probably find footage on the internets).
Perhaps you should try applying a filter when reading comments here. The legitimate
members of this forum are intelligent, articulate people who are well schooled in history,
politics, some in law and most can discuss current events intelligently without resorting to
hateful epithets.
We do, however, use strong language and this site is not a "safe space."
We are saving the world from socialism and communism.
We are energy independent, with innate exceptionalism and #MAGA# will usher in a new era
of American prosperity.
Any and all accusations of USSA imperialism, are made by the "woke" and those jealous of
the greatest Capitalist system in the world.
The swamp is being drained as I speak, and therefore will continue with unwavering
support for my 5x draft dodging, Zionist supporting, multiple times bankrupt, keeper of
broken promises POTUS.
Smedley Butler's book is not worthy of reading once you have the seminal work known as
"The Art Of The Deal"
You can't criticize Washington without mentioning the Zionists that control its war policies
on behalf of Israhell, and AIPAC is a powerful Israhelli lobby group in the equation that targets
anyone exposing the evils of the criminal state. It is more than just a hate group. 3 hours ago
(Edited) Zionists control USA and Trump.
Remember how Israel did 9/11 and how Trump's campaign manager (((Michael Glassner))) sold the
WTC to lucky (((Larry Silverstein)))? The police commissioner on 9/11 was jailed for accepting an
Israeli bribe and Trump just pardoned him.
Actions of Trump are dictated by his
handlers. He is just a marionette.
Notable quotes:
"... wealth on tap. ..."
"... There's more than an echo of McCartthism in this -- policies are championed to further the business and ideological interests of powerful individuals that don't necessarily reflect the priorities and interests of the country as a whole. People, often those who really should know better, then bandwaggon on those policies, not only to avoid being labeled unpatriotic but to also prove that they're just as or even more patriotic than the people originally promulgating them. We've seen this time and again, probably the most egregious recent example being the miasma of lies that were used to invade Iraq. Its a mindset that might appear to work but I believe that its ultimately a road to nowhere. ..."
During every presidential election cycle, pundits argue that foreign policy will play a decisive role. Every time -- at least
in my experience of 14 election cycles, nine in campaigns -- they have been proved wrong. This year will almost surely be no different.
On the hustings, presidential candidates rarely get questions from voters on foreign policy. However, during the
televised debates , journalist-questioners looking to make news quiz candidates on what they might do in thus-and-so circumstance,
although they can't possibly know until faced in the Oval Office with real-world choices.
Election Campaign Damage: Israel and Palestine
By contrast, presidential campaigns often have a serious impact on U.S. national security interests. This year, three foreign
policy issues tightly linked to U.S. domestic politics stand out. First, last week, Trump joined with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu at the White House to launch the "
deal of the century
" on Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking. The deal is so one-sided as to be risible and is " dead on arrival." It's good politics
for Trump with U.S. constituencies that are strongly pro-Israel, though with less impact with American Jews (most of whom are almost
certain to vote for the Democratic nominee) than with many American evangelicals.
But does it matter that, with Trump's proposal, the United States has abandoned any pretense of being an " honest broker" in the
Middle East? To be sure, keen observers rightly note that most Arab governments give no more than ritual support to the Palestinian
cause. Many have joined Israel in seeing Iran as their common enemy, and the Palestinians be damned.
But most Arab leaders still must look over their shoulders: can they be sure that their populations will forget about the Palestinians'
decades-long perception of humiliation by Israel, the United States, and most Arab leaders? Thus, to guard against giving a hostage
to fortune, both the
Arab League
and the
Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIG) have formally rejected the Trump plan.
Still, a third Palestinian Intifada (or "uprising") has so far not started. But these are early days. In any event, U.S. chances
of promoting stability in the region have been seriously damaged.
Damage: Iran
More consequential is the standoff between the Trump administration and Iran ' s clerical leadership, with the U.S. being egged
on by regional partners. Trump
probably does not want an open war with Iran. But heightened tensions raise doubts that either Trump or the Iranians can control
the pattern of escalation/de-escalation. Little would be needed to spark a major conflict, even by accident. After the United States
assassinated
Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani, Iran
responded only by launching pin-prick missile attacks against two Iraqi airbases used by the U.S. military, with advanced warning
to keep from killing Americans. Trump -- and the world -- might not be so lucky next time.
It takes strong nerves to bet that the Trump administration ' s " maximum pressure" strategy against Iran will remain
controlled , much less that Iran will accede to U.S. demands before negotiations even begin. Meanwhile, following Trump ' s amazing
folly two years ago of
withdrawing from the
Joint Comprehensive
Plan of Action (JCPOA), which effectively trammeled any chance that Iran could get nuclear weapons for at least a decade, Iran
is now ramping up its nuclear activities. Given that Trump has
pledged that " Iran will
never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon," at some point a " red line" can get crossed, not just in politics-driven perceptions
but in reality. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo still has on the table
12
demands that Iran must meet before any negotiations can begin. No country will accept unconditional surrender as the opening
bid for talking.
Several of the Democratic candidates for president, while deeply concerned about Iran's behavior,
oppose the Trump-Pompeo approach, with all of the risks of open conflict. Amid deep unease on Capitol Hill, the Democratic-controlled
House has voted to repeal the 2002 Authorization
for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), originally the legal basis for the invasion of Iraq, and to prevent funding of military action
against Iran without congressional authorization. (Yet neither House bill has much chance of passing the Republican-controlled Senate.)
But these concerns could be swept aside if an incident in the Persian Gulf region led to Americans getting killed, provoking a national
outcry. So long as Trump favors confrontation with Iran over any consideration of compromise or conciliation, the dangers will continue.
"Hair trigger" continues to be an apt metaphor.
Damage: The Democrats on Russia
It's not just the White House that is doing serious damage to U.S. interests abroad during this year's election campaign. Of even
greater consequence (absent a new Middle East war) is the U.S. relationship with Russia. It's currently unthinkable that Washington
will try to move beyond the status quo, even if Russian President Vladimir Putin were prepared to do so. Even before Trump was inaugurated,
many Democrats began calling for his
impeachment . Leading Democrats
laid
Hillary Clinton ' s defeat at the feet of Russian interference in the U.S. election -- a claim that stretched credulity past
the breaking point. Further, as Democrats looked for grounds to impeach Trump (or at least terminally to reduce his reelection chances),
the " Russia factor" was the best cudgel available. Charges included the
notion that " Putin has something on Trump," which
presumes he would sell out the nation ' s security for a mess of pottage.
All this domestic politicking ignores a geopolitical fact: while the Soviet Union lost the Cold War and, for some time thereafter,
Russia could be dismissed, it was always certain that it would again become a significant power, at least in Europe. Thus, even before
the Berlin Wall fell, President George H. W. Bush proposed
creating a " Europe whole and free" and at peace. Bill Clinton built on what Bush began. Both understood that a renascent Russia
could embrace revanchism, and for several years their efforts seemed to have a chance of succeeding.
Then the effort went off the rails. Putin took power in Russia, which made cooperation with the West difficult if not impossible.
He worked to consolidate his domestic position, in part by alleging that the West was " disrespecting" Russia and trying to encircle
it. For its part, the U.S. played into the Putin narrative by abandoning the Bush-Clinton vision of taking legitimate Russian interests
into account in fashioning European security arrangements. The breaking point came in 2014, when Russia
seized Crimea and sent
" little green men" to fight in some other parts of Ukraine. The West necessarily responded, with economic
sanctions and NATO's
buildup of " trip wire" forces in Central Europe.
But despite the ensuing standoff, the critical requirement remains: the United States has to acknowledge Russia's inevitable rise
as a major power while also impressing on Putin the need to trim his ambitions, if he is to avoid a new era of Russian isolation.
There is also serious business that the two countries need to pursue, including strategic arms control, the Middle East (especially
Iran), and climate change. Despite deep disagreements, including over Ukraine and parts of Central Europe, the U.S. needs to engage
in serious discussions with Russia, which means the renewal of diplomacy which has been in the deep freeze for years.
All of this has been put in pawn by the role that the "Russia factor" has been permitted to play in American presidential politics,
especially by Democrats. Longer-term U.S. interests are suffering, along with those of the European allies and Middle East partners.
The task has been made even more difficult by those U.S. politicians,
think tanks , and
journalists who
prefer to resurrect the term "cold war" rather than clearly examining the nation's strategic needs because of the blinkers imposed
by domestic politics. Open discussion about alternatives in dealing with Russia is thus stifled, at serious cost to the United States
and others.
In all three of these areas, the U.S. is paying a high price in terms of its national interests to the games political leaders,
both Republicans and Democrats, are playing. Great efforts will be needed to dig out of this mess, beginning with U.S. willingness
to do so. Leaders elsewhere must also be prepared to join in -- far from a sure thing! Unfortunately, there is currently little hope
that, at least in the three critical areas discussed above, pursuit of U.S. interests abroad will prevail over today's parochial
domestic politics. David G. Horsman
You apparently
do not appreciate these sociopaths live for this crap. It keeps their juices flowing. Cackling Killary may yet get on Stop and Frisk
your Bloomer's ticket and be VP. For a price of course.
This is a fantasy. Once fascism gets established it is nearly impossible to stop it if history teaches us anything.
Pseudo-religious talk about Karma is very reminiscent of the decent Christians comforting themselves that all those badies will be
punished in hell for an eternity. IE. Because they won't be in this life.
It's a way of coping with total defeat after 50 years of neoliberalcon supremacy and proto fascism. After a 100 year war on labour.
It's already over. What do think this is? France
?
I don't fight fascism because I believe we will win. It's because they are fascist. And we know who has all the guns.
Gezzah Potts
How many human
beings have now died as a result of the draconian sanctions unleashed on the Venezuelan people by this rogue terrorist state?
I also wonder how the people of Detroit are faring considering 33.4% live below the poverty line, or in Cleveland where 35% live
in poverty.
And yet Trump brags of defending 'American liberty' (oxymoron) by spending $2.2 trillion dollars in maintaining the hegemony of this
debauched Empire.
Yet, in the land of the free (another oxymoron) vast swathes of people live in poverty – or live in their cars, or in the burgeoning
tent cities.
How's the water in Flint? Is it still undrinkable?
As if any of the creatures in Washington care about any of this. Anything to maintain control over much of the Planet. Tim Jenkins
And with the
highest incarcerated prison population and highest record in private prison profits in California, most recent, it seems the solution
to corporate 'societal' wealth is to have 50,000 homeless on the streets in L.A. , just 'hanging' around, the corner . . .
wealth on tap.
(datsa' rap trap 😉 ) 5 0 Reply Feb 16, 2020 9:24 AM
Gezzah Potts
Just watched
John Pilger's searing documentary 'The Dirty War On The NHS' which included segments on the wondrously caring and compassionate US
'health system' in places like Chicago and such quaint notions as 'patient dumping' where, to further save costs, and make more billions
$$$$ – patients are evicted from hospitals early and dumped at homeless shelters.
My god, the barbarians are not just at the gate. They're already inside the building.
These completely dehumanised psychopathic neoliberal ideologues who only care about money and profits.
More and more for us and all you useless eaters can just fuck off and die.
That's the mentality. It's so sick.
No, that wasn't a pun. It is truly sick how warped society has become. Seamus Padraig
Despite the turmoil Trump has experienced since 2016, it has been his karmic responsibility to grow from those challenges,
to use each obstacle as a path to align with a higher vibration and become a more conscious person, fully aware of his global
responsibility to humanity – that has not appeared to have happened.
What appears to have happened is that Trump finally caved in to the Deep State, and that's why things are going better for him.
I am starting to suspect we may see a war against Iran in Term II.
Pelosi and the Dems have also created 'bad' karma with their own abuse of power; they too will reap the results of their own
behavior.
What they're gonna reap is more Trump after next November! Martin Usher
There's more
than an echo of McCartthism in this -- policies are championed to further the business and ideological interests of powerful individuals
that don't necessarily reflect the priorities and interests of the country as a whole. People, often those who really should know
better, then bandwaggon on those policies, not only to avoid being labeled unpatriotic but to also prove that they're just as or
even more patriotic than the people originally promulgating them. We've seen this time and again, probably the most egregious recent
example being the miasma of lies that were used to invade Iraq. Its a mindset that might appear to work but I believe that its ultimately
a road to nowhere.
I'm less concerned about the current emphasis on military spending than I would have been in the past because I sincerely doubt
the ability of the US to carry through on these plans. The writing's been on the wall for some time and they can certainly spend
the money but the chronic shortage of engineering talent, the systematic shortchanging of education and our steady erosion of manufacturing
knowhow will limit our ability to turn political wishful thinking into reality. Sure, we'll still be able to produce boutique products,
eye-wateringly expensive munitions that we can use to intimidate people who can't shoot back, but we're already in an era where serious
cost overruns and performance deficiencies are the rule rather than the exception. This problem has been brewing for a generation
or more and it will take a generation or more to fix it. Unfortunately our politicians are still living in the reflected glory of
past empires, they seem to be unable to recognize that WW2 was 75 years ago, so I expect we'll stumble along business as usual alienating
more and more people until all we have left are those we can buy with our increasingly useless dollars.
Not directly related to any of these points, but important in the mix, is the relation of both parties to AIPAC. People don't
want a government whose first priority is Israel.
As a Member of Congress and the vice-chair of the House Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee, I believe defending human rights and freedom are foundational to our national
security and our democracy. But the struggle to advance human rights and promote human
dignity inevitably results in confronting entrenched forces determined to dehumanize,
debase, and demonize individuals or entire populations to maintain dominance and an unjust
status quo. Hate is used as a weapon to incite and silence dissent. Unfortunately, this is
my recent experience with AIPAC – the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
AIPAC ran a series of Facebook ads that referenced "radicals in the Democratic party."
The text of the ad was accompanied by a collage featuring Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) Rashida
Tlaib (D-MI) and Betty McCollum (D-MN). "It's critical that we protect our Israeli allies
especially as they face threats from Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah ISIS and -- maybe more sinister
-- right here in the U.S. Congress," one of the ads read.
McCollum has become a target of the pro-Israel organization as a result of introducing
H.R.2407, an historic piece of legislation that aims to prohibit U.S. taxpayer money from
being used to detain Palestinian children in Israel."Israel's system of military juvenile
detention is state-sponsored child abuse designed to intimidate and terrorize Palestinian
children and their families," said McCollum after introducing the bill, "It must be
condemned, but it is equally outrageous that U.S. tax dollars in the form of military aid
to Israel are permitted to sustain what is clearly a gross human rights violation against
children." H.R. 2407 currently has 23 cosponsors"
@AnonStarter Israeli leader acknowledgement of intervention in legislation in state and
federal US laws. Imagine ANY other country doing this. Bragging about their influence over
our government to get laws passed that limit American freedoms.
PM of Israel
@IsraeliPM
"It was also not for nothing that the American administration has taken this step
together with us. In recent years, we have promoted laws in most US states, which determine
that strong action is to be taken against whoever tries to boycott Israel."
@AnonStarter You've got a real valid point here, AnonStarter. Yes, indeed, Israel –
actually, BB Nutty&Yahoo lied about Mossad's involvement in the destruction of the Twin
Towers on 9/11/01, and Israeli Trotskyists aka Neocons lied the US into Iraq, which
eventually turned into a disaster.
As you rightly said, Nutty&Yahoo also lied when he accused Iran of having nukes ..
Never mind that Ayatollahs Khomeini and later, Khameini, had issued Fatwas (religious
decrees) banning the development and production of nukes, and the nuclear scientists enriched
uranium/plutonium for electricity production and isotopes for treating cancer patients,
respectively.
Nutty&Yahoo's a vicious pathological liar who uttered a whopper of a lie to SecState
Mike Pompeo about IRGC Commander Qassem Soleimani, who passed that very same lie to DJT
– telling him to order Soleimani's assassination. Unfortunately, DJT believed the lies
and the assassination was culminated on January 3 of this year.
@04398436986 You can't seem to accept the fact that the US has no business being in Iraq
or Syria in the first place.
You can't seem to accept the fact that ISIS, like al Qaeda and all of the other terrorist
groups in the ME are creations if the US and/or Israel.
You can't seem to accept the fact that Arabs may not want "democracy" or that their view of
"democracy" may be different from the US view of "democracy", which is certainly different
from, for example, the Swiss view of "democracy".
Conjecture cannot replace fact. All female fruit flies have red eyes, but not all fruit flies
with red eyes are female. That is the situation in the ME. Nothing is obvious. In war,
declared or otherwise, bad things happen, and people are killed. Opposing Soleimani's killing
does not translate into approving anyone else's killing.
The point of Giraldi's article is that there is always conflicting information that needs
to be investigated. The US/NATO and Israel have a long history of declaring the narrative,
then being very selective with the investigation of facts. When it comes to war, declared or
otherwise, what's the rush?
It's been said that Kushner is also a Mossad agent or asset, which is a good guess,
since that agency has been placing their agents into the WH since at least the days of
Clinton, who had Rahm Emmanuel to whisper hate into his ear.
Speaking of whispering into his ear, I'd say the first agent placed by Mossad into WH was
Mathilde Krim, during days of LBJ:
LBJ and close friend Mathilde Krim
Excerpt from Was LBJ Shacked up with a pretty Zionist when Israel attacked the USS
Liberty?
The suggestion that LBJ was shacked up with a Zionist when Israel attacked and tried to
sink the USS Liberty in 1967 is not used here as a metaphor, as in "strange bedfellows;" it
is meant literally as in shacked up. You see, he was 'close friends" with Arthur and
Mathilde Krim and Johnson even built a little cottage on his ranch called "Mathilde's
house." No one has a tape of Johnson's doings in his bedroom that night, with the possible
exception of J Edgar Hoover, who was famous for such things, and Hoover's secretary
destroyed "those" files when he died.
"... Until recently, President Donald Trump's pro-Israel policy was centered on taking steps related to fulfilling campaign promises and strengthening his standing domestically with his evangelical base. Chief among these steps was his decision to pull out of the nuclear accord with Iran, and the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (and at the same time announcing moving the American embassy to Jerusalem). Trump also signed a presidential proclamation recognizing "Israeli sovereignty" over the Golan Heights. ..."
"... By deciding to carry out this assassination operation, Trump has brought his pro-Israel policy to an entirely new, and dangerous level. ..."
"... Israel may have found in the Trump administration the perfect ally when it comes to the demonization of Iran and the groups it supports. ..."
Until recently, President Donald Trump's pro-Israel policy was centered on taking steps
related to fulfilling campaign promises and strengthening his standing domestically with his
evangelical base. Chief among these steps was his decision to pull out of the nuclear accord
with Iran, and the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (and at the same time
announcing moving the American embassy to Jerusalem). Trump also signed a presidential
proclamation recognizing "Israeli sovereignty" over the Golan Heights.
All of this has changed, however, with the assassination of the commander of the Quds Force
in Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) General Qassem Soleimani and the deputy head
of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), Abu Mehdi Al-Muhandis.
By deciding to carry out this assassination operation, Trump has brought his pro-Israel
policy to an entirely new, and dangerous level.
Targeting the IRGC and PMF: An Israeli policy
It is worth remembering that Israel set the precedent for carrying out lethal operations in
Iraq by targeting elements of the IRGC and the PMF.
Israel began these operations last year, with the first taking place on July 19 near the
Iraqi town of Amerli. Iranian media later reported that senior IRGC commander Abu Alfazl
Sarabian had died in the attack.
Another Israeli attack on August 25 led to the death of a senior PMF commander in the Iraqi
town of Al-Qaim near the border with Syria, while 21 PMF members were killed in an Israeli
operation near the city of Hit in Iraq's Anbar province on September 20.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even admitted that Israel was behind
these attacks.
"We are working against Iranian consolidation in Iraq as well [as in Syria]" remarked
Netanyahu on August 22.
Trump administration officials adopt the Israel line of demonizing Iran
The Israeli fingerprints on U.S. policy could also be seen in the apparent stances taken by
U.S. officials following the assassination of Soleimani and Al-Muhandis.
According to the New York
Times , Trump administration officials have compared the assassination of Soleimani to the
killing of former ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi. Such a comparison is no doubt to Israel's
liking.
Not only has Israel long sought to equate the IRGC and its allies, including the Lebanese
Hezbollah and the Iraqi PMF, with terrorist groups like al-Qaida and ISIS, it has even
described the latter groups as being the lesser of the two evils.
According to sources in Washington, one of the most common complaints made by visiting
Israeli officials over the past years was that the U.S. was focusing too much on fighting Sunni
Jihadist groups (al-Qaida, ISIS, etc.) and not enough on fighting Iran and its network of
allies.
Israel's former ambassador to Washington, Michael Oren referred to this dynamic in an
interview with the Jerusalem Post back in September 2013, where he summed up the Israeli
policy regarding Syria. "The initial message about the Syrian issue was that we always wanted
(President) Bashar Assad to go" he stated, further adding; "we always preferred the bad guys
who weren't back by Iran (al-Qaida affiliates) to the bad guys who were backed by Iran".
For his part, former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon referred to an "
axis of evil ' comprising Iran, Syria, and Lebanon.
Yaalon made those remarks during a meeting with former chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of
Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey in August 2013, underscoring that this "axis of evil" must not
emerge victorious in Syria.
Israel may have found in the Trump administration the perfect ally when it comes to the
demonization of Iran and the groups it supports.
Hard-core evangelicals like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence
have a strong ideological affinity for Israel and its anti-Iranian agenda.
During a Senate hearing last April, Pompeo
repeated the long-debunked claim that Iran and al-Qaida have cooperated for years. "There
is no doubt there is a connection between the Islamic Republic of Iran and al-Qaida. Period,
full stop," Pompeo asserted.
Pence, meanwhile, has even gone so far as to claim that
Soleimani was involved with 9/11 . Following the assassination, Pence tweeted that
Soleimani had "assisted in the clandestine travel of 10 of the 12 terrorists who carried out
the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States."
American troops in danger as a result of the Israeli evangelical agenda
With the assassination of Soleimani and Al-Muhandes, Israel and its Christian evangelical
allies in Washington appear to have succeeded more than any time before in steering Trump's
foreign policy. Their success, however, may have placed U.S. troops in the region in grave
danger.
In a speech
commemorating the death of Soleimani and Al-Muhandes, the leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah
Hassan Nasrallah warned that retaliation would be aimed at U.S. military assets.
In remarks which brought back the memories of the 1983 attacks on the Marine Barracks in
Beirut, Nasrallah suggested that the U.S. military presence in the region would become a target
for suicide bombers.
"The suicide attackers who forced the Americans to leave our region in the past are still
here today and in far greater numbers," Nasrallah asserted.
Let's not forget Israel, which has backdoored the NSA for years, getting everything before
the US agency.
Am I being antisemitic?
Not by any rational person but be careful you are not being anti Semitic as you could be
accused of boycotting US products: see SIMITIC CP1613 NDIS Adapter.
On the big issue though I cant help seeing Pontious Pompeo as hurling himself about the
globe tilting at windmills. He is making the USA a laughing stock, very threatening for sure,
but he is a laughing stock and he perfectly sets up the scenario to ridicule his mongrel
stupid president.
All the whining done by the Outlaw US Empire confirms for me the brilliance of Escobar's
"The Siren
Call of a System Leader" as it goes about the planet screeching its spiel, then confesses
its alliance with Terrorism by "standing with the Turks." It seems the hysteria's building,
becoming an octave higher than the day before perhaps in an attempt to mute word of Sanders
continuing success by providing a falsetto of junk headlines and bunkum articles.
If I had to choose, I'd go Huawei given its security prowess and against all Western
products given their known security failings.
Actually any supremacist ideology produces something like an apartheid regime for other
nationalities.
The current situation looks like a dead end with little chances of reconciliation, especially
after recent killing of protesters by Israel army/snipers. But in general, it is iether a two
state solution of equal rights for Palestinians and Jews in the same state. The elements of
theocratic state should be eliminated and right wing parties outlawed as neofascist parties which
threatens democracy.
Notable quotes:
"... The peace process and the two-state solution failed because America -- the only country on which Israel could count on for generous diplomatic, military and economic support, and therefore the only country that has the necessary leverage to influence Israel's policies -- allowed it to fail. Consequently, most Israelis, including many belonging to the Blue/White party, headed by General Benny Gantz, oppose granting any future Palestinian entity the most basic features of sovereignty, including control of its own borders. Gantz refused to form a unity government with the Likud because of Netanyahu's indictment for multiple crimes, not because of differences over peace policy. What doubts anyone might have had on this subject were removed when Gantz just announced that he embraces Netanyahu's intention to annex the Jordan Valley to Israel. ..."
The threat of a new war with Iran that might have replicated what has been the worst
disaster in the history of America's international misadventures -- George W. Bush's invasion
of Iraq based on fabricated lies -- sucked the air out of all other international diplomatic
activity, not least of what used to be called the Middle East peace process.
Yet the failure of the peace process has not been the consequence of recent mindless and
destructive actions by Donald Trump and of the clownish shenanigans of his son-in-law, Jared
Kushner, who was charged with helping Israeli hardliners in nailing down permanently the
Palestinian occupation. For all the damage they caused (mainly to Palestinians), prospects for
a two-state solution actually ended during President Barack Obama's administration, despite
Secretary of State John Kerry's energetic efforts to renew the stalled negotiations. They were
not resumed because Obama, like his predecessors, failed to take the tough measures that were
necessary to overcome Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's determination to prevent the
emergence of a Palestinian state, notwithstanding his pledge in his Bar-Ilan speech of 2009 to
implement the agreements of the Oslo accords.
Yes, Obama and Kerry did warn that Israel's continued occupation might lead to an Israeli
apartheid regime. But knowing how deeply the accusation of an incipient Israeli apartheid could
anger right-wingers in Israel and in the U.S., they repeatedly followed that warning with the
assurance that "America will always have Israel's back." It was the sequence of this two-part
statement that convinced Netanyahu that AIPAC had succeeded in getting American presidents to
protect Israel's impunity. Had Obama and Kerry reversed that sequence, first noting that
the U.S. had always had Israel's back, and then warning that Israel is now on the verge
of trading its democracy for apartheid, the warning might have had quite different implications
for Israel's government.
The peace process and the two-state solution failed because America -- the only country
on which Israel could count on for generous diplomatic, military and economic support, and
therefore the only country that has the necessary leverage to influence Israel's policies --
allowed it to fail. Consequently, most Israelis, including many belonging to the Blue/White
party, headed by General Benny Gantz, oppose granting any future Palestinian entity the most
basic features of sovereignty, including control of its own borders. Gantz refused to form a
unity government with the Likud because of Netanyahu's indictment for multiple crimes, not
because of differences over peace policy. What doubts anyone might have had on this subject
were removed when Gantz just announced that he embraces Netanyahu's intention to annex the
Jordan Valley to Israel.
For the Palestinians, territory is the most critical of the final status issues. The current
internationally recognized borders that separate Israel and the Occupied Territories reduced
the territory originally assigned to Palestinians in the U.N. Partition Plan of 1947 from
roughly half of Palestine to 22 percent. Israel, which was assigned originally roughly the
other half of Palestine, now has 78 percent, not including Palestinian territory Israel has
confiscated for its illegal settlements.
No present or prospective Palestinian leadership will accept any further reduction of
territory from their promised state. Given the territory they already lost in 1947, and again
in 1949, and given Israel's refusal to accept the return of Palestinian refugees to Israel, is
it really reasonable to expect Palestinians to give up any further territory? Where else other
than the West Bank could Palestine refugees return to?
The one-state solution that is preferred by many Israelis is essentially a continuation of
the present de facto apartheid. It is not the one-state alternative any Palestinian would
accept. Repeated polling has shown that a majority of Jewish Israelis are unprepared to grant
equal rights to Palestinians in a one-state arrangement. This opposition is unsurprising, for
the inclusion in Israel's body politic of West Bank and Gaza Palestinians would mean the end of
Israel as a Jewish state, for Israel's non-Jewish citizens would then outnumber its Jewish
ones, and may already do so. Of course, Israel could contrive a non-voting status for the West
Bank's Palestinians, something many Jewish Israelis and political parties actually advocate,
but that would not deceive anyone. It would mean the formal end of Israel's democracy.
The foregoing notwithstanding, I have long maintained that if Israel were compelled to
choose between one state that grants full equality to Palestinians now under occupation and two
states that conform substantially to existing agreements and international law, and no other
options were available to it, the majority of Israelis would opt for two states. Why? Because
as noted above, the overwhelming majority of Israelis oppose any arrangement that might produce
a Palestinian majority with the same rights Israeli Jewish citizens enjoy. Of course, Israel
has never been compelled to make such a choice, nor will they be compelled to do so by the
international community.
However, they could be compelled to do so by the Palestinians, but only if Palestinians were
finally to expel their current leadership and choose a more honest and courageous one. That new
leadership would have to shut down the Palestinian Authority, which its present leaders allowed
Israel to portray as an arrangement that places Palestinians on the path to statehood, of
course in some undefined future. Israel has deliberately perpetuated that myth to conceal its
real intention to keep the current occupation unchanged. The new Palestinian leadership would
have to declare that since Israel has denied them their own state and established a one-state
reality, Palestinians will no longer deny that reality. Consequently, the national struggle
will now be for full citizenship in the one state that Israel has forced them into. I have
argued for the past two decades that the one-state option is far more likely to open a path to
a two-state solution, however counter intuitive that may seem to be. Palestinians rejected it
categorically from the outset, but
younger Palestinians have come around to accepting it -- even preferring it to the two-state
model.
Unlike the struggle for a two-state solution, a goal that has so easily been manipulated by
Israel to mean whatever serves their real goal of preventing such an outcome -- and also so
easily allowed international actors to pretend they have not given up their efforts to achieve
that outcome, an anti-apartheid struggle does not lend itself to such deceptions. South Africa
has taught the world too well what apartheid looks like, as well as how the international
community could deal with it. Of course, South Africa has also shown how long and bloody a
struggle against apartheid can be, and the terrible price paid by the victims of such a regime.
But Palestinians already live in such a regime, and have for long been paying a terrible price
for their subjugation.
Yet deeper and more troubling questions are raised by the choices that now face Israel,
including whether the original idea of the Zionist movement of a state that is both Jewish and
democratic is not deeply oxymoronic, a question that not only Israelis but Jews outside of
Israel must address. That question is underscored by the challenges to India's democracy posed
by its prime minister's decision to turn his country into a Hindu nation. It is a question that
did not escape some of the founders of the Zionist movement, who argued that Zionism should
define the state as Jewish only in its ethnic and secular cultural dimensions. But that this is
not how Jewish identity is treated in Israel is undeniable.
Imagine if Israel's laws defining national identity and citizenship, as recently
reformulated by Israel's Knesset, were adopted by the U.S. Congress or by other Western
democratic countries, and if Christianity in its "cultural dimensions" were declared to be
their national identity, with citizenship also granted by conversion to the dominant religion,
as is now the case in Israel, where arrangements for Jewish religious conversions are part of
the Prime Minister's office.
Is this not what America's founders, and the waves of immigrants, including European Jews,
sought to escape from? And how would Jews react today to legislation in the U.S. Congress that
would explicitly seek to maintain the majority status of Christians in the U.S.? Are Jews to
take pride in a Jewish state that adopts citizenship requirements that mirror those advocated
by white Christian supremacists? These supremacists have already proclaimed jubilantly that
Israel's policies vindicate the ones they have long been advocating.
It is true, of course, that for some Jews, aware of the history of anti-Semitism that has
spanned the ages, and especially the Holocaust, Zionism's contradictions with democratic
principles are an unpleasant but inescapable dilemma they can live with. As a survivor of the
Holocaust, I can understand that. But I also understand that the likely consequences of these
contradictions are not benign, and can yield their own terrible outcomes, particularly when
they lead to the dalliances by the prime minister of a Jewish state with right-wing racist and
xenophobic heads of state and of political parties that have fascist and anti-Semitic
parentage.
Legislation proposed in the U.S. Congress and by Trump, and recently celebrated by his
son-in-law Kushner in a New York Times op-ed, proposing that criticism of
Zionism be outlawed as antisemitism , would be laughable, were it not so clearly -- and
outrageously -- intended to deny freedom of speech on this subject. Yet laughable it is, for
its first target would have to be Jews -- not liberal left-wingers but the most Orthodox Jews,
known as Haredim, in Israel and in America.
At the very inception of the Zionist movement 150 years ago, not only the Haredim but the
overwhelming majority of Orthodox Jewry everywhere was opposed to Zionism, which it considered
to be a Jewish heresy, not only because the Zionists were mostly secularists, but because of an
oath taken by Jewish leaders after the destruction of the Second Temple following their exile
from Palestine, that Jews would not reestablish a Jewish kingdom except following the messianic
era. Zionism was also bitterly opposed by much of the world's Jewish Reform movement, many of
whose leaders insisted that Jewishness is a religion, not a political identity.
Much of Orthodox Jewry did not end its opposition to Zionism until after the war of 1967,
but many if not most Haredis continue to oppose Zionism as heresy. Most of its members refuse
to serve in Israel's military, to celebrate Israel's Independence Day, sing its national
anthem, and do not allow prayers in their synagogues for the wellbeing of Israel's political
leaders. Trump, Kushner, and the U.S. Congress would have to arrest them as anti-Semites.
I have no doubt that Trump's rage at the Jewish chairmen of the two Congressional committees
that led the procedures for his impeachment will sooner or later explode in anti-Semitic
expletives. The only reason it has not done so yet is because of Trump's fear of jeopardizing
Evangelical support and Sheldon Adelson's mega bucks. After all, Trump already told us that the
neo-Nazi rioters in Charlottesville declaiming "Jews will not replace us" included "very fine
people." Netanyahu never criticized Trump's statement, for he too does not want to jeopardize
certain relationships, namely the "very fine people" he has embraced -- leaders in Hungary,
Poland, Austria, Italy, Brazil, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere.
If Trump's son-in-law is searching for anti-Semites, he should have been told they are far
closer at hand than in America's schools, for they are ensconced in the White House. They are
also to be found in Jerusalem where they are being accorded honors by Netanyahu. The
anti-Semitic dog whistling contained in Trump's attacks on the two Jewish congressmen were not
misunderstood by his hardcore supporters -- who now include the entire leadership of the
Republican party -- who Trump needs to take him to victory in the coming presidential
elections, or to keep him in the White House were he to lose those elections.
If apartheid is coming (or has come) out of Zion, it should not shock that what may come out
of Washington is a repeat by Trump's Republican shock troops of what occurred in Berlin in
1933, when the Bundestag was taken over by the Nazi party and ended Germany's democracy.
In a key piece of actual extensive, on-the-ground reporting
, the New York Times's Alissa Rubin has raised serious questions about the official US
account of who it was that attacked the K-1 base near Kirkuk, in eastern Iraq, on December 27.
The United States almost immediately accused the Iran-backed Ketaib Hizbullah (KH) militia of
responsibility. But Rubin quotes by name Brig. General Ahmed Adnan, the chief of intelligence
for the Iraqi federal police at the same base, as saying, "All the indications are that it was
Daesh" -- that is, ISIS.
She also presents considerable further detailed reporting on the matter. And she notes that
though U.S. investigators claim to have evidence about KH's responsibility for the attack, they
have presented none of it publicly. Nor have they shared it with the Iraqi government.
KH is a paramilitary organization that operates under the command of the Iraqi military and
has been deeply involved in the anti-ISIS campaigns throughout the country.
The December 27 attack killed one Iraqi-American contractor and was cited by the Trump
administration as reason to launch a large-scale attack on five KH bases some 400 miles to the
west which killed around 50 KH fighters. Outraged KH fighters then mobbed the US embassy in
Baghdad, breaking through an outside perimeter on its large campus, but causing no casualties.
On January 2, Pres. Trump decided to escalate again, ordering the assassination of Iran's Gen.
Qasem Soleimani and bringing the region and the world close to a massive shooting war.
The new evidence presented by Rubin makes it look as if Trump and his advisors had
previously decided on a broad-scale plan to attack Iran's very influential allies in Iraq and
were waiting for a triggering event– any triggering event!– to use as a pretext to
launch it. The attack against the K-1 base presented them with that trigger, even though they
have not been able to present any evidence that it was KH that undertook it.
This playbook looks very similar to the one that Ariel Sharon, who was Israel's Defense
Minister in summer 1982, used to launch his wide attack against the PLO's presence in Lebanon
in June that year. The "trigger" Sharon used to launch his long-prepared attack was the serious
(but not fatal) wounding
of Israel's ambassador in London, Shlomo Argov, which the Israeli government immediately
blamed on the PLO.
Regarding London in 1982, as regarding K-1 last December, the actual identity of the
assailant(s) was misreported by the government that used it as a trigger for escalation. In
London, the police fairly speedily established that it was not the PLO but operatives of an
anti-PLO group headed by a man called Abu Nidal who had attacked Argov. But by the
time they had discovered and publicized that fact, Israeli tanks were already deep inside
Lebanon.
The parallels and connections between the two cases go further. If, as now seems likely, the
authors of the K-1 attack were indeed Da'esh, then they succeeded brilliantly in triggering a
bitter fight between two substantial forces in the coalition that had been fighting against
them in Iraq. Regarding the 1982 London attack, its authors also succeeded brilliantly in
triggering a lethal conflict between two forces (one substantial, one far less so) that were
both engaged in bitter combat against Abu Nidal's networks.
Worth noting: Abu Nidal's main backer, throughout his whole campaign against the PLO, was
Saddam Hussein's brutal government in Iraq. (The London assailants deposited their weapons in
the Iraqi embassy after completing the attack.) Many senior strategists and planners for ISIS
in Iraq were diehard remnants of Saddam's formerly intimidating security forces.
Also worth noting: Three months in to Sharon's massive 1982 invasion of Lebanon, it seemed
to have successfully reached its goals of expelling the PLO's fighting forces from Lebanon and
installing a strongly pro-Israeli government there. But over the longer haul, the invasion
looked much less successful. The lengthy Israeli occupation of south Lebanon that followed 1982
served to incubate the birth and growth of the (pro-Iranian) Hizbullah there. Today, Hizbullah is a strong
political movement inside Lebanon that commands a very capable fighting force that expelled
Israel's last presence from Lebanon in 2000, rebuffed a subsequent Israeli invasion of the
country six years later, and still exerts considerable deterrent power against
Israel today
Very few people in Israel today judge the 1982 invasion of Lebanon to have been a wise move.
How will the historians of the future view Trump's decision to launch his big escalation
against Iran's allies in Iraq, presumably as part of his "maximum pressure" campaign against
Tehran?
This article has been republished with permission from
Just World News .
"... In our late-imperial phase, we seem to have reached that moment when, whatever high officials say in matters of the empire's foreign policy, we must consider whether the opposite is in fact the case. So we have it now. ..."
"... Lawlessness begets lawlessness is the operative (and obvious) principle. In a remarkable speech at the Hoover Institution last week, Pompeo termed the Soleimani assassination "the restoration of deterrence" and appeared to promise other such operations against other nations Washington considers adversaries. Ominously enough, Pompeo singled out China and Russia. ..."
"... Against the background of the events noted above, it is clear from this speech alone that our secretary of state is a dangerously incompetent figure when it comes to judging global events, the proper responses to them, and the probable consequences of a given response. If we are going to think about costs, the heaviest will fall on Americans in months to come. ..."
"... Immediately after the U.S. drone that killed Soleimani at Baghdad International Airport, Mohammad Javad Zarif sent out a message whose importance should not be missed. "End of US's malign presence in West Asia has begun," Iran's foreign minister wrote. These few words, rendered in Twitterese, bear careful consideration given they come from an official whose nation had just sustained a critical blow. ..."
"... Gradually but rather certainly now, the community of nations is losing its patience with late-phase imperial America. With exceptions such as Japan and Israel, the Baltics and Saudi Arabia, this is so across both oceans and more or less across the non–Western world. In the Middle East, the American presence will remain for the time being, but we are now in the beginning-of-the-end phase. This was Zarif's meaning. And we now know the end will come neither peaceably nor lawfully. ..."
"... Amazing how the US government is bringing back the old days: "Slave markets" See: reuters.com/article/us-libya-security-rights/executions-torture-and-slave-markets-persist-in-libya-u-n-idUSKBN1GX1JY "Pillage", as pointed out in this article. ..."
"... To have such a person as the top diplomat in the USA shows how low the USA has sunk. For him to pretend to be some sort of Christian is sinister and extremely dangerous for everyone. There is NO reason for the US animosity towards Iran except subservience to Israel, which, again without real justification, claims to be terrified of Iran, which unlike Israel is NOT attacking others and has not for centuries. ..."
"... SecStae's remarks about deterrence befit a military commander, NOT a diplomat. Paranoia, grandiosity and violence begin with potus and cascade downward and about. Congress does its part in investing in machinery of war. ..."
"... Pompeo reminds me of the pigs in Animal Farm. He is a grotesque figure, steely-eyed, cold-blooded, fanatical, and hateful. "We lied, cheated, and stole" Pompous Maximus will get his comeuppance one of these days ..."
"... Pillage as policy. The Empire has fully embraced gangster capitalism for its modus operandi. ..."
"... Here is an interesting article that explains how governments have changed the rules so that they can justify killing anyone who they believe may at some point in time have the potential to be involved in a terrorist plot: viableopposition.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-bethlehem-doctrine-and-new.html ..."
"... This rather Orwellian move gives governments the justification that they to kill any of us just because they feel that we might pose a threat and that is a very, very scary prospect. It is very reminiscent of the movie Minority Report where crimes of the future are punished in the present. ..."
Of all the preposterous assertions made since the drone assassination of Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad on Jan. 3, the prize for
bottomless ignorance must go to the bottomlessly ignorant Mike Pompeo.
Speaking after the influential Iranian general's death, our frightening secretary of state declaimed on
CBS's Face the Nation
, "There was sound and just and legal reason for the actions the President took, and the world is safer as a result." In
appearances on
five
news programs on the same Sunday morning, the evangelical paranoid who now runs American foreign policy was a singer with a one-note
tune. "It's very clear the world's a safer place today," Pompeo said on ABC's Jan. 5 edition of This
Week.
In our late-imperial phase, we seem to have reached that moment when, whatever high officials say in matters of the empire's
foreign policy, we must consider whether the opposite is in fact the case. So we have it now.
We are not safer now that Soleimani, a revered figure across much of the Middle East, has been murdered. The planet has just become
significantly more dangerous, especially but not only for Americans, and this is so for one simple reason: The Trump administration,
Pompeo bearing the standard, has just tipped American conduct abroad into a zone of probably unprecedented lawlessness, Pompeo's
nonsensical claim to legality notwithstanding .
This is a very consequential line to cross.
Hardly does it hold that Washington's foreign policy cliques customarily keep international law uppermost in their minds and that
recent events are aberrations. Nothing suggests policy planners even consider legalities except when it makes useful propaganda to
charge others with violating international statutes and conventions.
Neither can the Soleimani assassination be understood in isolation: This was only the most reckless of numerous policy decisions
recently taken in the Middle East. Since late last year, to consider merely the immediate past, the Trump administration has acted
ever more flagrantly in violation of all international legal authorities and documents -- the UN Charter, the International Criminal
Court, and the International Court of Justice in the Hague chief among them.
Washington is into full-frontal lawlessness now.
'Keeping the Oil'
Shortly after Trump announced the withdrawal of U.S. forces from northern Syria last October, the president reversed course --
probably under Pentagon and State Department pressure -- and said some troops would remain to protect Syria's oilfields. "We want
to keep the oil," Trump declared in
the course of a Twitter storm. It soon emerged that the administration's true intent was to prevent the Assad government in Damascus
from reasserting sovereign control over Syrian oilfields.
The Russians had the honesty to call this for what it was. "Washington's attempt to put oilfields there under [its] control is
illegal,"
Sergei Lavrov said at the time. "In fact, it's tantamount to robbery," the Russian foreign minister added. (John Kiriakou, writing
for Consortium News, pointed out
that it is a violation of the 1907 Hague Convention. It is call pillage.)
Few outside the Trump administration, and possibly no one, has argued that Soleimani's murder was legitimate under international
law. Not only was the Iranian general from a country with which the U.S. is not at war, which means the crime is murder; the drone
attack was also a clear violation of Iraqi sovereignty, as has been widely reported.
In response to Baghdad's subsequent demand that all foreign troops withdraw from Iraqi soil,
Pompeo flatly refused even to discuss
the matter with Iraqi officials -- yet another openly contemptuous violation of Iraqi sovereignty.
It gets worse. In his own response to Baghdad's decision to evict foreign troops,
Trump threatened sanctions -- "sanctions like they've never seen before" -- and said Iraq would have to pay the U.S. the cost
of the bases the Pentagon has built there despite binding agreements that all fixed installations the U.S. has built in Iraq are
Iraqi government-owned.
At Baghdad's Throat
Trump, who seems to have oil eternally on his mind, has been at Baghdad's throat for some time. Twice since taking office three
years ago, he has
tried
to intimidate the Iraqis into "repaying" the U.S. for its 2003 invasion with access to Iraqi oil. "We did a lot, we did a lot
over there, we spent trillions over there, and a lot of people have been talking about the oil," he said on the second of these occasions.
Baghdad rebuffed Trump both times, but he has been at it since, according to Adil Abdul–Mahdi, Iraq's interim prime minister.
Last year the U.S. administration
asked Baghdad for 50 percent of the nation's oil output -- in total roughly 4.5 million barrels daily -- in exchange for various
promised reconstruction projects.
Rejecting the offer, Abdul–Mahdi
signed an "oil
for reconstruction" agreement with China last autumn -- whereupon Trump threatened to instigate widespread demonstrations in
Baghdad if Abdul–Mahdi did not cancel the China deal. (He did not do so and, coincidentally or otherwise, civil unrest ensued.)
U.S. Army forces operating in southern Iraq, April. 2, 2003. (U.S. Navy)
Blueprints for Reprisal
If American lawlessness is nothing new, the brazenly imperious character of all the events noted in this brief résumé has nonetheless
pushed U.S. foreign policy beyond a tipping point.
No American -- and certainly no American official or military personnel -- can any longer travel in the Middle East with an assurance
of safety. All American diplomats, all military officers, and all embassies and bases in the region are now vulnerable to reprisals.
The Associated Press reported after the Jan. 3 drone strike that
Iran has developed 13 blueprints for reprisals
against the U.S.
Lawlessness begets lawlessness is the operative (and obvious) principle. In a remarkable speech
at the Hoover Institution last week, Pompeo termed the Soleimani assassination "the restoration of deterrence" and appeared to promise
other such operations against other nations Washington considers adversaries. Ominously enough, Pompeo singled out China and Russia.
Here is a snippet from Pompeo's remarks:
"In strategic terms, deterrence simply means persuading the other party that the costs of a specific behavior exceed its benefits.
It requires credibility; indeed, it depends on it. Your adversary must understand not only do you have the capacity to impose
costs but that you are, in fact, willing to do so . In all cases we have to do this."
Against the background of the events noted above, it is clear from this speech alone that our secretary of state is a dangerously
incompetent figure when it comes to judging global events, the proper responses to them, and the probable consequences of a given
response. If we are going to think about costs, the heaviest will fall on Americans in months to come.
Immediately after the U.S. drone that killed Soleimani at Baghdad International Airport, Mohammad Javad Zarif
sent out a message
whose importance should not be missed. "End of US's malign presence in West Asia has begun," Iran's foreign minister wrote. These
few words, rendered in Twitterese, bear careful consideration given they come from an official whose nation had just sustained a
critical blow.
24 hrs ago, an arrogant clown -- masquerading as a diplomat -- claimed people were dancing in the cities of Iraq.
Today, hundreds of thousands of our proud Iraqi brothers and sisters offered him their response across their soil.
Gradually but rather certainly now, the community of nations is losing its patience with late-phase imperial America. With exceptions
such as Japan and Israel, the Baltics and Saudi Arabia, this is so across both oceans and more or less across the non–Western world.
In the Middle East, the American presence will remain for the time being, but we are now in the beginning-of-the-end phase. This
was Zarif's meaning. And we now know the end will come neither peaceably nor lawfully.
Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune , is a columnist,
essayist, author and lecturer. His most recent book is "Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century" (Yale). Follow him
on Twitter @thefloutist . His web site is
Patrick Lawrence . Support his work via
his Patreon site .
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Well, there's two relevant bits here. Bullshit walks and money talks. Our money stopped talking $23T ago.
What goes around, comes around. Whenever, however it comes down, it's gonna hurt.
Antiwar7 , January 21, 2020 at 13:46
Amazing how the US government is bringing back the old days: "Slave markets"
See: reuters.com/article/us-libya-security-rights/executions-torture-and-slave-markets-persist-in-libya-u-n-idUSKBN1GX1JY "Pillage", as pointed out in this article.
rosemerry , January 21, 2020 at 13:28
To have such a person as the top diplomat in the USA shows how low the USA has sunk. For him to pretend to be some sort of
Christian is sinister and extremely dangerous for everyone. There is NO reason for the US animosity towards Iran except subservience
to Israel, which, again without real justification, claims to be terrified of Iran, which unlike Israel is NOT attacking others
and has not for centuries.
Even if the USA hates Iran, it has already done inestimable damage to the Islamic Republic before this disgraceful action. Cruelty
to 80 million people who have never harmed, even really threatened, the mighty USA, by tossing out a working JCPOA and installing
economic "sanctions", should not be accepted by the rest of the world-giving in to blackmail encourages worse behavior, as we
have already seen.
"It requires credibility; indeed, it depends on it. " This is exactly what should be rejected by us all. These "leaders" will
not change their behavior without solidarity among "allies" like the European Union, which has already caved in and blamed Iran
for the changes -Iran has explained clearly why it made- to the JCPOA which the USA has left.
Abby , January 21, 2020 at 20:15
The only difference between Trump and Obama is that Trump doesn't hide the US naked aggression as well as Obama did. So far
Trump hasn't started any new wars. By this time in Obama's tenure we had started bombing more countries and accepted one coup.
dfnslblty , January 21, 2020 at 12:43
SecStae's remarks about deterrence befit a military commander, NOT a diplomat.
Paranoia, grandiosity and violence begin with potus and cascade downward and about.
Congress does its part in investing in machinery of war.
Cheyenne , January 21, 2020 at 11:49
The above comment shows exactly why bellicose adventurism for oil etc. is so stupid and dangerous. If we continually prance
around robbing people, they're gonna unite to slap us down.
Hardly seems like anyone should need that pointed out but if anybody mentioned it to Trump or any other gung ho warhawk, he
must not have been listening.
Trump and Pompeo seem to have entered the Wild West stage of recent American history. I think they watch too many western movies,
without understanding the underrlying plot of 100% of them. It is the bad guys take over a town, where they impose their will
on the population, terrorizing everyone into obediance. They steal everything in sight and any who oppose them are summarily killed
off. In the end a good guy ( In American parlance, " a good guy with a gun" shows up . The town`s people approach him and beg
him to oppose the bad guys. He then proceeds to kill off the bad guys after the general population joins him in his crusade. it
looks as though we are at the stage in the movie where the general population is ready to take up arms against the bad guys.
The moral of the story the bad guys, the bullies, Pompeo and Trump, are either killed or chased out of town. But perhaps the
problem is that this plot is too difficult for Trump and Pompeo to understand. So they don`t quite get the peril that there gunmen
and killers are now in. They don`t see the writing on the wall.
Caveman , January 21, 2020 at 11:30
It seems the only US considerations in the assassination were – will it weaken Iran, will it strengthen the American position?
On that perspective, the answer is probably yes on both counts. Legal considerations do not seem to have carried any weight. In
the UK we recently saw a chilling interview with Brian Hook, U.S. Special Representative for Iran and Senior Policy Advisor to
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. It was clear that he saw the assassination as another nail in the coffin of the Iranian regime,
simply furthering a policy objective.
Vera Gottlieb , January 21, 2020 at 11:19
What is even sadder is the world's lack of gonads to stand up to this bully nation – that has caused so much grief and still
does.
Michael McNulty , January 21, 2020 at 11:01
The US government became a crime syndicate. Today its bootleg liquor is oil, the boys they send round to steal it are armies
and their drive-by shootings are Warthog strafings using DU ammunition. Their drug rackets in the back streets are high-grade
reefer, heroin and amphetamines, with pharmaceutical-grade chemicals on Main Street. They still print banknotes just as before;
but this time it's legal but still doesn't make them enough, so to make up the shortfalls they've taken armed robbery abroad.
paul easton , January 21, 2020 at 12:55
The US Government is running a protection racket, literally. In return for US protection of their sources of oil, the NATO
countries provide international support for US war crimes. But now that the (figurative) Don is visibly out of his mind, they
are likely to turn to other protectors.
One need not step back very far in order to look at the bigger longer range picture. What immediately comes into focus is that
this is simply the current moment in what is now 500 plus years of Western colonialism/neocolonialism. When has the law EVER had
anything to do with any of this?
ML , January 21, 2020 at 10:31
Pompeo reminds me of the pigs in Animal Farm. He is a grotesque figure, steely-eyed, cold-blooded, fanatical, and hateful.
"We lied, cheated, and stole" Pompous Maximus will get his comeuppance one of these days. I hope he plans more overseas trips
for himself. He is a vile person, a psychopath proud of his psychopathy. He alone would make anyone considering conversion to
Christianity, his brand of it, run screaming into the night. Repulsive man.
Michael Crockett , January 21, 2020 at 09:40
Pillage as policy. The Empire has fully embraced gangster capitalism for its modus operandi. That said, IMO, the axis of resistance
has the military capability and the resolve to fight back and win. Combining China and Russia into a greater axis of resistance
could further shrink the Outlaw US Empire presence in West Asia. Thank you Patrick for your keen insight and observations. The
Empires days are numbered.
Sally Snyder , January 21, 2020 at 07:28
Here is an interesting article that explains how governments have changed the rules so that they can justify killing anyone
who they believe may at some point in time have the potential to be involved in a terrorist plot: viableopposition.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-bethlehem-doctrine-and-new.html
This rather Orwellian move gives governments the justification that they to kill any of us just because they feel that we might
pose a threat and that is a very, very scary prospect. It is very reminiscent of the movie Minority Report where crimes of the
future are punished in the present.
"With Flynn removed, Trump never regained his footing on foreign policy – which no
doubt was exactly as intended; thereby opening the door for the likes of Jared Kushner to
assume the role of 'trusted adviser."
Keep in mind, that Trump's Number One daughter married the likes of Jared Kushner. Trump then
brought both into the White House as Senior Advisers. Nepotism?
Note that the Anti Trumpers never go after Trump about Jared-Ivanka and real or perceived
nepotism. Hands off?
lundiel ,
It does not take a poli sci major to figure out that Flynn's immediate removal from the
Administration was essential to undermining Trump's entire foreign policy initiatives
including no new interventionist wars, peace with Russia and US withdrawal from Syria and
Afghanistan.
Sometimes off-the-cuff remarks provide a true assessment of where a country stands on
foreign policy.
Michael Ledeen is freedom scholar at FDD, and is an
internationally-renowned scholar on Iran, Iraq, terrorism, and international security, and a
world-renowned Italianist and expert on fascism. Michael has served as a consultant to the
National Security Council and the Departments of State and Defense, and as a special advisor
to the Secretary of State. He's also a neocon who made the following comment that sums up
American foreign policy in the middle east, whoever's the president.
"Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little
country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business".
The FBI is merely ensuring that there is no deviation to this policy.
"... Currently they can wrap themselves into constitution defenders flag and be pretty safe from any criticism. Because charges that Schiff brought to the floor are bogus, and probably were created out of thin air by NSC plotters. Senators on both sides understand this, creating a classic Kabuki theater environment. ..."
"... In any case, it is clear that Trump is just a marionette of more powerful forces behind him, and his impeachment does not means much, if those forces are untouchable. Impeachment Kabuki theatre is an attempt of restoration of NSC (read neocons) favored foreign policy from which Trump slightly deviated. ..."
As for "evil republican senators", they would be viewed as evil by electorate if and only only if actual crimes of Trump regime
like Douma false flag, Suleimani assassination (actually here Trump was set up By Bolton and Pompeo) and other were discussed.
Currently they can wrap themselves into constitution defenders flag and be pretty safe from any criticism. Because charges
that Schiff brought to the floor are bogus, and probably were created out of thin air by NSC plotters. Senators on both sides
understand this, creating a classic Kabuki theater environment.
Both sides are afraid to discuss real issues, real Trump regime crimes.
Schiff proved to be patently inept in this whole story even taking into account limitations put by Kabuki theater on him, and
in case of Trump acquittal *which is "highly probable" borrowing May government terminology in Skripals case :-) to resign would be a honest thing
for him to
do.
Assuming that he has some honestly left. Which is highly doubtful with statements like:
"The United States aids Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there so we don't have to fight Russia here."
And
"More than 15,000 Ukrainians have died fighting Russian forces and their proxies. 15,000."
Actually it was the USA interference in Ukraine (aka Nulandgate) that killed 15K Ukrainians, mainly Donbas residents
and badly trained recruits of the Ukrainian army sent to fight them, as well as volunteers of paramilitary "death squads" like Asov
battalion financed by oligarch Igor Kolomyskiy
In any case, it is clear that Trump is just a marionette of more powerful forces behind him, and his impeachment does not means
much, if those forces are untouchable. Impeachment Kabuki theatre is an attempt of restoration of NSC (read neocons) favored foreign policy from which Trump
slightly deviated.
"The Arab League rejected Trump's plan, saying in a communique it would not lead to a just
peace deal and adding it will not cooperate with the United States to execute the plan.
The ministers affirmed Palestinian rights to create a future state based on the land captured
and occupied by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war, with East Jerusalem as capital, the final
communique said.
Israeli officials expressed hope Saturday that the League's rejection could bring the U.S.
closer to green-lighting unilateral annexation of parts of the West Bank, in light of the fact
that Jared Kushner opposed immediate steps toward annexation because he thought the Arab League
might support the plan. " Haaretz
----------
Well, pilgrims, the truth is that nobody in the States who matters gives a damn about what
happens to the Palestinians and it was always thus. Kushner's "peace plan" is just another real
estate scam. pl
King Salman called Abbas to reassure him of Saudi support on the agreed upon outline drawn
up long ago. MbS thinks otherwise, and he is the one who really runs Saudi policy.
we have witnessed in the UK the defamation of Corbyn the ' Left Disrupter ' as he wanted to
throw back the normal state of political play.
He and the well meaning Labour Party was headed off at the pass.
We have to remember that the Ruling Class have to have fall back positions and that Biden is
better than Bernie as is Warren and so on.
It appears to me that the DNC also has its fallback positions too and Bernie will be chopped
by the Super Delegates once again on the altar of ' electabilty ' ( read any form of Socialism
– American or British is not acceptatble to the PTB ) and that is how it may end.
The battle at the moment in the UK Labour Party is which leader will back up and support
extra Parliamentary action in resistance to this very right wing Tory government?
In the US the thing is the same if Bernie doesn't get the nomination.
Personally I would think that he would be a plus ( despite his foreign policy views ) but
remember that Trump was a maverick Republican yet I'm not sure that Sanders would veer over to
that position.
If he did then the " action " part of the steep learning curve would have to kick in to
defend him and more to the point his genuinely progressive policies.
In the UK now Corbyn as the personification of ' Socialist ' threat is no longer doorstepped
by the British media.
Instead the installation of a Leftish Centrist by the media ( i.e. a person that is -no
threat to the existing order ) is a requirement.
This is all under the guise of a " Strong Opposition " to the right wing government.
Warren – not Biden seems to be that kind of favourite for the Ruling Class should
Trump fall.
We had Neil Kinnock and Tony Blair – you in the US will get Warren.
I wish Bernie and his backers weel but I don't see it happening.
Maybe Tulsi Gabbard in another 4 years?
She and AOC are very good But this is not their time.
Not yet. 2 0 Reply Jan 30, 2020 10:37 PM
Richard Le Sarc ,
When I think of how Corbyn refused to fight back against ENTIRELY mendacious and filthy
vilification as an 'antisemite', I think it might be possible that the MOSSAD told him that
if he resisted he might end up, dead in his bath, like John Smith.
@Nancy O'Brien
Simpson Because modern US presidents don't so much set policy as sell policies
that have already been approved by our real masters. In other words, modern US presidents are
more like glorified salesmen than actual national rulers. The establishment's ideal
president, therefore, would be someone like Barack Obama. He successfully marketed their
agenda of more foreign wars and Wall Street bailouts while looking hip, slick and cool for
the kiddies.
But in that regard, Trump has come up short. In the first case, he does occasionally push
back, even if only rhetorically. And furthermore, even when he does happen to be on their
side–think Venezuela or Iran–he's just too clumsy about it to be effective. His
zionism, for example, is so completely obsequious and over the top that no one on earth can
take seriously anymore the notion that the US's Middle East policy isn't controlled by
Israel. And since Trump has already been dubbed the 'new Hitler' by our own media, what does
it look like to the rest of the world when he himself tries to brand some other, foreign
ruler (like Khamenei or Maduro) as the next Hitler? Well, confusion results! I mean, if two
Hitlers are fighting each other at once, which one are the 'antifascists' supposed to
back?
So that's the élite's real problem with Trump: he's bad optics. And that's also the
main reason I am supporting him at the moment: if bad optics is the worst we can do to the
establishment at this point in time, then let's do it! It's better than nothing
Bolton is a war mongering narcissist that wanted his war, didn't get it, & is now
acting like a spoilt child that didn't get his way & is laying on the floor kicking &
screaming!
Trump excoriates Bolton in tweets this morning:
"For a guy who couldn't get approved for the Ambassador to the U.N. years ago, couldn't get
approved for anything since, 'begged' me for a non Senate approved job, which I gave him
despite many saying 'Don't do it, sir,' takes the job, mistakenly says 'Libyan Model' on T.V.,
and ... many more mistakes of judgement [sic], gets fired because frankly, if I listened to
him, we would be in World War Six by now, and goes out and IMMEDIATELY writes a nasty &
untrue book. All Classified National Security. Who would do this?"
IMO, Trump is a fantastic POTUS for this day and age, but he wasn't on his A game when he
brought Bolton onboard. He should have known better and, was, apparently, warned. Maybe Trump
thought he could control him and use him as a threatening pit bull. Mistake. Bolton is greedy
as well as vindictive.
i always thought it a shame that the war of 1812 ended in a (more or less) draw. the brits
had ideas for cutting up the US that would have been similar to that fake map (which was
kinda amusing until i saw the "derpa derp russia" bit) and kept the settler trash from moving
west and genociding everything that wasn't nailed down.
oh well...at least it's comforting to think ahead a few decades when most of the southwest
will be "little mexico".
I see Alaska and Hawaii have presumably gone back to the original owners, but it's not
shown.
I assume Alaska went to Russia (which is what a pal who fishes there expects!) (there is a
plan, I am told, to run a rail tunnel under Bering Strait, Canada, America, and further South
all the way as part of the OBOR project.). But that can happen if the natives wish
association with Ru and Chin...
(I'm not terribly serious about this, but Times do change and stuff does happen)
I assume the Monarchy is re-established in Hawaii.
In all seriousness, the DoD plans for Alaska if nukewar with USSR went against the US, was
to use Gladio teams to control the natives, who were regarded as unloyal and sympathetic to
the "commies"... no url, but I read this in FOIA stuff years ago.
Jackrabbit | Jan 30 2020 17:14 utc | 55
I assume that American Indians have already agreed to the North American Peace Plan (NAPP)so they can now go ahead and
take 30% of the land that the NAPP grants them - just as with the Trump-Jared Plan to settle the Israeli-Palestinian
Conflict.
Will homes of White Americans that disagree be bulldozed like the Israelis do to Palestinians?
What is interesting is that this issue is not so much about Israel and Palestinians, but
about the USA (and Trump personnel) credibility. Which is by-and-large lost. Behaving like a
gangster on international arena has its advantages, but also a huge disadvantages. As Trump
recently have found with Soleimani assassination.
There is also connected issue of Presidential election which I think Trump now will lose,
because he somehow morphed into Hillary (let's call him Hillary2020) -- the person most
reasonable people hate. His base will stay with him, but that's not enough to win the
elections. When people start viewing a person as midrange gangster, it does not help to win the elections. Impeachment or no
impeachment.
The idea of Bantustans is an attractive solution but virtually guarantee that Syria and Egypt
will remain hostile. And that the conflict between "settlers" and "natives" became more acute. Of cause, Israel will fight with Arabs till
the USA stop military aid which maintains parity with neighboring states (eve superiority is certain types of weapons) . With tiny
population of around 8 million against over 100 millions, so more then 1:10) maintaining parity is possible because it is
fully financed by the USA. But the USA global empire is gradually crumbling, because neoliberalism is dead. In military affairs
2:1 numerical superiority is a serious matter. And the threat of using nuclear weapons is a very tricky business because it is
unclear how Pakistan will react if a Muslim nations is attacked. Also major hits with conventional weapons are enough to make
major cities of Israel uninhabitable and Israel state to collapse.
The plan to use jihadists to destroy secular governed in Syria and partition the country
mostly (with the exception of areas occupied by the USA tropus -- "stealing opil" according to
Trump) failed and being surrounded by Syria (with its hardened by fight with Jihadists army and
more or less modern weapon systems) and Egypt (which is kept neutral only by the USA money) is
the permanent threat that Israel probably will never able to solve. And it can keep up only by
relying of the USA help and, especially money. Citizen of both countries are adamantly
anti-Israel. Especially after the story of Israel support of "pocket juhadis." So I doubt that
Israel can solve its problem even by just giving back Golan heights.
The tragedy is the Soviet Jews who emigrated to Israel hoping to find a "normal" country is
not only the for many their qualification proved to be useless and they waited their lives
working in third rate jobs, but also that they are now deeply entrenched into Gordian knot of "settler" vs
natives conflict which can not be solved peacefully like in USA or Australia. That's probably why a large part of
emigrants now supports Likud. They feel that their back is against the wall.
Notable quotes:
"... Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan physically and politically separates Palestinians by placing them within a non-contiguous homeland (Areas A and B and Gaza), and declaring them citizens of that homeland. Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan grants the Palestinian homeland autonomy over civil matters like education and healthcare, while critical areas such as trade, immigration, and security will remain under Israeli control. Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan is political sleight of hand: a thinly veiled attempt to claim that Israel, a state that rules over roughly the same number of Jews and Palestinians, is actually a Jewish-majority state. Also like apartheid South Africa, the Trump administration claims the homelands are a temporary solution. Once the indigenous population proves itself ready for self-governance they will one day be granted something that resembles a state. ..."
"... The Trump plan, much like the decades-long peace process that it crowns, gives Israel cover to perpetuate what is known as the status quo: Israel as the sole sovereign controlling the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, depriving millions of stateless people of basic civil rights, restricting their movement, criminalizing speech that may harm "public order," jailing them in indefinite "administrative detention" without trial or charge, and dispossessing them of their land -- all while congressional leaders, the European Union and much of the rest of the world applaud and encourage this charade, solemnly expressing their commitment to the resumption of "meaningful negotiations." ..."
"... Israel's defenders like to say that Israel is being singled out, and they are right. Israel is the only state perpetuating a permanent military occupation, with discriminatory laws for separate groups living in the same territory, that self-identified liberals around the world go out of their way to justify, defend and even fund. ..."
"... there is no reason to believe that this is any thing other than another $50B gift to the Israelis. Minus what ever is skimmed off and given to the Trump and Kushner clans of course. ..."
"... I propose that the US withhold all aid to Israel and sanction the country and its government officials (Magnitsky Act) until it demonstrates that it respects universal human rights and shows that it can behave itself as a normal country. Israel and Iran can work on this study of 'how to be a normal country' together. I would expect the Iranians to graduate long before Israel does. ..."
"... Probably, Israelis must abandon their illegal settlements on Palestinian territory, and Palestinians must acknowledge that Israel exists. This will come through only by mutual exhaustion. Otherwise, both will perish in hatred. ..."
"... One thing wrong is that Israel is guilty of war crimes and apartheid and while many countries are guilty of serious crimes, there is no need to single out Israel for praise and billions of dollars of aid and diplomatic support. Just treat them as yet another country with a rotten human rights record which pretends to be better than it is. Apartheid South Africa never had it so good. ..."
"... The Bantustans of South Africa appear to be the model here. ..."
"... The U.S.A. and Israel are far too entangled for the former to continue to play the part of a peacemaker between the latter and Palestine with any credibility. Indeed, The Donald's own family - the Kushners - are far too entangled with Israel! ..."
Sheena Anne Arackal explains very well
how the Trump administration's plan formalizes a system of apartheid at the expense of the
Palestinians:
Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan physically and politically
separates Palestinians by placing them within a non-contiguous homeland (Areas A and B and
Gaza), and declaring them citizens of that homeland. Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the
Trump plan grants the Palestinian homeland autonomy over civil matters like education and
healthcare, while critical areas such as trade, immigration, and security will remain under
Israeli control. Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan is political sleight of
hand: a thinly veiled attempt to claim that Israel, a state that rules over roughly the same
number of Jews and Palestinians, is actually a Jewish-majority state. Also like apartheid
South Africa, the Trump administration claims the homelands are a temporary solution. Once
the indigenous population proves itself ready for self-governance they will one day be
granted something that resembles a state.
Trump's annexation and apartheid plan destroys any remaining illusions that a "two-state
solution" is still possible, and it proposes a Palestinian "state" that possesses none of the
qualities of an independent state. It mockingly carves out a separate territory that would
exist to contain and control the Palestinian population while denying them their political and
economic rights, and this territory would remain subjugated under Israeli rule by design. This
reinforces everything outrageous and unjust under the current occupation, and it seeks to make
sure that the occupation never ends. To add insult to injury, the supporters of the plan
disingenuously present this as a boon to the very people that it oppresses.
Nathan Thrall observes that the Trump
plan is the awful but predictable conclusion to a U.S. policy that has consistently favored
Israel to the detriment of Palestinians:
The Trump plan, much like the decades-long peace process that it crowns, gives Israel
cover to perpetuate what is known as the status quo: Israel as the sole sovereign controlling
the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, depriving millions of
stateless people of basic civil rights, restricting their movement, criminalizing speech that
may harm "public order," jailing them in indefinite "administrative detention" without trial
or charge, and dispossessing them of their land -- all while congressional leaders, the
European Union and much of the rest of the world applaud and encourage this charade, solemnly
expressing their commitment to the resumption of "meaningful negotiations."
Israel's defenders like to say that Israel is being singled out, and they are right.
Israel is the only state perpetuating a permanent military occupation, with discriminatory
laws for separate groups living in the same territory, that self-identified liberals around
the world go out of their way to justify, defend and even fund.
The only good thing that might come from the administration's obscene plan is that it will
make it impossible for a growing number of Americans to accept continued U.S. enabling of
Israel's illegal annexations, war crimes, and human rights abuses.
If any one missed it trump let slip yesterday that the $50B that is supposed to go to the
Palestinians under this plan will be given to Israel to disperse to that Palestinians. The
Israelis however already collect taxes for the Palestinians that they don't hand over so
there is no reason to believe that this is any thing other than another $50B gift to the
Israelis. Minus what ever is skimmed off and given to the Trump and Kushner clans of
course.
I propose that the US withhold all aid to Israel and sanction the country and its
government officials (Magnitsky Act) until it demonstrates that it respects universal human
rights and shows that it can behave itself as a normal country. Israel and Iran can work on
this study of 'how to be a normal country' together. I would expect the Iranians to graduate
long before Israel does.
Iran stones gay people to death and rapes women before executing them. Israel has nude
beaches and gay pride parades. Israel is more "normal" than the US in some ways.
As soon as US Jews accept that the US is a Christian country, with laws forbidding Christians
from selling land to Jews, we can talk about how normal Israel is
'Laws forbidding Christians from selling land to Jews'...Not sure what you're trying to say
here.. In the meantime, over there, Arabs kill their own for selling land to Jews while Jews
freely sell land to Arabs.
Arab terrorists in Israeli jails are earning law degrees. Most Iranians I know in N America
want the mullahs gone. A Jewish friend of mine in Tel Aviv had his life saved by an Israeli
Arab surgeon. Get a grip on reality.
Israel and Palaestina are, of course, modern nations. To the Christian, divine revelation was
complete with the last apostle's death (probably John, at the beginning of the 2nd century
C.E.), and if there was a kind of collective guilt for unbelief on the part of the Jewish
nation, it was paid once and for all by 135 C.E. (cf. Exodus 20:5-6), when said people became
dispersed from the holy city and the holy land. There is no reason why modern Israelis and
Palaestinians should not be able to make peace on common terms that include two states with
normal borders.
Probably, Israelis must abandon their illegal settlements on Palestinian territory,
and Palestinians must acknowledge that Israel exists. This will come through only by mutual
exhaustion. Otherwise, both will perish in hatred. This is no different from other
leftovers from the WWI/WWII/cold war, e.g. North Korea / South Korea, China / Taiwan, the
former Soviet Union (now fifteen independent nations), and Kurds in Turkey / Syria / Iraq /
Iran (the statesman would prefer to get rid of the Kurds by giving them a nation, but the
despot would prefer to cling on to them for all the trouble, which after all keeps him in
power against his own people), Africa, et.c. Probably, the conservative strategy must be to
avoid great plans, keep peace or low level war as well as possible, and let time only do the
healing. Certainly, no more military adventures, neither on part of the U.S.A. or of Denmark.
But go home.
US needs to do what it can to keep troops out of the mideast. As far as Israel goes, the
Israelis wish to defend themselves without an outside army. Ask any Jew on the street over
there. Last time there was outside manpower help (vs the Seleucids) the results were the
Roman-Jewish wars. Not good. In 135CE, Judea was renamed Palestina by Hadrian as a slap in
the face to the Jewish losers.
ffwd 1920... League of Nations - San Remo Conference establishes Jewish homeland on WHAT
IS NOW ISREAL+ JORDAN. Recognized by all member nations at that time. 1922- Churchill bows to
Arab pressure and lops off about 70% of above territory to form Transjordan - designated for
the Arabs. There's your current 'Palestine'.
Note: Up until the 1960s, the Arabs in the area referred to themselves as 'Arabs', not
Palestinians.
KGB created the 'Palestine Liberation Organization" around 1964. Jordan controlled the
West Bank from 48-67, yet no outcry for a Palestinian state. Hmmmm.
The Jews who lived in the area from 1920-s -to '48 considered themselves 'Palestinians'. In
that time, Palestinian currency had Hebrew lettering, Jerusalem Post of today was Palestinian
Post of that period, etc.
"Like South Africa's grand apartheid, the Trump plan physically and politically separates
Palestinians by placing them within a non-contiguous homeland (Areas A and B and Gaza), and
declaring them citizens of that homeland."
This is an arrangement that the Palestinians themselves accepted at the Oslo Accords.
"depriving millions of stateless people of basic civil rights, restricting their
movement, criminalizing speech that may harm "public order," jailing them in indefinite
"administrative detention" without trial or charge"
...in response to their terrorism. Seems fair to me.
"This reinforces everything outrageous and unjust under the current occupation, and it
seeks to make sure that the occupation never ends."
The occupation will end when the Palestinians care more about building a state than
destroying the Jewish one. The ball is in their court.
"To add insult to injury, the supporters of the plan disingenuously present this as a
boon to the very people that it oppresses."
That's because it is. If the Palestinians behave, and make meaningful democratic reforms,
and make peace with Israel, they get aid and a state. What wrong with that? The outrage here
would be easier to take seriously if the people who are so upset suggested a peace plan that
would be more "fair" in their view.
"Israel is the only state perpetuating a permanent military occupation, with
discriminatory laws for separate groups living in the same territory, that self-identified
liberals around the world go out of their way to justify, defend and even fund."
One thing wrong is that Israel is guilty of war crimes and apartheid and while many
countries are guilty of serious crimes, there is no need to single out Israel for praise and
billions of dollars of aid and diplomatic support. Just treat them as yet another country
with a rotten human rights record which pretends to be better than it is. Apartheid South
Africa never had it so good.
"Apartheid" Israel is actually the only apartheid free state in the region, and treats the
Arabs better than any Arab state. In our conflict with the Islamic hordes, we don't have the
luxury of nitpicking about Jews building houses on disputed land. In any case, while the
apartheid charge is untenable against Israel, it would be instructive to remember that we
allied with Apartheid South Africa against Communism and gave them diplomatic support while
also supporting equality for the black Africans.
Agree. Swap Schiff,Nadler, Schumer, Soros(jew in name only), Stelter, JZucker, Streisand,
half of the media to Greenland. A lot of us remaining silent US Jews would be relieved.
I wonder how you would 'behave' if the land your ancestors lived on for untold centuries was
suddenly stolen from you. So rude of the Palestinians to not just give up and move out when
European Zionists immigrated and declared Palestine theirs.
I know refugees from the Partition of India, the Expulsion of Asians from Uganda, and the
Fall of Saigon personally. I've also met people who've fled Venezuela and Cuba. These are
people who, unlike the Palestinians, fled very long distances, actually had an established
state and national identity which was lost, had no way of avoiding war through a peace deal,
and didn't have 20+ states to flee to. Not a single suicide bomber among them. The
Palestinians, spoiled, petulant brats that they are, could learn a thing or two from other
refugees on how to behave.
Jews have been living there continuously for over 2500 years. Back around 1099, the Crusaders
were murdering Jews in Jerusalem as a sideshow for warring with the Muslims there. Jews in
Safed developed the Kabbalah in the 15th century. Jews and Arabs there all along. A lot of
the Jews came from across the Ottoman empire, as did the Arabs. The place was a forgotten
backwater. But a lot more Arabs showed up in the early 20th C as Jews were building and
cultivating the land...availability of work played a part. Read my reply to the guy from
Denmark.
Did I see the proposed map correctly, because that map looks like the reservations that we
permitted the sovereign indigenous people to have here in the US. What could go wrong when
the Palestinians do not have a way out except through Israeli territory.
"the Trump plan grants the Palestinian homeland autonomy over civil matters like
education and healthcare, while critical areas such as trade, immigration, and security
will remain under Israeli control. "
So there isn't even a pretense of an independent Palestinian homeland in this. Education
and healthcare are always the purview of subordinated entities, while trade, and immigration
are the perogatives of superordinate entities. Just think about the Federal government in the
US vis-à-vis the states (whose sovereignty, by now, everyone agrees is a joke), or the
EU vs the member states.
Except the Israel/Palestine case there isn't even an accession of the subordinate to
superordinate power by consent (as when the US and EU were formed).
The U.S.A. and Israel are far too entangled for the former to continue to play the part
of a peacemaker between the latter and Palestine with any credibility. Indeed, The Donald's
own family - the Kushners - are far too entangled with Israel!
Not uncritically against Israel and its policies against the Palestinians, the settlements on
the west bank was a giant mistake by Israel., and a crime against international law... but
lets be realistic, Israel are not going to forcefully remove the 300.000 jews in east
Jerusalem and the 400.000 in the settlements on the west bank. But you are calling israel
apartheid if they don't remove them and move back to un partition plan of 1947.
And lets be honest. A sizable proportion of Palestinians will fight and never allow Israel
rights to exist peacefully in any shape or form A view point im suspecting Daniel Larison
share. If not, he would be more nuanced in his description of how Israel and the Palestinians
got to this point.
The Jews in Israel won't let what happened to the Boers in South Africa happen to them. They
are not going to end their policies toward the Palestinians and they have the Nukes to tell
the rest of the World to shove off.
Great strategy. Especially if Trump thinks that association with Kushner and Netanyahu can help him to win 2020 election. God help him...
I think he put the final nail into his defeat in 2020, especially if Sanders is his opponent.
"Kushner and Greenblatt have limited the plan's distribution over the two years they have
been crafting it. It has been kept secret "to ensure people approach it with an open mind" when
it is released, a senior administration official said.
"Only four people have regular access - Kushner, Greenblatt, U.S. Ambassador to Israel David
Friedman and Kushner aide Avi Berkowitz, the official said." What's the common denominator among these men here? The nose knows.
"Speaking at the Republican Jewish Coalition gathering in Las Vegas, Trump said he made the
snap decision during a discussion with his top Middle East peace advisers, including the U.S.
ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, and son-in-law Jared Kushner.
"I said, 'Fellows, do me a favor. Give me a little history, quick. Want to go fast. I got a
lot of things I'm working on: China, North Korea. Give me a quickie," Trump said to laughter
from the Las Vegas crowd.
"'How do you like the idea of me recognizing exactly what we're discussing?'" said Trump,
recounting the conversation.
Trump, who typically demands short sharp briefings and is known for his colorful retelling
of stories, said Friedman was shocked, "like a wonderful, beautiful baby," and asked the
President if he would actually do it.
Trump and son-in-law Jared's vision laid bare: cloaked as "let's legitimize stollen property
and steal more"
it also allows Jerusalem to extend Israeli law to all the existing settlements, which
is tantamount to annexation.
in a closed door meeting of the usual suspects-
WASHINGTON -- US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman told a gathering of American Jewish
and Christian Evangelical leaders that it would take a long time for a Palestinian state to
emerge under the White House's Middle East peace plan, according to sources in the room.
Shortly after US President Donald Trump unveiled his long-awaited proposal Tuesday, with
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flanked by his side, Friedman met with a group of more
than 20 Jewish and Evangelical leaders for an off-the-record briefing.[.]
Thanks for your thoughtful post, and the Mondoweiss article was very good. It presents a
useful comparison between ethnonationalism here in the US and in Israel. While one is
condemned (by "woke" and almost all "unwoke"!), the other is accepted or ignored by many of
the same folks. I will use this when discussing the issue with those with open minds; the
challenge is finding the key to open minds, without moving into polarity which entrenches
folks in their views.
As to the term "anti-semitism" it is so ingrained into usage I don't see it going away any
time soon. I could see the narrative shifting as more people become aware that criticizing
Israel or opposing their actions is not "anti-semitic", and maybe they could also learn the
points you make about who semites actually are.
As to "Zionism", most people don't even know what it is (at least in the area where I
live). They have heard the term but make little connection with it actually being Jewish
ethnonationalism. I feel the term Zionism is valid for usage, but once again the challenge is
shifting the narrative so that people understand what it truly entails. Years ago, the UN
passed a resolution equating Zionism with Racism; of course the usual suspects voted against
that.
Rephrasing Lenin: hate became a material force when it is shared by the large number of people
Now the defeat of Trump in 2020 elections looks much more probable... Being considered a
puppet of Kushner and being closly associated with Natuanyhu does not look like a winning
strategy. He might lose Florida.
Notable quotes:
"... Mahmoud Abbas has stated that his side will not accept this ..."
"... the optics look bad with one criminal supporting another. ..."
"... IMHO the mindset and agenda behind this is as follows: ..."
"... Offer the Palestinians something they only can refuse ..."
"... Then say those damn Palestinians dont want peace, we tried it, they dont even want to discuss our very generous terms (sic) ..."
"... Then the Nethanyahus and fellow imperial Zionists take this narrative to claim talking with Palestinians will never work ..."
"... Which then will open up the road for their long term plan to totally and forever reject any rights of the Palestinians, and go full force into annexing all they can get ..."
"... It is not some naive plan to bring peace, but to give the Likudniks what they have dreamed of for so long: To not having to give even the smallest shit about international law, to never having to be bothered with it, and just rely totally on the military force to expand their growing regional-imperial ambitions. ..."
"... ''The proposals laid out by President Trump yesterday seemingly cement "unshakeable, unbreakable" U.S. support for Israel by offering the Israeli government unconditional American support for immediate annexation of land in the West Bank, while conditioning and constraining Palestinian self-determination to meet any and all Israeli security needs.'' ..."
"... IMO the Israelis who are overwhelmingly a tribal and exclusionist people will never allow Palestinian prosperity. ..."
"... Allow prosperity for the Palestinians? They view the Palestinians as little more than chattel under their feet. It's documented that the IDF's head Rabbi said so openly. And any Jew who dares to stand up against their aggression against the Palestinians, are labeled as a self-hating Jew. ..."
"... Sheldon Adelson and prominent Zionist leaders were present for Trump Deal. But not one Palestinian. ..."
"... William Polk has a nice article by Gershon Baskin of what the future could bring. I find it a quite plausible prediction. The legislation for confiscating Palestinian property in Jerusalem is in place. "Encountering Peace: Have We No Shame?" http://www.williampolk.com/assets/israel--yesterday%2c-today-and-tomorrow.pdf ..."
The Palestinians are offered very little in this final reconciliation between the US and the
forces of Zionisn within and without the US. If the sons and daughters of Ishmael (look it up)
behave and cooperate with their Israeli guardians, they will be rewarded with development money
intended to comfort them in their helotry. Trump did say to Bibi at the ceremony that Bibi
would have the Palestinian money with which to influence future events, but perhaps that was
merely clumsy. Trump also referred to "Israel's Holy Land." I suppose that still leaves open
the possibility of "religious tourism" as the Israelis call pilgrimage?
In Trump's plan Israel will forever control a strip of territory along the Jordanian border
as sovereign to themselves. But, in return the Palestinian "state" might receive an embassy
from the US, located in "eastern" Jerusalem. I suppose that would be out in that valley to the
east that the mandatory British government included as being within the boundaries of
Jerusalem.
Trump seems really to think that Palestinians are like stray dogs who will lick your hand if
you give them something, anything, to eat. Perhaps that is the general attitude in New York
City.
Mahmoud Abbas has stated that his side will not accept this, but at least there is peace
between the US and Israel. pl
the optics look bad with one criminal supporting another...
someone said israel is like nazi germany... the analogy seems to fit..
So Trump has elevated
himself as a Muktar for Bibi as well as MBS. Hmmm...... We saw him dancing the sword dance with
MBS's servants, guess we will now see him dancing the Horah for Bibi.
This whole scenario smacks of the Keystone Cops segment, without the laugh track.
So this is the result of three years of effort from
Jarred? At least he hasn't been working on the economy. Does Trump really think the
Palestinians are going to unilaterally disarm, have their borders controlled by the IDF with
future cross border inspections run by the same folks doing so now, all in exchange for some
nebulous funding and promises of some land swaps? It might serve as a distraction from Bibi's
troubles but I can't see anyone taking this "deal" seriously.
I'm much taken by the two
bumps of territory along the Egypt/Israel border that stick out like sore-thumbs in Trump's
let's-pretend map.
Where will the Palestinians come from to inhabit those "industrial" and "residential"
parcels of land?
I suspect that those two bumps of land represent the two bantustans that are going to be
created (out of thin-air, apparently) specifically to house "Israeli Arabs".
If I'm right then Trump's plan is simply Apartheid on steroids.
The possibility of a formal,
however unreal, Palestinian state is being cast [so as not to anger those to the right of
Netanyahu] as something for the future if all goes well. As for the money, it is to be geared
towards tying the Palestinians even tighter into the economy of Israel than has been the case
since the Oslo accords.
No, it cannot fly and certainly not with Jordan. The King of Saudi Arabia [not MbS, I note]
called Mahmoud Abbas to state that his country stands firm behind the Palestinians. Of course,
the proposed "Steal of the Century" is a non-starter for Jordan. What actually is done
unilaterally by Israel could actually put into jeopardy some or all of the peace agreement
between Jordan and Israel.
Netanyahu made clear that the issue of the '48 refugees is not theirs to solve. There is one
far out idea being shaped by the Saudis/Israelis/the US/and some Sunni leaders in Anbar as a
bonus to their plan of separating Sunni territories from the Shia dominated state, using the
legal methods employed by the KRG. That is to settle any stateless Palestinians looking for a
place to live to move to sparsely populated Anbar. The immediate impetus for this developing
plan is a way to maintain troops in Iraq even if ordered out by the Baghdad government. Anbar
abuts Sunni dominated areas of Syria the US sees as critical to its policies.
The question now is just how vindictive Trump will be when the Palestinians say not. He has
already taken away assistance, so it might be in the form of green-lighting more dramatic
actions by Israel. And what will various other players in the region and around the globe
do?
As for an "embassy" in the outer areas of Jerusalem, this is, I assume, Israel's way of
saying forget about any PA capital, even if it is in Abu Dis.
Nice plan for a change.
Definitely got potential for the long term. Once the old guard hit forgetful age the youth can
look forward to a peaceful coexistence. Gaza linked to the westbank is a great idea.
Politically this is the best possible scenario. The arab side should be aware after
soliemani that trump and co.mean business. Probably same applies to Israeli leadership. Unless
anyone has a better solution that does not involve war this is the deal worth supporting.
Only God can bring peace to
that part of the world. My immediate thought after reading this post was of the last lines of
Moby-Dick. It comes from the only survivor of the Pequod: "Call me Ishmael."
I'm praying that Melville was not prescient in his assessment of our society.
IMHO the mindset and agenda
behind this is as follows:
-Offer the Palestinians something they only can refuse
-Then say those damn Palestinians dont want peace, we tried it, they dont even want to
discuss our very generous terms (sic)
-Then the Nethanyahus and fellow imperial Zionists take this narrative to claim talking with
Palestinians will never work
-Which then will open up the road for their long term plan to totally and forever reject any
rights of the Palestinians, and go full force into annexing all they can get
-Peace process will be officially buried forever
That is the true purpose of this charade. It is not some naive plan to bring peace, but to
give the Likudniks what they have dreamed of for so long: To not having to give even the
smallest shit about international law, to never having to be bothered with it, and just rely
totally on the military force to expand their growing regional-imperial ambitions.
@james - Do you not know
that making such a comparison is a hate crime? You are (for now) permitted to make a comparison
between contemporary Israeli policy and the creation of South Africa's colonial Bantustans.
However, I'm sure the Strategic Affairs Ministry are on it and will shortly arrange for this
too to be denoted as hateful expression.
I am pleased to see our visitor @anon recognize the workability of the plan. His paymasters
in Tel Aviv will be happy. FYI there are many who have a better solution in mind. These groups
can often be recognized by "al-Quds" somewhere in their name. All of them are perfectly happy
to consider warfare as the means of implementing their plan.
What is telling is that with
the exception of Turkey and Iran against and UK for this deal. It has been absolutely crickets
chirping in the international community. All that money the US poured into building Israel up
has worked. Every one including the UNSC members who voted for Obama's last stop measure at the
UN are ready to trade the Palestinians lives for access to the tech in Israel.
This deal will only bring more misery on both sides.
The plan also promises ports, which appear unconnected from any Palestinian territory - I
guess there will be a "Palestinian building" surrounded by Israeli customs on an Israeli
port?
One wonders how much whiskey (or whatever Israeli's drink) was required to come up with such
an evidently lame plan (maybe it was a first year intern)? Hmm what was Jared's budget to
develop it?
Transactional Trump clearly believes that the Palestinians (are naive enough) to sell out
for a promise of $$ - as if such promises are worth more than the paper of Native American
treaties. Funny, thing, though, with the Fed printing $16 trillion for the Repo market since
Sept., the Fed could slip an extra trillion or so into the mix allowing Trump to make a real
offer (which would be hard to campaign on).
So many small minds here who
cant envision a Gaza strip filled with Trump casinos and towers. With the right tax structure
it could be the next Monte Carlo. Perhaps a bullet train to the West Bank.
Of course it might not work as a democracy, but a royal family could fix that. Perhaps
Prince Harry, or Jared? Ivanka could make a fine queen.
''The proposals laid out by
President Trump yesterday seemingly cement "unshakeable, unbreakable" U.S. support for Israel
by offering the Israeli government unconditional American support for immediate annexation of
land in the West Bank, while conditioning and constraining Palestinian self-determination to
meet any and all Israeli security needs.''
When pray tell are Americans going to find their balls and refuse to have their country used
by that little outlaw country' and our treasonous Fifth Column Politicians?
Really, to think we once threw out King George and now we are reduced to being drooling
eunuchs in service to a foreign and domestic cancer.
The residential and
industrial areas appear on the map to be in the Sinai Desert on the Israeli side. Originally,
consideration was given to providing Gaza with land on what is now the Egyptian side of their
mutual border, but the public reaction made Sisi rule it out. That original plan assumed that
West Bankers would want to move there to work and live as well as Palestinian refugees from
elsewhere.
It was to be part of the grand plan by Israel, Egypt and Saudi Arabia to "solve" the
Palestinian problem through industrial development and employment.
This new apparition would
seem to imply that Israel was willing to add a couple of additional carefully guarded bantustans to the current mix. My suggestion is that if the Israelis wanted to help someone, it
might be better to allow the native Bedouin who have been forcefully uprooted from their
traditional grazing lands.
A couple of comments about this trump farce Peace Plan.
1- Trump keeps saying the Palestinian capital will be East Jerusalem. This is not true, the
Palestinian capital that the plan specifies will be in Abu Dis, just outside East Jerusalem and
in fact on the other side of the wall surrounding East Jerusalem.
2 - The 3 little bumps of territory along the Egyptian border allocated to the Palestinian
state are now heavily populated by Israeli Arabs. If this plan goes through, they will lose
their Israeli citizenship and travel rights to Israel proper. This is done to reduce the Arab
portion of Israeli citizens making Israel even more Jewish.
3- The annexation of the Jordan Valley takes away the breadbasket of the Palestinians. It is
far and away ther most fertile land in either Israel or the West Bank.
4 - Israsel will still have complete security control of every part of the West Bank which
means Palestinian travel between their bantustans will be subject to IDF approval.
5 - The $50 billion in illusionary aid is supposed to be divided between Egypt, Lebanon,
Syria etc. It is an open question how much will remain for the West Bank.
Allow prosperity for the
Palestinians? They view the Palestinians as little more than chattel under their feet. It's
documented that the IDF's head Rabbi said so openly. And any Jew who dares to stand up against
their aggression against the Palestinians, are labeled as a self-hating Jew.
Sheldon Adelson and
prominent Zionist leaders were present for Trump Deal. But not one Palestinian. I don't believe
that the Palestinians were invited.
BraveNewWorld - I don't
agree with you about Israeli tech being so attractive. I visit at least once a year having
relatives there and am always surprised at how low tech the country actually is. My son works
in that industry as well as my Wife's nephew and they are talking about stuff which is fairly
out of date. Maybe they have something unseen by society but in general it is not particularly
high tech at all.
William Polk has a nice
article by Gershon Baskin of what the future could bring. I find it a quite plausible
prediction. The legislation for confiscating Palestinian property in Jerusalem is in place.
"Encountering Peace: Have We No Shame?" http://www.williampolk.com/assets/israel--yesterday%2c-today-and-tomorrow.pdf
"Kushner and Greenblatt have limited the plan's distribution over the two years they have
been crafting it. It has been kept secret "to ensure people approach it with an open mind" when
it is released, a senior administration official said.
"Only four people have regular access - Kushner, Greenblatt, U.S. Ambassador to Israel David
Friedman and Kushner aide Avi Berkowitz, the official said."
What's the common denominator among these men here? The nose knows.
"Speaking at the Republican Jewish Coalition gathering in Las Vegas, Trump said he made the
snap decision during a discussion with his top Middle East peace advisers, including the U.S.
ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, and son-in-law Jared Kushner.
"I said, 'Fellows, do me a favor. Give me a little history, quick. Want to go fast. I got a
lot of things I'm working on: China, North Korea. Give me a quickie," Trump said to laughter
from the Las Vegas crowd.
"'How do you like the idea of me recognizing exactly what we're discussing?'" said Trump,
recounting the conversation.
Trump, who typically demands short sharp briefings and is known for his colorful retelling
of stories, said Friedman was shocked, "like a wonderful, beautiful baby," and asked the
President if he would actually do it.
Wouldn't you have to establish who Israel "belongs to" first?
"Again and again in the "covenant" language He never says: "I will give you, ethnic
Israelites, the land of Israel." Rather He says something far more radical - far more
subversive -- far more Godlike in my view. He says: IF you visit those imprisoned...act
mercifully to the widow and the orphan...welcome the stranger in your midst...tend the
sick...do justice and love mercy ....and perform various other tasks...THEN YOU WILL BE MY
PEOPLE AND THIS LAND WILL BE YOUR LAND. So "my people" is not ethnic -- it is transactional.
"
I don't engage in theological discussion because I don't have the depth of knowledge
necessary, but the above in it's entirely seems pretty straightforward.
The faces of the old guard who were behind the doomed campaign of HRC in her defeat to
long-shot Trump. Also UANI and the successful campaign to defeat the Iran deal, by second
try, in 2018.
Oui | Jan 30 2020 14:09 utc | 16 (zionish buckies)
They say that Truman beat Dewey in '48 because the nazis, er "zionist agent" ponyed up 2
million 1948 dollars. Lotta money in those days...
............
steven t johnson | Jan 30 2020 14:13 utc | 17
We are surrounded in our small riverain community by nuttychristers who believe precisely
as you describe. They also, many, expect to beam up in some magical way..."rapture". The Old
Army Game on their soft pliable grey matters...a gang of dangerous rubes.
zionism, nazi-ism, and Judaism are not compatible, but if any preacher or Rabbi were to
say this from a local pulpit there'd be a change in his status before sunset. (actually there
are zero Rabbis here, but a few within 100 km.
I am pretty sure the guy who tried 30 years ago to teach me Hebrew, a Rabbi (long retired
now) sees this for what it is, and for what it's leading to, if he's still alive.
The misconduct for which Donald Trump has been impeached centers on an attempt to drag a
foreign government into a U.S. election campaign. That caper has increased public attention
to the problem of foreign interference in U.S. politics, but the problem is more extensive
than discourse about the impeachment process would suggest.
The problem with continuing to use Zionism and antisemitism is because those terms have been
corrupted and confused to the point they mean little beyond their wide pejorative
application. Kinda like "left" and "right" when describing the Reps and Dems... Sanders is a
"socialist"? Spare us all that idiocy.
There can be little mistaking what Jewish ethnonationalism or Judeophobia means. Using
these terms would force those who use them for "cover" out into the light for all to see, and
not just here at MoA.
I think ethnosupremacist is a more accurate term because the ambitions of Zionism are
global in nature, not by any means tethered to Israel. That's just where they want their
headquarters from which they'll rule over all of humanity.
Words matter, they can be as precise as scalpels or as blunt as a sledgehammer. In skilled
hands, a word-tool can be either be a scalpel or a sledgehammer.
Jewish ethnonationalism (Zionism) was well underway from the mid-1800s, and well-supported
(at least in terms of "solving the Jewish problem") in some elite circles in the early 1900s
as the Balfour Declaration proves. The Nazis erred in thinking it was the Jewish population
was the "problem", when the problem resided in the Jewish/banking and intellectual elites
(e.g. Rothchilds).
AIPAC etc. shows this malignant ideology continues to grow in scope and influence.
We here at MoA should adopt Florin's more correct terms and use them here at MoA AND
ANYWHERE ELSE WE POST... From and acorn of an idea, a mighty oak of understanding may grow.
But it won't grow if we don't nurture it.
Semitism refers to speakers of Semitic languages, of which Hebrew-speakers are but one
part... most of the rest are Arabic speakers. The term antisemitism was hijacked in the early
1800's.
"... also antisemitism, 1881, from German Antisemitismus, first used by Wilhelm Marr
(1819-1904) German radical, nationalist and race-agitator, who founded the Antisemiten-Liga
in 1879; see anti- + Semite.
Not etymologically restricted to anti-Jewish theories, actions, or policies, but almost
always used in this sense. Those who object to the inaccuracy of the term might try Hermann
Adler's Judaeophobia (1881). Anti-Semitic (also antisemitic) and anti-Semite (also
antisemite) also are from 1881, like anti-Semitism they appear first in English in an article
in the "Athenaeum" of Sept. 31, in reference to German literature. Jew-hatred is attested
from 1881. As an adjective, anti-Jewish is from 1817."
---------
Words matter as the Israel Project's "Global Language Dictionary"(IP-GLG) demonstrates,
the Jewish ethnonationalists (Zionists) use words to hide their intentions. Why not call the
IP-GLD "Propaganda Language to support the theft of, and genocide in, Palestine"? It's a far
more accurate description of the contents and intents... but being honest and transparent is
not what the international Jew/Israel Lobby/elite is all about. https://www.transcend.org/tms/2014/08/global-language-dictionary/
My background is semantics and semiotics not geopolitics, but I often wonder how arguments
involving Israel and its international lobby arm would be apprehended differently if two
words were changed (made more accurate):
1. 'anti-semitism' to 'judeophobia.' Most semites arent Jews, most Jews arent Semites.
The 'woke' Left seems not to have noticed that with the word 'anti-semitism,' all other
semitic peoples are excluded.
2. Zionism to 'Jewish ethnonationalism.' Sure, it's cumbersome, but by highlighting that
zionism is in fact {quasi} ethnonationalism, the often hypocritical positions of Jewish
supporters of Israel who otherwise attack nationalism is exposed.
1) if you really have a background in semantics and semiotics your question seems a bit
odd. But let me tell you, historically this argument has a very, very long tail. But Ok, I
have met people in my field, who apparently weren't aware of simple basics after whatever
degree. Thus you may not be a sham naive.
But could you tell me something about the "'woke' Left". As elder, I may not be quite as
radically hopeful as b is. Woke is related how to radical semantically and considering
usage?
2) welcome to the realisation that Zionism may have been some kind of Janus-Face or
similiar response to the later Nazis to 19th century dynamics. In that context history and
surely the history of language research may be a good starting points.
If you don't appreciate short-cuts and fast explanation to the complicated plain of
history. Which surely Semantics mirror.
Often the end result of Trump's actions is the opposite of what he ostensibly aims to
achieve. Some believe this is intentional.
For years Israel has been bullshitting the world with talk of peace and a two state
solution. The plan has one positive aspect, it lays bare the Israeli vision of "peace" for
all to see. It is not a two state solution but apartheid. A legal cover for occupation.
You are absolutely right in my opinion, the issue is that the terms used in most public
discourse have been chosen with malice aforethought. Good luck with trying to change the
terms of debate. Even if you succeeded (which you won't) they have a new term, 'antisemitic
tropes' which, as you will have noticed, is as broad as they choose.
The real problem is that the western world is run by bankers and a surprisingly large
proportion of the most influential ones are Jewish. They control the media (including
Hollywood) and have a death grip on most western governments. Why else would 2/3 of the UK
parliament be in 'Friends of Israel' groups, why else do US politicians have to swear
undying loyalty to the nasty little apartheid war criminal state?
You are just going to have to settle for being right but seeing your point ignored. As
we know, any criticism of Israel or any of their cronies is indicative of a desire to round
up all Jewish people and put them all in great big ovens, apparently.
Trump's 'vision for peace' appears to be a prelude to war.
As for vision, both Schmidt and Trump disgrace the word. Trump is not a man of vision.
He is closer to the opposite. Vision IS needed in geopolitics and in politics generally.
Most leaders today are afflicted with severe lack if vision.
Russia can no longer be defended, Putin in particular. To constantly preach about
international law while warmly countenancing Israel's endless and brutal violation of it
looks even worse on Russia than it looks on the US. For the US it is arrogance. For Russia
it is subservience.
Completely agree with #1. An egregious presumption by zionist supporters demarcating,
fallaciously, judeophobia as anything to do with the Middle East, North Africa. Calling
what is and has been judeophobia (anti-Jewish/ness) anti-semitism and using it exclusively
for this group is to deny Palestinians particularly their really existing Semitism. And it
makes "special" this discrimination, prejudice, different, more heinous.
With #2 less in agreement, unless by "ethno-nationalism" you mean that the zionist
Ashkenazim (the majority of Jewish zionists, to my knowledge)have falsely adopted the
semitism of the region while, of course, actually viewing themselves as superior to
Arabs/Palestinians/Arab Jews - the genuine semites.
And zionism is surely about as European, western an Orientalist, supremacist mindset,
worldview? As well as being in practice and action in Occupied Palestine (known as Israel
as well as the West Bank and Gaza) - in completely colonialist, inhumane, violent, war
criminal ways and has been so for more than 70 years. Indeed since the later 19C...
"... I think they were trying to start a war when they killed Soleimani, and the Iranians decided to use it against them instead. Which is smart. Neocons talk a lot but they are not smart. They are bullies and cowards. ..."
Posted by: Patroklos | Jan 30 2020 23:02 utc | 124
I think they were trying to start a war when they killed Soleimani, and the Iranians
decided to use it against them instead. Which is smart. Neocons talk a lot but they are not
smart. They are bullies and cowards.
At present what I notice is what you do, there is a lot going on, but you won't find it in
the MSM. They are busy reducing their audience share with propaganda.
They kicked the jams out when they droned Soleiman. No more "deals".
But I expect Iran to do these things while this is going on:
1.) Annoy Trump and his minions and USG political class as much as possible, stay in their
face.
2.) Watch, and help their "proxies" work on making life unbearable in the Middle East for
us.
The Houthis seem to have just kicked the shit out of the Saudi coalition again. Quite a
few damaged ships and down aircraft reports too, not just Afghanistan.
Trump will be kept in play for as long as the rulers decide, the voters/rabble can shout all
they want, dogs barking at the Moon. Their puppet is delivering: Most bombs dropped in
Afghanistan (stock prices & divs up), racism simmering nicely on southern border, the Fed
rampant with QE4 driving the NASDAQ & Dow to mythic heights before the Crash, the
Impeachment Show dithering along distracting even those not brain dead from the relentless
thuggery of the Trump administration. The show must go on, and it will, until the producers
have pocketed their profits. Relax, folks, it's not personal it's (show) business. So smile
George Marchand ,
Amusing if the Democrats get their way and face President Pence and Vice President Ted Cruz
in the fall😱
I haven't had time to read all the comments here (usual excuse!). This recent piece by
Whitney Webb, on Mint Press News, might have been linked to before. Whatever, I feel it's
worth me linking to again because it gives a very good insight into what's going on in the
Middle East at the moment, and the fact that we are ruled by gangster psychopaths
HRC is going for some bazookas as along with a face lift?
BIll's always been a giant tit. Maybe she could get away with just one upgrade.
paul ,
No. 1 Shabbos goy Trump is currently down on his hands and knees licking Netanyahu's boots,
rubber stamping each and every one of the demands of the fake Jew Khazars in Occupied
Palestine.
paul ,
The Palestinians are being offered an incredibly generous deal of a Bantustan on a few acres
of scruffy desert somewhere the Jews don't want. An incredible vision of peace! The deal of
the century! Tremendous! Amazing!! Terrific!!! Wonderful!!! Historic!!! A Triumph!!!!
Hugh O'Neill ,
The penultimate link above was an article on CIA assassinations. It somehow elided their
successful jobs on JFK, MLK and RFK. Credit where it's due. Too modest. What self effacing
heroes. Not to mention Dag Hammarskjold, maybe Olof Palme, and dozens of other democratically
elected leaders. So they missed Fidel. You can't win them all.
Einstein ,
And don't forget the third-worlders, like Allende and Lumumba.
And mass killing using the now default fanatical Muzzies backed up by "contractors", as
happened in Indonesia in 1965. Several millions were murdered then, more than the Khmer Rouge
atrocities and approaching the WWII Holocaust in magnitude. It continues in Papua.
Anyone with two thinking neurons knows that 2020 Trump, unlike 2016 Trump, is completely and
unequivocally a creature of the zionist lobby and the military industrial complex, and
therefore guaranteed re-(s)election in November. Since he is guaranteed a second term, the
duty of the Daymockratic Party is to make sure he doesn't lose by accident. This they will do
by, first, making certain nobody remotely electable is put up against der Twitterführer,
and, second, by making such a ludicrous spectacle of themselves that even fence sitters and
those who detest Trump (not a hard thing to do) will end up voting for him out of disgust.
That is all.
csc61 ,
Hey look, yet another low-information voter (who probably doesn't vote) regurgitating the
hate his mainstream media overlords told him he must have for the president. Couldn't
articulate a single thought on why he finds the president so distasteful or how the Trump
presidency has effected his life in any way shape or form other than to lower his taxes.
Still these useless bottom-feeders persist. "Orange man bad!" Look mom, I had an original
thought oh, wait, no, never-mind.
Robert Mueller III buried any FBI case against HRC; he also buried any 9/11 FBI case against
any Saudis!
Einstein ,
Mueller doesn't know how to wield a shovel.
paul ,
He couldn't find his own arse with both hands.
Richard Le Sarc ,
Come on Ant-everybody knows that it was the MOSSAD, allied to US sayanim and rogue elements
of the US elite who did 9/11. The Saudis were just the patsies, Oswalds one and all.
Antonym ,
Did you know that even Hamas and Iran are run by the Mossad? And Xi Jinping too! Me too, you
too. No more need for an Off Guardian site, all riddles solved.
paul ,
No, they don't run Hamas any more. They did create it and gave it money and guns. To
undermine Yasser Arafat and his organisation. Standard dirty colonial gam of divide and rule.
paul ,
People fixate too much on Trump.
In due course he will be replaced with another trained monkey serving the same organ
grinders, and the game of musical chairs will continue.
The organ grinders are fond of nothing if not variety. They will give us a black monkey, an
orange monkey, a gay monkey, a monkey with a vagina, a foul mouthed oafish monkey or a
polished well behaved monkey. Just so long as it rattles its tin cup for the organ
grinder.
At Davos he promised more tax cuts for the rich if re elected.
He threatened 25% tariffs on the car industries of his most faithful satraps if they tried to
tax Silicon Valley.
God forbid that Amazon should have to pay a cent in tax on its $11 billion profits.
You might think the organ grinders are being a bit hard on the Orange Man, trying to impeach
him.
After all, he has increased the military budget to $1,134 billion, (real figure), more than
the rest of the world combined. You'd think that would buy him a bit of gratitude from
Lockheed and Raytheon.
And his fellow billionaires increased their wealth by 12% last year. That should stand him in
good stead with Adelson, Saban and Singer.
And the people who rule the roost should be happy with his Gives to the kosher folk.
Jerusalem, Golan, West Bank, ever more billions, free weapons and unlimited political
cover.
And all that nonsense about Draining The Swamp and Building The Wall is just so much ancient
history, though a few of the Deplorables probably still believe in it.
And Obomber deported far more illegals than he has.
So why are they so hard on poor old Donny?
He upset the apple cart. He wasn't supposed to win. And however much grovelling he does to
Israel and Wall Street, it just doesn't matter. They hate him. They will take all his Gives
without any gratitude.
Because he is a loose cannon, an unprincipled opportunist. He is not a true believer
waiting for the Rapture like Pence and Pompeo. Or someone as corrupt and compromised and
easily controlled as Clinton.
Syria was supposed to have been destroyed by now. Assad was supposed to be dead. The war
with Iran was scheduled for 3 years ago. But Trump screwed up their plans, and nothing he can
do will ever deflect their hatred.
So he will either be re elected in November, or replaced with some mediocrity like Creepy
Joe or Pocahontas or an even more dodgy billionaire like Bloomberg.
But it is all kabuki theatre. Nothing will change. There will still be 1,000 plus military
bases all over the planet. The rich will get richer and the poor 99% will get more
austerity.
And the Magic Roundabout will keep on turning round and round and round till the
inevitable collapse. Trump is just another Goldstein for the Woke and the Deluded to
hate.
csc61 ,
That all seems rather cynical to me. But just to keep facts straight, the US currently has
900 bases in 137 countries. Close to '1000 plus' but not quite. Just thought you'd appreciate
the fact checking.
paul ,
We live in a rather cynical world. If you count those in 50 African countries which aren't
included, it's well in excess of 1,000. Though the Pentagon seems confused on the subject
itself. It seems to have "lost" a lot of them, like it "lost" $21 trillion from the military
budget.
walter hewitt ,
Meanwhile back on the Farm we're still suffering Why Trump? Why? This is not a joke or a
debate. Not a possibility or a maybe. Millions of children in UK are suffering now. Millions.
Families are under the cosh. We all have been for decades. You've read the headlines.
Grenfall. Hillsbough etc etc. And you wanna chat about trump trump trump mr televison mr mind
control meanwhile in the real world millions of children in UK are suffering now.
Fuck off.
paul People fixate too much on Trump.
In due course he will be replaced with another trained monkey serving the same organ grinders,
and the game of musical chairs will continue.
The organ grinders are fond of nothing if not variety. They will give us a black monkey, an
orange monkey, a gay monkey, a monkey with a vagina, a foul mouthed oafish monkey or a polished
well behaved monkey. Just so long as it rattles its tin cup for the organ grinder.
At Davos he promised more tax cuts for the rich if re elected.
He threatened 25% tariffs on the car industries of his most faithful satraps if they tried to
tax Silicon Valley.
God forbid that Amazon should have to pay a cent in tax on its $11 billion profits.
You might think the organ grinders are being a bit hard on the Orange Man, trying to impeach
him.
After all, he has increased the military budget to $1,134 billion, (real figure), more than the
rest of the world combined. You'd think that would buy him a bit of gratitude from Lockheed and
Raytheon.
And his fellow billionaires increased their wealth by 12% last year. That should stand him in
good stead with Adelson, Saban and Singer.
And the people who rule the roost should be happy with his Gives to the kosher folk. Jerusalem,
Golan, West Bank, ever more billions, free weapons and unlimited political cover.
And all that nonsense about Draining The Swamp and Building The Wall is just so much ancient
history, though a few of the Deplorables probably still believe in it.
And Obomber deported far more illegals than he has.
So why are they so hard on poor old Donny?
He upset the apple cart. He wasn't supposed to win. And however much grovelling he does to
Israel and Wall Street, it just doesn't matter. They hate him. They will take all his Gives
without any gratitude.
Because he is a loose cannon, an unprincipled opportunist. He is not a true believer waiting
for the Rapture like Pence and Pompeo. Or someone as corrupt and compromised and easily
controlled as Clinton.
Syria was supposed to have been destroyed by now. Assad was supposed to be dead. The war with
Iran was scheduled for 3 years ago. But Trump screwed up their plans, and nothing he can do
will ever deflect their hatred.
So he will either be re elected in November, or replaced with some mediocrity like Creepy Joe
or Pocahontas or an even more dodgy billionaire like Bloomberg.
But it is all kabuki theatre. Nothing will change. There will still be 1,000 plus military
bases all over the planet. The rich will get richer and the poor 99% will get more
austerity.
And the Magic Roundabout will keep on turning round and round and round till the inevitable
collapse.
Trump is just another Goldstein for the Woke and the Deluded to hate. 19 0 Reply Jan 28, 2020
4:16 AM
csc61 ,
That all seems rather cynical to me. But just to keep facts straight, the US currently has
900 bases in 137 countries. Close to '1000 plus' but not quite. Just thought you'd appreciate
the fact checking.
paul ,
We live in a rather cynical world.
If you count those in 50 African countries which aren't included, it's well in excess of
1,000. Though the Pentagon seems confused on the subject itself.
It seems to have "lost" a lot of them, like it "lost" $21 trillion from the military budget.
walter hewitt ,
Charlotte Russe ,
Trump doesn't have a thing to fear he's been a huge asset to the security state, whose
Russiagate theatrics provided mainstream media news with just enough bullshit to distract the
public, so that Trump could never be aggressively attacked from the Left. For the last three
years, all the "resistance oxygen" was sucked up by the warmongering against Russia. Meanwhile,
this enabled Trump to successfully pass a slew of reactionary legislation and fasttrack
numerous lifetime appointments to the federal court without barely a whimper from the phony
Dems. In fact, the Democrats unanimously voted for Trump's military budget. The same idiot they
called unhinged was given the power to start WWIII.
No matter how much liberals complain–the wealthy are happy with the status quo and the
right-wing Evangelicals are as pleased as punch. However, there's quite a large number of
disaffected Trump voters looking at Tulsi, but could eventually come Bernie's way. Especially,
if Tulsi endorses Bernie. This discontented bunch includes the working-poor, the indebted
young, and all the folks who are not doing economically well under Trump's fabulous stock
market. It especially includes the military families who were promised an end to the miserable
foreign interventions. Bernie, has some appeal to these folks. His platform certainly resonates
with all those who can barely pay their health insurance
premiums, and whose salary is NOT nearly considered a living wage. But Bernie could win
hands-down and steal Trump's base, if he only had the courage to UNAPOLOGETICALLY speak out
against US imperialism and connect all the dots explaining how the security state plundered the
treasury for decades f–king over the working-class.
Donald Trump delivers a speech at the Isreli American Council Summit in Hollywood, Florida
on December 7, 2019. Uploaded to YouTube for archival purposes by Factba.se (
https://factba.se )
"... Yet the U.S. has little real insight into what happens in hostile regimes like Maduro's, and "Pompeo is probably the least reliable person in the world when it comes to information about Iran or its proxies," said Abrahms. "He has a terrible track record; he is an ideologue. He is the opposite of an impartial empiricist. I would never accept anything he says without corroborating sources." ..."
"... According to what we know, a Hezbollah agent conducted years of surveillance on potential targets , and alleged sleeper agents within U.S. cities have so far not been activated, even in the wake of Iranian Quds force General Soleimani's death and the series of crippling sanctions the Trump administration has put on Iran. ..."
Why is Pompeo suddenly directing increasingly heated rhetoric towards Iran and its proxies
in South America?
"Anti-Iran hawks like Pompeo like to emphasize that Iran is not a defensively-minded
international actor, but rather that it is offensively-minded and poses a direct threat to the
United States," said Max Abrahms, associate professor of political science at Northeastern and
fellow of the Quincy Institute said in an interview with The American Conservative. "And
so for obvious reasons, underscoring Hezbollah's international tentacles helps to sell their
argument that Iran needs to be dealt with in a military way, and that the key to dealing with
Iran is through confrontation and pressure."
Stories highlighting the role of Hezbollah in America's backyard "are almost always peddled
by anti-Iran hawks," he said.
Like Clare Lopez, vice president for research and analysis at the Center for Security
Policy, who aligns with the argument that Hezbollah has been populating South America since the
days of the Islamic revolution.
"From at least the 1980s, many Lebanese fled to South America, and among that flow Hezbollah
embedded themselves," she told The American Conservative in a recent interview. Their
activity "really expanded throughout the continent" during the presidencies of Iran's Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad and Venezuela's Hugo Chavez.
During that time, Lopez added, "there was a really strong relationship that developed
Iranians established diplomatic facilities, enormous embassies and consulates, embedded IRGC
cover positions and MOIS (intelligence services) within commercial companies and mosques and
Islamic centers. This took place in Brazil in particular but Venezuela also."
Iran and Hezbollah intensified their involvement throughout the region in technical services
like tunneling, money laundering, and drug trafficking. Venezuela offered Iran an international
banking work-around during the period of sanctions, said Lopez.
Obviously security analysts like Lopez and even Pompeo, have been following this for years.
But the timing here, as the Senate impeachment inquiry heats up, looks suspicious.
Last week, just as it looks increasingly likely that former national security advisor John
Bolton and Pompeo himself will be hauled before the Senate as witnesses about the foreign aid
hold-up to Ukraine, Pompeo praised Colombia, Honduras, and Guatemala for designating
"Iran-backed Hezbollah a terrorist organization," and slammed Venezuelan President Nicolas
Maduro for embracing the terrorist group.
Hezbollah "has found a home in Venezuela under Maduro. This is unacceptable," Pompeo said
when he met with Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido last week.
Asked by Bloomberg News how significant a role Hezbollah plays in the region, Pompeo
responded, "too much."
From the interview:
Pompeo : " I mentioned it in Venezuela, but in the Tri-Border Area as well. This
is again an area where Iranian influence – we talk about them as the world's largest
state sponsor of terror. We do that intentionally. It's the world's largest; it's not just a
Middle East phenomenon. So while – when folks think of Hezbollah, they typically think
of Syria and Lebanon, but Hezbollah has now put down roots throughout the globe and in South
America, and it's great to see now multiple countries now having designated Hezbollah as a
terrorist organization. It means we can work together to stamp out the security threat in the
region."
Question: "I'm struck by this, because even hearing you – what you're
saying, right, now – I mean, to take a step back, an Iranian-backed terrorist
organization has found a home in America's backyard."
Pompeo: "It's – it's something that we've been talking about for some
time. When you see the scope and reach of what the Islamic Republic of Iran's regime has
done, you can't forget they tried to kill someone in the United States of America. They've
conducted assassination campaigns in Europe. This is a global phenomenon. When we say that
Iran is the leading destabilizing force in the Middle East and throughout the world, it's
because of this terror activity that they have now spread as a cancer all across the globe.
"
Pompeo has also been publicly floating increasing sanctions on Venezuela. He called the
behavior of Maduro's government "cartel-like" and "terror-like," intensifying the sense that
there is a real security "threat" in our hemisphere.
Yet the U.S. has little real insight into what happens in hostile regimes like Maduro's, and
"Pompeo is probably the least reliable person in the world when it comes to information about
Iran or its proxies," said Abrahms. "He has a terrible track record; he is an ideologue. He is
the opposite of an impartial empiricist. I would never accept anything he says without
corroborating sources."
There's no question that Hezbollah has a presence in South America, said Abrahms, "but the
nature of its presence has been politicized."
"What this underscores is that Iran could pull the trigger, it could bloody
the U.S., including the U.S. homeland, but tends to avoid such violence. I think the question
that needs to be asked isn't just, 'where in the world could Iran commit an attack?' but
whether Iran is a rational actor that can be deterred," said Abrahms. "Interestingly, this
administration as well as its hawkish supporters tend to emphasize their belief that Iran can
in fact be deterred," since that is the logic behind "maximum pressure" against Iran, after
all. "The main causal mechanism according to advocates of maximum pressure, is that it will
force Iran as a rational actor to reconsider whether it wants to irritate the U.S By applying
economic pressure through sanctions, [they hope to] succeed in coaxing Iran to restructure the
nuclear deal and making additional concessions to the west and reigning in its activities in
the Persian Gulf and the Levant. At least on a rhetorical level, the hawks say they believe
Iran can be deterred," he said.
It would not be the first time that a president reacted to an intensifying impeachment
inquiry by redirecting national focus to threats abroad. In December 1998, as the impeachment
inquiry into then-President Bill Clinton heated up, Clinton launched airstrikes against Iraq.
We should therefore apply some caution when we see decades-old threats amplified by
administration officials.
Barbara Boland is TAC's foreign policy and national security
reporter. Previously, she worked as an editor for the Washington Examiner and for CNS News. She
is the author of Patton Uncovered, a book about General George Patton in World War II, and her
work has appeared on Fox News, The Hill, UK Spectator, and elsewhere. Boland is a graduate from
Immaculata University in Pennsylvania. Follow her on Twitter
"Turkey: The goal of American peace is to destroy and plunder Palestine."
"Turkish Foreign Ministry:
The fake US plan for peace in the Middle East was born 'dead'.
We will not allow actions to legitimize Israeli occupation and oppression."
Yet another cord in the knot tying Turkey to the West is severed. Word is the Turkish convoy
has turned around and will not be constructing another OP near Saraqib.
"Denouncing Trump Plan as 'Unacceptable,' Sanders Declares It Is Time to 'End the Israeli
Occupation:'
"'Trump's so-called 'peace deal,' warned the White House hopeful, 'will only perpetuate the
conflict, and undermine the security interests of Americans, Israelis, and Palestinians.'"
But isn't that exactly what the plan's supposed to do?
"Ambassador Yousef Al Otaiba Statement on Peace Plan:
"The United Arab Emirates appreciates continued US efforts to reach a Palestine-Israel
peace agreement. This plan is a serious initiative that addresses many issues raised over
the years. (1/3)"
From what I've read, Egypt also favors the plan, although I've yet to read anything
official from Egypt's government. But Hezbollah's correct, IMO.
"The only way to guarantee a lasting solution is to reach an agreement between all
concerned parties. The UAE believes that Palestinians and Israelis can achieve lasting
peace and genuine coexistence with the support of the international community. (2/3)"
"The plan announced today offers an important starting point for a return to
negotiations within a US-led international framework. (3/3)"
"This deal would not have taken place without the collusion and treason of a number of
Arab regimes, both secret and public. The peoples of our nation will never forgive those
rulers who forsook resistance to maintain their fragile thrones."
"Trump greenlights Netanyahu to annex at least 1/3 of the West Bank.
"Never forget that Oman, Bahrain and the UAE were present in that room [where the
speech was made]."
I'm very surprised at Oman. This indicates to me both the Iranian and Russian
collective security proposals are now dead and the situation will now escalate
further.
But isn't that exactly what the plan's supposed to do?
Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 28 2020 21:12 utc | 33
"In the remaining weeks before the March 2 Israeli elections, and the few months left
until elections in the United States, Trump's peace plan will primarily serve the goal
for which it was designed: election propaganda for Israel's right-wing."
+Bonus prize = Stay out of jail card for Netanyahu if he remains Prime Minister.
"In the near term, the 80-page plan is most likely to stir up Israeli and American
politics. Mr. Trump is sure to cite the plan's pro-Israel slant on the 2020 campaign
trail to win support from conservative Jewish Americans in Florida and other key states,
along with the Evangelical Christians who are some of his strongest backers and support
Israeli expansion in the Holy Land."
Let's not forget the far right Zionist money men AIPAC members who lavish millions on
trump and GOP campaigns. ie Sheldon Adelson was seated in the front row when trump and
netanyahu made their announcement. I would say these are the things it's intended to
do.
Why did people vote for Bojo?
Let me explain it.
There were 3 reasons.
1. Labour lost 59 seats. 55 of these voted Leave in the referendum. The other 4 were
traditional Tory seats that Labour were lucky to pick up in 2017, when Jezza did pretty well,
despite all the polls and pundits. May and the Tories were expecting a Labour wipe out in 2017.
They got it in 2020.
The Blairites and the Remoaners strong armed Jezza into adopting a ludicrous and incoherent
Brexit policy, ignoring the referendum result and having a 2nd referendum. Negotiating a new
agreement with Brussels which they themselves would then campaign against. This was widely seen
as both farcical and profoundly anti democratic.
The even more fanatical Brussels Groupies in the Liberals suffered the same result.
2. Smear Campaign (a) mounted by the Board of Deputies, the Israeli embassy, the MSM, and
the massed ranks of Shabbos goys in the Friends of Israel. This was waged relentlessly by our
Levantine friends for 3 years, and clearly had an effect. They said they were going to drive Jezza out of public life, and they did. The policies and membership of Labour are now subject
to the veto of a tiny religious majority with close links to the Tories.
3. Smear Campaign (b) mounted by the Blairite Backstabbers who make up 80-85% of the PLP.
"Lord" Watson, Benn, Bradshaw, Bryant, Thornberry, Phillips, Austin, "Lord" Mann, Ryan, Berger, Ellman, Smee, the list is very long and very undistinguished. They tried to unseat him twice in
No Confidence motions, supported by around 180 of these snakes. They were more terrified of a
Labour victory and Jezza getting the keys to Number Ten than any Tory. They were shooting off
their fat mouths for 3 years, saying Jezza wasn't fit to be elected dog catcher. They gave the
Tories so much ammunition they didn't know what to do with it. Without all this backstabbing,
the Labour might well have won the 2017 election, if only in coalition with the SNP. People
don't vote for parties that are fighting with each other like rats in a sack.
Well, it looks like I'll need to start contributing to NPR again. They are a little too
woke for my tastes, but Pompeo is a liar, and frankly beyond the pale. A perfect
representative of the current administration by the way. Kudos to NPR for standing up to
him.
Much like U.S. foreign policy, it seems that Mike Pompeo is going to ignore the facts and
keep recklessly escalating the conflict. Surely he's aware that
The Washington Post
published the
email correspondence
between Ms. Kelley and press aide. This just makes him look like
a coward.
From the Trump voter perspective, this journalist should feel lucky that she wasn't sent
to Guantanamo Bay. All Trump voters think this way, there is no exception.
"... Trump was adamant that Palestinians would be forced to accept his plan in the end. "We have the support of the prime minister, we have the support of the other parties, and we think we will ultimately have the support of the Palestinians, but we're going to see," he said on Monday. ..."
"... Trump has largely outsourced the creation of the plan to his adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner. The initial idea was to publish it after the April 2019 election in Israel, but the uncertainty hanging over the Knesset over the past year has delayed the announcement. ..."
The announcement comes after Trump met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his
main political rival Benjamin 'Benny' Gantz. The Palestinian authorities have repeatedly
objected to the plan, as its details were trickling out, and mass protests are expected in the
Palestinian territories as Israel tightens security measures. US President Donald
Trump has unveiled his long-anticipated Middle East plan – effectively his
administration's vision for the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Trump said that under his plan Jerusalem will remain Israel's 'undivided' capital.
Israel's West Bank settlements would be recognised by the United States.
However, Israel would freeze the construction of new settlements on Palestinian territories
for four years while Palestinian statehood is negotiated. Trump said that the US will open an
embassy to Palestine in East Jerusalem.
The US president said that his Palestine-Israel map would "more than double" the Palestinian
territory.
"I want this deal to be a great deal for the Palestinians, it has to be. Today's agreement is
a historic opportunity for the Palestinians to finally achieve an independent state of their
own," Trump said. "These maps will more than double Palestinian territory and provide a
Palestinian capital in Eastern Jerusalem where America will proudly open its embassy."
He added that the US and Israel would create a committee to implement the proposed peace
plan.
"My vision presents a win-win opportunity for both sides, a realistic two-state solution that
resolves the risk of Palestinian statehood to Israel's security," Trump said during a press
conference.
On Monday, Donald Trump held separate meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and
opposition leader Benny Gantz. Neither of the two managed to achieve a decisive victory in
general elections in April or September last year, and a third vote is scheduled for March to
break the impasse.
Benny Gantz, the leader of the centre-right Blue and White alliance, praised Trump's plan
following Monday's meeting in Washington and promised to put it into practice if he wins the
March election. Netanyahu has not commented publicly on it yet.
There has been some speculation in the media that Trump wants Netanyahu and Gantz to work
together toward implementing the plan.
No Palestinians at the table
Trump had not met with any Palestinian representatives prior to the announcement;
Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas had reportedly turned down several
offers to discuss the proposal.
Palestinian leaders in the West Bank and Gaza have called for mass protests against the
peace plan, prompting the Israeli military to reinforce troops in the Jordan Valley.
President Abbas reportedly greenlighted a "Day of Rage" over
the Trump plan on Wednesday, paving the way for violent clashes between protesters and Israeli
forces. He is currently holding an emergency meeting of the executive bodies of the Palestine
Liberation Organisation and the Fatah party.
Palestinians have also floated the possibility of quitting the Oslo accords, which created
the Palestinian Authority and regulate its relations with the state of Israel.
The Oslo accords, signed in the 1990s, officially created the Palestinian Authority as a
structure tasked with exercising self-governance over the territories of the West Bank and the
Gaza Strip.
A long path behind
Trump was adamant that Palestinians would be forced to accept his plan in the end. "We have
the support of the prime minister, we have the support of the other parties, and we think we
will ultimately have the support of the Palestinians, but we're going to see," he said on
Monday.
Trump has largely outsourced the creation of the plan to his adviser and son-in-law Jared
Kushner. The initial idea was to publish it after the April 2019 election in Israel, but the
uncertainty hanging over the Knesset over the past year has delayed the announcement.
Jared Kushner unveiled the economic portion of the plan this past summer at a conference in
Bahrain, but failed to shore up support from Palestinians and faced widespread condemnation
instead.
Israelis and Palestinians have been embroiled in a conflict ever since the State of Israel
came into existence. Previous American administrations, in line with the United Nations's
approach, had long favoured an arrangement that envisaged an independent Palestinian state in
the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, with its capital in East Jerusalem.
The Trump administration reversed that policy and made a series of decidedly pro-Israel
moves in the past three years. Those included moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem
and recognising the Golan
Heights (which it annexed illegally from Syria) and Israeli settlements in the West Bank
(illegal under international law) as parts of Israel.
Bolton is pretty dangerous neocon scum... Now he tried to backstab Trump, so Trump gets what
he deserves as only complete idiot or a fully controlled puppet would appoint Bolton to his
Administration.
Breitbart
News , which would include the recently leaked manuscript of former National Security
adviser John Bolton.
The report describes the reviews as a "standard process that allows the NSC to review book
manuscripts, op-eds, or any other material for any classified material to be eliminated before
publication."
The New York Timesreported
Sunday evening that Bolton's draft book manuscript, which had been submitted to the NSC for
prepublication review on Dec. 30, alleged that President Trump told Bolton in August 2019
that he wanted to withhold security assistance to Ukraine until it agreed to investigate
former Vice President Joe Biden, among others.
It was not clear if the Times had seen the Bolton manuscript; its sources were
"multiple people" who "described Mr. Bolton's account of the Ukraine affair."
Bolton's lawyer, Chuck Cooper,
issued a statement in which he said: "It is clear, regrettably, from The New York Times
article published today that the prepublication review process has been corrupted ." He did
not confirm or deny the Times ' reporting on the content of the manuscript. -
Breitbart News
What a coincidence! While Alexander Vindman at the NSC testifies against Trump at the
House impeachment, the other brother (Yevgeny) appears to be in charge of clearing John
Bolton's book for publication.
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman famously
testified against President Trump during House impeachment hearings in November, where he
admitted to violating the chain of command when he reported his concerns over a July 25 phone
call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky.
Nunes: Did you know that financial records show a Ukrainian natural gas company, Burisma,
routed more than $ 3 million to American accounts tied to Hunter Biden?
Vindman, whose job is to handle Ukraine policy: "I'm not aware of this fact." pic.twitter.com/6yFbWkufmH
Breitbart notes that the Vindman brothers have offices
across from each other at the NSC , and that the Wall Street Journal describes
Vindman as "an NSC lawyer handling ethics issues." Alexander Vindman, meanwhile, has said that
his brother was the " lead
ethics official " at the agency.
Meanwhile, looks like people are already distancing themselves from Bolton's claims that
President Trump explicitly linked Ukraine aid with an investigation into the Bidens.
"Today, January 27, 2020, we have a stunning update ==>>
After previously claiming no FBI records could be found related to Seth Rich, emails have
been uncovered. These emails weren't just from anybody. These emails were between FBI
lovebirds Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two most corrupt individuals involved in the Russia
Collusion Hoax.
In a set of
emails released by Judicial Watch on January 22, 2020, provided by a FOIA request on
Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, two pages on emails refer to Seth Rich:"
These guys are Ukrainian mob moles, sent here by their Ukie Jewish oligarchs when their
positions of privilege went into decline with the collapse of communism. Because its typical
for three first generation schmucks fresh off the immigrant boat to end up with two as
officers both working in the white house, and the third brother back in Ukie Euro land
controlling a major bank hip deep in all the scandal.
Think any investigative agency will touch it, don't **** with the mossad.
Nov 5, 2019In an eye-opening thread on Twitter last week, retired U.S. Army Lt. Colonel
Jim Hickman said that he "verbally reprimanded " Vindman after he heard some of his derisive
remarks for himself. " Do not let the uniform fool you," Hickman wrote. "He is a political
activist in uniform."
So why isn't Vindman doing contracts in North Alaska or deputy attache in Namibia tonight
until he gets passed over 3 times for promotion and forced to retire unless Durham can find
evidence of his guilt?
Speaking of Vindman, an Obama holdover, White House HR head, has prohibited Vindman's
removal from the NSC. He even gets a $30k raise and is permitted to serve out his term until
June. You can't make this **** up:
Trump outlived his shelf life. Money quote: "This may well be a fatal mistake of his. And while i have thought Trump to be the lesser evil compared to Clinton, i am now at a
point where i seriously fear what his ignorance and slavery to the neocon doctrine may bring
the world in 4 more years."
Notable quotes:
"... Some combination of the disasters that may emerge from these ME factors might well turn Trump's base against him and this result would be entirely of his own making ..."
"... This may well be a fatal mistake of his. And while i have thought Trump to be the lesser evil compared to Clinton, i am now at a point where i seriously fear what his ignorance and slavery to the neocon doctrine may bring the world in 4 more years. ..."
"... besides much talk and showmastery, he has not really changed anything substantial in this regard; Nothing that could seriously change the course. ..."
"... So he stripped himself of any true argument to vote for him, besides for ultra neocons and ultra fundamental evangelical Christians. And even they don't seem to trust in his intentions. ..."
"... Trump stands no chance if things get hot with Iran. He didn't win by enough to sacrifice the antiwar vote. ..."
"... Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo have got themselves in a no-win situation. NATO cannot occupy both Syria and Iraq, illegally. There are way too few troops. The bases in these nations are sitting ducks for the next precision ballistic missile attack. Any buildup would be contested. Ground travel curtailed. A Peace Treaty and Withdrawal is the only safe way out. ..."
"... Donald Trump is blessed with his opponents. Democrats who restarted the Cold War with Russia in 2014 are now using it to justify his Impeachment. If leaders cannot see reality clearly, they will keep making incredibly stupid mistakes. If Joe Biden is his opponent, I can't vote for either. Both spread chaos. ..."
"... President Trump controls part of the White House -- definitely not the NSC ..."
"... His hold elsewhere in the DC bureaucracy may be 5 - 15%. When the President decided to pull US troops out of Syria, his NSC Director flew to Egypt and Turkey to countermand the order. Facing the opposition of a united DC SWAMP, the President caved, and thereby delayed his formal impeachment by a year. ..."
"... Going out on a limb, President Trump continues to play a very weak hand and may survive to fight another day. Fortunately for the US, his tax and regulatory policies, as well as his economic negotiations with China, Japan, Korea and Mexico seem to be on target and successful. ..."
President Trump will easily be acquitted in the senate trial. This may occur this week and
there will probably be no witnesses called. That will be an additional victory for him and will
add to the effect of his trade deal victories and the general state of the US economy. These
factors should point to a solid victory in November for him and the GOP in Congress.
Ah! Not so fast the cognoscenti may cry out. Not so fast. The Middle East is a graveyard of
dreams:
1. Iraq. Street demonstrations in Iraq against a US alliance are growing more
intense. There may well have been a million people in Muqtada al-Sadr's extravaganza. Shia
fury over the death of Soleimani is quite real. Trump's belief that in a contest of the will he
will prevail over the Iraqi Shia is a delusion, a delusion born of his narcissistic personality
and his unwillingness to listen to people who do not share his delusions. A hostile Iraqi
government and street mobs would make life unbearable for US forces there.
2. Syria. The handful of American troops east and north of the Euphrates "guarding"
Syrian oil from the Syrian government are in a precarious position with the Shia Iraqis at
their backs across the border and a hostile array of SAA, Turks, jihadis and potentially
Russians to their front and on their flanks.
3. Palestine. The "Deal of the Century" is approaching announcement. From what is
known of its contours, the deal will kill any remaining prospects for Palestinian statehood and
will relegate all Palestinians (both Israeli citizens and the merely occupied) to the status of
helots forever . Look it up. In return the deal will offer the helotry substantial bribes in
economic aid money. Trump evidently continues to believe that Palestinians are
untermenschen . He believe they will sell their freedom. The Palestinian Authority has
already rejected this deal. IMO their reaction to the imposition of this regime is likely to be
another intifada.
Some combination of the disasters that may emerge from these ME factors might well turn
Trump's base against him and this result would be entirely of his own making . pl
Could it be true? If that is the case, it´s more scary than Elora thought when that of Soleimani
happened....This starts to look as a frenopatic...isn´t it?
With Iran and her allies holding the figurative Trump Card on escalation, will they ramp up
the pressure to topple him? They could end up with a Dem who couldn't afford to "lose" Syria
or Iraq.
I submit to you, Colonel, that the biggest threat to Trump is a Bernie/Tulsi ticket. Bernie
is leading in the Iowa and NH polls, and the recent spat with Warren (in my opinion) leaves
Bernie with no viable choice for VP other than Tulsi.
Thank you Colonel; I have been waiting for your take on this.
And thank you for opening the comments again. If there is a problem with my post, please
point them out to me.
And i agree. This may well be a fatal mistake of his. And while i have thought Trump to be the lesser evil compared to Clinton, i am now at a
point where i seriously fear what his ignorance and slavery to the neocon doctrine may bring
the world in 4 more years.
Still, immigration is another important issue, but besides much talk and showmastery, he
has not really changed anything substantial in this regard; Nothing that could seriously
change the course.
So he stripped himself of any true argument to vote for him, besides for ultra neocons and
ultra fundamental evangelical Christians. And even they don't seem to trust in his
intentions.
And China? He may have changed some small to medium problems for the better, but nothing
is changed in the overall trend of the US continuing to loose while China emerges as the next
global superpower.
It may have been slowed for some years; It may even have been accelerated, now that China
has been waken up to the extend of the threat posed by the US.
North Korea? They surely will never denuclearize. Even less after how Trump showed the
world how he treats international law and even allies.
With Trump its all photo ops and showmanship. And while he senses what issues are
important, it is worth a damn if he butchers the execution, or values photo ops more than
substantial progress.
Not that i would see a democratic alternative. No. But at least now everyone who wants to
know can see, that he is neither one.
4 years ago, democracy was corrupted, but at least there was someone who presented himself
as an alternative to that rotten establishment.
Now, even that small ray of light is as dark as it gets.
And that is the saddest thing. What worth is democracy, when one does not even have a true
alternative, besides Tulsi on endless wars, and Bernie for the socialist ;) ?
I just have watched again the Ken Burns documentary of the civil war. I know it is not
perfect (Though i love Shelby Foote's parts), but the sense of the divided 2 Americas there,
is still the same today. Today, America seems to break apart culturally, socially and
economically on the fault lines that have sucked it into the civil war over 150 years
ago.
And just like with seeing no real way out politically, i sadly can see no way to heal and
unite this country, as it never was truly united after the civil war, if not ever before. As
you Colonel said some weeks ago, the US were never a nation.
And looking at other countries, only a major national crisis may change this.
A most sad realization. But this hold true also for other western countries, including my
own.
The economy is actually quite good and he is NOT "a dictator." Dictators are not put on
trial by the legislature. He is extremely ignorant and suffers from a life in which only
money mattered.
Once Bernie wins the nomination, it's going to be escalation time. Trump stands no chance if
things get hot with Iran. He didn't win by enough to sacrifice the antiwar vote.
I'm starting to think that Trumps weakness is believing that everyone and everything has a
monetary price. I think perhaps his dealings with China may reinforce his perception, as,
also, his alleged success in bullying the Europeans over Iran -- with the threat of tariffs on
European car imports. His almost weekly references to Iraqi and Syrian oil, allies "not
paying their way", financial threats to the Iraq Government, all suggest a fixation on
finance that has served him well in business.
The trouble is that one day President Trump is going to discover there is something money
can't buy, to the detriment of America.
Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo have got themselves in a no-win situation. NATO cannot occupy
both Syria and Iraq, illegally. There are way too few troops. The bases in these nations are
sitting ducks for the next precision ballistic missile attack. Any buildup would be
contested. Ground travel curtailed. A Peace Treaty and Withdrawal is the only safe way
out.
Donald Trump is blessed with his opponents. Democrats who restarted the Cold War with
Russia in 2014 are now using it to justify his Impeachment. If leaders cannot see reality
clearly, they will keep making incredibly stupid mistakes. If Joe Biden is his opponent, I
can't vote for either. Both spread chaos.
My subconscious is again acting out. The mini-WWIII with Iran could shut off Middle
Eastern oil at any time. The Fed is back to injecting digital money into the market. China
has quarantined 44 million people. Global trade is fragile. Today there are four cases of
Wuhan Coronavirus in the USA.
If confirmed that the virus is contagious without symptoms and
an infected person transmits the virus to 2 to 3 people and with a 3% mortality rate and a
higher 15% rate for the infirmed, the resupply trip to Safeway this summer could be both
futile and dangerous.
It's an old story. Mr X is elected POTUS; going to do this and that; something happens in the
MENA. That's all anyone remembers.
Maybe time to kiss Israel goodbye, tell SA to sell in whatever currency it wants, and realise that oil producers have to sell
the stuff -- it's no good to them in the ground...
President Trump controls part of the White House -- definitely not the NSC -- and much of the
Department of Commerce & Treasury. His hold elsewhere in the DC bureaucracy may be 5 -
15%. When the President decided to pull US troops out of Syria, his NSC Director flew to
Egypt and Turkey to countermand the order. Facing the opposition of a united DC SWAMP, the
President caved, and thereby delayed his formal impeachment by a year.
Going out on a limb, President Trump continues to play a very weak hand and may survive to
fight another day. Fortunately for the US, his tax and regulatory policies, as well as his
economic negotiations with China, Japan, Korea and Mexico seem to be on target and
successful.
Carthage must be destroyed! I don't know if Trump is going to war with Iran willingly or with
a Neocon gun to his head, but if he's impeached I expect Pence to go on a holy crusade.
Western Democracies have fallen to the secretive Zionist Death Cult.
We need Movement(s) to restore democracy.
"Democracy Works!" propagandists will tell you that you only need YOUR VOTE. That is
false. They ask for unilateral disarmament. We will never restore democracy by voting in
rigged elections.
Zionist Death Cult? is no exaggeration. IMO The Zionist Movement has been
hijacked by those who see ANY opposition as an existential threat. Thus, they MUST smash
countries in the Middle East, and they MUST rule the world, even if that means conflict
with Russia and China.
<> <> <> <> <> <>
I see Zionism not as a bad expression.... Zion and Zionism is, in my view, only a
necessary expression of an oppressed people ...
Massaging Zionist egos with happy talk is counter-productive. (Yeah, I know you qualify
your happy talk later, but still ...) THEY DON'T CARE. They are only interested in POWER
and keeping it.
Whatever it started out as, Zionism has morphed into a Movement that has brought misery
to millions and threatens the extinction of humanity via WWIII. The Doomsday Clock is now 100 seconds to
midnight .
Just imagine if your culture, your tribe, was abolished and persecuted for
centuries ...
Whatever was learned from that persecution seems to have been co-opted by ruthless
Zionists who don't just want a homeland but the defeat of everyone that might
restrict or restain them in any way - thus, the alliance with USA Empire-builders that to
rule the world (NWO).
Just imagine if ... : your country has been subverted by a secretive
Movement that bypasses Democratic process and corrupts your leaders via money and
relentless organizing - including illegal blackmail operations that subvert anyone that
doesn't approve of their goals and means of achieving them. At some point, they get to a
point where their undermining is essentially more than paid for by grants from the
government that they now control.
= That the state of Israel is oppressing other people today, and is secured by the
'empire' and the holocaust emblem, is certainly a sad period of history.
You're forgetting the Christian Zionists, MIC, and others that have a financial interest
in continuing the farce.
USA and Western political elites are virtually ALL corrupted by Zionist influence.
= It inverted the role play entirely, even perverted it. There is some hope in the
citizens of Israel and the Jews that live abroad to find a way to end this
insanity.
We should not rely upon that faint hope. The people in the West need to take back their
democracies via MOVEMENTS.
They we might see a quick rush by Israel embrace those "simple solutions" that you
talked about and to be less like the belligerent rogue State that they are today.
= [Jews are] ... a people that is suffering from finding a place to be, to find a home.
Palestine is somehow their home, but it must be shared with the Arab people who also call
Palestine their home. Of course there is no simple solution to that question.
Well, the "simple solutions" that have been rejected by Zionist Death Cult.
The Zionist Death Cult decided that if they gain political control of USA, then they
don't need to agree to "simple solutions". And "Zionist" Empire-builders in USA decided
that they could use Israel to control the region and increase MIC profits. And the Zionist
Death Cult mentality applies not just to Middle East but the World.
= We, as a global community, have to bring separated tribes together. We have no other
choice. Else, there is war. Constant war. Which is of course the plan for a certain
elevated upper realm that is playing the part of the bad guy.
Yeah, well hoping for the best is not a plan.
<> <> <> <> <> <>
Laguerre @40:
[Phil @35] Jews are a separate identity ... If they wish to remain a separate
identity, then there are consequences.
As I see it, the problem is not Jews but Zionists, neocons, and other warmongers.
Too often, criticism of Israel or Zionism is wrongly translated into criticism of
Jews.
"... Today Israel's IDF faces a combat hardened army in Syria, a combat hardened irregular military force in Lebanon, and increasingly hardened resistance in its own backyard with Hamas. And Iranian ground forces are not pushovers. ..."
Martin Indyk: An Important Neoliberal Defects From the Blob
Let's hope the former ambassador's heresy about withdrawing from the Middle East catches
fire and spreads. Then-VP of Brookings Martin Indyk in 2017. (Sharon Farmer/sfphotoworks)
January 22, 2020
|
12:01 am
Andrew
J. Bacevich Within the inner precincts of the American foreign policy establishment, last
names are redundant. At a Washington cocktail party, when some half-sloshed AEI fellow
whispers, "Apparently, Henry is back in Beijing to see Xi," there's no need to ask, "Which
Henry?" In that world, there is only one Henry, at least only one who counts.
Similarly, there is only one Martin. While Martin Indyk may not equal Henry Kissinger in
star power, he has for several decades been a major player in U.S. policy regarding Israel and
the Middle East more broadly. Founder of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, senior
director on the National Security Council, twice U.S. ambassador to Israel, assistant secretary
of state for Near East affairs, presidential envoy -- not a bad resume for someone who was born
in London, raised in Australia, and became a U.S. citizen only in his 40s.
Throughout his career, Martin has been deeply invested in the Israeli-Palestinian "peace
process" and in the proposition that the United States has a vital interest in pursuing that
process to a successful conclusion. More broadly, he has subscribed to the view that the United
States has vital interests at stake in the Middle East more generally, with regional stability
and the well-being of the people living there dependent on the United States exercising what
people in Washington call "leadership." In this context, of course, leadership tends to be a
euphemism for the use or threatened use of military power.
These are, of course, establishment notions, to which all members of the "Blob" necessarily
declare their fealty. Indeed, at least until Trump came along, to dissent from such views was
to become ineligible for appointment to even a mid-level post in the State Department, the
Pentagon, or the White House.
Yet Martin has now publicly recanted.
In an extraordinary op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal (of all places), he
asserts that "few vital interests of the US continue to be at stake in the Middle East."
Policies centered on ensuring the free flow of Persian Gulf oil and the survival of Israel have
become superfluous. "The US economy no longer relies on imported petroleum," he correctly
notes. "Fracking has turned the US into a net oil and natural-gas exporter." As a consequence,
Persian Gulf oil "is no longer a vital interest -- that is, one worth fighting for. Difficult
as it might be to get our heads around the idea, China and India need to be protecting the sea
lanes between the Gulf and their ports, not the US Navy."
As for the Jewish State, Martin notes, again correctly, that today Israel has the capacity
"to defend itself by itself." Notwithstanding the blustering threats regularly issued by
Tehran, "it is today's nuclear-armed Israel that has the means to crush Iran, not the other way
around."
Furthermore, Martin has had his fill of the peace process. "A two-state solution to the
Palestinian problem is a vital Israeli interest, not a vital American one," he writes,
insisting that "it's time to end the farce of putting forward American peace plans only to have
one or both sides reject them."
Martin does identify one vital U.S. interest in the Middle East: averting a nuclear arms
race. Yet "we should be wary of those who would rush to battle stations," he cautions. "Curbing
Iran's nuclear aspirations and ambitions for regional dominance will require assiduous American
diplomacy, not war."
That last sentence captures the essence of Martin's overall conclusion: he proposes not
disengaging from the Middle East but demilitarizing U.S. policy. "After the sacrifice of so
many American lives, the waste of so much energy and money in quixotic efforts that ended up
doing more harm than good," he writes, "it is time for the US to find a way to escape the
costly, demoralising cycle of crusades and retreats."
Now such sentiments appear regularly in the pages of The American Conservative and on
the website of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft . Yet in establishment
circles, a willingness to describe U.S. policy in the Middle East as quixotic is rare indeed.
As for acknowledging that we have done more harm than good, such commonsense views are usually
regarded as beyond the pale.
Martin deserves our congratulations. We must hope that his heresy catches fire and spreads
throughout the Blob. In the meantime, if he's in need of office space, the Quincy Institute
stands ready to help.
Welcome to the ranks of the truth tellers, comrade.
Andrew Bacevich is TAC's writer-at-large and president of the Quincy Institute. His new
book, The Age of Illusions: How America Squandered Its Cold War Victory ,has
just been published.
"Martin has been deeply invested in the Israeli-Palestinian "peace process" and in the
proposition that the United States has a vital interest in pursuing that process to a
successful conclusion. More broadly, he has subscribed to the view that the United States has
vital interests at stake in the Middle East more generally, with regional stability and the
well-being of the people living there"
No. The only use he ever had for the peace process was as cover for what Israel was really
doing.
The only interest he ever cared about was Israel, not the stability or well-being of any
other people but the hawks among Israelis.
He perverted US policy from the inside, in pursuit of those ends of those Lobby partisans.
He has never been anything else.
And is about to pervert it AGAIN. One must be a total ignoramus not to notice American
public's changing attitude towards Israel, as well as Israel's high powered lobbyists.
Before the change turns into an outright hostility, the apologists of the Empire are defusing
the nascent rage. So, HE is the one to be PRAISED for being so wise, and deserving our
support?
This leopard will keep on changing spots, but never his nature.
He is and will remain ardent apologist of American Empire -- for as long as this Empire
serves his primary interest. And that interest is clear -- interest of Israel AND all of its
citizens around the globe.
It is disheartening to read Bacevich praise Indyk-who was, after all, one of the architects
of our disastrous Middle East "policy". I guess the Quincy Institute wants to hew a path
closer to the mainstream narrative. What will be next? An apologia for Doug Feith and Richard
Perle?
Indyk's comments read like a neo-con who's lost favor and power. This is not a good sign.
This points to the internecine warfare within the halls of conceptual power being closer to
decided. With the diplomats out, it leaves the apocalypse cult as the de-facto winner.
Expect more ludicrous demands of US vassals and more effort to attack Iran. They're not
going to stop. Where the oil comes from doesn't matter, what currency is used to conduct
trade does.
It is exactly so -- internecine warfare. But I do not see them loosing power. They are losing
NARRATIVE both internationally and domestically. This is a beginning of crafting a new
narrative to stem the rising hostility against Israel centric militaristic foreign policy
orientation.
Thus switching to "diplomacy", as military posturing just brings about dead ends to
defend.
He wants results, So, change the narrative, diffuse anti-Israeli tide, and become a beacon of
reason and wholesomeness. Who can resist these new spots?
There was never anything Quixotic about US foreign policy in the ME. As for Israel/Palestine,
the policy, and "Martin" was central to it, was to pretend to negotiate in good faith while
Israel occupied "the land from the river to the sea." In Iraq, except for Cheney's oil lust,
it was to carry out the neo-con chant of "the road to Iran is through Iraq." As for Iran, it
has been to barely resist Israel's, and US Israel-firster's, pressure for war, though it may
still happen.
You mean to say that some establishment guy finally got fed up with all the bullshit?
In any event, Indyk is wrong to believe that Israel can defeat Iran in a conflict. Israeli
nuclear weapons are really of little consequence in such a situation as the majority of them
must be delivered by aircraft which Iran will simply shoot down. Those that are siloed will
most likely meet the same fate. But in either case Russia will not allow any such conflict to
go nuclear.
In terms of conventional capabailities, the IDF has never been a very good military unit
since it basically has only entered engagements with less than equally capable opponents.
However, that has all been changing since Hezbollah's defeat of the IDF in 2006.
Today Israel's IDF faces a combat hardened army in Syria, a combat hardened irregular
military force in Lebanon, and increasingly hardened resistance in its own backyard with
Hamas. And Iranian ground forces are not pushovers.
The Israeli navy is meaningless in this situation so it is only in the air that Israel now
has any claim to fame. However, instead of increasing its Air Force with modernized F15x
models, Israel has opted to acquire the F35, which no amount of avionics can make the
air-frame fly better. Iran still uses the F14 as a heavy fighter, which Israel also requires
for her situation making the acquisition of the F35 rather odd.
In the end, it will be Iranian missile development that places that nation in a position
to deal a death blow to the Israeli state.
Trump pro-Israel policy looks more and more like t "How to get Adelson money and lose the
re-election" Pandering to Israel Likud leadership should not be the priority task for the USA.
And violating UN resolutions to please Netanyahu does not get Trump any additional voters
iether.
And he's bringing Netanyahu and Benny Gantz here on Tuesday, smack in the middle of
impeachment. Benjamin Netanyahu stands near a photo showing him and US President Donald Trump
shake hands as he speaks to supporters at a Likud Party campaign rally on January 21, 2020 in
Jerusalem, Israel. (Photo by Amir Levy/Getty Images)
January 24, 2020
|
9:43 am
Kelley
Beaucar Vlahos In his bid to detract from his impeachment and to help out his friend Benjamin Netanyahu,
who is under indictment and facing a fierce election March 2, is Trump willing to light the
Middle East on fire?
That is what the news suggests this morning. The details are vague but it appears that Trump
may be planning to announce his "peace deal of the century" for Israel and the Palestinians
soon, and has invited Prime Minister Netanyahu and his political rival Benny Gantz to the White
House next week. He has not invited Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, who would be the other
signatory if a "peace deal" would in fact be in the offing.
More importantly, reports indicate that the so-called deal might give Israel
the green light to annex the Jordan Valley and illegal settlements in the West Bank. This
is what Netanyahu has promised Israelis throughout this tumultuous election drama and his own
indictment on charges
of fraud and bribery , for which he has yet to stand trial. He is on a razor thin
tightrope, but despite claims that he was finished (even from these pages!) he has managed to
stay on. Trump's gambit -- -giving him everything he asked for right before the election, may
be the greatest gift Trump could give.
And what does it do for Trump? On it's face, it's all upsides for him politically. He has
not been hurt as he has made other brazen moves to put the American thumb on the scale for
Israel's right wing throughout his three-and-a-half-year term -- including moving the U.S.
embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing Israel's annex of the Golan Heights, withdrawing aid from
Palestinian refugees, and declaring that Jewish settlements in disputed Palestinian territories
were not illegal.
If he can bolster his Republican hawk base -- think Senators Rubio, Cotton, and Graham --
during impeachment, all the better. High profile Democrats are unlikely to make a fuss, either,
as many of them are strong supporters of Israel, too. It would be no surprise to see several of
them take time from the trial for an audience with Netanyahu when he is here.
Trump was characteristically banal in his comment about the plan Thursday: "It's a great
plan. It's a plan that really would work," he told reporters on Air Force One en route to a
Republican Party meeting in Florida. Sure, it would work for Netanyahu and the right wing
Israelis who have been praying for a U.S. president to act so boldly biased in favor of them
for decades. For their part, the Palestinians under Abbas have already rejected Trump's plan in
the works and have cut off all diplomatic ties with Washington, for obvious reasons. There is
no "peace" in this plan, the fix was in from the start. The whole business of the deal
including a huge economic plan for the Palestinians is hooey and the world knows it -- that's
why Trump son-in-law and senior advisor Jared Kushner was widely panned when he announced that
piece of the proposal last year.
For all the politics, even Israeli media sees the danger in the course, whether or not the
people in Washington give a damn. From
Haaretz this morning:
Before starting the celebrations, the officials would do well to consider the possible risks.
For some three years, Military Intelligence has been warning the government about the risk of
violence erupting in the West Bank. Since the last, short-lived, mini-intifada faded out in
the summer of 2016, the West Bank has been mostly quiet .
But a peace deal that would be interpreted as an Israeli-American conspiracy could push the
Palestinian Authority to desperate moves, like igniting a wave of protests or even, as
happened after the failure of the Camp David peace conference in 2000, encourage large-scale
terror acts. This would change everything.
There is a really skewed vision of "peace" in the White House and it has very little to do
with foreign policy expertise, or well-informed ideas or plans. Trump has been led by
members of his team with specific ideological interests from the start . He and his
surrogates were very plain about this during his 2016 campaign. His vice presidential pick,
plus his hiring of Pompeo, Bolton, Kushner and appointment of David "Israel is
on the side of God" Friedman as U.S. ambassador only cemented it. He has been ratified by
his base all the way. God help us if this latest political calculation is the one that goes too
far.
Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, executive editor, has been writing for TAC for the last decade,
focusing on national security, foreign policy, civil liberties and domestic politics. She
served for 15 years as a Washington bureau reporter for FoxNews.com, and at WTOP News in
Washington from 2013-2017 as a writer, digital editor and social media strategist. She has also
worked as a beat reporter at Bridge News financial wire (now part of Reuters) and Homeland
Security Today, and as a regular contributor at Antiwar.com. A native Nutmegger, she got her
start in Connecticut newspapers, but now resides with her family in Arlington, Va.
Nothing goes too far for Trump. Anyone opposing this so-called deal will have to face
accusations of being Israel-haters and antisemites, and whatever the Palestinians do,
they'll remain an ungrateful, violent people who just can't understand the wise decisions
taken for them by their betters in Washington and Jerusalem.
Not that it matters. The EU is toothless, Russia and China don't care, and Saudi Arabia
will somehow find a way to make this benefit whatever scheme they're currently running.
Trump wins, if only because no one knows what the game is anymore.
Violence would be the dumbest move on the Palestinians part. The smartest would be to throw
in the towel and demand full citizenship. Israel would have a choice: run an Apartheid
state or become a totally secular society. Both losers for Israel in their eyes.
Israel is already an apartheid state, if not one quite as blatant as South Africa used to
be, and becoming more of one every year. And many Israelis are not only fine with that, but
would dearly love to expel all of the Arabs, from both the West Bank and Israel proper.
'demand' full citizenship? You mean like all the Illegal Aliens residing in the USA? Won't
some Americans object, as would some Israelis? do they have the right to say no to open
borders and mass immigration?
is Trump willing to light the Middle East on fire?
Seriously? I've been hearing this for years, ... oh please, get over it! The Middle East
surely can't get any worse than it is now? I mean after the Iraq invasion, Syrian Civil
War, Libyan regime change, Yemen War, growing Iranian influence, endless Color Revolutions
and uprisings, etc, etc, ... do you really think a little Israeli land grab (and
dispossession of Palestinians) will make things that much worse??
If insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results,
then the British Labour Party is institutionally insane and beyond recovery.
Labour's leadership candidates didn't learn a thing from their Party's humiliating electoral
defeat last month. Instead of returning to universal anti racist politics consistent with
so-called 'Labour values,' the compromised contenders for party leadership bow to the
demands
made by the Board of Deputies of British Jews , a self-elected pressure group that claims
to represent 0.5% of the British public. Our Labour leadership candidates have attended to
whims uttered by a tiny privileged voice while ignoring at least 99.5% of the British public.
'For the very few and no one else,' falls short of describing this political suicide.
This weekend, Labour's first leadership hustings in Liverpool provided another spectacular
display of the candidates' spineless and unprincipled behaviour. Each waited his or her turn to
utter embarrassing statements that they hoped would appease their party's bitterest enemy.
During the event, leadership candidate Jess Phillips took a furious swipe at her rivals'
'alleged silence over anti-Semitism.' She claimed that Labour's failure on antisemitism had
lost the party its "moral high ground" in the battle against racism. She referred in her
comments to Rebecca Long-Bailey, Emily Thornberry and Sir Keir Starmer, who had all been part
of Corbyn's team.
Emily Thornberry, who just a week ago was on "
her hands and knees " asking for Jewish "forgiveness," hit back at the accusations, saying
she has always been clear that antisemitism "undermines us as a party." Vowing to kick out
so-called 'antisemites,' she said: "What the Israeli government is doing at the moment is
completely unacceptable. But that is not the fault of the Jews."
Someone should remind the 'kneeling enthusiast' that in his entire career, Corbyn never
criticised Jews, Judaism or Jewishness. He did criticise Israel and Zionism, while making a
clear distinction between Jews and Zionism. It is this critique of Israel and its politics that
made Corbyn and the party 'antisemitic' in the eyes of the Zionist pressure groups. If
Thornberry insists on getting on her hands and knees to ask for pardon, she ought to understand
the 'fault' that has been attached to her party, otherwise, her conduct fits too well with the
definition of insanity.
Frontrunner Sir Keir Starmer, candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey and candidate Lisa Nandy all
repeated the same line. Each vowed to repair Labour's relationships with British Jews. There is
nothing inherently wrong with altering the Party's appeal to Jews but the leadership candidates
must have failed to notice that Corbyn wasted his political energy as a Party leader trying to
do just that.
In the early stages of his leadership, Corbyn's popularity was the result of the false
perception that he was an ideologically principled leader. It was Corbyn's anti war stand,
opposition to Anglo-American imperialism and Zionism that so many liked. As time passed, it
became clear that Corbyn, the person, had little or nothing in common with his revolutionary
image. The man zigzagged around every possible topic including antisemitism and Zionism, let
alone Brexit. The man who at one stage was perceived as a 'Left Icon' publicly transformed into
a caricature of a political 'left over.' Corbyn lost the election because he was unfit to dwell
in Number 10. The Brits realised that if Corbyn couldn't handle a tiny foreign lobby, he would
struggle to deal with Putin.
But there was a lesson entangled in Corbyn's political demise. When Corbyn showed a bit of
willingness to resist the Lobby's pressure, his public support grew dramatically. Two weeks
before the election, while being interviewed by BBC's Andrew Neil, Corbyn refused to apologise to the Jewish
community . He took a firm stand and upheld a universal anti racist approach to
discrimination.
The spike in the polls was immediate. In some of the polls
Labour halved the gap with the Tories. At the time, I was skeptical about Corbyn's bravery.
I thought his reaction was likely accidental. Perhaps he wasn't prepared for the question and
forgot to crawl on demand. It only took a few days before Corbyn and his shadow chancellor reverted to their
usual apologetic take on the matter: the rest is history. Corbyn's Labour suffered its worst
electoral defeat in 84 years.
This week we learned that Labour's leadership candidates haven't learned a thing. 'Insanely'
they repeated Corbyn's mistakes maybe expecting different results. Instead of producing a firm
position consistent with their Party's universal ideology, they competed to appease the whims
and demands of one hostile foreign lobby.
As in every tragic story, there was a glimpse of hope: MP Diane Abbott reported in a tweet
from the Liverpool hustings that "Richard Burgon gets the most applause of anyone at the
Liverpool deputy leadership hustings for his thoughtful response on the anti-semitism
issue."
Watching Deputy leader candidate Richard Burgon comments reveals that his seemingly firm
stand against the 'antisemitism blitz,' did indeed receive warm applause from the Labour party
members in the room.
However, a careful listen to Burgon's position clarifies that his stand on the issue is even
more ridiculous than that of the other candidates. Burgon refuses to sign the BOD's demands
because he wants to work with the BOD as well as 'all other Jewish organisations." Burgon was
referring particularly to the "minority within the minority, whether it would be LGBT Jewish
people or Black Jewish people "
ORDER IT NOW
The party that claimed to act for 'the many not the few' is now concerned with 5%
(considered the demographics of sexual orientation and gender identity within western society)
of the 0.5% of the entire British population. In mathematical terms, Burgon rejects the BOD's
demands because he is concerned with a population that comprises 0.000025 of the country's
entire population. I haven't bothered to look at the percentage of Black Jews in Britain as
there is no indication that such a community exists or is at all organized in Britain. And if
it does exist, it has yet to oppose the BOD's alleged hegemony.
Rather than looking for a 'minority within a minority' to flirt with, Burgon and the Labour
party would do well to reinstate the Party's flat rejection of racism of all types. If such an
approach comes short of satisfying the Israel Lobby, the Labour party is free to continue
without their approval. This is the only meaning of acting as a true opposition party.
It all paints a very grim picture. The Labour Party in its current form is an occupied zone.
It is not occupied by Zionists, or Blairites, as we often hear, it is conquered by its own
insanity. The positive reaction to Burgon's comments suggests that Labour supporters are still
attuned to their party's ideas. It is just the leadership that has drifted.
' Emily Thornberry, who just a week ago was on "her hands and knees" asking for Jewish
"forgiveness," hit back at the accusations, saying she has always been clear that
antisemitism "undermines us as a party." Vowing to kick out so-called 'antisemites,' she
said: "What the Israeli government is doing at the moment is completely unacceptable. But
that is not the fault of the Jews "'
All those atrocities are commented at the behest of the Arab community in Israel.
@Colin Wright The
tactic I see the Lobby use often is that when one dishes out a particularly strong criticism
of Israel, they cry out 'anti-Semitism!' as they strike you down, 'Why are you so obsessed
with the only Jewish state in the world?' they say, thereby actually being 'anti-semitic'
themselves by associating Israel with Jews.
I think this is how the dynamic goes, ostensibly right-wing parties support Israel no
matter what they do, these parties are completely infiltrated with Neoconservatives and they
are only right-wing in the economic sense – free markets so that our companies may
monopolise and dominate. These parties may pay lip service to their base's right-wing social
values but they always concede ground to the opposition.
Ostensibly left-wing parties are filled with socialist Jews, in these circles it is
encouraged to virtue signal about the two-state solution, but not to actually push forward
plans to make it happen (sanctioning Israel for building settlements). If you watch the
Al-Jazeera exposé of the Lobby, you will see such a group operating within Labour.
Corbyn was one of those flabby equality types, it seems impossible to me that he hates or
even disliked Jews. His real crime was opposing the Israel Lobby. This episode should have
alerted a significant number of Britons as to the power-wielders in this Nation.
I'm not British, so I understand that there is much that I can't understand about the
politics and goings-on in Britain. But surely there is a choice other than voting Jewish v.
other minority ("anti-tacism") concerns! It would make sense for a Labor party in Britain to
concentrate on the best interests of the majority, native British population, but that never
happens! It seems like that is the situation in every western nation, and that IS insane.
Thornberry and Phillips literally make your toes curl inside your shoes when you read some
of their squishy, self-serving pleas being passed as principles.
But I regard their words and behavior more a matter of sheer political incompetence than
anything else. Incompetence is to be found in politicians far more than is commonly
realized.
As well, of course, we have corruption, as we saw with Tony Blair who literally became
wealthy in gratitude for his helping kill a million Iraqis to please Aerial Sharon. Tony's
"New" Labour meant a party dedicated to lobby funds and strongly pro-Israel policies. Tony
helped lead the charge against Corbyn, too.
We saw no complaints about "anti-Semitism in Blair's heyday. Somehow, after he left power,
anti-Semitism just suddenly exploded inside the Labour Party the way Athena exploded from the
forehead of Zeus. Extraordinary.
I long defended Corbyn as a decent and humane politician – qualities frequently
missing in the profession – and I still believe that of him. The idea that he was ever
"anti-Semitic" is bitterly laughable. And as a matter of fact, we have very little active
anti-Semitism today in the West, and much of what self-serving fraternal organizations call
anti-Semitism is fair criticism of Israel's often barbaric policies.
The whole campaign against Corbyn was McCarthyism resuscitated for a new cause. It should
have been confronted in exactly that way. Truth well-spoken can still be a powerful weapon.
We have far too little of it in Western politics.
In the end, he did prove weak vis-a-vis the Israel lobby, but that's easier to judge from
the outside than when you are being libeled and insulted and pelted with eggs week after
week.
The lobby uses an old established principle. Throw enough crap at the wall, and some it
will stick. It is a standard principle of advertising and has always been instinctively
applied by groups like Germany's 1930s Brownshirts.
The lobby and Israel do not want fairness and decency anywhere near the affairs of Israel.
You are not allowed to be fair. You must be totally for Israel and against anyone Israel
regards as undesirable.
That was Corbyn sin. And he could not be allowed near power. And talk about external
interference, several Israeli politicians, including Netanyahu, got directly involved in
British politics over the period of Corbyn's leadership.
Israel – like a major part of racist cowboy America, notably all of Trump's crowd
holding pick-up truck meets in Walmart parking lots – simply has no use for genuine
liberals or progressives.
Why?
The essence of being a genuine liberal is deep regard for human and democratic rights.
Obviously, Israel could not exist as it is today were liberal views to hold any sway.
And the same goes for America's imperialism abroad and its defense of the Plantation
System in many parts of the world.
There almost are no liberals in America or Israel.
You do not even have a country in fact when you have an empire. Empire and military and
security concerns dominate and provide most of the attractive career paths for talented
people, crowding out everything else.
And what is Israel but a privileged strategic colony of the American empire? One
pretending to represent high principles when the truth is literally the opposite. Israel's
best friends in the region are tyrants – Saudi's Crown Prince or Egypt's Generalissimo
– who keep their people suppressed. And it calls democratic organizations like Hamas
"terrorists" for the same reason people like Corbyn are attacked.
Some democratic values. But we do live in a world where painting the roses red is an
accepted principle. We see that in every word and activity of a Donald Trump or a Boris
Johnson.
If the definition of insanity is repeating the same thing over and over and expecting
different results. Look no further then yourself.
Someone should remind the 'kneeling enthusiast' that in his entire career, Corbyn never
criticised Jews, Judaism or Jewishness. He did criticise Israel and Zionism, while making a
clear distinction between Jews and Zionism. It is this critique of Israel and its politics
that made Corbyn and the party 'antisemitic' in the eyes of the Zionist pressure groups. If
Thornberry insists on getting on her hands and knees to ask for pardon, she ought to
understand the 'fault' that has been attached to her party, otherwise, her conduct fits too
well with the definition of insanity.
It is dishonest of you to suggest that you are only critiquing Zionism and Israel. Your
mantra is enlightening the world to the dangers of Judaism and their diabolical control of
the levers of world power, thru their racists choseness and thru Holocaust worship and
victimization. (Do I have that correct I have been studying your ideas for a while) You
inform how Jewish power works thru the Jewish lobby, and their Shabbos goys. Not only do you
inform (thru your books) but you insist that Jew power be stopped, like you are clearly
warning people about Judaism and Jews. So am I correct you do not subscribe to the IHRA which
most of the world ascribes to? Do you not understand that you are what the current Labour
leaders are "down on their knees about" No?
What Labour is trying to do now is separate the legitimate critique of Zionism and Israel
from the Jew haters. It is a delicate line and the lines got blurred last time around. Aren't
you and your fellow travelers the ones that blurred them? The line in the sand is:
delegitimizing Israel as the right of Jews to self determination as a Jewish state.
You disagree with that correct? To cross that line is considered anti-semitic, and no
political party in the Western World is going to delegitimize Israel's right to exist.
So why are you doubling down on your ideas? Trust me if it has not dawned on you that you
are the one that emphasizes the .5% (the Jews ) that runs the world, not the rest of the 95%.
The 95% do no really care about Zionism, Israel or the Palestinians. They care about their
lives in the UK.
You just lost that argument during the election or did you not notice?
@Fran Taubman It
was not just Israel, Corbyn was reflexively 'progressive' on every issue; he was friendly
with the leaders of the IRA before the cease fire, not so long ago said there was no
upper limit of immigration, and wanted to give the EU immigrants a vote in another Brexit
referendum which would certainly mean reversing the decision of the real British. He quite
obviously objects to strong ethnic majorities with any special rights in their own country.
Yet Corbyn did think Palestinians have special rights. Even those born and who have lived
their entire lives outside Palestine were Palestinians with a right of 'return' in his book.
He also said an 'man who self IDs as woman' was eligible to stand on Labour's all women
shortlists to become an MP. You got suspended for disagreeing with the idea that woman could
have a penis. He was more or less openly unpatriotic
Far from seeing Israel as particularly malevolent, Corbyn thought it was no worse than his
own county, he was pro–underdog. He would doubtless conceptualise it as a veil of
ignorance thinking, but in practice the West and all its works were bad. His support came
from massively expanded universities, mainly among students in the humanities, where it is
all about pronoun engendering rather than biological organs, and hyper-internationalism. The
traditional Labour support are just that: traditional. Many of them in the former Labour
industrial heartlands north of Watford had voted Brexit so how could he possibly have carried
them with him? Him agreeing to let Boris have an election was either just a bad political
mistake, or a sign that he wanted to get losing and resigning over with in a world gone
populist and nationalist. Time has passed Corbyn and his treacherous fellow travelers by.
@Fran Taubman' What Labour is trying to do now is separate the legitimate critique of Zionism and
Israel from the Jew haters. It is a delicate line and the lines got blurred last time around.
Aren't you and your fellow travelers the ones that blurred them?'
No. Of course it is you Zionists who blurred those lines, by persistently equating
condemnation of Israel with anti-semitism.
Moreover, you did it quite intentionally. I could have condemned the USSR; no one would
have claimed that this demonstrated I was bigoted against Russians. I could have called for
the unconditional defeat of Nazi Germany; that would not have proven that I hated
Germans.
But if I call for the abolition of Israel? I am an 'anti-semite.'
This is the equation you Zionists yourselves insisted on. What do you want?
Left and Progressive ideologies are (unfortunately) Jerusalemite to the core.
They teach ppl 'what to say' (Chomsky, Democracy Later, JVP, Mondweiss) as opposed to 'how
to think for themselves' (Heidegger)..
Left is defined by boundaries of correctness as opposed to correspondence rules with
reality
As if this is not enough, both Left and Progressivism are forms of self-elected
righteousness.. We are here for the 'progress' as opposed to the rest who are
'reactionaries'.
It doesn't take too much study to grasp that the strict binary distinction between 'the
revolutionary' and the 'reactionary' is identical with the strict Jew/Goy binarism.
Consequently, the Left and the Progressivism offer the Jews an alternative discourse of
choseness
@John Chuckman
Corbyn may be a decent human being but 1. this is not enough to run a country 2. It is
impossible to deny that it was Corbyn's Labour that deteriorated into its current Orwellian
apparatus. 3, If Corbyn didn't manage to grasp what he was up against after being the patron
of the PSC (Palestinian Solidarity Campaign) for 3 decades, he belongs in the learning
difficulties class,,, he can't run a state or party or a corner shop.
But there is something good to say about Corbyn. It is his extreme lack of cognitive
ability that brought to light the extreme infiltration of the Lobby (both Zionist and so
called 'anti) into our public life (politics, media, finance, culture)
"Your mantra is enlightening the world to the dangers of Judaism and their diabolical control
of the levers of world power, thru their racists choseness and thru Holocaust worship and
victimization."
Try to concentrate Frau Taubman,,, please point out where do I criticise 'JUDAISM' in this
piece or anywhere else.
Not that I believe that Judaism should be free of criticism but Judaism isn't my topic, I
am actually way more concerned with Jewish secularism.
I do indeed write about Jewish Identity politics. Jewish culture, Jewishness
(יהודיות), Judeo-centrism, J-biologism I dig into
the metaphysics of these and suggest that some aspects of those ideology are problematic,
racist, supremacist. They endanger the world and Jews alike.
@Fran Taubman
"The 95% do no really care about Zionism, Israel or the Palestinians. They care about their
lives in the UK."
To start with we are talking about 99.5% (in Britain) or 98% in the USA ,,, again you
don't concentrate enough to engage,,, but out of interest, would you also hold the same
position in Germany in 1937, would you say that 98% of the Germans didn't really care about
the Jews?
I actually think that 10 years ago, no one cared about the Jews, or Zionism or Palestine
except just a few humanists in the marginal Left.. but the orchestrated campaign against
Labour that was led by the BOD, CAA in collaboration with the chief Rabbi, the Israeli
embassy , the media and beyond revealed to the Brits that they have a problem .
In fact, you are doing your relentless Hasbara job on each of my papers because the
problem has unveiled itself and it is more severe than ever
As I mentioned to you many times before, my criticism of Jewishness is not different from
early Zionists such as Gordon, Herzl, Nordaw, Kazanelson, Borochov, our diagnosis of the
problem is pretty much identical. We, however, differ on the remedy. They (the early
Zionists) believed that a solution was possible (civilizing by means of 'homecoming'). I am
myself a very successful product of their philosophy (so are Israel Shamir, Uri Avneri,
Israel Shahak, Gideon Levi and just a few others) ! However, Israel has amplified all the
symptoms it was designed to suppress. Hence, I can't think of an appropriate remedy, I may
even argue that a remedy that sustains the J ID is conditionally impossible
@OilcanFloyd
Labour was let down by its pandering to minorities, from Muslims to sexual perverts. They
were also in favour of increasing immigration.
If a Labour party were to oppose immigration on purely economic grounds (more
people = more supply = lower wages) then they would win big. Unfortunately they are either
controlled, incompetent or more likely a mix of both.
@John Chuckman
Corbyn is allowed idpol fanatics to dominate the party. The pandering to minoriteks was
unreal. The only reason they were actually opposed to Israel was to pay lip service to their
sizeable Muslim voter base. The fact that Israel and their agents have been responsible for
pushing Britain into Middle East wars was not even hinted at.
I personally believe in equality of opportunity. The Labour party believes in equality of
outcome and their anti-White race-baiting is unbearable (people like David Lammy or Diane
Abott)
The Tories are pretty bad, they virtue signal their right-wing credentials but don't
actually do anything. If Labour were competent and realised that they must win over the low
to middle-low income native British people, they could have won. Labour as they currently
stand are Islamophillic.
@John Chuckman
Great article & great comment, John Chuckman.
"But I regard their words and behavior more a matter of sheer political incompetence than
anything else. "
There"s a lot of truth here. It is political death to appear & to be weak. Constantly
apologising is a strobe light shrieking weakness (how often do politicians apologise for
anything ? Infrequently, I'd say).
So, yes, Labour's leadership is incompetent, stupid & insane.
Frankly & assertively state the truth: the State of Israel is open to question &
where justified, criticism. Such criticism has NOTHING to do with Jew's, especially UK Jews.
We will criticise any state that engages in immoral or criminal activity. For us doing
anything less would be immoral.
Wear the flack, dig in, repeat, do not resile a millimetre.
@Gilad Atzmon
This is the problem with Zionists displaying high levels of ethnocentrism, it stops them from
seeing objective reality and they start becoming neurotic and drawing more attention to
themselves.
Or do you think they want more anti-Semitism in society to remind Jews of their DNA?
Didn't some prominent Israeli politician say that integration and assimilation is akin to a
second Holocaust?
We all know that if peace were to come to the Middle East, Israelis would start
degenerating into nothingness much like Westerners. No more national service and no more
danger. Just drugs and pride parades.
I personally never even understood what anti-Semitism was about until I started hearing
about it in the media in relation to Jeremy Corbyn, on further investigation I found many
interesting sources of information regarding Jews (Unz Review included) which could be
regarded as anti-Semitic. My believe after research that a group of Jews were responsible for
the was in the Middle East is denounced as anti-Semitic but I would likely never have found
this out of it were not for the Zionists crying out in pain.
The perfect amount of anti-semitism must be maintained in society. Not too much so that
there is a mass uprising, but also not so little that normal Jews lose their sense of
identity and the chances of finding Jews to participate in conspiracies is lowered
considerably.
If I were a British Jew who has not experienced anti-Semitism in real life, and one day a
news story tells me about the rise in anti-Semitism in British society and directed me to
these instances, I would become quite aware of my Jewishness and likely become more loyal to
Israel to be on the safe side.
@Gilad Atzmon The
Democratic Party went through their devastating transformation in the early 1990s, and chose
to abandon its traditional base of American workers and concentrated on winning through
increased immigration and appealing to the fringes. Had the population not increased from 230
million to around 300 mollion since, mostly through immigration, the Democratic party would
be out of business. Instead, they look to be the future, and much of America is without a
nation.
Corbyn was one of those flabby equality types, it seems impossible to me that he hates
or even disliked Jews. His real crime was opposing the Israel Lobby. This episode should
have alerted a significant number of Britons as to the power-wielders in this Nation.
It has done.
As I said earlier the Zionists greatly overplayed their hand in the last UK election and
normally oblivious people have begun to notice.
However, Israel has amplified all the symptoms it was designed to suppress.
Early Zionists were articulating a view of the time that once they created Israel there
would be an alteration in Jewishness. There are emergent qualities of a nation state and once
you create one it will start acting in accordance with the dictates of realism like all the
others. How could Israel have been different? If the world is getting more like Israel then
it is because the common people have increasingly come to reject the idea their country is a
charitable institution. John Gray has an interesting article about this in which he says the
days when being a 'progressive' was a step on a political career are coming to an end because
to ordinary people have lost faith in hyperliberal sexual mores, internationalism of behalf
of minorities and even whole countries that are actually comparable to Britain, which is now
a medium sized economy highly dependant on the financial services virtual city state south of
Watford. Four days ago:-
Donald Trump threatened the UK with a 25 per cent tariff on its cars unless the British
government officially accused Iran of breaking the 2015 nuclear deal, it has been reported.
The secret threat last week, first reported by The Washington Post, which cited unnamed
European officials, would have seen the tariff imposed on all European automobile imports
to the US unless Britain, France and Germany agreed to the ultimatum.
Assuming Corbyn had been elected what could he have done about that, or this:
The joint drills also serve as a signal to the world that relations between Tehran,
Moscow and Beijing have reached a "meaningful" level, Tahani said. He added that it was the
first time Iran has held a joint exercise with two major world naval powers at this
scale
Britain is militarily and diplomatically puny and now only notable for its lack of
productive capacity (inexorably eroded by Europe), which made the industrial worker dependant
Labour Party's decline inevitable. Bliar's decade of immigration rubbed the nose of
the people in diversity, and lost much of their remaining advantage in the depressed Midlands
and North.
I actually think that 10 years ago, no one cared about the Jews, or Zionism or Palestine
except just a few humanists in the marginal Left.. but the orchestrated campaign against
Labour that was led by the BOD, CAA in collaboration with the chief Rabbi, the Israeli
embassy , the media and beyond revealed to the Brits that they have a problem .
So true. Now, thanks to this pitiful Corbyn interlude, a larger number of British leftists
than ever will have begun to fathom why they can't have nice things. So maybe in the end,
it's all for the best.
I find it bizarre how Brexit is supposed to be finally happening in less than 10 days, if
Boris keeps his word (lol), and yet the media seems to have completely dropped any mention of
it.
This will be arguably the biggest event in British history since WW2 but based on the
media's coverage of it it's almost as if Brexit no longer exists. The media seem more
interested in the Harry and Meghan royal family scandal.
@Sean Britain
nowadays is an "every man for himself", zero hours contract "services" economy. As you point
out there's no place for a "Labour Party" in such a political and economic climate, in such a
society the centre-right rule because people don't expect a welfare state or any real workers
rights, they just want minimal taxes to maximise their income.
Gilad is, of course, right to question why anyone of the Labour leadership contenders should
submit to the BOD's demands. The answer, of course, is that their demands come with an
unsubtle threat – do as they say, or the BOD and their allies will destroy the Labour
party in the same way that they destroyed Corbyn.
@John Chuckman It
seems to me there's lots of anti-Semitism around. How could there not be, given how
aggressive Jews are in pushing their agenda and punishing their critics? A vague, general
hostility between ethnic groups is pretty widespread in history and pretty natural.
@Gilad Atzmon' It doesn't take too much study to grasp that the strict binary distinction between 'the
revolutionary' and the 'reactionary' is identical with the strict Jew/Goy binarism '
Yeah -- but the whole 'Neocon' phenomenon violated the perfection of that division,
however superficially.
'Neocon' ideology is basically progressivism with two adjustments to meet the changing
desiderata of Zionist Jews: support for American aggression (there's no other word for it) in
the Middle East, and a reduction in the tax burden for the very wealthy
now-that-the-very-wealthy-are-disproportionately-Jewish.
Immigration, multi-culturalism, multi-sexuality -- all mighty fine. Just no taxes and more
war for Israel. That's what their 'conservatism' consists of.
@Just passing
through It is very possible that self destruction is embedded in Jewishness,,, This would
explain why Jewish past is a chain of disasters but it also entails that Goyim should be
finally vindicated They just happen to be in the wrong place at the worng time
Golda Meir said once "We (Jews) can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot
forgive them for forcing us to kill their children." Now try to imagine that Golda was
projecting her own guilt. Check what happens when we replace the word Jews with Goyim and
Arabs with Jews
To start with we are talking about 99.5% (in Britain) or 98% in the USA ,,, again you
don't concentrate enough to engage,,, but out of interest, would you also hold the same
position in Germany in 1937, would you say that 98% of the Germans didn't really care about
the Jews?
Not a chance of comparison. So so many forces at play as the world moved forward from
1937.
The anti-semitism in Europe from Medieval times to before the war was the result of the
Christian Church and the European aristocracy as the head of the church. This lead to secular
Zionism where Jews could be normal people.
The second Vatican council and the rise of Christian Zionism remedied the riff between
Christianity and Judaism who have joined forces in fighting Islamic fundamentalism. This
battle is viewed as a Judo-Christian battle to save western civilization.
The rejection of global secularism has created many Jewish and Zionist supporters amongst
Eastern European Catholic countries who are fighting Islamic integration in their
countries.
There are many many forces at play in the world today that did not exist in 1937. No
comparison.
@Sean I agree
with a lot of the ideas you explore here. My last book's title is Being in Time – a
Post Political Manifesto. The reality you describe above is that post political realm .a
collective mass fatigue ,,,
@MarkU' As I
said earlier the Zionists greatly overplayed their hand in the last UK election and normally
oblivious people have begun to notice.'
So one hopes. One of the more exasperating tendencies of the English is their willingness
to overlook almost anything if noticing it would prove awkward.
As I mentioned to you many times before, my criticism of Jewishness is not different
from early Zionists such as Gordon, Herzl, Nordaw, Kazanelson, Borochov, our diagnosis of
the problem is pretty much identical. We, however, differ on the remedy. They (the early
Zionists) believed that a solution was possible (civilizing by means of 'homecoming'). I am
myself a very successful product of their philosophy (so are Israel Shamir, Uri Avneri,
Israel Shahak, Gideon Levi and just a few others) ! However, Israel has amplified all the
symptoms it was designed to suppress. Hence, I can't think of an appropriate remedy, I may
even argue that a remedy that sustains the J ID is conditionally impossible
Many forces are at play, to blame it all on the Jews is to not understand the way the
world has evolved especially in the middle east. The secular Zionist that founded Israel ran
into a buzz saw of fanatical religious irrational Islamism. Jihad against the Jews. Most of
the fight over there has nothing to do with the Palestinians or land. It is a religious war,
and an irrational one. Islam is at a similar place to Medieval Europe Christianity. Verbatim.
We poison Muslim's wells. You never understand the evolution of the natural forces in nature
that the Jews have had to respond to. Islamic fundamentalism has nothing to do with Judaism
and everything to do with Islam's failure in the modern world. We just happed to be
there.
I actually think that 10 years ago, no one cared about the Jews, or Zionism or Palestine
except just a few humanists in the marginal Left.. but the orchestrated campaign against
Labour that was led by the BOD, CAA in collaboration with the chief Rabbi, the Israeli
embassy , the media and beyond revealed to the Brits that they have a problem .
I and many have a flipped view of this. We view the recent display of Jewish force as
saving the UK from Globalism, conspirators, Islamic immigration and irrational progressives
who want to make Zionism, Jewish power, Palestinians and Islam the center of the universe.
The Jews saved the UK from Corbyn and his cronies. As I keep repeating: you and your
travelers are the problem. Keep pounding your Zionist are running the show drum as it
fits your paradigm and see where it leads.
In fact, you are doing your relentless Hasbara job on each of my papers because the
problem has unveiled itself and it is more severe than ever
If Hasbara is fighting the incessant lies and propaganda about Israel and Jews then yes I
am a Hasbarist. I take your positions personally as an artist that grew up in a religious
home of survivors (half). I am here to speak about my personal information and experiences
that is all I need to engage in this thread. I can tell you as a fact no one spoke about the
Holocaust when I was growing up. No one. It was humiliating, the survivors never claimed
victimization They wanted to pretend it never happened.
Since the onslaught of the digital age there has been relentless attacks on Jews and
Israel with vicious propaganda. I am here to fight that., and make corrections against
outrageous claims. Not only are we fighting the hard left and Muslims, but as you can see on
your threads Jews are now fighting against the WN and Neo Nazis. It is important to speak
out. The internet did not turn out like we hoped. That is why I engage.
" left-wing parties are filled with socialist Jews, "
Correct and for a reason .
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "socialist Jews". If "socialist Jews" equates to
Marxism/communism, then that may, or may not be true. Marxism is the Jewish version of
socialism, which has been pushed as being all socialism, when, in fact, many of Marx's
non-Jewish contemporaries were not only hostile to his concepts of socialism, but openly
"anti-Semitic".
If "socialist Jews" means Jews see themselves as a commune, I believe that is more accurate,
because with the exception of a few faith based ones, all political parties are "filled with
socialist Jews". In Canada, one critic used to refer to the "Little Knesset" within
Parliament. The Jews from all of the political parties were as one, when it came to Jews and
Israel.
The reality is, that the Jews have just been more successful than other "minority groups".
They infiltrate all parties and lobby for the ethnic self interest. That the Jews became so
prominent in Labour, or actually "New Labour" was by design. Like Emily Thornberry, and her
ilk, Tony Blair was also on his hands and knees, not asking forgiveness, rather offering
himself up to be used and pimped out. Labour will become government when the Jews have
decided that the Conservatives aren't as compliant as Labour.
As for Corbyn's interview with Andrew Neil, I wouldn't have expected less. Neil, from all
I've seen, is the BBoD's bitch. He continually asks targets like Corbyn or Nick Griffin "when
did you stop beating your wife" type questions then interrupts the answers. When challenged,
he resorts to "I am the one asking questions." The best thing any politician could do would
be to tell him to F-off, this interview is over. I saw this with an AfD member involved in a
"debate", when interrupted the 3rd time, she said obviously you aren't interested in my
reply, as you won't let me answer. Then took off her microphone and walked off to
considerable audience applause.
Try to concentrate Frau Taubman,,, please point out where do I criticise 'JUDAISM' in
this piece or anywhere else.
Your lectures (on video) with the circles and arrows, the curves of mountain peaks and
valleys where you explain how the Jews make hay in between Holocausts.
Why do you post articles about Criminal Jews and claim there criminal behavior is Jewish
behavior? I have heard you explain sexual deviation and blame it onJewish males and their
Jewish parents, as in Epstein. He is not a criminal to you he is a Jewish criminal.
Your recent claim that the "ethnic cleansing" of black neighborhoods in Monsey and Jersey
City caused the recent violent attacks on Jews when in fact the crimes were committed by
schizophrenic lunatics. One living in a solid middle class neighborhood of Harlem, who's
sister was trying to have him committed.
It sounds to me and others like a concerted effort to dehumanize Jews and separate them
and their behavior from the rest of society, why else spread vicious slander to a sycophantic
rabid Jew hating audience? A lot of what you post is one sided like the rape accusations of
the Israelis. You don't know the truth and the truth is not on a tabloid page. You
sensationalize this stuff. You could claim that Jews fly at night to secret location and the
rabid Jew hater would believe you.
The second Vatican council and the rise of Christian Zionism remedied the riff between
Christianity and Judaism who have joined forces in fighting Islamic fundamentalism. This
battle is viewed as a Judo-Christian battle to save western civilization.
So-called Islamic fundamentalism is to some extent a function of U.S. foreign policy.
The CIA removed a legitimate government in Iran leading to 'blowback'.
Jihadis sent to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets by the CIA and Saudis destabilized
already chaotic Pakistan. When these people returned they became a menace in countries like
Algeria (civil war) and France (bombings) plus even fought in Bosnia.
El Trumpo's Saudi buddies are funding mosques and extremism in the West including
Britain.
@Colin Wright
Neoconservatism should be regarded as a natural development from a promised land to a
promised planet It is an attempt to integrate the English Speaking empire into the Tikun Olam
philosophy The disastrous outcome is known to everyone here,,,
@Curmudgeon It is
pretty simple, there is a categorical difference between Jewish socialists (which is really
an oxymoron as socialism is universal and Jewishness is tribal) and Socialists who happen to
be Jewish (by origin) which is a totally valid concept The all idea of socialism is that it
doesn't matter whether you are Black or Jewish or woman or Muslim. We are all sharing the
same class struggle as working people. The people who identify politically as Jewish can't
really be socialists as their primary identification defies the socialist universal concept.
@Fran Taubman /in
fact the crimes were committed by schizophrenic lunatics/
Oh, okay.
So now that we've cleared that up, we shouldn't expect to see those offenses added to the
list of "anti-Semitic hate crimes." After all, their perpetrators were acting irrationally,
as mentally ill people, rather than as individuals with a rational animus toward Jews.
Good to know that zionists aren't interested in exploiting such occasions to further
advance "hate crime" legislation, isn't it?
@Fran Taubman' Your recent claim that the "ethnic cleansing" of black neighborhoods in Monsey and
Jersey City caused the recent violent attacks on Jews when in fact the crimes were committed
by schizophrenic lunatics. One living in a solid middle class neighborhood of Harlem, who's
sister was trying to have him committed '
'Schizophrenic lunatics' are often canaries in the coal mine. When they act out, the
direction they choose is often suggested by the attitude of some segment of the wider
society.
See John Brown, the Zebra killers, John Hinckley, the Unibomber, the guy who shot up that
synagogue in Pittsburgh. They were all pretty obviously disturbed and headed for a violent
outburst of some kind. However, it was trends in the wider culture that suggested to them
what targets could be rationalized as legitimate. Who they whack -- or try to whack -- is not
random.
I could, say, inveigh against abortion. I personally could be perfectly sane, my rhetoric
lucid and rational, and violence genuinely the last thing on my mind. Nevertheless, when some
loon bombs an abortion clinic, it's perfectly possible he drew inspiration from my
website.
You can't simply segregate the behavior of the mentally ill from trends in the wider
society. The loons watch TV too, hear the gossip in the barber shop, etc.
@Gilad Atzmon' The all idea of socialism is that it doesn't matter whether you are Black or Jewish or
woman or Muslim '
Well, not really. You may well agree with socialism, and so naturally you prefer to find
it on the side of the angels in all things -- but it ain't necessarily so.
Jack London was indubitably socialist -- and very racist, sometimes genocidally so. In at
least one story, the happy ending comes when the white race works out a way to exterminate
all Chinese.
Then there are the National Socialists. Say what you will; their policies were at least as
'socialist' as those of the post-war Social Democratic regimes across Western Europe. Yet if
the Soviets had decided to pursue 'socialism in one country,' the Nazis had plumped for
'socialism for one nationality' -- or as they thought of it, one race.
@Colin Wright
your claim that "Jack London was indubitably socialist -- and very racist, sometimes
genocidally so. In at least one story, the happy ending comes when the white race works out a
way to exterminate all Chinese". is somewhat anecdotal. You confuse fiction with reality. It
is as if someone claimed that Conan Doyle identified with the murderers decribed in his
writings.
@AnonStarter
Totally it happened to a church in Texas. It is violence against Christians and Jews and
Whites and Blacks. But does not make you feel more safe if you are Jewish. We are currently
spending money for 2 armed security guards at our Synagogue, one inside and one outside.
@Gilad Atzmon
Socialism today is completely different then Socialism in the 1950's which was totally
different then 1917.
Originally Socialism was about the peasants who were uneducated and some were slaves. There
was also an aristocracy and class system. So Socialism was at first meant to brake down the
classes.
We now have a middle class and upward mobility.
@Fran Taubman'Socialism today is completely different then Socialism in the 1950's which was totally
different then 1917.
Originally Socialism was about the peasants who were uneducated and some were slaves. There
was also an aristocracy and class system. So Socialism was at first meant to brake down the
classes.
We now have a middle class and upward mobility.'
@Fran Taubman
Unfortunately, Fran, zionists are
exploiting the occasion to advance such legislation and bilk the government of more money
in the process. You either aren't paying attention or you're playing dumb.
Were I betting man, my money would be on the latter.
British men are the most cucked of all Europeans, except for maybe the Swedes. They've had
Jews living among them and marrying into their aristocracy for 4 centuries. It's hopeless. As
Henry Ford said in The International Jew in 1920:
Jewry will retain such kings as it desires as long as it desires them. Probably the last
throne to be vacated will be the British throne because what to the British mind is the
honor of being Jewry's protector and therefore the inheritor of the blessing which that
attitude brings, is to the Jewish mind the good fortune of being able to use a world-wide
empire for the furtherance of Jewry's purpose. Each has served the other and the
partnership will probably last until Jewry gets ready to throw Britain over, which Jewry
can do at almost any time. There are indications that it has already started in this last
task.
Henry Ford foresaw what was to come. Even if he didn't predict WWII, he correctly
predicted then that the English would persuade the US to take the Jews' side of the war.
Wouldn't surprise me if Meghan Markle has a Jewish advisor coaching and egging her on
about how to tear apart the royal family.
@Fran Taubman You
can always use you advantageous position as a Jew to campaign against the malicious
behaviours of your group. For example campaigning against the push for war with Iran which
has a distinctly Jewish flavour, much like those who caused the war in Iraq were mostly
Jewish Neoconservatives.
Your status as a Jew would be more conducive in persuading other Jews about these sorts of
harms caused by certain Jews, you could also campaign against the neurotic Jews who are
launching a lynch Mon against Labour for not licking their boots hard enough.
But instead of being reasonable, you defend every single bad behaviour by a small clique
of Jews judging by your comments on this website.
As it says in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion , throw as many theories and ideas
how there as possible to confuse the gentiles, make them fight among themselves. Practically
every "ism" out there is invented by a Jew. Jews gave us capitalism, communism, socialism,
liberalism, leftism, neoconism, classism, racism, sexism, Zionism the only "ism" they didn't
invent was pragmatism . The end result is Jews always end up leading every ideological
fight, with gentiles blindly following and quarreling among themselves over these stupid
ideologies invented by the Jews.
Jews also lead all the labor unions, to drive a wedge between labor and management, so
they can use it as an excuse to move manufacturing out of the US since they control capital.
And they invented all the economic theories like "the purpose of a business is to maximize
profit, profit is king" (Milton Friedman) to help pave the way for de-industrialization of US
and simultaneous maximum immigration, ostensibly to lower labor cost and maximize profit, but
really to destroy the country and weaken white society through multiculturalism.
Unbelievably, to this day, gullible subservient Yanks and Brits mutilate the genitals of
their male offspring to demonstrate fealty to a vile Kock Kutter Kult. Is this rational
..asking some quack to cut the end off your kid's dick to please some creepy fictional
talmudic sky god? Maybe give your kid a break and find some other way to kiss the precious
yid's ass.
@Colin Wright I
agree that socialism means many things to different people my reference to socialism which
you quoted above was Marxist oriented, however I do agree that not all socialists are
Marxists
@Gilad Atzmon
Homecoming would have been possible if Israel weren't a colonial project, but if the Jews
actually bought the sovereignty from the Palestinians themselves, for a fair price.
With their money (earned by exploitation and corruption), Jews rule the Western states. A
large majority of the people in these states know that, but they are keeping quiet. One might
ask. For how long? The answer is not very long. It is a repeat of the 1930s in Europe,
Germany in particular. Europeans rebelled against Jews. Hitler was one of those who rebelled.
History is repeating itself.
@MarkU
' As I said earlier the Zionists greatly overplayed their hand in the last UK election
and normally oblivious people have begun to notice.'
So one hopes. One of the more exasperating tendencies of the English is their
willingness to overlook almost anything if noticing it would prove awkward.
IMO they did overplay their hand with the Labour Anti-Semitism blitz. It was obviously
fake, and aimed at Corbyn because of his (previous) Palestinian sympathies.
The British don't like to "make a fuss", but they can be bloody minded in some situations,
and appreciate fair play. The missing factor here is a politician who can crystallize their
views. At one point it looked like it would be Corbyn, but he washed out in the pre-election
Johnson-Corbyn live TV debate – accepting all the Anti-Semitism smears and promising
more Labour self-flagellation.
He would have greatly improved Labour's election chances if he had stood up to the
Zionists.
The assumption would then be, that if he was capable of standing up against the Zionists,
he would also be capable of standing up against the U.K.'s many other special interest
lobbies.
@OilcanFloyd " It
would make sense for a Labor party in Britain to concentrate on the best interests of the
majority, native British population, but that never happens! It seems like that is the
situation in every western nation, and that IS insane."
And sane observers notice that the prime movers of the insanity are Jews.
Originally Socialism was about the peasants who were uneducated and some were slaves.
There was also an aristocracy and class system. So Socialism was at first meant to brake
down the classes. We now have a middle class and upward mobility.
Strange logic, but not strange considering where it comes from: an addled head.
If there is a middle, there must be something lower, and something upper. Therefore lower,
middle and upper classes, and other layers in between.
The same goes for "upward mobility" implying there is movement up the social scale from an
original point down the scale.
As to the other inanities about Socialism, thank you very much. It only shows the dismal
ignorance of a defective intellect.
Stick to the Talmudic doctrine, the right subject for an oozy mind.
@AnonStarter A
very disrespectful comment. Our synagogue congregants are paying for the security.
As far as I know there are no government funds available for security. If legislation does
pass I assume it will cover all religious and educational-institutions to protect from the
recent shootings.
You either hate Zionist or you are spuriously trying to defame Jews by accusing them of
thievery.
If I were a betting woman I would say both. Oh and clever replacing Jews with Zionist. I
live in NY. I doubt legislation would pass to protect Zionist. LOL
I would also bet that your comment is pretty insincere.
Jews do not bilk the government
Most Jew haters on this site dare pretty direct. You are full of hide and seek.
@JUSA So in
summary, the Jews are doing to Anglo society what the Jews and Anglos did to various parts of
the world?
Shame on the Anglos for trusting Jews in their criminal enterprise, history should have
told them that one day the Jews' hungry gaze would turn onto them.
America is currently doing Judea's bidding in the Middle East, all I can say is, today the
Anglo works hand in hand to hang the others, very soon in the future, the Anglo will find
himself standing at the gallows with Schlomo ready to hang him.
Colonialism was entirely prodded on by Jews in my opinion, they used the Anglo might to
conquer the world and divert the profits to themselves. I personally would be supportive of
Rothschild and Warburg banks paying reparations to both Whites and Browns/Yellows/Blacks for
all the harm they have caused.
@Ilya G
Poimandres If only. Palestinian leaders are not interested in a fair price or any
workable solution that includes Jews. Islam as currently practiced in the ME is an insane and
irrational sectarian mess.
Islamist LEADERS not the regular folks want Jihad against the Jews for whatever Jihadist
reasons they can think of. Jordan is a colonial creation. Why not go after Jordan. If I were
a Palestinian that is what I would do.
If rationale was running the show it would have all been settled like 70 years ago when
the partition plan was created. The Palestinians would be celebrating 70 years as
Palestine.
It would have been settled many years after that when the Palestinians had the full world
court. Yessir Arafat met with Clinton more then any other world leader. True also of his
presence in Europe.
But no one cares anymore because rational solutions do not fit a Jihadist mind. Like when
the Muslim Brotherhood assassinated Anwar Sadat for making peace with Israel.
If Israel were gone tomorrow nothing would change over there. They would start holy wars
against each other.
@Fran Taubman
Yes, because Israeli society is such a tolerant and peace loving place?
While their agents lobby Western governments to fight their wars, Jews send their kids
into the IDF to shoot unarmed Palestinians. And yet Zionists like you have the
chutzpah to say Israel is on the brink of destruction to justify your Jewish
Lebensraum project.
Remind me who killed Yitzhak Rabin after he signed the Oslo Peace Accords?
Would any Israeli politician dare move forward with the peace process knowing there is an
abundance of Zionist fanatics in Israeli society who will kill them if they are not Zionist
enough?
You Zionists are just making this worse for normal Jews, whose feelings towards Israel are
latent at best. You know that increasing anti-Semitism leads to Jewish racial awareness and
makes them more likely to participate in subversive activities, lest the invisible hand of
the anti-Semite set in motion another Shoah. This is why Jewish critics like Gilead Atzmon,
Israel Shamir and Norman G. Finkelstein cause so much kvetching in Zionist circles.
@Anonymous Media
hysterics over Brexit have served their purpose it seems. The country was divided, the
opposition party shown to be weak, and now the establishment can get on with tying the
British economy to the US and "israeli" economies as, it seems, was the plan all along.
Brexshit was a disgusting manipulation of the British people by the rich and powerful
Jewish lobby. It's msm did as it was instructed like a good lapdog. Now we all get to suffer
what will surely be some rather interesting effects: privatisation of the NHS and a
"deffence" policy tied directly to "israel" alongside the criminalisation of opinions which
question these moves.
@Just passing
through I am a US citizen. I have no advantaged position. I have the same rights and
privileges every other US citizens have.
Totally ludicrous comment.
I am not interested in a war with Iran. They Persians are wonderful people. Iran should stop
killing Israelis, Jews and Americans. They should stop their behavior of taking over other
countries like Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria.
I am not here to police the behavior of Jews who are like every other peoples in the
world. There are malicious Jews, and Jews with exceptionally high morality. Like other
people.
There exists in the British Labour Party both Jews and non Jews with bad neurotic
behavior. I am not a British Subject.
Jeremy Corbyn got what he deserved. He lost the election. And no person in Labour had more
bad behavior, low morals and neurotic behavior then Corbyn. He could not defend himself or
his party because he stood for nothing that helped the people of the UK.
To
produce healthy children, you should marry a third or fourth cousin. Farther out, the
genetic costs of outbreeding begin to outweigh those of inbreeding. That was what a cohort
study found in examining Icelanders born between 1800 and 1964. Fertility was lower if the
woman's husband was either closer in or farther out (Helgason et al. 2008).
Being a family of inbreds has not hurt the Rothschilds.
I find it astounding how much the media are paying attention to this Markle drama,
they should focus more on Andrew and Epstein.
I am mildly surprised that more attention has not been given to Epstein throwing vast
amounts of money to Catholic professor Martin Nowak at Harvard
to help him discredit Inclusive fitness . (Charles Darwin was
a product of moderate consanguineous marriage, and so was er, Hitler. whose parents called
each other 'Uncle' and 'Niece'). Tory ideas man David Willetts, in the Financial Times,
thought Nowak's book Supercooperators excellent for understanding the development of
cooperation in society. Why is it that so many Jews even renegade ones are so committed to
promoting the role of nurture over nature.
Maybe Jews instinctively understand that people want to disbelieve in genes mattering
much. As far back as the play The Tempest , Shakespeare has Prospero identify
hereditary qualities as malevolent. when calling Caliban "a born devil, on whose nature/
Nurture can never stick". In humans Nowak says the key to eliciting cooperation is indirect
reciprocity, which is when you help others and get a good reputation that pays off big time
because people will help people who are known to help other third persons. The late Professor
Henry Harpending on Kin Selection
Giving Bigotry
a Chance This figure shows the data from the Druze, a community in the Middle East that
has endured episodes of very small effective size. Here opportunities for discord and
clannishness are high as individuals able to discriminate kin would ally against the
"others." In this kind of social/genetic environment one would predict very different
patterns of family and clan and group loyalty and cooperation.
This weekend, Labour's first leadership hustings in Liverpool provided another
spectacular display of the candidates' spineless and unprincipled behaviour.
They were simply following in the footsteps of the great Traitorous Shabbos Goy, Tony
Bliar, who showed his party cohorts how to get ahead in this world do the bidding of your
masters and you will be splendidly rewarded!
This battle is viewed as a Judo-Christian battle to save western civilization.
Yes, yes of, course, Fran. The Judos are earnestly doing everything in their power to save
Western civilization by "encouraging" their Shabbos Goys puppets in key governmental
positions to welcome mass immigration into their countries.
Yes, The Dumb Goyi m should be grateful to the efforts of Open Society Foundations,
HIAS, etc. for saving our civilization.
. and never forget, goy, Diversity Is Our Greatest strength!
@Anon British
people almost think of themselves as Jews in a subconcious sort of way. In Britain there is
almost no perception of the City of London financial industry as being in any way Jewish, the
vast majority of native British people see banking and finance as authentically British, in
fact perhaps the most quintessentially British industry there is.
The British have assimilated Jewish ways so much they have practically made it their own.
I get the impression that many non-Anglos use the terms Anglo and Jew almost interchangeably
and see them as one and the same.
@Fran Taubman
Jews, and Judaism, and Zionism, and Talmudism, are the problems Frannie. All of them.
They are all ugly manifestations of Chosenism, riddled with Hypocrisy (Chutzpah),
anti-Humanism, anti-Christianity, anti-Islamism, and oppression of peoples within their grasp
(Palestinians, Lebanese, etc.).
You Frannie, are a part of the problem. You and your Jewish worldview of lies and
myths.
Grow up. Learn about Christ, the Truth.
Otherwise go to Hell, where you and your kind truly belong, worshipping your true master,
Satan. Christ Himself described what you all are and when you die, you cannot escape Truth
any longer.
The Jews saved the UK from Corbyn and his cronies Keep pounding your Zionist are running
the show drum as it fits
Can you see what you did there Fran? In one breath you state that " the Jews s aved
the UK from " (which, incidentally subjects the British people to another 5 years of
unrestrained Tory austerity, crippling poverty and ever-rising homelessness, whilst
dismantling the National Health Service, and our freedom of self expression, so thanks for
that) and in the next breath you castigate Gilad for suggesting that the zionists ( i. e.
jews) are running the show.
Can you see the contradiction in your own writing, in your own views?
You're so hell-bent on defending "israel" and its' international constituency, and on
blaming Muslim Arabs for the mess the ME is in thanks to zio-backed/instigated western
interference, that you have closed and shuttered your own mind against any and all opposing
views, to the point that your "arguments" become utterly incoherent and self
contradictory.
My own grandparents survived the war and very rarely spoke about it. This despite the fact
that my great-grandparents lost 3 of their 6 children (or 4 out of 7. Can't quite remember)
in just one night when the air-raid shelter they were sheltering in was blitzed. – All
so that your ideological forefathers could push forward on their plan to wipe Palestine out,
steal the land and build themselves another golum there.
Could it be that those who survived the war (first declared by international jewry agaist
nationalist Germany) in your family didn't talk about their experiences because EVERYBODY who
survived understood that their suffering was shared by all and that no-one was unique in this
regard?
If you never question your pre-conceptions, how can you know they're right?
@Gilad Atzmon
This really isn't so complicated. Corbyn proved incoherent, if nor worthless and weak, on
Brexit, a National Question if there ever was one.
Did any of you see Labor's closing pitch in the last election? A parody appeal to what
Steve Sailer calls The Coalition of the Fringes. Nothing on the paramount question of
national sovereignty, except a veiled promise to give it good and hard to the British
majority when Labor took power.
This was Hillary's crass appeal.
I know it's hard for most here to hear but you characters, including not the least the
author, are outliers in where in the scheme of things you rank Israel and the Jews. I never
fail to be reminded of that old joke about the little Jewish boy in school -- with the punch
line "Elephants and the Jewish Question."
Is it really so difficult for this audience to understand that since Corbyn got the big,
important stuff wrong, his position/messaging on Jews/anti-semitism/Israel/Palestinians . . .
, regardless of its specific content, revealed he was the wrong man for the job.
As if this is not enough, both Left and Progressivism are forms of self-elected
righteousness.. We are here for the 'progress' as opposed to the rest who are
'reactionaries'.
Virginia Democrats are currently engaged in this self-defeating behavior, having nothing
to do with Jews etc. Having won control in the last elections, they've decided the time is
right to re-litigate the Civil War.
Pretty much how it is here in the good ole' USA. The 2% own the government – ZOG*.
Izrael Uber Alles!
But it's beyond ZOG it's the Globohomo Elite, which is dominated, of course, by Jews.
The war is coming and that 'Taubman' typist (poster) above isn't going to be happy.
(Wry grin)
*0.5% or 2% it doesn't matter, the globohomo/Zionist elite, a minority within a minority,
run most of the Western governments anyway.
As always, beware The Power of the CABAL .
@Truth3 If your
first sentence is true, then it is equally true that Judaizing heresy is the problem. And if
that is true, then the logical, inherent, fruits of Judaizing heresy are the problem.
Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy. Anglo-Saxon Puritanism is responsible for
the basic ethos of WASP culture, for its religious and therefore moral proclivities.
And that means that WASP culture, Modern English culture, is the problem.
Anglo-Saxon Puritanism that is not forcibly stopped dead in its tracks and rejected
culturally leads inextricably to Anglo-Zionist Empire.
Jews as a high achieving minority have always been hated. But Corbyn cannot commit political
suicide and directly blame Jews for Britain's problems, so he picks on tiny Israel to get Jew
haters to support him.
Before Israel existed Jew hating politicians were bolder, they directly claimed they hated
Jews.
A "democratic socialist " like Corbyn never stood a chance in the UK which , like the US is a
plutocracy, in fact the UK is still a monarchy as to be seated in the House of Commons a
member of Parliament MUST first swear allegiance to the Queen . The massmedia in the UK is
indirectly owned by billionaires and millionaires who were universally opposed to Corbyn ,
Corbyn was also opposed by the intelligence services and the military who characterized him
as a threat to "National security" ,and for months he was smeared as an anti-semite because
he supported Palestinian rights and , for good measure, the BBC in its coverage of the
campaign was clearly biased in favor of Boris Johnson . Should Bernie Sanders another
"democratic socialist " become the nominee of the Democratic party he will be subject to the
same treatment by the press and the powers that be as meted out to Corbyn , it has already
started with the ambush of Sanders by Warren and CNN at the last Democratic debate .
@Anonymous This
sentence should be repeated over and over by everyone trying to figure out what is going on:
British people almost think of themselves as Jews in a subconcious sort of way .
This is the long term end game of Judaizing heresy, which is what Anglo-Saxon Puritanism
was, and Anglo-Saxon Puritanism determined Modern English culture.
If you do not reject WASP culture, Modern English/Anglo-Saxon culture, then you are part
of the problem.
"If the definition of insanity is repeating the same thing over and over and expecting
different results."
Allow me to pick this nit –
This stupid saying is NOT the definition of insanity (rather the definition of practicing to
get better.)
The definitions of insanities fill a book an inch thick.
This is actually a saying from Albert Einstein and is a classic example of the fallacious
Argument To Authority – citing an authority but who is outside their area of
expertise.
@Fran Taubman "
Israel should stop killing Arabs should stop their behavior of taking over other countries
like Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria. "
@melpol I think
you know very well Corbyn did not harbour any hatred towards Jews. Once again, Zionists and
Talmudists creating anti-Semitism out of thin air to satisfy their demand for persecution
@Z-man Ask
yourself how they got to this level of power. Why were they allowed to ingrain themselves
within the elite of Western societies by the previous elite?
"... In my last post, I said it was time to close down this blog, mostly due to its ineffectiveness, short reach, and choir preaching. I wrote that I might as well pound sand for all the good it did. ..."
"... The US began targeting Iran following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This included "freezing" -- polite-speak for theft -- around $12 billion in Iranian assets, including gold, property, and bank holdings. After Obama agreed to return this filched property and money as part of the nuke deal (minus any real nukes), neocons said he gave away US taxpayer money to international terrorists. This warped lie became part of the narrative, yet another state-orchestrated fake news "alternative fact." ..."
In my last post, I said it was time to close down this blog, mostly due to its
ineffectiveness, short reach, and choir preaching. I wrote that I might as well pound sand for
all the good it did.
A few days later, Trump killed a high level Iranian military leader and I have decided a
post is in order, never mind that a round of tiddlywinks will have about the same influence as
a post here. The wars just keep on coming, no matter what we do.
Let's turn to social media where dimwits, neocon partisans, and clueless Democrats are
running wild after corporate Mafia boss and numero uno Israeli cheerleader Donald Trump ordered
a hit on Gen. Qasem Soleimani and others near Baghdad's international airport on Thursday.
Let's begin with this teleprompter reader and "presenter" from Al Jazeera:
"This is what happens when you put a narcissistic, megalomaniacal, former reality TV star
with a thin skin and a very large temper in charge of the world's most powerful military You
know who else attacks cultural sites? ISIS. The Taliban." – me on Trump/Iran on MSNBC
today: pic.twitter.com/YCRARB2anv
It is interesting how the memory of such people only goes back to the election of Donald
Trump.
The US began targeting Iran following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This included "freezing"
-- polite-speak for theft -- around $12 billion in Iranian assets, including gold, property,
and bank holdings. After Obama agreed to return this filched property and money as part of the
nuke deal (minus any real nukes), neocons said he gave away US taxpayer money to international
terrorists. This warped lie became part of the narrative, yet another state-orchestrated fake
news "alternative fact."
Here's another idiot. He was the boss of the DNC for a while and unsuccessfully ran for
president.
Nice job trump and Pompeo you dimwits. You've completed the neocon move to have Iraq
become a satellite of Iran. You have to be the dumbest people ever to run the US government.
You can add that to being the most corrupt. Get these guys out of here. https://t.co/gQHhHSeiJQ
Once again, history is lost in a tangle of lies and omission. Centuries before John Dean
thought it might be a good idea to run for president, Persians and Shias in what is now Iraq
and Iran were crossing the border -- later drawn up by invading Brits and French -- in
pilgrimages to the shrines of Imam Husayn and Abbas in Karbala. We can't expect an arrogant
sociopath like Mr. Dean to know about Ashura, Shia pilgrimages, the Remembrance of Muharram,
and events dating back to 680 AD.
Shias from Iran pilgrimage to other Iraqi cities as well, including An-Najaf, Samarra,
Mashhad, and Baghdad (although the latter is more important to Sunnis).
Corporate fake news teleprompter reader Stephanopoulos said the Geneva Conventions
(including United Nations Security Council Resolution 2347) outlaw the targeting of cultural
sites, which Trump said he will bomb.
Trump said there are 52 different sites; the number is not arbitrary, it is based on the 52
hostages, many of them CIA officers, taken hostage during Iran's revolution against the
US-installed Shah and his brutal secret police sadists.
Pompeo said Trump won't destroy Iran's cultural and heritage sites. Pompeo, as a dedicated
Zionist operative, knows damn well the US will destroy EVERYTHING of value in Iran, same as it
did in Iraq and later Libya and Syria. This includes not only cultural sites, but civilian
infrastructure -- hospitals, schools, roads, bridges, and mosques.
STEPHANOPOULOS: The Geneva Conventions outlaws attacks on cultural objects & places of
worship. Why is Trump threatening Iran w/ war crimes?
POMPEO: We'll behave lawfully
S: So to be clear, Trump's threat wasn't accurate?
Although I believe Jill Stein is living in a Marxian fantasy world, I agree with her tweet
in regard to the Zionist hit on Soleimani:
Now THIS is grounds for #impeachment
– treachery unleashing the unthinkable for Americans & people the world over: Trump
asked Iraqi prime minister to mediate with #Iran then
assassinated Soleimani – on a mediation mission. https://t.co/f0F9FEMALD
Trump should be impeached -- tried and imprisoned -- not in response to some dreamed-up and
ludicrous Russian plot or even concern about the opportunist Hunter Biden using his father's
position to make millions in uber-corrupt Ukraine, but because he is a war criminal responsible
for killing women and children.
As for the planned forever military occupation of Iraq,
USA Today reports:
Iraq's Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi told lawmakers that a timetable for the withdrawal
of all foreign troops, including U.S. ones, was required "for the sake of our national
sovereignty." About 5,000 American troops are in various parts of Iraq.
The latest:
-- Iraqi lawmakers voted to oust U.S. troops
-- U.S.-led coalition fighting ISIS has paused operations
-- Hundreds of thousands mourned General Suleimani in Iran
-- President Trump said the U.S. has 52 possible targets in Iran in case of retaliation
https://t.co/pmUuAQdKlc
No way in hell will Sec. State Pompeo and his Zionist neocon handlers allow this to happen
without a fight. However, it shouldn't be too difficult for the Iraqis to expel 5,000
brainwashed American soldiers from the country, bombed to smithereens almost twenty years ago
by Bush the Neocon Idiot Savant.
Never mind Schumer's pretend concern about another war. This friend of Israel from New York
didn't go on national television and excoriate Obama and his cutthroat Sec. of State Hillary
Clinton for killing 30,000 Libyans.
I'm concerned President Trump's impulsive foreign policy is dragging America into another
endless war in the Middle East that will make us less safe.
Meanwhile, it looks like social media is burning the midnight oil in order to prevent their
platforms being used to argue against Trump's latest Zionist-directed insanity.
It is absolutely crazy that Twitter is auto-locking the accounts of anyone who posts this
"No war on Iran" image, and forcing them to delete the anti-war tweet in order to unlock
their account.
This is complete and utter bullshit, but I'm sure the American people will gobble it down
without question. Trump's advisers are neocons and they are seriously experienced in the art of
promoting and engineering assassination, cyber-attacks, invasions, and mass murder.
Newsmax scribbler John Cardillo thinks he has it all figure out.
"In mid-October Soleimani instructed his top ally in Iraq, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and
other powerful militia leaders to step up attacks on U.S. targets in the country using
sophisticated new weapons provided by Iran "
Imagine this, however improbable and ludicrous: Iran invades America and assassinates
General Hyten or General McConville, both top members of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. Now
imagine the response by the "exceptional nation."
We can't leave out the Christian Zionist from Indiana, Mike Pence. Mike wants you to believe
Iran was responsible for 9/11, thus stirring up the appropriate animosity and consensus for
mass murder.
Neither Iran nor Soleimani were linked to the terror attack in the "9/11 Commission
Report." Pence didn't even get the number of hijackers right. https://t.co/QtQZm2Yyh9
Finally, here is the crown jewel of propaganda -- in part responsible for the death of well
over a million Iraqis -- The New York Times showing off its rampant hypocrisy.
In Opinion
The editorial board writes, "It is crucial that influential Republican senators like
Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio and Mitch McConnell remind President Trump of his promise to keep
America out of foreign quagmires" https://t.co/2swusvBWbg
Never mind Judith Miller, the Queen of NYT pro-war propaganda back in the day, spreading
neocon fabricated lies about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction. America -- or
rather the United States (the government) -- is addicted to quagmires and never-ending war.
This is simply more anti-Trump bullshit by the NYT editorial board. The newspaper loves war
waged in the name of Israel, but only if jumpstarted by Democrats.
Trump the fool, the fact-free reality TV president will eventually unleash the dogs of war
against Iran, much to the satisfaction of Israel, its racist Zionists, Israel-first neocons in
America, and the chattering pro-war class of "journalists," and "foreign policy experts" (most
former Pentagon employees).
Expect more nonsense like that dispensed by the robot Mike Pence, the former tank commander
now serving as Sec. of State, and any number of neocon fellow travelers, many with coveted blue
checkmarks on Twitter while the truth-tellers are expelled from the conversation and exiled to
the political wilderness.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your
email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Kurt Nimmo writes on his blog, Another Day in the Empire, where this
article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global
Research.
As'ad AbuKhalil analyzes the Trump administration's decision
to escalate hostilities with Iran and its regional allies.
By As`ad AbuKhalil
January 21, 2020 " Information Clearing House " - S omething big
and unprecedented has happened in the Middle East after the assassination of one of Iran's
top commanders, Qasim Suleimani.
The U.S. has long assumed that assassinations of major figures in the Iranian
"resistance-axis" in the Middle East would bring risk to the U.S. military-intelligence
presence in the Middle East. Western and Arab media reported that the U.S. had prevented
Israel in the past from killing Suleimani. But with the top commander's death, the Trump
administration seems to think a key barrier to U.S. military operations in the Middle East
has been removed.
The U.S. and Israel had noticed that Hizbullah and Iran did not retaliate against previous
assassinations by Israel (or the U.S.) that took place in Syria (of Imad Mughniyyah, Jihad
Mughniyyah, Samir Quntar); or for other attacks on Palestinian and Lebanese commanders in
Syria.
The U.S. thus assumed that this assassination would not bring repercussions or harm to
U.S. interests. Iranian reluctance to retaliate has only increased the willingness of Israel
and the U.S. to violate the unspoken rules of engagement with Iran in the Arab East.
For many years Israel did perpetrate various assassinations against Iranian scientists and
officers in Syria during the on-going war. But Israel and the U.S. avoided targeting leaders
or commanders of Iran. During the U.S. occupation of Iraq, the U.S. and Iran collided
directly and indirectly, but avoided engaging in assassinations for fear that this would
unleash a series of tit-for-tat.
But the Trump administration has become known for not playing by the book, and for
operating often according to the whims and impulses of President Donald Trump.
Different Level of Escalation
The decision to strike at Baghdad airport, however, was a different level of escalation.
In addition to killing Suleimani it also killed Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, a key leader of Hashd
forces in Iraq. Like Suleimani, al-Muhandis was known for waging the long fight against ISIS.
(Despite this, the U.S. media only give credit to the U.S. and its clients who barely lifted
a finger in the fight against ISIS.)
On the surface of it, the strike was uncharacteristic of Trump. Here is a man who pledged
to pull the U.S. out of the Middle East turmoil -- turmoil for which the U.S and Israel bear
the primary responsibility. And yet he seems willing to order a strike that will guarantee
intensification of the conflict in the region, and even the deployment of more U.S.
forces.
Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda?
The first term of the Trump administration has revealed the extent to which the U.S. war
empire is run by the military-intelligence apparatus. There is not much a president -- even a
popular president like Barack Obama in his second term -- can do to change the course of
empire. It is not that Obama wanted to end U.S. wars in the region, but Trump has tried to
retreat from Middle East conflicts and yet he has been unable due to pressures not only from
the military-intelligence apparatus but also from their war advocates in the U.S. Congress
and Western media, D.C. think tanks and the human-rights industry. The pressures to preserve
the war agenda is too powerful on a U.S. president for it to cease in the foreseeable future.
But Trump has managed to start fewer new wars than his predecessors -- until this strike.
Trump's Obama Obsession
Trump in his foreign policy is obsessed with the legacy and image of Obama. He decided to
violate the Iran nuclear agreement (which carried the weight of international law after its
adoption by the UN Security Council) largely because he wanted to prove that he is tougher
than Obama, and also because he wanted an international agreement that carries his imprint.
Just as Trump relishes putting his name on buildings, hotels, and casinos he wants to put his
name on international agreements. His decision, to strike at a convoy carrying perhaps the
second most important person in Iran was presumably attached to an intelligence assessment
that calculated that Iran is too weakened and too fatigued to strike back directly at the
U.S.
Iran faced difficult choices in response to the assassination of Suleimani. On the one
hand, Iran would appear weak and vulnerable if it did not retaliate and that would only
invite more direct U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iranian targets.
On the other hand, the decision to respond in a large-scale attack on U.S. military or
diplomatic targets in the Middle East would invite an immediate massive U.S. strike inside
Iran. Such an attack has been on the books; the U.S military (and Israel, of course) have
been waiting for the right moment for the U.S. to destroy key strategic sites inside
Iran.
Furthermore, there is no question that the cruel U.S.-imposed sanctions on Iran have made
life difficult for the Iranian people and have limited the choices of the government, and
weakened its political legitimacy, especially in the face of vast Gulf-Western attempts to
exploit internal dissent and divisions inside Iran. (Not that dissent inside Iran is not
real, and not that repression by the regime is not real).
Nonetheless, if the Iranian regime were to open an all-out war against the U.S., this
would certainly cause great harm and damage to U.S. and Israeli interests.
Iran Sending Messages
In the last year, however, Iran successfully sent messages to Gulf regimes (through
attacks on oil shipping in the Gulf, for which Iran did not claim responsibility, nor did it
take responsibility for the pin-point attack on ARAMCO oil installations) that any future
conflict would not spare their territories.
That quickly reversed the policy orientations of both Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which
suddenly became weary of confrontation with Iran, and both are now negotiating (openly and
secretively) with the Iranian government. Ironically, both the UAE and Saudi regimes -- which
constituted a lobby for war against Iran in Western capitals -- are also eager to distance
themselves from U.S. military action against
Iran . And Kuwait quickly
denied that the U.S. used its territory in the U.S. attack on Baghdad airport, while
Qatar dispatched its foreign minister to Iran (officially to offer condolences over the death
of Suleimani, but presumably also to distance itself and its territory from the U.S.
attack).
The Iranian response was very measured and very specific. It was purposefully intended to
avoid causing U.S. casualties; it was intended more as a message of Iranian missile
capabilities and their pin point accuracy. And that message was not lost on Israel.
Hasan Nasrallah, the leader of Hizbullah, sent a more strident message. He basically
implied that it would be left to Iran's allies to engineer military responses. He also
declared a war on the U.S. military presence in the Middle East, although he was at pains to
stress that U.S. civilians are to be spared in any attack or retaliation.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/6yyC897UliI
Supporters of the Iran resistance axis have been quite angry in the wake of the
assassination. The status of Suleimani in his camp is similar to the status of Nasrallah
although Nasrallah -- due to his charisma and to his performance and the performance of his
party in the July 2006 war -- may have attained a higher status.
It would be easy for the Trump administration to ignite a Middle East war by provoking
Iran once again, and wrongly assuming that there are no limits to Iranian caution and
self-restraint. But if the U.S. (and Israel with it or behind it) were to start a Middle East
war, it will spread far wider and last far longer than the last war in Iraq, which the U.S.
is yet to complete.
As'ad AbuKhalil is a Lebanese-American professor of political science at California
State University, Stanislaus. He is the author of the "Historical Dictionary of Lebanon"
(1998), "Bin Laden, Islam and America's New War on Terrorism (2002), and "The Battle for
Saudi Arabia" (2004). He tweets as @asadabukhal
At the time, there was minimal Zionist influence over the Trump campaign
You did not pay attention. Moving embassy to Jerusalem and reneging on Obama's Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran nuclear deal) were Trump's campaign promises which he
delivered but many Trump supporters did not hear them as they were gobbling up the MAGA
stuff.
@utu Moving
the American embassy to Jerusalem happened by Law in 1995, adopted by the Senate
(93–5), and the House (374–37); Clinton, Bush and Obama (and Trump initially)
played a game of "waivers" to avoid going through with the move. "On June 5, 2017, the U.S.
Senate unanimously passed a resolution commemorating the 50th anniversary of reunification of
Jerusalem by 90-0. The resolution reaffirmed the Jerusalem Embassy Act and called upon the
President and all United States officials to abide by its provisions. On December 6, 2017,
Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital" [from wiki].
Obama's (and John Kerry's) Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran nuclear deal) was
dead on arrival no matter who became President in the 2016 Election. The worst part of the
JCPOA was indirect, as Joe Luria reported at Consortium News; Obama bought off Saudi
objections by agreeing to support the genocide in Yemen (Obama had already passed a National
Emergency (SANCTIONS) against Yemen in 2012; and droned American citizens, the al-Awlaki
family (including a 16 year old and an 8 year old) in multiple attacks between
2011-2017.)
Trump has prosecuted the Forever wars from Bush II and Obama viciously, but he is being
played by the neocons who run DC and America. Wars no longer end. Too much money is being
made.
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is ..."
Supporters of Donald Trump often make the point that he has not started any new wars. One
might observe that it has not been for lack of trying, as his cruise missile attacks on Syria
based on fabricated evidence and his recent assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani
have been indisputably acts of war. Trump also has enhanced troop levels both in the Middle
East and in Afghanistan while also increasing the frequency and lethality of armed drone
attacks worldwide.
Congress has been somewhat unseriously toying around with a tightening of the war powers act
of 1973 to make it more difficult for a president to carry out acts of war without any
deliberation by or authorization from the legislature. But perhaps the definition of war itself
should be expanded. The one area where Trump and his team of narcissistic sociopaths have been
most active has been in the imposition of sanctions with lethal intent. Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo has been explicit in his explanations that the assertion of "extreme pressure" on
countries like Iran and Venezuela is intended to make the people suffer to such an extent that
they rise up against their governments and bring about "regime change." In Pompeo's twisted
reckoning that is how places that Washington disapproves of will again become "normal
countries."
The sanctions can kill. Those imposed by the United States are backed up by the U.S.
Treasury which is able to block cash transfers going through the dollar denominated
international banking system. Banks that do not comply with America's imposed rules can
themselves be sanctioned, meaning that U.S. sanctions are de facto globally
applicable, even if foreign banks and governments do not agree with the policies that drive
them. It is well documented how sanctions that have an impact on the importation of medicines
have killed thousands of Iranians. In Venezuela, the effect of sanctions has been starvation as
food imports have been blocked, forcing a large part of the population to flee the country just
to survive.
The latest exercise of United States economic warfare has been directed against Iraq. In the
space of one week from December 29 th to January 3 rd , the American
military, which operates out of two major bases in Iraq, killed 25 Iraqi militiamen who were
part of the Popular Mobilization Units of the Iraqi Army. The militiamen had most recently been
engaged in the successful fight against ISIS. It followed up on that attack by killing
Soleimani, Iraqi militia general Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and eight other Iraqis in a drone
strike near Baghdad International Airport. As the attacks were not approved in any way by the
Iraqi government, it was no surprise that rioting followed and the Iraqi Parliament voted to
remove all foreign troops from its soil. The decree was signed off on by Prime Minister Adel
Abdul Mahdi, based on the fact that the U.S. military was in Iraq at the invitation of the
country's government and that invitation had just been revoked by parliament.
That Iraq is to say the least unstable is attributable to the ill-advised U.S. invasion of
2003. The persistence of U.S. forces in the country is ostensibly to aid in the fight against
ISIS, but the real reason is to serve as a check on Iranian influence in Iraq, which is a
strategic demand made by Israel and not responsive to any actual American interest. Indeed, the
Iraqi government is probably closer politically to Tehran than to Washington, though the neocon
line that the country is dominated by the Iranians is far from true.
Washington's response to the legitimate Iraqi demand that its troops should be removed
consisted of threats. When Prime Minister Mahdi spoke with Pompeo on the phone and asked for
discussions and a time table to create a "withdrawal mechanism" the Secretary of State made it
clear that there would be no negotiations. A State Department written response entitled "The
U.S. Continued Partnership with Iraq" asserted that American troops are in Iraq to serve as a
"force for good" in the Middle East and that it is "our right" to maintain "appropriate force
posture" in the region.
The Iraqi position also immediately produced presidential threats and tweets about
"sanctions like they have never seen," with the implication that the U.S. was more than willing
to wreck the Iraqi economy if it did not get its way. The latest threat to emerge involves
blocking Iraq access to its New York federal reserve bank account, where international oil
sale revenue is kept, creating a devastating cash crunch in Iraq's financial system that might
indeed destroy the Iraqi economy. If taking steps to ruin a country economically is not
considered warfare by other means it is difficult to discern what might fit that
description.
After dealing with Iraq, the Trump Administration turned its guns on one of its oldest and
closest allies. Great Britain, like most of the other European signatories to the 2015 Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has been reluctant to withdraw from the agreement over
concern that Iran will as a result decide to develop nuclear weapons. According to the
Guardian , a United States representative from the National Security Council named
Richard Goldberg,
had visited London recently to make clear to the British government that if it does not
follow the American lead and withdraw from the JCPOA and reapply sanctions it just might be
difficult to work out a trade agreement with Washington post-Brexit. It is a significant threat
as part of the pro-Brexit vote clearly was derived from a Trump pledge to make up for some of
the anticipated decline in European trade by increasing U.K. access to the U.S. market. Now the
quid pro quo is clear: Britain, which normally does in fact follow the Washington lead
in foreign policy, will now be expected to be completely on board all of the time and
everywhere, particularly in the Middle East.
During his visit, Goldberg told the BBC: "The question for prime minister Johnson is: 'As
you are moving towards Brexit what are you going to do post-31 January as you come to
Washington to negotiate a free-trade agreement with the United States?' It's absolutely in
[your] interests and the people of Great Britain's interests to join with President Trump, with
the United States, to realign your foreign policy away from Brussels, and to join the maximum
pressure campaign to keep all of us safe."
And there is an interesting back story on Richard Goldberg, a John Bolton
protégé anti-Iran hardliner, who threatened the British on behalf of Trump. James
Carden, writing at The
Nation , posits "Consider the following scenario: A Washington, DC–based,
tax-exempt organization that bills itself as a think tank dedicated to the enhancement of a
foreign country's reputation within the United States, funded by billionaires closely aligned
with said foreign country, has one of its high-ranking operatives (often referred to as
'fellows') embedded within the White House national security staff in order to further the
oft-stated agenda of his home organization, which, as it happens, is also paying his salary
during his year-long stint there. As it happens, this is exactly what the pro-Israel think tank
the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) reportedly achieved in an arrangement
brokered by former Trump national security adviser John Bolton."
The FDD senior adviser in question, who was placed on the National Security Council, was
Richard Goldberg. FDD is largely funded by Jewish American billionaires including vulture fund
capitalist Paul Singer and Home Depot partner Bernard Marcus. Its officers meet regularly with
Israeli government officials and the organization is best known for its unrelenting effort to
bring about war with Iran. It has relentlessly pushed for a recklessly militaristic U.S. policy
directed against Iran and also more generally in the Middle East. It is a reliable mouthpiece
for Israel and, inevitably, it has never been required to register under the Foreign Agents
Registration Act of 1938.
To be sure, Trump also has other neocons advising him on Iran,
including David Wurmser, another Bolton associate, who has the president's ear and is a
consultant to the National Security Council. Wurmser has recently submitted a series of memos
to the White House advocating a policy of "regime disruption" with the Islamic Republic that
will destabilize it and eventually lead to a change of government. He may have played a key
role in giving the green light to the assassination of Soleimani.
The good news, if there is any, is that Goldberg
resigned on January 3rd, allegedly because the war against Iran was not developing fast
enough to suit him and FDD, but he is symptomatic of the many neoconservative hawks who have
infiltrated the Trump Administration at secondary and tertiary levels, where much of the
development and implementation of policy actually takes place. It also explains that when it
comes to Iran and the irrational continuation of a significant U.S. military presence in the
Middle East, it is Israel and its Lobby that are steering the ship of state.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National
Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that
seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is[email protected] .
2] "Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and
counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very
cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be "reformed"or "improved",simply because of
their innate criminal nature." onebornfree http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/
Therefor, if you have [always criminal] governments in the first place, then, as night
follows day, you must have [always criminal] government-made wars .
US President Donald Trump chose as the deputy chairwoman [also appointed by Trump, the
current chairman is Steve Feinberg] of the intelligence advisory board a Jewish national
security expert who is well known in the pro-Israel national security community.
Ravich, a former deputy national security adviser to vice president Dick Cheney, is a
senior adviser to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, an influential hawkish
pro-Israel think tank. She is also a senior adviser to the Chertoff Group, founded by Michael
Chertoff, a homeland security secretary in the George W. Bush administration, and has worked
with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
She has also worked with the pro-Israel community helping to raise money for Israel
Bonds.
It is evident that Trump will win re-election and go to war with Iran afterwards. All this
Impeachment mania is simply theatre created by Jews from both sides of the political spectrum
in order to prepare Trump for the Zionist vs. Iran war.
The Greater Israel Project has always been the main objective of American foreign policy.
Now, Israel hacked the 2016 election and selected Trump as he attains the required
personality, theatre and following in order to deepen the control towards the masses.
@Reality
Check Trump destroyed the Republican contenders in the 2016 Primaries, easily. At the
time, there was minimal Zionist influence over the Trump campaign – the Jewish factor
was heavily focused on the other Republican rivals. Trump won the Primaries in a generic and
motivational fashion. Afterwards, the Zionists took over Trump and related entities. The real
MAGA Trump factor ended once the Primaries were won – enter the Zionists.
Israel rigged the election by fixing the actual voting numbers.
Robert Mercer and Zuckerberg rigged the election by compromising the masses on Facebook.
For the government of one country to designate another country's armed forces as a "terrorist
organization" is essentially a declaration of war. When in April of 2019 Netanyahu claimed
credit for Trump's designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization, he created the
pseudo-law framework which became part of the justification for the Israeli-US war crime of 2
Jan. 2020.
Now the pressure is being placed squarely on the NATO countries, but especially Canada, to
follow the Netanyahu-Trump lead by designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization. The
Canadian branch of the ADL has even gone as far as giving an ultimatum to Justin Trudeau, an
ultimatum to make the designation within a month or else. Is the agenda to get NATO ensnared
in a US war against Iran to serve Israel?
Ever since the misrepresentation of the events of 9/11 we have been engulfed in a massive
propaganda campaign aimed at giving the appearance of legitimacy to pseudo-laws founded in
major war crimes extending from Sept. of 2001 until today. The continuing reign of the
ongoing lies and crimes of 9/11 has brought us to this point where the Axis of Deception,
whose mascot of human degradation is Jeffrey Epstein, stands against the Axis of Resistance.
In recent days a guiding spirit of the Axis of Resistance has become the martyred holy
warrior, Qassem Soleimani.
Sanctions can kill and cause great human suffering. Sanctions are presented as a humane
alternative to war, cheaper and means to avoid military action with uncertain consequences.
But history warns that sanctions aimed at bringing about capitulation or regime change lead
to full-scale conflict. If they are too effective or ineffective one side must escalate. https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
Right TG, traditionally, as you said up there first, and legally too, under the supreme law
of the land. Economic sanctions are subject to the same UNSC supervision as forcible
coercion.
UN Charter Article 41: "The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the
use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon
the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or
partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio,
and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations."
US "sanctions" require UNSC authorization. Unilateral sanctions are nothing but illegal
coercive intervention, as the non-intervention principle is customary international law,
which is US federal common law.
The G-192, that is, the entire world, has affirmed this law. That's why the US is trying
to defund UNCTAD as redundant with the WTO (UNCTAD is the G-192's primary forum.) In any
case, now that the SCO is in a position to enforce this law at gunpoint with its
overwhelmingly superior missile technology, the US is going to get stomped and tased until it
complies and stops resisting.
Sanctions are the modern day equivalent of laying a siege on the enemy's castle. Such tactic
has been an integral part of warfare ever since the first castles were built by man.
This 21st century crusade against the muslim world is fast approaching its final climax.
Everything is going as planned by the ruler-wannabes and the whole of middle earth seems
destined to be theirs for once and for all.
We are all contemporary witnesses to the war campaign of the MILLENNIUM that was
prescribed by the bible and the tora and few recognize the historic significance.
Will we get to see which of the New Testament and the Tora prevails, not that we want to,
but because we have no choice but to see? Or will there be a rarest of rare black swan event
that will produce an unanticipated course of history?
The war on Iran is in the formative stage with sanctions and the murder of Soleimani who was
helping defeat the AL CIADA aka ISIS terrorists who were created and funded and armed by the
US and Israel and Britain and NATO and for that reason he was murdered...
Terrific article, but I would not use the word "infiltrate" when speaking of theneocons in
the Trump administration. They are there by open invitation by the biggest neo-con of them
all – Trump.
If you review newspaper articles concerning Iran from 2003 onward, you see very clearly the
slow escalation to war and that that war with Iran is inevitable no matter who is in office.
In my opinion, that is why Trump is in office. Maybe they thought there would be too much lag
time with theother Republican or Democrat candidates when he was running in 2016, but if he
gets re-elected, we will see war with Iran. That is thepurpose of the sanctions. To provoke
not only thepeople to war against the gov't, but to provoke the government to war. We did it
to the Japanese, we did it to Iraq during Saddam Hussein's time, and we are doing it now.
It is pretty obvious that they wish to keep the mid east in a state of complete and utter
chaos,. That is what Israel wants, and that is exactly what they are going to get. Israel has
been trying to help themselves to the land of other countries for many years. You cannot do
that with a vialbe and unified country. You have to break it all up first – turn it
tribal.
But when it is all over, and the Shia Muslims who hate us now, hate us more after their
countries have been all bombedto smithereens, and when China and Russia, who are biding their
time, are strong enough, we will eventually get a taste our just desserts.
I hope that if any Iranian or English people are reading this, that they know that none of
this was the idea of the average American. That we have actually lost our nation and have no
control over it anymore. And that the only Americans left supporting this foreign "policy"
are Evangelical holy rollers from the South and Midwest, dinosaur Baby Boomers who still
think it is civil defense, dupes and suckers who buy into the "support the troops" cult of
military, and the slowly decreasing number of misinformed and brainwashed Americans who get
their "news" from the (((corporate media))).
@anastasia
Agree that "It is pretty obvious that they wish to keep the mid east in a state of complete
and utter chaos ." In "Greater Israel and the Balkanization of the Middle East : Oded Yinon's
Strategy for
Israel " globalresearch.ca ,
Adeyinke Makinde argues that balkanization has always formed a part of the rationalization of
political Zionism stating "After the establishment of Israel in 1948 , a national policy of
weakening Arab and Muslim states , balkanising them, or keeping them under a neo-colonial
state of affairs has persisted . The prevailing logic was and always has been that any stable
, nationalist government in the Arab world poses an existential threat to Israel ."
"... In the larger global picture, if the U.S. is to find its own balance in the contemporary world, Friedman argues that the seemingly-endless instability in the Middle East is the first and foremost problem that must be solved. Iran is a major problem here, but so is Israel, and Friedman argues that the US must find the path toward "quietly distanc[ing] itself from Israel" (p.6). ..."
"... This course of action regarding Iran and Israel (and other actors in the Muslim world, including Pakistan and Turkey) is, in Friedman's geopolitical perspective, not so much a matter of supporting U.S. global hegemony as it is recognizing the larger course that the U.S. will be compelled to take. ..."
"... So, it's back to Plan A for the Democrats and the "Left" that would be laughably absurd if it wasn't so reactionary, to get the neoliberal/ neoconservative endless-war agenda back on track, so that the march toward Iran can continue sooner rather than later. For now, the more spectacular the failure of this impeachment nonsense, the better! ..."
Let's be clear, there is a difference between substituting geopolitical power calculations
for a universal perspective on the good of humanity, and, on the other hand, recognizing that
the existing layout of the world has to be taken into account in attempts to open up a true
politics. (My larger perspective on the problem of "opening" is presented in the long essay,
"The Fourth Hypothesis," at counterpunch.org.)
Personally, I find the geopolitical analyses of George Friedman very much worthwhile to
consider, especially when he is looking at things long-range, as in his books The Next 100
Years and The Next Decade. The latter was published at the beginning of 2012, and so we are
coming to the close of the ten-year period that Friedman discusses.
One of the major arguments that Friedman makes in The Next Decade is that the
United States will have to reach some sort of accommodation with Iran and its regional
ambitions. The key to this, Friedman argues, is to bring about some kind of balance of power
again, such as existed before Iraq was torn apart.
This is the key in general to continued U.S. hegemony in the world, in Friedman's view --
regional balances that keep regional powers tied up and unable to rise on the world stage. (An
especially interesting example here is that Friedman says that Poland will be built up as a
bulwark between Russia and Germany.)
In the larger global picture, if the U.S. is to find its own balance in the contemporary
world, Friedman argues that the seemingly-endless instability in the Middle East is the first
and foremost problem that must be solved. Iran is a major problem here, but so is Israel, and
Friedman argues that the US must find the path toward "quietly distanc[ing] itself from
Israel" (p.6).
This course of action regarding Iran and Israel (and other actors in the Muslim world,
including Pakistan and Turkey) is, in Friedman's geopolitical perspective, not so much a matter
of supporting U.S. global hegemony as it is recognizing the larger course that the U.S. will be
compelled to take.
(As the founder, CEO, and "Chief Intelligence Officer" of Stratfor, Friedman aimed to
provide "non-ideological" strategic intelligence. My understanding of "non-ideological" is that
the analysis was not formulated to suit the agendas of the two mainstream political parties in
the U.S. However, my sense is that Friedman does believe that U.S. global hegemony is on the
whole good for the world.)
In his book that came out before The Next Decade (2011), The Next 100
Years (2009), Friedman makes the case that the U.S. will not be seriously challenged
globally for decades to come -- in fact, all the way until about 2080!
Just to give a different spin to something I said earlier, and that I've tried to emphasize
in my articles since March 2016: questions of mere power are not questions of politics.
Geopolitics is not politics, either -- in my terminology, it is "anti-politics."
For my part, I am not interested in supporting U.S. hegemony, not in the present and not in
the future, and for the most part not in the past, either.
For the moment, let us simply say that the historical periods of the U.S. that are more
supportable -- because they make some contribution, however flawed, to the greater, universal,
human project -- are either from before the U.S. entered the road of seeking to compete with
other "great powers" on the world stage, or quite apart from this road.
In my view, the end of U.S. global hegemony and, for that matter, the end of any "great
nation-state" global hegemony, is a condition sine qua non of a human future that is just and
sustainable. So, again, the brilliance that George Friedman often brings to geopolitical
analysis is to be understood in terms of a coldly-realistic perspective, not a warmly-normative
one.)
Of course, this continued U.S. hegemony depends on certain "wise" courses of action being
taken by U.S. leaders (Friedman doesn't really get into the question of what might be behind
these leaders), including a "subtle" approach to the aforementioned questions of Israel and
Iran.
Obviously, anything associated with Donald Trump is not going to be overly subtle! On the
other hand, here we are almost at the end of Friedman's decade, so perhaps the time for
subtlety has passed, and the U.S. is compelled to be a bit heavy-handed if there is to be any
chance of extricating itself from the endless quagmire.
However, there's a certain fly, a rather large one, in the ointment that seems to have
eluded Friedman's calculations: "the rise of China."
It isn't that Friedman avoids the China question, not at all; Friedman argues, however, that
by 2020 China will not only not be contending with the United States to have the largest
economy in the world, but instead that China will fragment, perhaps even devolve into civil
war, because of deep inequalities between the relatively prosperous coastal urban areas, and
the rural interior.
Certainly I know from study, and many conversations with people in China, this was a real
concern going into the 2010s and in the first half of the decade.
The chapter dealing with all this in The Next 100 Years (Ch. 5) is titled, "China
2020: Paper Tiger," the latter term being one that Chairman Mao used regarding U.S.
imperialism. Friedman writes of another "figure like Mao emerg[ing] to close the country
off from the outside, [to] equalize the wealth -- or poverty " (p.7).
Being an anti-necessitarian in philosophy, I certainly believe anything can happen in social
matters, but it seems as though President Xi Jinping and the current leadership of the
Communist Party of China have, at least for the time being, managed to head off fragmentation
at the pass, so to speak.
Friedman argued that the "pass" that China especially had to deal with is unsustainable
growth rates; but it appears that China has accomplished this, by purposely slowing its economy
down.
One of the things that Friedman is especially helpful with, in his larger geopolitical
analysis, is understanding the role that naval power plays in sustaining U.S. hegemony. (In
global terms, such power is what keeps the neoliberal "free market" running, and this power is
far from free.)
*
... ... ...
Two of the best supporters of Trump's stated agenda are Tucker Carlson and Steve Hilton.
Neither of them pull any punches on this issue when it comes to Republicans, and both of them
go some distance beyond Trump in stating an explicitly anti-war agenda.
They perhaps do not entirely fit the mold of leftist anti-imperialism as it existed from the
1890s through the Sixties (as in the political decade, perhaps 1964-1974 or so) and 1970s, but
they do in fact fit this mold vastly better than almost any major figure of the Democratic
Party, with the possible exceptions of Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, and Andrew Yang. (But
none of them has gone as far as Trump on this question!)
Certainly Elizabeth Warren is no exception, and at the moment of this writing she has made
the crucial turn toward sticking the knife back into Bernie's back. That is her job, in my
view, and part of it is to seem close to Bernie's positions (whatever their defects, which I'll
discuss elsewhere), at least the ones that are more directly "economic," while winking at the
ruling class.
There are a few things Carlson and Hilton say on the Iran situation and the Middle East in
general that I don't agree with. But in the main I think both are right on where these issues
are concerned.
As I've quoted Carlson a number of times previously, and as I also want to put forward
Hilton as an important voice for a politics subservient to neither the liberal nor the
conservative establishments, here let me quote what Hilton said in the midst of the Iran
crisis, on January 5, 2020:
The best thing America can do to put the Middle East on a path
that leads to more democracy, less terrorism, human rights and economic growth is to get the
hell out of there while showing an absolute crystal clear determination to defend American
interests with force whenever they are threatened.
That doesn't mean not doing anything, it means intervening only in ways that help
America.
It means responding only to attacks on Americans disproportionately as a deterrent, just as
we saw this week and it means finally accepting that it's not our job to fix the Middle East
from afar.
The only part of this I take exception to is the "intervening only in ways that help
America"-bit -- that opens the door to exactly the kinds of problems that Hilton wants the U.S.
to avoid, besides the (to me, more important) fact that it is just morally wrong to think it is
acceptable to intervene if it is in one's "interests."
My guess is that Hilton thinks that there is some built-in utilitarian or pragmatic calculus
that means the morally-problematic interventions will not occur. I do not see where this has
ever worked, but more importantly, this is where philosophy is important, theoretical work and
abstract thinking are important.
It used to be that the Left was pretty good at this sort of thing, and there were some
thoughtful conservatives who weren't bad, either. (A decent number of the latter,
significantly, come from the Catholic intellectual tradition.) Now there are still a few of the
latter, and there are ordinary people who are "thoughtful conservatives" in their "unschooled
way" -- which is often better! -- but the Left has sold its intellectual soul along with its
political soul.
That's a story for elsewhere (I have told parts of it in previous articles in this series);
the point here is that the utilitarianism and "pragmatism" of merely calculating interests is
not nearly going to cut it. (I have partly gone into this here because Hilton also advocates
"pragmatism" in his very worthwhile book, Positive Populism -- it is the "affirmative" other
side to Tucker Carlson's critical, "negative" expose, Ship of Fools.)
The wonderful philosophical pragmatism of William James is another matter; this is important
because James, along with his friend Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain), were leading figures of the
Anti-Imperialist League back in the 1890s, when the U.S. establishment was beating the drums
loudly to get into the race with Europeans for colonies.
They were for never getting "in" -- and of course they were not successful, which is why
"get the hell out" is as important as anything people can say today.
What an insane world when the U.S. president says this and the political establishment
opposes him, and "progressives" and "the Left" join in with the denunciations!
It has often been argued that the major utilitarian philosophers, from Bentham and Mill to
Peter Singer, have implicit principles that go beyond the utilitarian calculus; I agree with
this, and I think this is true of Steve Hilton as well.
In this light, allow me to quote a little more from the important statement he made on his
Fox News Channel program, "The Next Revolution," on January 5; all of this is stuff I entirely
agree with, and that expresses some very good principles:
The West's involvement in the
Middle East has been a disaster from the start and finally, with President Trump, America is in
a position to bring it to an end. We don't need their oil and we don't need their problems.
Finally, we have a U.S. president who gets that and wants to get out. There are no prospects
for Middle East peace as long as we are there.
We're never going to defeat the ideology of Islamist terror as long as these countries are
basket cases and one of the reasons they are basket cases is that our preposterous foreign
policy establishment with monumental arrogance have treated the middle east like some chess
game played out in the board rooms in Washington and London.
– [foxnews.com, transcribed by Yael Halon]
So then there is the usual tittering about this and that regarding Carlson and Hilton from
liberal and progressive Democrats and leftists who support the Democrats, and it seems to me
that there is one major reason why there is this foolish tittering: It is because these
liberals and leftists really don't care about, for example, the destruction of Libya, or the
murder of Berta Caceres.
Or, maybe they do care, but they have convinced themselves that these things have to swept
under the rug in the name of defeating the pure evil of Trump. What this amounts to, in the
"nationalist" discourse, is that Trump is some kind of nationalist (as he has said numerous
times), perhaps of an "isolationist" sort, while the Democrats are in fact what can be called
"nationalists of the neoliberal/neoconservative compact."
My liberal and leftist friends (some of them Maoists and post-Maoists and Trotskyists or
some other kinds of Marxists or purported radicals -- feminists or antifa or whatever) just
cannot see, it simply appears to be completely beyond the realm of their imaginations, that the
latter kind of nationalism is much worse and qualitatively worse than what Trump represents,
and it completely lacks the substantial good elements of Trump's agenda.
But hey, don't worry my liberal and leftist friends, it is hard to imagine that Joe Biden's
"return to normalcy" won't happen at some point -- it will take not only an immense movement to
even have a chance of things working out otherwise, but a movement that likes of which is
beyond everyone's imagination at this point -- a movement of a revolutionary politics that
remains to be invented, as all real politics are, by the masses.
Liberals and leftists have little to worry about here, they're okay with a Deep State
society with a bullshit-democratic veneer and a neoliberal world order; this set-up doesn't
really affect them all that much, not negatively at any rate, and the deplorables can just go
to hell.
*
The Left I grew up with was the Sixties Left, and they used to be a great source of
historical memory, and of anti-imperialism, civil rights, and ordinary working-people
empowerment.
The current Left, and whatever array of Democratic-Party supporters, have received their
marching orders, finally, from commander Pelosi (in reality, something more like a lieutenant),
so the two weeks or so of "immense concern" about Iran has given way again to the
extraordinarily-important and solemn work of impeachment.
But then, impeachment is about derailing the three main aspects of Trump's agenda, so you
see how that works. Indeed, perhaps the way this is working is that Trump did in fact head off,
whatever one thinks of the methods, a war with Iran (at this time! – and I do think this
is but a temporary respite), or more accurately, a war between Iran and Israel that the U.S.
would almost certainly be sucked into immediately.
So, it's back to Plan A for the Democrats and the "Left" that would be laughably absurd if
it wasn't so reactionary, to get the neoliberal/ neoconservative endless-war agenda back on
track, so that the march toward Iran can continue sooner rather than later. For now, the more
spectacular the failure of this impeachment nonsense, the better!
Bill Martin is a
philosopher and musician, retired from DePaul University. He is completing a book with the
title, "The Trump Clarification: Disruption at the Edge of the System (toward a theory)." His
most recent albums are "Raga Chaturanga" (Bill Martin + Zugzwang; Avant-Bass 3) and "Emptiness,
Garden: String Quartets nos. 1 and 2 (Ryokucha Bass Guitar Quartet; Avant-Bass 4). He lives in
Salina, Kansas, and plays bass guitar with The Radicles.
Dungroanin ,
I have read through finally. And comments too.
My opinion is Bill Martin is on the ball except for one personage- Hilton. If he is
Camerons Hilton and architect of the Brexit referendum – for which he is rewarded with
a 'seat at the table' of the crumbling Empire. The Strafor man too is just as complicit in
the Empires wickedness.
But I'll let Bill off with that because he mentioned the Anti-Imperialist Mark Twain
– always a joy to be reminded of Americas Dickens.
On Trump – he didn't use the Nuclear codes 10 minutes after getting them as warned
by EVERYONE. Nor start a war with RocketMan, or Russia in Syria, or in Ukraine or with the
Chinese using the proxy Uighars, or push through with attempted Bay of Pigs in Venezuela or
just now Hong Kong. The Wall is not built and the ineffectual ripoff Obamacare version of a
NHS is still there.
Judge by deeds not words.
Soleimani aside – He may have stopped the drive for war. Trumps direct contact with
fellow world leaders HAS largely bypassed the war mongering State Department and also the
Trillion dollar tax free Foundations set up last century to deliver the world Empire, that
has so abused the American peoples and environment. He probably wasn't able to stop
Bolivia.
The appointments of various players were not necessarily in his hands as Assad identified-
the modern potus is merely a CEO/Chair of a board of directors who are put into place by the
special interests who pour billions, 10's of billions into getting their politicians elected.
They determine 'National Interests'. All he can do is accept their appointment and give them
enough rope to hang themselves – which most have done!
These are that fight clubs rules.
On the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation – after 20 full years of working towards
cohesion- they have succeeded. Iran is due to become a full member – once it is free of
UN sanctions, which is why Trump was forced into pulling the treaty with them, so that
technicality could stop that membership. China is not having it nor is Russia – Putins
clear statement re the 'international rules' not being mandatory for them dovetails with the
US position of Exceptionality. Checkmate.
As for the Old Robber Baron Banker Pirates idea that they should be allowed a Maritime
Empire as consolation- ha ha ha, pull the other one.
The ancient sea trading routes from Africa to China were active for thousands of years
before the Europeans turned up and used unequal power to disrupt and pillage at their hearts
content.
What made that possible was of course explained in the brilliant Guns, Germs and
Steel.
These ancients have ALL these and are equal or advanced in all else including Space, Comms
and AI. A navy is not so vital when even nuclear subs are visible from low orbit satellites
except in the deepest trenches – not a safe place to hide for months and also pretty
crowded with all the other subs trying to hide there. As for Aircraft carrier groups –
just build an island! Diego Garcia has a rival.
Double Checkmate.
The Empire is Dead. Long live the Empire.
Dungroanin ,
And this is hilarious about potus turning the tables on the brass who tried to drag him into
the 'tank'.
'Grab the damn fainting couch. Trump told the assembled military leaders who had presided
over a military stalemate in Afghanistan and the rise of ISIS as "losers." Not a one of them
had the balls to stand up, tell him to his face he was wrong and offer their resignation.
Nope. They preferred to endure such abuse in order to keep their jobs. Pathetic.
This excerpt in the Washington Post tells the reader more about the corruption of the Deep
State and their mindset than it does about Trump's so-called mental state. Trump acted no
differently in front of these senior officers and diplomats than he did on the campaign
trail. He was honest. That is something the liars in Washington cannot stomach. '
Rhys Jaggar ,
I am not an expert on US Constitutional Law, but is there any legal mechanism for a US
President to hold a Referendum in the way that the UK held a 'Brexit Referendum' and Scotland
held an 'Independence Referendum'?
How would a US Referendum in 'Getting the hell out of the Middle East, bringing our boys
and girls home before the year is out' play out, I wonder?
That takes the argument away from arch hawks like Bolton et al and puts it firmly in the
ambit of Joe Schmo of Main Street, Oshkosh
wardropper ,
Great idea.
Main problem is that most Americans are brought up to think their government is separate from
themselves, and should not be seriously criticized.
By "criticized", I mean, taken to task in a way which actually puts them on a playing field
where they are confronted by real people.
Shouting insults at the government from the rooftops is simply greeted with indulgent smiles
from the guilty elite.
Richard Le Sarc ,
George Friedman is a bog standard Zionist, therefore, out of fear, a virulent Sinophobe,
because the Zionists will never control China as they do the Western slave regimes. China
surpassed the USA as the world' s largest economy in 2014, on the PPP calculus that the
CIA,IMF and just about everyone uses. It' s growing three times as fast as the USA, too. The
chance of China fragmenting by 2020 is minuscule, certainly far less than that of the USA.
The Chinese have almost totally eliminated poverty, and will raise the living standard of all
to a ' middle income' by 2049. It is, however, the genocidal policy of the USA, on which it
expend billions EVERY year, to do its diabolical worst to attempt to foment and foster such a
hideous fate inside China, by supporting vermin like the Hong Kong fascist thugs, the Uighur
salafist terrorist butchers, the medieval theocrats of the Dalai clique and separatist
movements in Inner Mongolia, ' Manchuria', Taiwan, even Guandong and Guangxi. It takes a real
Western thug to look forward to the ghastly suffering that these villainous ambitions would
unleash.
Antonym ,
In RlS's nut shell: China can annex area but Israel: no way!
Dungroanin ,
Which area is China looking to annex?
Richard Le Sarc ,
Ant is a pathological Zionist liar, but you can see his loyalty to ' Eretz Yisrael' , '
..from the Nile to the Euphrates', and ' cleansed' of non-Jews, can' t you.
alsdkjf ,
I'm surprised that this author can even remember the counter culture of the 60s given his
Trump love.
Yet more Trumpism from Off Guardian. One doesn't have to buy into the politics of post DLC
corporate owned DNC to know Trump for what he is. A fascist.
It's just amazing this Trump "left". Pathetic.
Antonym ,
Trump .. better than HRC but the guy is totally hypnotized by the level of the New York stock
exchanges: even his foreign policy is improvised around that. He simply thinks higher is
a proof of better forgetting that 90% of Americans don't own serious quantity of stock
and that levels are manipulated by big players and the FED. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/08/business/economy/stocks-economy.html
Look at his dealing with China: tough as much as the US stock market stays benign in the
short term. Same for Iran etc.
Sure, he is crippled by Pelosi & the FBI / CIA, but he is also by his own stock
dependent mind. Might be the reason he is still alive ???
alsdkjf ,
Trump crippled by the CIA? Trump?
I mean the fascist jerk appointed ex CIA torture loving Pompeo to replace swamp creature
oil tycoon as Secretary of State, no?
He appointed torture queen within the CIA to become CIA Director, no?
He went to the CIA headquarters on day one of his Administration to lavish praise, no?
He took on ex CIA Director Woolsey as advisor on foreign policy during his campaign,
no?
I tell ya that Trump is a real adversary of the CIA!
Roger that. Trump appoints a dominatrix as DCI. Only a masochist or a sadist would Dream of
Gina..you know the head of the torture squad under Bush. Otherwise nice girl. PompAss is a
total clown but a dangerous one who even makes John Bolton look sane. Now that's scary!
This guy is Hilary Clinton in drag. The only thing missing is the evil triumphalist cackle
after whacking Soleimani. Maybe it wasn't recorded.
So much for "draining the swamp". The Whitehouse has become an even bigger swamp.
my take from this article:
There are, among the murderers and assassins in Washington, a couple of characters who appear
to have 2% of human DNA.
They author may confirm.
two ,
"israel is right in the cen "
sorry, the muderous regime israel has repeatedly proven, it's never never right . please
avoid this usage.
three ,
There are 53 or 54 'I's in the article, including his partner's Is. The author may confirm.
Dungroanin ,
Phew!
That is a lot of words mate. Fingers must be sore. I won't comment more until trying to
re-read again except quote this:
"Being an anti-necessitarian in philosophy,.."
I must say i had a wtf moment at that point see ya later.
paul ,
The idea that Trump's recent actions in the Middle East were part of some incredibly cunning
plan to avoid war with Iran, strikes me as somewhat implausible, to put it (very) charitably.
Even Hitler didn't want war. He wanted to achieve his objectives without fighting. When
that didn't work, war was Plan B. Trump probably has very little actual control over foreign
policy. He is surrounded by people who have been plotting and scheming against him from long
before he was elected. He heads a chaotic and dysfunctional administration of billionaires,
chancers, grifters, conmen, superannuated generals, religious nut jobs, swamp creatures,
halfwits and outright criminals, lurching from one crisis and one fiasco to the next. Some of
these people like Bolton were foisted upon him by Adelson and various other backers and wire
pullers, but that is not to absolve Trump of personal responsibility.
Competing agencies which are a law unto themselves have been free to pursue their own turf
wars at the expense of anything remotely resembling a rational and coherent strategy. So have
quite low level bureaucrats, formulating and implementing their own policies with little
regard for the White House. In Syria, the Pentagon, the CIA, and the State Department went
their own way, each supporting competing and mutually antagonistic factions and terrorist
groups. Agreements that were reached with Russia over Syria, for example, were deliberately
sabotaged by Ashton Carter in 24 hours. Likewise, Bolton did everything he could to wreck
Trump's delicate negotiations with N. Korea.
paul ,
Seen in this light, US policy (or the absence of any coherent policy) is more understandable.
What passes for US leadership is the worst in its history, even given a very low bar.
Arrogant, venal, corrupt, delusional, irredeemably ignorant, and ideologically driven. The
only positive thing that can be said is that the alternative (Clinton) would probably have
been even worse, if that is possible.
That may also be the key to understanding the current situation. For all his pandering to
Israel, Trump is more of a self serving unprincipled opportunist than a true Neocon/ Zionist
believer in the mould of Pence, Bolton and Pompeo. For that reason he is not trusted by the
Zionist Power Elite. He is too much of a loose cannon. They will take all his Gives, like
Jerusalem and the JCPOA, but without any gratitude.
It has taken them a century of plotting, scheming and manoeuvring to achieve their
political, financial, and media stranglehold over the US. but America is a wasting asset and
they are under time pressure. It is visibly declining and losing its influence. And the
parasite will find it difficult to find a similar host. Who else is going to give Israel
billions a year in tribute, unlimited free weaponry and diplomatic cover? Russia? Are Chinese
troops "happy to die for Israel" asUS ones are (according to their general)?
paul ,
And they are way behind schedule. Assad was supposed to be dead by now, and Syria another
defenceless failed state, broken up into feuding little cantons, with Israel expanding into
the south of the country. The main event, the war with Iran, should have started lond ago.
That is the reason for the impeachment circus. This is not intended to be resolved one way
or the other. It is intended to drag on indefinitely, for months and years, to distract and
weaken Trump and make it possible to extract what they want. One of the reasons Trump agreed
to the murder of Soleimani and his Iraqi opposite number was to appease some Republican
senators like Graham whose support is essential to survive impeachment. They were the ones
who wanted it, along with Bolton and Netanyahu.
paul ,
It is instructive that all the main players in the impeachment circus are Jews, under
Sanhedrin Chief Priests Schiff and Nadler, apart from a few token goys thrown in to make up
the numbers. That even goes for those defending Trump.
Richard Le Sarc ,
Don' t forget that Lebanon up to the Litani is the patrimony of the Jewish tribes of Asher
and Naphtali, and, as Smotrich, Deputy Speaker of the Knesset, said on Israeli TV a few years
ago, ' Damascus belongs to the Jews'.
bevin ,
" China will fragment, perhaps even devolve into civil war, because of deep inequalities
between the relatively prosperous coastal urban areas, and the rural interior."
This is not Bill, but Bill's mate the Stratcor geopolitical theorist for hire.
What is happening in the world is that the only empire the globe, as a whole, has ever
seen- the pirate kingdom that the Dutch, then the British and finally the US, leveraged out
of the plunder and conquest of America -the maritime empire, of sea routes and navies is
under challenge by a revival of the Eurasian proto-empires that preceded it and drove its
merchants and princes on the Atlantic coast, to sea.
We know who the neo-liberals are the current iteration of the gloomy philosophies of the
Scots Enlightenment, (Cobbett's 'Scotch Feelosophy') utilitarianism in its crudest form and
the principles of necessary inequalities, from the Austrian School back to the various crude
racisms which became characteristic of the C19th.
The neo-cons are the latest expression of the maritime powers' fear of Eurasia and its
interior lines of communication. Besides which the importance of navies and of maritime
agility crumble.
Bill mentions that China has not got much of a navy. I'm not so sure about that, but isn't it
becoming clear that navies-except to shipyards, prostitutes and arms contractors- are no
longer of sovereign importance? There must be missile commanders in China drooling over the
prospect of catching a US Fleet in all its glory within 500 miles of the mainland. Not to
mention on the east coast of the Persian Gulf.
The neo-cons are the last in a long line of strategists, ideologists and, for the most part,
mercenary publicists defying the logic of Halford Mackinder's geo-strategy for a lot more
than a penny a line. And what they urge, is all that they can without crossing the line from
deceitfulness to complete dishonesty: chaos and destabilisation within Eurasia, surrounding
Russia, subverting Sinkiang and Tibet, employing sectarian guerrillas, fabricating
nationalists and nationalisms.. recreate the land piracy, the raiding and the ethnic
explosions that drove trade from the land to the sea and crippled the Qing empire.
The clash is between war, necessary to the Maritime Empire and Peace, vital to the
consolidation and flowering of Eurasia.
As to Israel, and perhaps we can go into this later: it looms much larger in the US
imagination (and the imaginations the 'west' borrows from the US) than anywhere else. It is a
tiny sliver of a country. Far from being an elephant in any room, it is simply a highly
perfumed lapdog which also serves as its master's ventriloquist's dummy. Its danger lies in
the fact that after decades of neglect by its idiotic self indulgent masters, it has become
an openly fascist regime, which was definitely not meant to happen, and, misled by its own
exotic theories of race, has come to believe that it can do what it wants. It can't-and this
is one reason why Bill misjudges the reasoning behind the Soleimani killing- but it likes to
act, or rather threaten to act, as if it could.
(By the way-note to morons across the web-Bill's partner quotes Adorno and writes about
him too: cue rants about Cultural Marxism.)
Hugh O'Neill ,
Thanks, Bevin. The article was so long, I had quite forgotten that he laid too much emphasis
on the Stratcor Unspeakable. Clever he may be, but not much use without a moral compass.
Talking of geo-strategists, you will doubtless be aware of the work of A.T. Mahan whose
blueprint for acquisition of inspired Teddy Roosevelt and leaders throughout Europe, Russia,
Japan.
Richard Le Sarc ,
Friedman is a snake oil peddler. He tells the ruling psychopaths what they want to hear, like
' China crumbling', their favourite wet-dream.
bevin ,
I agree about Mahan's importance. He understood what lay behind the Empire on which the sun
never set but he had enough brains to have been able to realise that current conditions make
those fleets obsolete. In fact the Germans in the last War realised that too- their strategy
was Eurasian, it broke down over the small matter of devouring the USSR. The expiry date on
the tin of Empire has been obvious for a long time- there is simply too much money to be made
by ignoring it.
Russia has always been the problem, either real (very occasionally) or latent for the
Dutch/British/US Empire because it is just so clear that the quickest and most efficient
communications between Shanghai and Lisbon do not go through the Straits of Malacca, the Suez
Canal, or round the cape . Russia never had to do a thing to earn the enmity of the Empire,
simply existing was a challenge. And that remains the case- for centuries the Empire
denounced the Russians because of the Autocracy, then it was the anarchism of the Bolsheviks,
then it was the autocracy again, this time featuring Stalin, then it was the chaos of the
oligarchs and now we are back with the Tsar/Stalin Putin.
Hugh O'Neill ,
Phenomenal diagnosis, Bevin. However, one suspects that there is still too much profit to be
made by the MIC in pursuing useless strategies. I imagine Mahan turning in his grave in his
final geo-strategic twist.
Richard Le Sarc ,
Yes-Zionist hubris will get Israel into a whole world of sorrow.
MASTER OF UNIVE ,
More USA Deep State conspiracy theorizing which makes the author American paternalism posing
as authorship that is revenue neutral when it ain't.
Any article with mention of mother-'Tucker' Carlson is one that is pure propagandistic
tripe in the extreme. Off-G is a UK blog yet this Americanism & worn out aged propaganda
still prevails in the minds of US centric myopics writ large across all states in the
disunity equally divided from cities to rural towns all.
MOU
johny conspiranoid ,
"More USA Deep State conspiracy theorizing which makes the author American paternalism posing
as authorship that is revenue neutral when it ain'"
Is this even a sentence?
MASTER OF UNIVE ,
It was a sentence when I was smoking marijuana yesterday, Johnny C. Today it is still a
sentence IMHO, but you transcribed it incorrectly, and forgot the end of the sentence.
NOTE: When I smoke marijuana I am allowed to write uncoordinated sentences. These are the
rules in CANADA. If you don't like it write to your local politician and complain
bitterly.
MOU
Charlotte Russe ,
Bush, Obama, and Clinton are despicable. In fact, they're particularly disgusting, inasmuch,
as they were much more "cognizant" than Trump of how their actions would lead to very
specific insidious consequences. In addition, they were more able to cleverly conceal their
malevolent deeds from the public. And that's why Trump is now sitting in the Oval
Office–he won because of public disgust for lying politicians.
However, Trump is "dangerous" because he's a "misinformed idiot," and as such is extremely
malleable. Of course, ignorance is no excuse when the future of humanity is on the line
In any event, Trump is often not aware of the outcome of his actions. And when you're
surrounded and misinformed by warmongering neoconservative nutcases, especially ones who
donated to your campaign chances are you'll do stupid things. And that's what they're
counting on.
alsdkfj ,
Trump is some virtuous example of a truth teller? Trump?
The biggest liar to every occupy the White House and that is saying a lot.
Swamp Monster fascist Trump. So much to love, right?
He could murder one of your friends and you'd still apologize for him, is my guess.
Hugh O'Neill ,
It was a long read, but I got there. In essence, I agreed with 99%, but I hesitate to share
too much praise for Trump's qualities as a Human Being – though he may be marginally
more Human than the entire US body politic. I was walking our new puppy yesterday when he did
his usual attempt to leap all over other walkers. I pleaded their forgiveness and explained
that his big heart was in inverse proportion to his small brain. It occurred to me later that
the opposite would be pure evil i.e. a small heart but big brain. Capitalism as is now
infects the Human Experiment, has reduced both brains and hearts: propagandists believe their
own lies, and too few trust their own instincts and innate compassion, ground down by the
relentless distractions of lies and 'entertainment' (at least the Romas gave you free
bread!).
I get the impression that Trump's world view hasn't altered much since he was about 11 years
old. I do not intend to insult all eleven-year-olds, but his naivety is not a redeeming
feature of his spoilt brat bully personality. He has swallowed hook, line and sinker every
John Wayne cowboy movie and thinks the world can be divided into good guys and bad guys
depending on what colour hat they wear. In the days of Black & White TV, it was either
black or white. The world seemed so much simpler aged 11 .(1966).
Dungroanin ,
Yet I have yet to see one photo of Trump with a gun or in uniform.
MASTER OF UNIVE ,
The Duck learned to dress appropriately for business, I'll give him that. As a New York Real
Estate scion you will never see him dress otherwise. Protocol in business is a contemporary
business suit. No other manner of dress is allowed for the executive class in North America
or UK.
The U.S. was having some success with turning protest messaging against Iran – until,
that is – its killing and wounding of so many Iraqi security force members last week
(Ketaib Hizbullah is a part of Iraq's armed forces).
Escalation of maximum-pressure was one thing (Iran was confident of weathering that); but
assassinating such a senior official on his state duties, was quite something else. We have not
observed a state assassinating a most senior official of another state before.
And the manner of its doing, was unprecedented too. Soleimani was officially visiting Iraq.
He arrived openly as a VIP guest from Syria, and was met on the tarmac by an equally senior
Iraqi official, Al-Muhandis, who was assassinated also, (together with seven others). It was
all open. General Soleimani regularly used his mobile phone as he argued that as a senior state
official, if he were to be assassinated by another state, it would only be as an act of
war.
This act, performed at the international airport of Baghdad, constitutes not just the
sundering of red lines, but a humiliation inflicted on Iraq – its government and people.
It will upend Iraq's strategic positioning. The erstwhile Iraqi attempt at balancing between
Washington and Iran will be swept away by Trump's hubristic trampling on the country's
sovereignty. It may well mark the beginning of the end of the U.S. presence in Iraq (and
therefore Syria, too), and ultimately, of America's footprint in the Middle East.
Trump may earn easy plaudits now for his "We're America, Bitch!", as one senior White House
official defined the Trump foreign policy doctrine; but the doubts – and unforeseen
consequences soon may come home to roost.
Why did he do it? If no one really wanted 'war', why did Trump escalate and smash up all the
crockery? He has had an easy run (so far) towards re-election, so why play the always
unpredictable 'wild card' of a yet another Mid-East conflict?
Was it that he wanted to show 'no Benghazi'; no U.S. embassy siege 'on my watch' –
unlike Obama's handling of that situation? Was he persuaded that these assassinations would
play well to his constituency (Israeli and Evangelical)? Or was he offered this option baldly
by the Netanyahu faction in Washington? Maybe.
Some in Israel are worried about a three or four front war reaching Israel. Senior Israeli
officials recently have been speculating about the likelihood of regional conflict occurring
within the coming months. Israel's PM however, is fighting for his political life, and has
requested immunity from prosecution on three indictments – pleading that this was his
legal right, and that it was needed for him to "continue to lead Israel" for the sake of its
future. Effectively, Netanyahu has nothing to lose from escalating tensions with Iran -- but
much to gain.
Opposition Israeli political and military leaders have warned that the PM needs 'war' with
Iran -- effectively to underscore the country's 'need' for his continued leadership. And for
technical reasons in the Israeli parliament, his plea is unlikely to be settled before the
March general elections. Netanyahu thus may still have some time to wind up the case for his
continued tenure of the premiership.
One prime factor in the Israeli caution towards Iran rests not so much on the waywardness of
Netanyahu, but on the inconstancy of President Trump: Can it be guaranteed that the U.S. will
back Israel unreservedly -- were it to again to become enmeshed in a Mid-East war? The Israeli
and Gulf answer seemingly is 'no'. The import of this assessment is significant. Trump now is
seen by some in Israel – and by some insiders in Washington – as a threat to
Israel's future security vis à vis Iran. Was Trump aware of this? Was this act a gamble
to guarantee no slippage in that vital constituency in the lead up to the U.S. elections? We do
not know.
So we arrive at three final questions: How far will Iran absorb this new escalation? Will
Iran confine its retaliation to within Iraq? Or will the U.S. cross another 'red line' by
striking inside Iran itself, in any subsequent tit for tat?
Is it deliberate (or is it political autism) that makes Secretary Pompeo term all the Iraqi
Hash'd a-Sha'abi forces – whether or not part of official Iraqi forces – as
"Iran-led"? The term seems to be used as a laissez-passer to attack all the many Hash'd
a-Sha'abi units on the grounds that, being "Iran-linked", they therefore count as 'terrorist
forces'. This formulation gives rise to the false sequitur that all other Iraqis would somehow
approve of the killings. This would be laughable, if it were not so serious. The Hash'd forces
led the war against ISIS and are esteemed by the vast majority of Iraqis. And Soleimani was on
the ground at the front line, with those Iraqi forces.
These forces are not Iranian 'proxies'. They are Iraqi nationalists who share a common Shi'a
identity with their co-religionists in Iran, and across the region. They share a common
zeitgeist, they see politics similarly, but they are no puppets (we write from direct
experience).
But what this formulation does do is to invite a widening conflict: Many Iraqis will be
outraged by the U.S. attacks on fellow Iraqis and will revenge them. Pompeo (falsely) will then
blame Iran. Is that Pompeo's purpose: casus belli?
But where is the off-ramp? Iran will respond Is this affair simply set to escalate from
limited military exchanges and from thence, to escalate until what? We understand that this was
not addressed in Washington before the President's decision was made. There are no real U.S.
channels of communication (other than low level) with Iran; nor is there a plan for the next
days. Nor an obvious exit. Is Trump relying on gut instinct again?
"... "Since President Donald Trump ordered the drone strike that killed [Soleimani – justified in terms of deterrence, and allegedly halting an attack] a handful of Trump's advisers, however, [espied another] strategic benefit to killing Soleimani: Call it regime disruption ..."
"... "The case for disruption is outlined in a series of unclassified memos sent to [John Bolton]in May and June 2019 their author, David Wurmser, is a longtime adviser to Bolton who then served as a consultant to the National Security Council. Wurmser argues that Iran is in the midst of a legitimacy crisis. Its leadership, he writes, is divided between camps that seek an apocalyptic return of the Hidden Imam, and those that favour of the preservation of the Islamic Republic. All the while, many Iranians have grown disgusted with the regime's incompetence and corruption. ..."
"... "Wurmser's crucial insight [is that] – were unexpected, rule-changing actions taken against Iran, it would confuse the regime. It would need to scramble," he writes. Such a U.S. attack would "rattle the delicate internal balance of forces and the control over them upon which the regime depends for stability and survival." Such a moment of confusion, Wurmser writes, will create momentary paralysis -- and the perception among the Iranian public that its leaders are weak. ..."
"... "Wurmser's memos show that the Trump administration has been debating the blow against Soleimani since the current crisis began, some seven months ago After Iran downed a U.S. drone [in June], Wurmser advised Bolton that the U.S. response should be overt and designed to send a message that the U.S. holds the Iranian regime, not the Iranian people, responsible. "This could even involve something as a targeted strike on someone like Soleimani or his top deputies," Wurmser wrote in a June 22 memo. ..."
"... In these memos, Wurmser is careful to counsel against a ground invasion of Iran. He says the U.S. response "does not need to be boots on the ground (in fact, it should not be)." Rather, he stresses that the U.S. response should be calibrated to exacerbate the regime's domestic legitimacy crisis. ..."
That was how the English protestant leader saw Catholic Spain in 1656. And it is very close
to how key orientations in the U.S. sees Iran today : The evil of religion – of
Shi'ism – subjecting (they believe) Iranians to repression, and to serfdom. In Europe,
this ideological struggle against the 'evil' of an imposed religious community (the Holy
'Roman' Axis, then) brought Europe to 'near-Armageddon', with the worst affected parts of
Europe seeing their population decimated by up to 60% during the conflict.
Is this faction in the U.S. now intent on invoking a new, near-Armageddon – on this
occasion, in the Middle East – in order, like Cromwell, to destroy the religious
'community known' as the Shi'a Resistance Axis, seen to stretch across the region, in order to
preserve the Jewish "peoples' desire for simple liberties"?
Of course, today's leaders of this ideological faction are no longer Puritan Protestants
(though the Christian Evangelicals are at one with Cromwell's 'Old Testament' literalism and
prophesy). No, its lead ideologues are the neo-conservatives, who have leveraged Karl Popper's
hugely influential The Open Society and its Enemies – a seminal treatise, which
to a large extent, has shaped how many Americans imagine their 'world'. Popper's was history
understood as a series of attempts, by the forces of reaction, to smother an open society with
the weapons of traditional religion and traditional culture:
Marx and Russia were cast as the archetypal reactionary threat to open societies. This
construct was taken up by Reagan, and re-connected to the Christian apocalyptic tradition
(hence the neo-conservative coalition with Evangelists yearning for
Redemption , and with liberal interventionists, yearning for a secular millenarianism). All
concur that Iran is reactionary, and furthermore, the posit, poses a grave threat to Israel's
self-proclaimed 'open society'.
The point here is that there is little point in arguing with these people that Iran poses no
threat to the U.S. (which is obvious) – for the 'project' is ideological through and
through. It has to be understood by these lights. Popper's purpose was to propose that only
liberal globalism would bring about a "growing measure of humane and enlightened life" and a
free and open society – period.
All this is but the outer Matryoshka – a suitable public rhetoric, a painted image
– that can be used to encase the secret, inner dolls. Eli Lake,
writing in Bloomberg , however, gives away the next doll:
"Since President Donald Trump ordered the drone strike that killed [Soleimani –
justified in terms of deterrence, and allegedly halting an attack] a handful of Trump's
advisers, however, [espied another] strategic benefit to killing Soleimani: Call it regime
disruption
"The case for disruption is outlined in a series of unclassified memos sent to [John
Bolton]in May and June 2019 their author, David Wurmser, is a longtime adviser to Bolton who
then served as a consultant to the National Security Council. Wurmser argues that Iran is in
the midst of a legitimacy crisis. Its leadership, he writes, is divided between camps that seek
an apocalyptic return of the Hidden Imam, and those that favour of the preservation of the
Islamic Republic. All the while, many Iranians have grown disgusted with the regime's
incompetence and corruption.
"Wurmser's crucial insight [is that] – were unexpected, rule-changing actions
taken against Iran, it would confuse the regime. It would need to scramble," he writes. Such a
U.S. attack would "rattle the delicate internal balance of forces and the control over them
upon which the regime depends for stability and survival." Such a moment of confusion, Wurmser
writes, will create momentary paralysis -- and the perception among the Iranian public that its
leaders are weak.
"Wurmser's memos show that the Trump administration has been debating the blow against
Soleimani since the current crisis began, some seven months ago After Iran downed a U.S. drone
[in June], Wurmser advised Bolton that the U.S. response should be overt and designed to send a
message that the U.S. holds the Iranian regime, not the Iranian people, responsible. "This
could even involve something as a targeted strike on someone like Soleimani or his top
deputies," Wurmser wrote in a June 22 memo.
In these memos, Wurmser is careful to counsel against a ground invasion of Iran. He says
the U.S. response "does not need to be boots on the ground (in fact, it should not be)."
Rather, he stresses that the U.S. response should be calibrated to exacerbate the regime's
domestic legitimacy crisis.
So there it is – David Wurmser is the 'doll' within: no military invasion, but just a
strategy to blow apart the Iranian Republic. Wurmser, Eli Lake reveals, has quietly been
advising Bolton and the Trump Administration all along. This was the neo-con, who in 1996,
compiled Coping with Crumbling States (which flowed on from the infamous Clean
Break policy strategy paper, written for Netanyahu, as a blueprint for destructing
Israel's enemies). Both these papers advocated the overthrow of the Secular-Arab nationalist
states – excoriated both as "crumbling relics of the 'evil' USSR" (using Popperian
language, of course) – and inherently hostile to Israel (the real message).
Well (
big surprise ), Wurmser has now been at work as the author of how to 'implode' and destroy
Iran. And his insight? "A targeted strike on someone like Soleimani"; split the Iranian
leadership into warring factions; cut an open wound into the flesh of Iran's domestic
legitimacy; put a finger into that open wound, and twist it; disrupt – and pretend that
the U.S. sides with the Iranian people, against its government.
Eli Lake seems, in his Bloomberg piece, to think that the Wurmser strategy has
worked. Really? The problem here is that narratives in Washington are so far apart from the
reality that exists on the ground – they simply do not touch at any point. Millions
attended Soleimani's cortege. His killing gave a renewed cohesion to Iran. Little more
than a dribble have protested.
Now let us unpack the next 'doll': Trump bought into Wurmser's 'play', albeit, with Trump
subsequently admitting that he did the assassination under
intense pressure from Republican Senators. Maybe he believed the patently absurd narrative
that Iranians would 'be dancing in the street' at Soleimani's killing. In any event, Trump is
not known, exactly, for admitting his mistakes. Rather, when something is portrayed as his
error, the President adopts the full 'salesman' persona: trying to convince his base that the
murder was no error, but a great strategic success – "They like us", Trump claimed of
protestors in Iran.
Tom Luongo has
observed : "Trump's impeachment trial in the Senate begins next week, and it's clear that
this will not be a walk in the park for the President. Anyone dismissing this because the
Republicans hold the Senate, simply do not understand why this impeachment exists in the first
place. It is [occurring because it offers] the ultimate form of leverage over a President whose
desire to end the wars in the Middle East is anathema to the entrenched powers in the D.C.
Swamp." Ah, so here we arrive at another inner Matryoshka.
This is Luongo's point: Impeachment was the leverage to drive open a wedge between
Republican neo-conservatives in the Senate – and Trump. And now the Pelosi pressure on
Republican Senators is
escalating . The Establishment threw cold water over Trump's assertion of imminent
attack, as justification for murdering Soleimani, and Trump responds by painting himself
further into a corner on Iran – by going the full salesman 'monte'.
On the campaign trail, the President goes way over-the-top, calling Soleimani
a "son of a b -- -", who killed 'thousands' and furthermore was responsible for every U.S.
veteran who lost a limb in Iraq. And he then conjures up a fantasy picture of protesters
pouring onto the streets of Tehran, tearing down images of Soleimani, and screaming abuse at
the Iranian leadership.
It is nonsense. There are
no mass protests (there have been a few hundred students protesting at one main Tehran
University). But Trump has dived in pretty deep, now
threatening the Euro-Three signatories to the JCPOA, that unless they brand Iran as having
defaulted on JCPOA at the UNSC disputes mechanism, he will slap an eye-watering 25% tariff on
their automobiles.
So, how will Trump avoid plunging in even deeper to conflict if – and when –
Americans die in Iraq or Syria at the hands of militia – and when Pompeo or Lindsay
Graham will claim, baldly, 'Iran's proxies did it'? Sending emollient faxes to the Swiss to
pass to Tehran will not do. Tehran will not read them, or believe them, even if they did.
It all reeks of stage-management; a set up: a very clever stage-management, designed to end
with the U.S. crossing Iran's 'red line', by striking at a target within Iranian
territory. Here, finally, we arrive at the innermost doll.
Cui bono ? Some Senators who never liked Trump, and would prefer Pence as
President; the Democrats, who would prefer to run their candidate against Pence in November,
rather than Trump. But also, as someone who once worked with Wurmser observed tartly: when you
hear that name (Wurmser), immediately you think Netanyahu, his intimate associate.
"... They have promoted dishonest claims about the JCPOA and made unfounded claims about Iran's so-called "nuclear ambitions" in order to make it seem as if the Iranian government is trying to acquire nuclear weapons. They have done this to justify their hard-line policies and to lay the groundwork for pursuing regime change and war. Every time that someone repeats false claims about a non-existent "nuclear weapons program" in Iran, it creates unnecessary fear and plays into the administration's hands. ..."
"... The administration is already working overtime to propagandize the public and scare Americans into supporting aggressive and destructive policies against Iran, and no one should be giving them extra help. ..."
"... "Friedman's claim that Iran restarted a "nuclear weapons program" is completely false. That isn't what the Iranian government did, and it is irresponsible to say this when it is clearly untrue." ..."
"... Friedman isn't usually thought of as a devotee of Truth, and the chance of him correcting even the most egregious falsehoods you point out is approximately zero. At heart he's a propaganda guy, not a fact-based analyst. ..."
"... Friedman does it for Israel. It is their line, their constant foreign policy push. The NYT lets him, seems to encourage it, due to its own complex ties to Israel. ..."
"... The Israel Lobby is behind vast wars, killing, and waste. It has become an endless evil. ..."
"... Friedman seems to forget that Iran is a signatory of the NPT and inspectors come and monitor activities, all outside JPCOA. But hey, Iraq had WMD at the time the international inspectors were saying that it didn't and their message and activities were obstructed and blocked by the US. Same as with the alleged gas attacks in Syria and the OPCW "mishandling" the reporting... US has learned since Iraq and wanted compliance from these types of organizations. ..."
Friedman's
latest column obviously wasn't
fact-checked before it was published:
And then, a few weeks later, Trump ordered the killing of Suleimani, an action that required him to shift more troops into the
region and tell Iraqis that we're not leaving their territory, even though their Parliament voted to evict us. It also prompted
Iran to restart its nuclear weapons program [bold mine-DL], which could well necessitate U.S. military action. And then, a few
weeks later, Trump ordered the killing of Suleimani, an action that required him to shift more troops into the region and tell
Iraqis that we're not leaving their territory, even though their Parliament voted to evict us. It also prompted Iran to restart
its nuclear weapons program [bold mine-DL], which could well necessitate U.S. military action.
Friedman's claim that Iran restarted a "nuclear weapons program" is completely false. That isn't what the Iranian government did,
and it is irresponsible to say this when it is clearly untrue. Iran has no nuclear weapons program, and it hasn't had anything like
that for more than sixteen years. The Iranian government took another step in reducing its compliance with the JCPOA in the days
following the assassination, but contrary to other misleading headlines their government did not abandon the nuclear deal. Iran has
not repudiated its commitment to keep its nuclear program peaceful, and it doesn't help in reducing tensions to suggest that they
have. Trump's recent actions are reckless and dangerous, but it is wrong to say that those actions have caused Iran to start up a
nuclear weapons program. That isn't the case, and engaging in more threat inflation when tensions are already so high is foolish.
Friedman is not the only one to make this blunder, but it is the sort of sloppy mistake we expect from him. If this were just
another error from Friedman, it would be annoying but it wouldn't matter very much. This has to do with the nature of our debate
over Iran policy and the nuclear issue in particular. This matters because there is a great deal of confusion in this country about
Iran's nuclear program that the Trump administration has deliberately encouraged. They have promoted dishonest claims about the JCPOA
and made unfounded claims about Iran's so-called "nuclear ambitions" in order to make it seem as if the Iranian government is trying
to acquire nuclear weapons. They have done this to justify their hard-line policies and to lay the groundwork for pursuing regime
change and war. Every time that someone repeats false claims about a non-existent "nuclear weapons program" in Iran, it creates unnecessary
fear and plays into the administration's hands.
The administration is already working overtime to propagandize the public and scare
Americans into supporting aggressive and destructive policies against Iran, and no one should be giving them extra help. The second
part of Friedman's sentence is also quite dangerous, because it encourages his readers to think that the U.S. would somehow be justified
in attacking Iran in the unlikely event that they started developing a nuclear weapon. He suggests that an Iranian nuclear weapons
program might "necessitate" military action, but any attack on Iran under those circumstances would be illegal and a war of choice
just like the invasion of Iraq that Friedman supported almost 17 years ago. Even when Friedman seems to be skeptical of something
that the government has done, he can't help but indulge in threat inflation and lend support to the idea of preventive war.
Friedman's
claim that Iran restarted a "nuclear weapons program" is completely false. That isn't what the Iranian government did, and it is
irresponsible to say this when it is clearly untrue. Iran has no nuclear weapons program, and it hasn't had anything like that for
more than sixteen years. The Iranian government took another step in reducing its compliance with the JCPOA in the days following
the assassination, but contrary to other misleading headlines their government did not abandon the nuclear deal. Iran has not repudiated
its commitment to keep its nuclear program peaceful, and it doesn't help in reducing tensions to suggest that they have. Trump's
recent actions are reckless and dangerous, but it is wrong to say that those actions have caused Iran to start up a nuclear weapons
program. That isn't the case, and engaging in more threat inflation when tensions are already so high is foolish.
... ... ...
He suggests that an Iranian nuclear weapons program might "necessitate" military action, but any attack on Iran under those circumstances
would be illegal and a war of choice just like the invasion of Iraq that Friedman supported almost 17 years ago. Even when Friedman
seems to be skeptical of something that the government has done, he can't help but indulge in threat inflation and lend support to
the idea of preventive war. The second part of Friedman's sentence is also quite dangerous, because it encourages his readers to
think that the U.S. would somehow be justified in attacking Iran in the unlikely event that they started developing a nuclear weapon.
He suggests that an Iranian nuclear weapons program might "necessitate" military action, but any attack on Iran under those circumstances
would be illegal and a war of choice just like the invasion of Iraq that Friedman supported almost 17 years ago. Even when Friedman
seems to be skeptical of something that the government has done, he can't help but indulge in threat inflation and lend support to
the idea of preventive war.
"Friedman's claim that Iran restarted a "nuclear weapons program" is
completely false. That isn't what the Iranian government did, and it is
irresponsible to say this when it is clearly untrue."
Friedman isn't usually thought of as a devotee of Truth, and the chance of him correcting even the most egregious falsehoods
you point out is approximately zero. At heart he's a propaganda guy, not a fact-based analyst.
Friedman does it for Israel. It is their line, their constant foreign policy push. The NYT lets him, seems to encourage it, due
to its own complex ties to Israel.
The Israel Lobby is behind vast wars, killing, and waste. It has become an endless evil.
Friedman's readers are the choir, and he's just singing to them. People who have seen through his fabrications stopped reading
him years ago. Friedman will always have his little clique of deluded pseudo-intellectuals, but truly intelligent people don't
waste their time with him.
I think the picture of Friedman that accompanies this article tells a big part of the story. His furrowed brow, the intensity
of his studied gaze, his penetrating and knowing look into the the complexities that only someone of his intelligence can unravel.
It is really the picture of a stuffed shirt.
Friedman represents something really wrong with our society and culture: The incompetent, the ignorant, and the arrogant ones
are given positions of power and influence, and the wise and knowledgeable are marginalized.
It is difficult to name a more odious shill for Israel war mongering than friedman but than he does have competition in the NYT
staff. NYT is a bugle for Israel.
Mr. Friedman recently called Gen. Soleimani "the dumbest man in Iran" for sponsoring terrorist forces in Lebanon, Syria, and
Yemen backing paramilitary forces fighting terrorism in Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen.
Mr. Friedman is one of the dumbest pundits
in the media class and almost certainly the dumbest ever to work for The New York Times. He just can't help himself...
Friedman seems to forget that Iran is a signatory of the NPT and inspectors come and monitor activities, all outside JPCOA. But
hey, Iraq had WMD at the time the international inspectors were saying that it didn't and their message and activities were obstructed
and blocked by the US. Same as with the alleged gas attacks in Syria and the OPCW "mishandling" the reporting... US has learned
since Iraq and wanted compliance from these types of organizations.
1/10/20 Grant Smith on the Rise of the Virginia Israel Advisory Board
by Scott | Jan 13, 2020
| Interviews Grant Smith
discusses his new book, The Israel Lobby Enters State Government , which tells the
scandalous story of the Virginia Israel Advisory Board, a branch of the Virginia state
legislature tasked with promoting Israeli business interests in the state. Unlike a chamber of
commerce, says Smith, VIAB is quite literally a part of Virginia's government, so its members
can use political power to obtain contracts for businesses that they choose, with special
provisions that businesses in the free market would never get. This has led to failure after
failure, with much of the taxpayer money that funds these companies simply lost forever.
If you wonder what the post-Trump Republican Party will look like,
take a glimpse at Tom Cotton, one of the US senators from Arkansas (where I live). Cotton has
waged a
relentless campaign for war against Iran and has supported every horror produced by the US
foreign-policy establishment for the last 20 years. He makes other American hawks look like
pacifists. Cotton once said that his only criticism of the US prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba,
where people are held indefinitely without charge or trial, is that too many beds are empty.
Typical of take-no-prisoners warmongers, Cotton savages critics of the pro-war policy that
has characterized US foreign policy in the 21st century. No baseless charge is beneath him. He
recently attacked the Quincy Institute in the course of remarks about anti-Semitism. (You can
see what's coming.) According to Jewish Insider , Cotton
said that anti-Semitism "festers in Washington think tanks like the Quincy Institute, an
isolationist blame America first money pit for so-called 'scholars' who've written that
American foreign policy could be fixed if only it were rid of the malign influence of Jewish
money."
This is worse than a series of malicious lies – every word is false. In fact, it's an
attempt to incite hostility toward and even disruption of one of the bright spots on the mostly
desolate foreign-policy-analysis landscape.
The Quincy Institute for Responsible
Statecraft (QI) started last year with money from, among others, the Charles Koch
Foundation and George Soros's Open Society Foundations. Its officers and staff include
respected and sober foreign-policy analysts and journalists such as Andrew Bacevich, Trita
Parsi, Jim Lobe, and Eli Clifton. Also associated with the institute are the well-credentialed
foreign-policy authorities John
Mearsheimer, Paul Pillar, Gary Sick, Stephen Walt, and Lawrence Wilkerson. This is indeed a
distinguished team of foreign-policy "realists" who are heroically resisting America's
endless-war-as-first-resort policy.
Named for John Quincy Adams – who as secretary of state famously declared that
"America "goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy" – QI "promotes ideas that
move U.S. foreign policy away from endless war and toward vigorous diplomacy in the pursuit of
international peace." The QI website goes on to state:
The US military exists to defend the people and territory of the United States, not to
act as a global police force. The United States should reject preventive wars and military
intervention to overthrow regimes that do not threaten the United States. Wars of these kinds
not only are counterproductive; they are wrong in principle.
It then goes on to indict the current foreign-policy establishment:
The foreign policy of the United States has become detached from any defensible
conception of US interests and from a decent respect for the rights and dignity of humankind.
Political leaders have increasingly deployed the military in a costly, counterproductive, and
indiscriminate manner, normalizing war and treating armed dominance as an end in
itself.
Moreover, much of the foreign policy community in Washington has succumbed to
intellectual lethargy and dysfunction. It suppresses or avoids serious debate and fails to hold
policymakers and commentators accountable for disastrous policies. It has forfeited the
confidence of the American public. The result is a foreign policy that undermines American
interests and tramples on American values while sacrificing the stores of influence that the
United States had earned.
This may not be pure libertarian foreign policy ("US interests" is too slippery a term for
my taste), but compared to what passes for foreign-policy thinking these days, it's pretty damn
good.
So why is Tom Cotton so upset? It should be obvious. QI opposes the easy-war policy of the
last 20 years. Of course Cotton is upset. Take away war, and he's got nothing in his toolbox.
He certainly doesn't want to see the public turn antiwar before he's had a shot at high office,
say, secretary of state, secretary of defense, CIA director, or even the presidency.
Cotton's charges against QI are wrong on every count.
QI is not isolationist as long as it supports trade with the world and diplomacy as the
preferred method of resolving conflicts.
It's not a blame-America-first outfit because the object of its critique is not America or
Americans, but the imperial war-loving elite of the American political establishment. Cotton is
part of that elite, but that does not entitle him to identify the mass of Americans with his
lethal policy preferences.
It's not a money pit. As you can see, QI boasts an eminent lineup thinkers and writers. So
the money is obviously well-spent on badly needed analysis. QI should have been set up long
ago. Cotton shows his pettiness by putting the word scholars in sarcasm quotes. He
should aspire to such scholarship as Bacevich, Parsi, et al. have produced.
But where Cotton really shows his agenda is his absurd claim that anti-Semitism "festers" in
QI (and other think tanks – which ones?).
Cotton here is performing that worn-out trick that, alas, still has some life in it:
conflating criticism of Israel and its American lobby with people who are Jewish (and who may
well oppose how the Israeli state mistreats the Palestinians). I'm sure he knows better: this
is demagogy and not ignorance.
On its face, the proposition that virtually anyone who criticizes Israel's conduct toward
the Palestinians and its Arab and Iranian neighbors probably hates Jews as Jews is patently
ridiculous. Any clear-thinking person dismisses that claim out of hand.
Undoubtedly Cotton has in mind primarily Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, authors of
The Israel Lobby and Foreign Policy , published in 2008. (It began as an essay
in The London Review of Books .) In that work, Walt and Mearsheimer reasonably attribute
the lion's share of influence on US policy in the Middle East to the Israel lobby, "a loose
coalition of individuals and organizations that actively works to move US foreign policy in a
pro-Israel direction." They add, "[I]t is certainly not a cabal or conspiracy that 'controls'
US foreign policy. It is simply a powerful interest group, made up of both Jews and gentiles,
whose acknowledged purpose is to press Israel's case within the United States and influence
American foreign policy in ways that its members believe will benefit the Jewish state."
This is hardly controversial stuff, although reasonable people can disagree over whether the
lobby was decisive in any given case.
But does anyone doubt that American champions of Israel work overtime and spend a lot of
money to advance what they see as Israel's interests? If so, see this and my book
Coming to Palestine . (Many non-Zionist Jews disagree with them about those
interests.) Organizations like AIPAC often boast about their influence. That they sincerely
believe Israel's interests coincide with America's interests is beside the point. (I won't
address that dubious contention here.) That influence, which supports massive annual military
aid to Israel, has helped to facilitate the oppression of the Palestinians, wars against
Lebanon, and attacks on Syria, Iraq, and Iran. It has also provoked hostility to America and
vengeful terrorism against Americans. (For example, the 9/11
attacks as acknowledged by the
government's commission .) Pro-Israel American political and military officials acknowledge
this.
Cotton need not wonder why the lobby has succeeded so often since he himself is using the
anti-Semitism canard to inhibit Israel's critics. No one wants to be condemned as anti-Semite
(or as any other kind of bigot), so we can easily imagine prominent people in the past
withholding criticism of Israel for fear of being thought anti-Jewish. (It's Israel and its
champions, not Israel's critics, who insist that Israel is the state of all Jews, no
matter where else they may be citizens.) Thankfully, despite the efforts of Cotton, Kenneth
Marcus, Bari Weiss , Bret Stephens, and others, the invidious conflation has lost much of
its force. More than ever, people understand that to oppose the entangling alliance with Israel
and to express solidarity with the long-suffering Palestinians do not constitute bigotry
against Jews.
Can Cotton produce any evidence that anyone at QI believes that pro-Israel Jewish Americans
should be barred from lobbying and making political donations or that such an obvious violation
of liberty would fix American foreign policy? Of course not. There is no evidence. Moreover,
I'm sure the QI realists understand that other interests also propel the pro-war US foreign
policy, including glory-seeking politicians and generals and the profit-craving
military-industrial complex.
Those who reflexively and slanderously tar Israel's critics as anti-Semites seem not to
realize that the worthy effort to eliminate real anti-Semitism is undermined by their efforts
to immunize Israel and its American champions from good-faith criticism.
For the time being it seems we avoided the global disaster of an all-out confrontation
between US, Israel and their allies on the one hand, Iran and its allies. Going to the edge of
the precipice and then backpedaling has become a quite usual pattern as far as the Iranian
question is concerned, since 2006, the first time the Neocon Party of War pushed hard for an
attack on Iran, most probably with "tactical" nuclear arms
.
Is this sui generis truce the end of the story? No, it is not. As experience proved time and
again, the forces promoting this war are very strong to accept defeat, as for the deep
underlying causes pushing to such a confrontation remain very much at work. This is what makes
a near certainty the return, sooner or later, in one form or another, of the war scenario. And
it is hard to imagine that this situation of oscillation between a pseudo-peace and an open war
can last forever. Only very deep and very radical changes in the world system can ban for good
the war perspective.
The article that follows was written just before the recent Iranian missile attack to the US
bases in Iraq. But we believe everything said here is still valid and maybe more valid after
the attacks.
A world in chock
"Cry 'Havoc!' And let's slip the dogs of war". It is Marcus Antonius who says that
in front of the
assassinated Ceasar (Act 3, Scene 1, line 273 of William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar). And
it is Richard Haas, president of the CFR, the most prestigious, bipartisan US think tank on
foreign policy, who is using this phrase to begin his article
in the Financial Times . Haas grasps well the dramatic nature of the moment. He also warns
the scope of the conflict is the whole world. But then, his analysis degenerates, and could not
be otherwise, into a rather deplorable attempt to discuss a legal basis justifying General
Soleimani's assassination in Baghdad and a not-so-convincing search for a place for diplomacy
after a murder which probably took place exactly to wipe out any such place. The article is
absolutely indicative of the embarrassment, despair and shock of a large part of the
international establishment.
DieZeit , perhaps the most serious newspaper in Germany, compares General
Soleimani's murder with that of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo, back in 1914, by which WWI was
launched. The same analogy is adopted by Mediapart, one of the few remaining media
outlets in France with some element of credibility and seriousness.
We urge our readers to study very carefully New York Times ' shocking reportage on Israeli
and American extremists' decades-long effort to wage war on Iran, the fierce conflict over this
issue for years, between Obama and Netanyahu, and the equally fierce battle inside Israel,
between Netanyahu on the one hand, Israeli army and services on the other. You must read it if
you want to know what is happening in the Middle East and what
can happen to you tomorrow .
The war with Iran has come much closer, but it will not be conventional, says Soraya Lennie
of London's SOAS University, Britain's "colonial school".
First but also the Second
World War
The unprecedented shock of the international system is also reflected in the astonishing
lack of any serious reaction of the "international community" to one of the most serious and
dangerous crises humanity is facing. They speak saying nothing or they put on the same footage
the offender and the victim of the offense.
But shocks you suffer only if you have made very wrong assessments of the situation and of
the the forces in action, or if you take your wishes as realities.
Unfortunately, there is no analogy only with the outbreak of World War I. It can also be
established with the situation prevailing during the period preceding World War II in Europe,
between 1933 and 1939-41. Then, as it happens now, the world was in front of the emergence of
an extremist core in the center of the Western system, but it sharply underestimated its
dynamics and its potential. European capitals believed they can handle the situation by
maneuvering, appeasing, compromising. Some, who understood nothing of the force they were
facing and of its project, were even believing it is possible to cooperate or even ally with
it. We know too well where all that has finally led.
Anyway, the analogy with WWI seems to have crossed simultaneously a lot of minds after
Soleimani's assassination. Many former senior US intelligence officials, now critical of the
policy of their government, adopted also this analogy, in a memorandum addressed to President
Trump
with the plea not to double the Iraqi "madness" in Iran .
The memorandum is signed, among others, by Graham Fuller, former vice president of the
National Intelligence Council, Daniel Ellsberg, known in particular for his PentagonPapers , the former technical director of the NSA Edward Loomis, the senior CIA analyst
Ray McGovern, daily briefer on USSR of five US Presidents. Our readers can watch a debate of
this writer with Ray McGovern on Iran and Trump, three years ago, just after Trump's
election.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/t9ppwjpC8vY
In the memorandum, the intelligence veterans criticize the President and his son in law
Kushner for pursuing blindly Netanyahu's policy on Iran, as Bush and Cheney followed blindly
Ariel Sharon's policy by invading Iraq. They also recall Netanyahu's own confession of the way
he fooled President Clinton to make him believe he was working on implementing the Oslo
agreements with the Palestinians, while he was working to destroy them.
The period ahead is very critical, not only for the factors we know but also because of the
possibility of the War camp launching a second provocation as the first, Soleimani's murder,
did not suffice for the launching of an all-out war.
In 2009 it was revealed that the NSA had secretly taped conversations of Congresswomen
Jane Harman negotiating with two AIPAC spies accused of giving sensitive information about US
military activities to the Israeli government. In the taped conversation she is being asked
to dismiss their espionage charges in return for large political contributions and a
chairmanship of the US Intelligence Committee. This information was secretly revealed by the
NSA to Nancy Polosi prior to the selection of the committee chairman and was a factor in
Harmon's failure to obtain this highly sensitive position. However, the case against the two
Israeli lobbyists was dismissed -- against the insistence of the FBI. No satisfactory reason
has been given for this. Unfortunately, such an act of treason remains unchallenged and Jane
Harman remains at her congressional job and enjoys being the third wealthiest member of
Congress.
Jonathan Jay Pollard was an American-Israeli citizen who worked for the US government. He
is well known because he stole more secrets from the U.S. than has any other spy in American
history. During his interrogation Pollard said he felt compelled to put the "interests of my
state" ahead of his own. Although as a U.S. Navy counter-intelligence specialist he had a
top-secret security clearance, by "my state" he meant the state of Israel.
This List of US, Pro-Israel Pressure Groups is Extraordinary -- 'The Israel Lobby -- a
List'
• The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC):
• Pro-Israel Political Action Committees (PACs):
• Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations (CoP):
• The American Israel Education Foundation (AIEF):
• The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP):
• Anti-Defamation League (ADL):
• International Fellowship of Christians and Jews (aka Stand for Israel):
• Central Fund of Israel:
• Christians United for Israel (CUFI):
• Simon Wiesenthal Center:
• The Israel Project:
• Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces (FIDF):
• Hadassah (Women's Zionist Organization of America):
• America's Voices in Israel (AVI):
• The Jewish Agency for Israel:
• Young Judaea:
• American Friends of Likud:
• American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise (AICE) [Jewish Virtual Library]:
• The Israel Allies Foundation:
• Americans United with Israel:
• The Jewish Policy Center:
• The Haym Salomon Center:
• The Foundation for Jewish Camp:
• The Jim Joseph Foundation:
• The Avi Chai Foundation:
• Stand with Us:
• Emergency Committee for Israel (ECI):
• Leona M. and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust:
• AMIT:
• Aaron and Marie Blackman Foundation, Inc:
• Jewish Day Schools:
• Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA):
• Jewish National Fund (JNF):
• Zionist Organization of America (ZOA):
• American Jewish Committee (AJC):
• World Jewish Congress:
• Friends of Aish Hatorah:
• Chabad:
• Republican Jewish Coalition:
• National Jewish Democratic Council:
• Foundation for Defense of Democracies:
• JINSA:
• Saban Center at Brookings:
• Center for Security Policy:
• MEMRI:
• Hillel:
• Birthright Israel:
• David Project:
• Amcha Initiative:
• Young Israel:
• Ateret Cohanim:
• Elad:
• BBYO
• Israeli-American Council:
• America-Israel Chamber of Commerce Chicago:
* PACs: Usually a PAC can only donate $5,000 for a primary and $5,000 for general
elections. But with thirty "unaffiliated" PACs marching in lockstep behind AIPAC, this can
balloon up to $300,000 for any given candidate. The extent of this influence remains hidden
from view. They also use "bundling," which means taking various individual donations and
handing them over en masse to a candidate, so that on the books it shows up as several
individual donations, but everyone except the FEC understands who's really controlling the
money.A 1996 book called Stealth PACs reports that "in 1988, Israel's lobby had 78 PACs
spending more than $5.5 million to bribe Congress to vote more aid for Israel. That was more
than total contributions together of the two next largest special interests in the United
States -- the real estate lobby and the teamsters."
January
18, 2020 A Opinion One comment At a talk I delivered in Northern England in March 2018, I
proposed that the best response to falsified accusations of antisemitism, which are often
lobbed against pro-Palestinian communities and intellectuals everywhere, is to draw even closer
to the Palestinian narrative.
In fact, my proposal was not meant to be a sentimental response in any way.
"Reclaiming the Palestinian narrative" has been the main theme in most of my public speeches
and writings in recent years. All of my books and much of my academic studies and research have
largely focused on positioning the Palestinian people – their rights, history, culture,
and political aspirations – at the very core of any genuine understanding of the
Palestinian struggle against Israeli colonialism and apartheid.
True, there was nothing particularly special about my talk in Northern England. I had
already delivered a version of that speech in other parts of the UK, Europe and elsewhere. But
what made that event memorable is a conversation I had with a passionate activist, who
introduced himself as an advisor to the office of the head of the British Labor Party, Jeremy
Corbyn.
Although the activist agreed with me regarding the need to embrace the Palestinian
narrative, he insisted that the best way for Corbyn to deflect anti-Semitic accusations, which
have dogged his leadership since day one, is for Labor to issue a sweeping and decisive
condemnation of antisemitism, so that Corbyn may silence his critics and he is finally able to
focus on the pressing subject of Palestinian rights.
I was doubtful. I explained to the animated and self-assured activist that Zionist
manipulation and misuse of antisemitism is a phenomenon that has preceded Corbyn by many
decades, and will always be there as long as the Israeli government finds the need to distract
from its war crimes against Palestinians and to crush pro-Palestinian solidarity worldwide.
I explained to him that while anti-Jewish racism is a real phenomenon that must be
confronted, "antisemitism", as defined by Israel and its Zionist allies, is not a moral
question that is meant to be solved by a press release, no matter how strongly-worded. Rather,
it is a smokescreen, with the ultimate aim of distracting from the real conversation, that
being the crimes of military occupation, racism, and apartheid in Palestine.
In other words, no amount of talking, debating or defending oneself can possibly convince
the Zionists that demanding an end to the Israeli military occupation in Palestine or the
dismantling of the Israeli apartheid regime, or any genuine criticism of the policies of
Israel's right-wing government are not, in fact, acts of antisemitism.
Alas, the activist insisted that a strong statement that would clarify Labor's position on
antisemitism would finally absolve Corbyn and protect his legacy against the undeserved
smearing.
The rest is history. Labor went into a witch-hunt, to catch the "true" anti-Semites among
its members. The unprecedented purge has reached many good people who have dedicated years to
serving their communities and defending human rights in Palestine and elsewhere.
The statement to end all statements was followed by many others. Numerous articles and
arguments were written and made in defense of Corbyn – to no avail. Only a few days
before Labor lost the general election in December, the Simon Wiesenthal Center named
Corbyn, one of Britain's most sincere and well-intentioned leaders in the modern era, the "top
anti-Semite of 2019." So much for engaging the Zionists.
It doesn't matter whether Corbyn's party lost the elections in part because of Zionist
smearing and unfounded anti-Semitic accusations. What truly matter for me as a Palestinian
intellectual who has hoped that Corbyn's leadership will constitute a paradigm shift regarding
the country's attitude towards Israel and Palestine, is the fact that the Zionists have indeed
succeeded in keeping the conversation focused on Israeli priorities and Zionist sensibilities.
It saddens me that while Palestine should have occupied the center stage, at least during
Corbyn's leadership years, it was still marginalized signifying once again that solidarity with
Palestine has become a political liability to anyone hoping to win an election – in the
UK and anywhere in the West as well.
I find it puzzling, indeed disturbing, that Israel, directly or otherwise, is able to
determine the nature of any discussion on Palestine in the West, not only within typical
mainstream platforms but within pro-Palestinian circles as well. For example, I have heard
activists repeatedly questioning whether the one-state solution is at all possible because
"Israel simply would never accept it".
I often challenge my audiences to base their solidarity with Palestine on real love,
support, and admiration for the Palestinian people, for their history, their anti-colonial
struggle, and the thousands of heroes and heroines who have sacrificed their own lives so that
their people may live in freedom.
How many of us can name Palestine's top poets, artists, feminists, football players,
singers, and historians? How familiar are we really, with Palestinian geography, the
intricacies of its politics, and the richness of its culture?
Even in platforms that are sympathetic to the Palestinian struggle, there is an inherent
fear that such sympathy could be misconstrued as antisemitism to the extent that Palestinian
voices are often neglected, if not completely supplanted with anti-Zionist Jewish voices. I see
this happening quite often even in Middle Eastern media that supposedly champion the
Palestinian cause.
This phenomenon is largely linked to Palestine and Palestine only. While the anti-apartheid
struggle in South Africa and the civil rights struggle in the United States – as was the
case of many genuine anti-colonial liberation movements around the world – have
strategically used intersectionality to link with other groups, locally, nationally or
internationally, the movements themselves relied on black voices as true representatives of
their peoples' struggles.
Historically, Palestinians have not always been marginalized within their own discourse.
Once upon a time, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), despite its many shortcomings,
provided unified Palestinian political discourse which served as a litmus test for any
individual, group or government regarding their position on Palestinian rights and freedom.
The Oslo accords ended all of that – it fragmented the Palestinian discourse just as
it has divided the Palestinian people. Since then, the message emanating from Palestine has
become muddled, factionalized and often self-defeating. The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions
Movement (BDS) has done a tremendous job in bringing about some clarity by attempting to
articulate a universal Palestinian discourse.
However, BDS is yet to yield a centralized political strategy that is communicated through a
democratically-elected Palestinian body. As long as the PLO persists in its inertia and without
a truly democratic alternative, the crisis of the Palestinian political discourse is likely to
continue.
Concurrently, the Zionists must not be allowed to determine the nature of our solidarity
with the Palestinian people. While true Palestinian solidarity requires the complete rejection
of all forms of racism, including antisemitism, the pro-Israel camp must be sidelined entirely
from any conversation pertaining to the values and morality of what it means to be
"pro-Palestine".
To be anti-Zionist is not always the same as being pro-Palestine, the former emanating from
the rejection of racist, Zionist ideas and the latter indicating a real connection and bond
with Palestine and her people.
To be pro-Palestine is also to respect the centrality of the Palestinian voice, because
without the Palestinian narrative there can be no real or meaningful solidarity, and also
because, ultimately it will be the Palestinian people who will liberate themselves.
"I am not a liberator," said the iconic South American revolutionary Ernesto Che Guevara.
"Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves".
For the Palestinians to "liberate themselves", they have to claim their centrality in the
struggle for Palestinian rights everywhere, to articulate their own discourse and to be the
champions of their own freedom. Nothing else will suffice.
Feature photo | Members of the Jewish anti-Zionist Neturei Karta group demonstrate
against the Israeli General Elections outside a polling station in Jerusalem. Sebastian
Scheiner | AP
Well, we're not quite as fond of Israel as is the USA – it's not yet the acid test of a
political candidate in Canada to learn his/her position on Israel, as if he/she were running
for election there, although the lobby groups do try to develop the same level of fervor. But
I could buy being ensconced in Uncle Sam; our trade is so inextricably linked that the two
nationalities are barely distinguishable. Many Canadian companies are actually owned by
Americans, and vice-versa. At one time, as I used to be fond of pointing out illustratively,
the CEO of American Airlines was a Canadian, while the CFO of Air Canada was American.
There was just an article in the local paper the other day, though, which of course I
cannot find now, which reported local sales of BC agricultural products broke however-many
millions for the first time in 2019, so consumers do go out of their way to not buy American
agricultural products if an alternative is available. And when Canadian fruit and vegetables
are out of season, I notice now that a considerable amount of what is offered in the markets
is from Mexico, so I buy that. Sometimes, though, there is no alternative to California
produce. Onions, for instance – all last year, all the onions sold by Thrifty Foods,
where I usually buy groceries, were from California. I inquired about it a couple of times,
and never received a satisfactory answer. I would have to go to a farm market to buy Canadian
onions, which I found astounding. Pork, too, often originated in the USA; my mom kept buying
it for us because it was so cheap.
Bedrock of American Conservative ideology The National Review recently expressed concerns
regarding trump's behaviour, and were not inclined to praise Caesar. Choosing to speak to his
state of mind instead.
"And there's the larger fact that since America's withdrawal from the Iran deal, the
nation's policy toward Iran seems to be one of drifting toward war lazily and thoughtlessly.
Making unreasonable demands, imposing sanctions, and then watching Iranian provocations roll
in.
But most important, we don't live in a vacuum. And perhaps you've noticed that since the
news of this assassination broke,
the president has sounded out of his mind.
He has returned to his idea of vandalism, blasphemy, and outrage as strategy.
Contradicting his own secretary of state, Trump promised that the United States would respond
to further Iranian provocation by deliberately bombing cultural sites in Iran. "They're
allowed to kill our people. They're allowed to torture and maim our people. They're allowed
to use roadside bombs and blow up our people. And we're not allowed to touch their cultural
sites," he said. "It doesn't work that way."
This disgusting threat is in many ways worse than his promises of "fire and fury" in North
Korea. The punishment would fall not on the government, or on the military that tortures and
maims, but on the whole Iranian people -- and really all of humanity that has an interest in
the preservation of great treasures of antiquity, of which there are many in Iran. These are
jewels of ancient civilization that ought to outlast Iran's current government, and that
deserve a better custodian than the mullahs. That aside, the threat carries zero strategic
value for us while offering infinite propaganda value for the Iranian regime."
Again, from the above: "the president has sounded out of his mind."
However, to trump's base his actions may not appear to be those of a madman, and I
sincerely doubt the National Review is on their reading list. If they read at all that is.
Case in point, why go to all the effort to attend his weird rallies just to hear the same
lies they could have read at multiple sources from the comfort of their homes?
"WaPo: Days before Europeans warned Iran of nuclear deal violations, Trump secretly
threatened to impose 25% tariff on European autos if they didn't...The U.S. effort to coerce
European foreign policy through tariffs, a move one European official equated to "extortion,"
represents a new level of hardball tactics with the United States' oldest allies...
U.S. officials conveyed the threat directly to officials in London, Berlin and Paris rather
than through their embassies in Washington, said a senior European official."
Good! Couldn't happen to a more deserving mob of bootlicks. Their compliance proves they
want and deserve it.
I agree with those who say, This is exactly the kind of thing I hoped for from Trump.
On the other hand this is exactly why the likes of the WaPo hate him - although not a
fascist, he's too directly thuggish for the neoliberal formula. Too much stick, not enough
(poisoned) carrot.
"He has returned to his idea of vandalism, blasphemy, and outrage as strategy.
Contradicting his own secretary of state, Trump promised that the United States would respond
to further Iranian provocation by deliberately bombing cultural sites in Iran...
This disgusting threat is in many ways worse than his promises of "fire and fury" in North
Korea. The punishment would fall not on the government, or on the military that tortures and
maims, but on the whole Iranian people -- and really all of humanity that has an interest in
the preservation of great treasures of antiquity, of which there are many in Iran."
Here too Trump is only the most openly thuggish face and voice of relentless general
practice.
I'll make a rare link to my own blog since this was the subject of my most recent
post.
In modern times the destruction has become less overtly religious, more secularized,
mundane, assembly-line and industrial. Therefore it is vastly more comprehensive and
horrific.
Capitalism, productionism, "Progress", the economic civilization devour and eradicate
vastly more historic sites and sacred lands, by many orders of magnitude, than all the
religious and nationalistic hatreds thruout history put together...
In these ways, as always, Trump is nothing but the more openly scabrous and brutish
incarnation of the essence of the US and especially of all US economic and political
activity. He is by far the most typical and characteristic of all US presidents. He is the
most logical production of the US to date.
Looking at a president Americans look at themselves in a mirror. With the likes of
Obama, the Clintons, George Bush, plus scammers like Sanders, they see skillfully idealized,
romanticized, flattering fake reflections of themselves...
@ 182 bubbles... that quote you highlight show you just how sick trump and the usa is at
present to try to pass off that type of lie to the public to be broadcast wide and far..
"They're allowed to kill our people. They're allowed to torture and maim our people.
They're allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people. And we're not allowed to touch
their cultural sites."
no - usa invaded iraq and some of ''your'' people were killed actively invading another
country. blame it on yourselves, but don't try to pass off this shit on the public.. it is
the worst form of propaganda you can generate...
i am speaking generally here to the usa public.. obviously the americans here are aware of
this, but i am not following who in the usa has challenged this outrageous propaganda...
and, i agree with others here - trump - for just how ugly he is, is really highlighting
just how bad things in the usa has gotten.. and it will get worse if they can't figure out a
way to get their shit together too..
@182 "Case in point, why go to all the effort to attend his weird rallies just to hear the
same lies they could have read at multiple sources from the comfort of their homes?"
That's easy. They go to the rallies because they like the solidarity. It is comforting to
hear their leader speaking surrounded by thousands of like-minded people. Plus it's a great
opportunity to wear their MAGA hats and wave flags.
@185 russ.. i went to the article you posted and read it.. - keep on speaking out and get
your message out far and wide russ... i agree with your viewpoint expressed...
Yes, in fact one of the big "advantages" of the Trump presidency is that everyone for sure
knows that US is an Empire, so every Storm Trooper knows that they are not fighting "to
defend" nothing, they are pawns, cannon fodder of an Empire fighting in other lands to grab
resources and impose "tax" (in a subtle way through the financial system) fot he global
"Wealth Pump" from all the world to send it to the center of the Empire in exchange of
"protection" (Vito Corleone) and to spread "freedom", "democracy", "human rights",
"prosperity", and all that vacuous BS.
Now the Storm Troopers fully know they are in Syria and Iraq to "protect our oil" (from
the Iraqis) and to fight those who oppose the grabbing (Iraqis, Iranians, Syrians,
etc...).
But they will have a hard time in the future, this will not be Desert Storm 2.0 or Iraqi
Freedom 2.0, this will be like Lebanon 2006 but against a kind of Hezbollah x100 more
powerful and they are so far far far away from home...
Dehumanizing. By order of the Overlords, who of course know better than all those folks
they view as inferior. Messianic is one applicable term.
George Soros once subtly agreed he had Messianic tendencies in an interview that used to
be available on utube.
Benjamin Netanyahu has been accused of having the same flaw by some learned persons. He of
course follows the 'admit nothing' doctrine. But his actions speak for themselves. Including
his 'alleged' criminal activities.
The United States doesn't have a culture, unless by some queer assessment consumerism
could be called a culture. That is the basis for it's disrespect.
Clearly you're a thinker but I don't follow your opinion on Sanders. He seems a decent
sort to me. Thanks for you reply btw and I will go to your site and explore your
thoughts.
That's easy. They go to the rallies because they like the solidarity. It is comforting to
hear their leader speaking surrounded by thousands of like-minded people. Plus it's a great
opportunity to wear their MAGA hats and wave flags.
Posted by: dh | Jan 15 2020 20:59 utc | 187
Some decades ago, there were other's who posed as Nationalists, and they caused a world of
hurt.
Descendant's of those people who were sent off to defend Democracy understand the
sacrifice. What some don't understand, is that sacrifice being grossly abused and has the
enemy they were sent to defeat actually been defeated? Or were they simply pawns in a rich
mans contest, where the rich men threw trinkets their way after the War was won?
Who was the enemy then? Who is the enemy now? Are they the same?
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Some one had blunder'd:
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why
@191 I get what your saying but I think comparing Trump with Hitler is a bit of a stretch.
Circe will vehemently disagree but I think Trump is smart enough to know that his supporters
don't like being called Nazis. They are the 'good guys'. They really want to 'make America
great again' whatever that means.
@191 I get what your saying but I think comparing Trump with Hitler is a bit of a stretch.
True, Hitler was smarter. And even more insane than trump. But, let's look at some clear
differences.. Hitler wasn't a pampered boy whose father worked all the angles of corruption
to make a lot of money.
Hitler was a combat veteran. A veteran of the trench wars of WW1. A Veteran of the horrors
of that ugly war of attrition.
Trump sought 5 deferments to avoid serving in ANY capacity in America's war in Vietnam.
FIVE DEFERMENTS.
His father faced inquiries about his abusive behaviour related to war profiteering and he
proudly defended his right to use levers afforded to him to use local officials so he could
profit on the backs of WW2 Veterans and their families.
Little wonder he maintained his father's relationship with Benjamin Netanyahu.
@193 Hitler was evil. That seems to be generally agreed. But he won elections. He was popular
with ordinary people in pre-war Germany. Obviously the Versailles Treaty was a big factor.
I can see a few similarities. Trump was elected on a nationalist platform too. How far can
Trump push it? The Wall hasn't been a huge success so far. ICE has started rounding up
illegal immigrants. Trumpists approve of that. Would people feel OK if he started gassing
them? That would be the logical outcome of MAGA. But I like to think it would be step too far
for most Americans. He's on fairly safe ground beating up on furriners though.
" "First, Iran must declare to the IAEA a full account of the prior military dimensions of
its nuclear program, and permanently and verifiably abandon such work in perpetuity."
"Second, Iran must stop uranium enrichment and never pursue plutonium reprocessing. This
includes closing its heavy water reactor."
"Third, Iran must also provide the IAEA with unqualified access to all sites throughout the
entire country."
"Iran must end its proliferation of ballistic missiles and halt further launching or
development of nuclear-capable missile systems."
"Iran must release all U.S. citizens, as well as citizens of our partners and allies, each of
them detained on spurious charges."
"Iran must end support to Middle East terrorist groups, including Lebanese Hizballah
[Hezbollah], Hamas, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad."
"Iran must respect the sovereignty of the Iraqi Government and permit the disarming,
demobilization, and reintegration of Shia militias."
"Iran must also end its military support for the Houthi militia and work towards a peaceful
political settlement in Yemen."
"Iran must withdraw all forces under Iranian command throughout the entirety of Syria."
"Iran, too, must end support for the Taliban and other terrorists in Afghanistan and the
region, and cease harboring senior Al Qaida leaders."
"Iran, too, must end the IRG [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] Qods Force's [Quds Force's]
support for terrorists and militant partners around the world."
"And too, Iran must end its threatening behavior against its neighbors – many of whom
are U.S. allies. This certainly includes its threats to destroy Israel, and its firing of
missiles into Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. It also includes threats to
international shipping and destructive – and destructive cyberattacks."
The trump Regime, who clearly covet AIPAC $ and hope to take away the dems primary spot,
dance to the Nethanyahu / far right tune. It's as obvious as the sun rising in the east and
setting in the west.
@196 The Allied Powers were dictating terms to a defeated Germany in Versailles. Trump is
dictating terms to an undefeated Iran on behalf of Israel. The act of dictation is certainly
similar. Are we arguing about something?
Trump is dictating terms as if his adversary was already vanquished. Clearly it ain't
over, but the bloviator in Chief and his Lobbyist appointed advisors would very much like
people to believe their goading Iran will result in capitulation, Versailles style. But who
in their right mind would believe the foreign affairs neophyte and tabloid princeling, donald
trump?
trump is working hand in hand with Netanyahu, Adelson and the rest of the far far right
weirdos, he's their bum boy. Their agenda is clear, provoke Iran to retaliate to US and
Israeli provocations so the Cabal can howl at the top of their lungs and demand Vengance. On
American tax payers dime, not Israeli taxpayers dime. Heck, when did they ever pay for all
those aggression's dating back to Desert Storm?
@198 Yes all of that about Trump and Netanyahu, Adelson, provoking Ira etc. is well known
here at MOA. I was more interested in the similarities between Trump and Hitler. I find it
hard to imagine the US slipping into full blown Nazism. Maybe some kind of happy-face fascism
is a possibility.
"Hitler was evil. That seems to be generally agreed. But he won elections."
dh195
No he didn't. The only elections that he won were after he had taken power and put his
opponents in jail. Then he campaigned, using the Storm Troopers and the police forces of the
various states-Prussia most notably where Goering was Minister-President and controlled the
police- to intimidate any opposition.
It is an old Conservative talking point and a prime argument of enemies of democracy to
insist that Hitler won elections. In fact he lost lots of them. It was this unpopularity that
gave the militarist/industrialist coterie surrounding Hindenburg confidence that they could
control the Bohemian corporal they despised.
Trump is such a douchebag. He claims there were no lives lost due to their "early warning system" -- no mention that the "early
warning system" was a phone call!
Now he's once again justifying assassination, etc.
there was no "better choice" between trump and clinton. i still think clinton represented a greater danger than trump of getting
into a war with russia, but they are both warmongers first class. for our next election, we may have a choice between ebola and
flesh eating bacteria, or brain cancer and leprosy. if the game is rigged there's no winning it playing by the game's "rules".
"... On Sunday, the Washington Post, citing a senior U.S official, reported that "Pompeo first spoke with Trump about killing Suleimani months ago but neither the president nor Pentagon officials were willing to countenance such an operation." On Thursday, CNN's Nicole Gaouette and Jamie Gangel reported that "Pompeo was a driving force behind President Donald Trump's decision to kill" the Iranian general. The CNN story said that Pompeo, who was the director of the Central Intelligence Agency under Trump before he moved to the State Department, viewed Suleimani as the mastermind of myriad operations targeting Americans and U.S interests. It also quoted an unnamed source close to Pompeo, who recalled the Secretary of State telling friends, "I will not retire from public service until Suleimani is off the battlefield." ..."
One of the new bogus explanations that the administration has been offering up is that there was a threat to one or more U.S. embassies
that led to the assassination. Rep. Justin Amash notes this morning that they have presented no evidence to Congress to back up any
of this or their original claim of an "imminent" attack:
The administration didn't present evidence to Congress regarding even one embassy. The four embassies claim seems to be totally
made up. And they have never presented evidence of imminence -- a necessary condition to act without congressional approval --
with respect to any of this. The administration didn't present evidence to Congress regarding even one embassy. The four embassies
claim seems to be totally made up. And they have never presented evidence of imminence -- a necessary condition to act without
congressional approval -- with respect to any of this. https://t.co/Eg0vaCnqFd
-- Justin Amash (@justinamash) -- Justin Amash (@justinamash) -- Justin Amash (@justinamash)
January 12, 2020
The administration's story keeps changing, because they are just making up unconvincing justifications for what they did. The president
invents new excuses for the illegal assassination, and his subordinates feel obliged to follow his lead because they are implicated
in his decision. The strange thing is that this administration still expects to be believed on something as important as this despite
their constant lying to Congress and the public about everything else. The president and Secretary of State have trashed their credibility
long ago, so there is no chance that we would give them the benefit of the doubt now. As a result, there is much more healthy and
appropriate skepticism about the administration's claims since January 2nd than there usually is. We are still piecing together what
happened at the start of this year in the days leading up to the assassination, but the picture we are getting is one of a push by
determined hard-line ideologues to take military action against a government they hate. Pompeo was the leading advocate for doing
this. John Cassidy The administration's story keeps changing, because they are just making up unconvincing justifications for what
they did. The president invents new excuses for the illegal assassination, and his subordinates feel obliged to follow his lead because
they are implicated in his decision. The strange thing is that this administration still expects to be believed on something as important
as this despite their constant lying to Congress and the public about everything else. The president and Secretary of State have
trashed their credibility long ago, so there is no chance that we would give them the benefit of the doubt now. As a result, there
is much more healthy and appropriate skepticism about the administration's claims since January 2nd than there usually is. We are
still piecing together what happened at the start of this year in the days leading up to the assassination, but the picture we are
getting is one of a push by determined hard-line ideologues to take military action against a government they hate. Pompeo was the
leading advocate for doing this. John Cassidy We are still piecing together what happened at the start of this year in the days leading
up to the assassination, but the picture we are getting is one of a push by determined hard-line ideologues to take military action
against a government they hate. Pompeo was the leading advocate for doing this. John Cassidy We are still piecing together what happened
at the start of this year in the days leading up to the assassination, but the picture we are getting is one of a push by determined
hard-line ideologues to take military action against a government they hate. Pompeo was the leading advocate for doing this. John
Cassidy
reports :
On Sunday, the Washington Post, citing a senior U.S official, reported that "Pompeo first spoke with Trump about killing Suleimani
months ago but neither the president nor Pentagon officials were willing to countenance such an operation." On Thursday, CNN's
Nicole Gaouette and Jamie Gangel reported that "Pompeo was a driving force behind President Donald Trump's decision to kill" the
Iranian general. The CNN story said that Pompeo, who was the director of the Central Intelligence Agency under Trump before he
moved to the State Department, viewed Suleimani as the mastermind of myriad operations targeting Americans and U.S interests.
It also quoted an unnamed source close to Pompeo, who recalled the Secretary of State telling friends, "I will not retire from
public service until Suleimani is off the battlefield."
Pompeo has Pompeo has
lied constantly
about Iran and the nuclear deal before and after he became Secretary of State, so it is not surprising that he has been the administration's
public face as they lie to Congress and the public about this illegal assassination. No wonder
he doesn't want to appear before Congress to testify.
Add to this the concomitant attempt made in Yemen, where there is no American presence other than the bombs dropping from the
sky, against an Iranian operative, and it shows the push of the administration to go for the kill as the main factor. The US is
becoming more and more like Israel: kill first, no excuses, we are the chosen ones - The "revenge" of Dinah's brothers, Genesis
34:25. This is The US of A's diplomacy nowadays. The world has really been put on notice. And the world will be reacting, see
the visit of Chancellor Merkel to Moscow immediately after that.
The question is what the American citizens are going to do? What are they going to vote for?
Why shouldn't Trump and his Administration's creatures "expect to be believed"? He and his toadies have misstated, misled, BS-ed
and outright lied to the public for three years now; and - despite a "credibility gap" of Vallis Marineris proportions - have
gotten no appreciable pushback from the media.
The right-wing media simply cheerlead him, as usual: and everybody else just sort of nods, grunts, and moves on.
Rick Wiles (TruNews) goes full red pill on Zionist Israel. The U.S. is conquered territory. You will be placed in a digital
ghetto if you discuss Israel's crimes, or complain about the Jewish mafia takeover in America. Rabbi Trumpenstein will look the
other way to appease his Jewish handlers. These outrageous Jewish actions are becoming more and more outrageous under the Agent
Orange administration. Meanwhile, we are distracted by what is going on in the M.E.
Jeffrey Epstein was a Mossad operative who was tasked with blackmailing influential politicians and persons of interest in
the West, but in America in particular.
TruNews got dropped by PayPal after this report. The video is an hour long, but the best bit is the opening monologue, which
is shorter. Here is the summary.
The founder of TruNews accused PayPal of conducting a "financial pogrom" hours after the Florida-based Christian broadcaster
published a hard-hitting news report that linked the Jeffrey Epstein child sex scandal to Israel's Mossad spy agency.
PayPal abruptly terminated the account of TruNews without warning or explanation. The conservative Christian news program
has received donations in its PayPal account for more than 16 years without any problems. TruNews is funded by donations from
viewers. The weekday Christian news and commentary program started in 1999.
TruNews' founder and host Rick Wiles accused PayPal CEO Daniel Schulman, a progressive leftwing Jewish business executive,
of punishing the Christian broadcaster for its hard-hitting reports on Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell:
"PayPal abruptly closed our account on the morning of January 3, 2020. TruNews' report on January 2 was titled 'Ghislaine
Maxwell: Which spy agency is hiding her?' Our newscast focused on her father's longtime service to Israel's intelligence
agencies, how she was Jeffrey Epstein's handler for Mossad, and how Epstein's team video-recorded influential American men
having sex with underage girls who had been recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell."
Wiles said the swiftness of PayPal's action hours after the release of TruNews' report on the Epstein-Maxwell-Mossad
child sex blackmail operation was not a coincidence:
"Any American citizen or entity that questions Israeli actions and its influence in America are now marked targets. Israel's
blackmail operation in America for over 30 years was so successful that it is now dangerous for any law-abiding American
citizen to demand a real investigation into the biggest scandal in American history which resulted in much of America's
ruling class being caught in a child-sex blackmail trap."
Damn. When you're right, you're right, Rick.
Rick Wiles even saw through the whole fake "teen sex" angle that the media was pushing and promoting. The real story
wasn't some 16-year-old girls, but the children that the Jews were using for blackmail purposes. This is the real
kompromat that the Jews have on our politicians.
Wiles accused PayPal of conducting a financial pogrom against opponents of Israeli Zionism.
"TruNews is a victim of a PayPal pogrom. PayPal and the other Techno-Nazis like YouTube and Facebook are pushing American
patriots into digital ghettos if they dare to act like free men and women."
Wiles said he is driven by his commitment to justice:
"TruNews is demanding justice for thousands of American girls who were raped in Epstein's fake mansions, and we're demanding
a legitimate investigation into Israel's blackmailing of influential American men."
Wiles admitted he has little hope of seeing a real investigation because the FBI and Department of Justice have been
corrupted too.
When you understand the Jewish Question, you can just cut through the ******** like a laser. The JQ like nothing else sharpens
the minds and hones you in on the truth.
PayPal also abruptly closed on the same day the account of Bless an Orphan; a nonprofit Christian ministry founded by
Wiles' daughter Karissa Washburn. The Florida-based organization rescues children in South America who were kidnapped or
sold into sex trafficking. Wiles blasted PayPal for punishing his daughter:
"PayPal's action against Bless an Orphan was cruel and vindictive. Daniel Schulman punished my daughter who is saving
the
lives of little girls who were sold to sex traffickers. PayPal closed Bless an Orphan's account for one reason. They
wanted to intimidate me by targeting my daughter. PayPal is also making me aware that they know what my daughter is doing
in South America to rescue children."
TruNews has relentlessly pursued the Jeffrey Epstein child sex scandal. The Christian news organization believes that
Ghislaine Maxwell was Epstein's Mossad handler, not his lover. Maxwell is the daughter of the late Robert Maxwell who
mysteriously drowned in 1991. Maxwell, whose real name was Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch, was a Jewish billionaire who
was suspected of being a Mossad agent. He was given a state funeral in Israel and buried on the Mount of Olives.
TruNews also believes that Epstein was not a billionaire, but an imposter recruited by Mossad to act like a billionaire:
"You cannot convince me that Jeffrey Epstein was a self-made billionaire with only one client who owned mansions throughout
America and London and Paris. His mansions were owned by wealthy Jews through trusts."
Absolutely correct.
The outspoken TruNews founder also wants to know who received the video feeds from Epstein's mansions:
"According to anonymous former employees and women who were in those homes as teenagers, we know that cameras were
in all bedrooms and bathrooms that fed video to secret media rooms that were staffed with people capturing the child
sex acts on video. Who received the video? I believe it was sent to Tel Aviv for blackmail purposes."
"... What i find truly amazing is that American Zionists still believe crushing Iran is easy enough. Israel, with 8 million jews stuffed in a small country, is nothing more than a carrier battle group marooned on land ..."
The tramp & nutNyahoo machismo show continues to be fun to watch. Both
show off their penis worms as they arrogantly claim they can crush iran. Both the usa and
israel keep banging on the doors and walls of their pissed-off neighbors' houses. That
eventually gets you murdered whether in baltimore or baghdad.
A crushable iran is true if and only if they can mount a full-on nuclear war on Iran.
But such horrendous cheating means all bets are off, and iran's allies will provide the
nukes required to melt down the American homeland too. Nobody, not even Russia and china,
can afford to stay in the sidelines in a nuclear war in the 2020s.
What i find truly amazing is that American Zionists still believe crushing Iran is easy
enough. Israel, with 8 million jews stuffed in a small country, is nothing more than a
carrier battle group marooned on land. Sitting ducks, with nice armor, nukes and all, are
... still sitting ducks. nutNyahoo should ask his technical crew just how few megatons are
needed, or just a few thousand modern missiles are required to transform sitting ducks into
nicely roasted peking ducks.
So a conventional war it is. The usa and israel has exactly zero, zilch and nada chances
of winning a war with iran. The usa keeps forgetting that it is a dying empire with dying
funding value and mental resources. Just like israel which oddly thinks dozens of f-35s
will give it immunity through air superiority. Proof of this fact that iran will win comes
from simply asking american and israeli war experts to go on cnn or the washington post on
how they intend to win a war with iran.
Im sure these expert bloviators will say that it is as easy as winning a naval war
against china, which is capable of launching only 3 new warships in a week. Or an even
easier time against russia, which can launch only a few thousand hypersonic nuke missiles
because its GDP is no bigger than that of texas.
The Pentagon is super slow to adapt and learn. If you understand that
bureaucracy is an ancient organizational structure and that the organizational culture of
the Pentagon is pathologically dysfunctional you could have predicted the moral and
financial bankruptcy of America 15-20 years ago. The "Why?", finally made sense when I
discovered what a sociopath was.
It's about time the US practices what it preachs and start behaving like a normal
country instead of a spoiled narcissistic brat. see more
US military & strategic thought became lazy during the
late days of the Cold War. It mirrored the decline & fall of the foundations of its
opponent, USSR. Post-Cold War, US military & strategic thinking flushed into the sewer.
It was all about maintaining the military as some sort of a social policy jobs program,
operating legacy tech as the mission. And then came the "world-improvers" -- beginning w
the Clinton Admin -- who worked to turn the world into a global "urban renewal" project;
meaning to mirror the success US Big Govt showed in the slums of American cities from sea
to sea. The past 30 yrs of US strategic thinking and related governance truly disgusts me.
see more
Soviet union fall had very different reasons and Soviet military thought was
doing quite well then along with military. Current russian military wonders is completion
of what was started then and not finished earlier because of the disintegration of the
Soviet state. The soviet fall however is extremely regrettable because there was a new way how things can
be done that Soviet union was showing to the world. USA fall long term is a very good thing
because USA is a paragon of how things should be done the old way and basically a huge
parasite. Many negative trends that are afflicting the world were started by USA. Unlimited
individualism and consumerism would be a couple of those. see more
Why does almost every person on Earth feel the need to force others to
bend the knee to their beliefs?
Religious beliefs are what one thinks should be done to promote survival in an
afterlife, political beliefs are what one thinks should be done to promote survival in this
world.
The world would be a far better, more civilized, of world if such beliefs were only
shared on a voluntary basis.
As for individualism, I would rather be free than live in a modern day egalitarian
hunter-gatherer tribe run by modern day psychopathic alpha-males.
That is certainly not a recipe for success. see more
It also mirrors the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. It was Emperor
Augustus that decided the costs to further expand the Empire were too great after losing
one (or two?) legions against the Germanic tribes.
The US has reached its greatest extent. We are living through it. The US didn't go forward
into war with Iran twice. The odds of humanity surviving this immense turn of history is
looking better. see more
Frankly, nothing in common. I read this comparison all the
time.
Yes, Augustus decided not to continue along with expansion into Germany after losing 3
Varus legions due to ambush.
But he famously noted that it does not worth to go fishing with golden hook. Basically
speaking, Germany was not worth fighting for. Poor and remote it had nothing to offer. Just
a drain on resources. As long as conquest was moving smoothly it was ok, but after losses
were inflicted Augustus decided it was not worth it.
Roman expansion under augustus was carried mostly to consolidate previous conquests and
create strategical debth along core and strategical provinces also creating linkage.
When enemy far stronger than germans posed resources which made the whole conquest worthy
no amount of resistance saved Dacians and Parthia also almost died under Trajan attack.
Roman policies were adequate and wise. Treaties were respected, allies supported and
benefited. Empire was build around Mediterranean creating good communication and routes
considering obviously limits of that day technology.
Rome did not behave like crazy and did not deliver threats that she could not follow
through. When war was decided upon thorough preparations were taken. Political goals were
achieved. Wars were won. When Adrian considered that empire was overextended in Parthis, he
simply abandoned all conquered territories. Just like that.
Logical calm thinking USA,is not capable of. Rome truly based upon superior military and
diplomacy dominance lasted many centuries. USA few decades. One hit wonder, lucky fool I
would call it. see more
Yes, this is somewhat puzzling. As I said, let's wait and see where it all
develops to, but as Twisted Genius succinctly observed -- Iran now controls tempo because she
has conventional superiority. Anyone who has precision-guided, stand off weaponry in good
numbers will be on top. see more
The old submarine saying is, "There are two kinds of ships; submarines, and
targets." . The new version for land ops is, "There are two kinds of land-based military assets;
precision-guided missiles, and targets." (And per the photos, those Iranian missiles were
quite precise; bulls-eyes.) . Iran and its missiles demonstrated that the entire strategic foundation for US mil presence
in the Middle East is now obsolete. Everything the US would ever want to do there is now
subject to Iran's version of "steel rain." Every runway, hangar, aircraft parking area;
every supply depot or warehouse; every loading pier, fuel site, naval pier. Everything...
is a target. And really... there's no amount of US "airpower" and "tech" than can mitigate
the Iran missile threat. . Meanwhile, related thinking... Iran's true strategic interest is NOT fighting a near-term
war w/ USA. Iran wants US to exit Middle East; and Iran wants to be able to pursue its
nuclear program. Soleimani or no, Iran appears to have its eyeballs fixed on the long-term
goals. see more
The new version for land ops is, "There are two kinds of land-based military assets;
precision-guided missiles, and targets."
Exactly, and Iran has long-range TLAMs in who knows what numbers, That, in its turn,
brings about the next issue of range for Iranian indigenous anti-ship missiles. Not, of
course, to mention the fact of only select people knowing if Russia transferred P-800 Onyx
to Iran She certainly did it for Syria. If that weapon is there--the Persian Gulf and
Hormuz Strait will be shut completely closed and will push out CBGs far into the Indian
Ocean. see more
It is simply pathetic after decades of talking non stop about developments of
anti missiles and huge amounts wasted and nobody is responsible. This is the way capitalism
works.profits is everything and outcomes secondary. Thankfully russia has got soviet
foundation and things so far are working well. I come to think that in our times no serious
industrial processes should be allowed to stay in private hands. Only services and so.e
other simpler stuff under heavy state control to ensure quality. Otherwise profit
orientation will eventually destroy everything like with Boeing.
I know, i already wrote a full scale war scenario in one of
the comments. Iran can destroy all US bases in 2000 km range. But this does not mean that
it can not be bombed back to the stone age, if the US really wishes so. The problem for the
US is the high cost as well as the high debt levels, but it does have the technical
capability to do that after 2 - 3 years of bombing.
Also low yield tactical nukes are designed to lower the treshold of the use of nukes in
otherwise conventional war, producing less international outrage than the megaton city
buster bombs. Why do you think the US is developing them again? Because they would want to
use them in conventional conflicts.
Here btw is Yurasumy, he also says that the US can technically bomb Iran back to the
stone age, but the cost will be too high.
Again--what's the plan and what's the price? Iran HAS Russia's ISR on her side in case
of such SEAD.
Does the United States want to risk lives of thousands of its personnel (not
to speak of expensive equipment) in Qatar, KSA, Iraq. Does Israel want to "get it"?
There
are numbers which describe such an operation (it was. most likely, already planned as
contingency). Immediate question: when was the last time USAF operated in REAL dense ECM
and ECCM environment? I do not count some brushes with minimal EW in Syria.
Russia there
uses only minimally required option, for now. Iran has a truck load EW systems, including
some funny Russian toys which allowed Iran to take control of US UAVs, as an example. As I
say, this is not Iraq and by a gigantic margin. see more
I already said that debt levels do not allow it and the price
would be too high, but yes, the US does have the military capability to destroy Iran. By
conventional means. It is another question that it is not in good fiscal shape. Anyway, US
ballistic missiles (non nuclear armed) will be hard to stop by EW. Even if Iran gets rid of
50 % of incoming TLAMs, the US will keep sending more and more until most infrastructure,
bridges, oil refineries, power plants, factories, ports etc. are destroyed. This is why i
said it would take 2 - 3 years. see more
but yes, the US does have the military capability to destroy Iran. By conventional
means
That is the whole point: NO, it doesn't. Unless US goes into full mobilization mode and
addresses ALL (plus a million more not listed) requirements for such a war which I listed
in the post. Well, that or nukes. see
more
Yurasumy is a pretty good analist and he thinks that they can. I do not
see it for the US being too hard to produce more TLAMS, ICBMs and IRBMs (conventional) to
sustain the effort for 2 years, by that time most iranian infrastructure will be destroyed.
If the fiscal situation allowes it. see more
I don't know who Yarasumy is and what is his background, but unlike him I
actually write books, including on modern warfare. This is not to show off, but I am sure I
can make basic calculations. This is not to mention the fact that even Sivkov agrees with
my points and Sivkov, unlike Yarsumy, graduated Popov's VVMURE, served at subs, then
graduated Kuznetsov Academy, then Academy of the General Staff and served in Main
Operational Directorate (GOU) until retiring in the rank of Captain 1st Rank from the
billet of Combat Planning group. So, I would rather stick to my opinion.
see more
Why do you think that the US can not destroy Iran with IRBMs? Actually this
is their strategy vs China. If they think its viable vs China, then it should be viable vs
Iran too. see more
Because unlike the US, Russia's Air Defenses have a rather
very impressive history of shifting the balance in wars in favor of those who have them,
when used properly. But then I can quote for you a high ranking intelligence officer:
A friend of mine who has expertise in these matters wrote me:
Any air defense engineer with a securityclearance that isn't lying through his teeth
will admit that Russia'sair defense technology surpassed us in the 1950's and we've never
been able to catch up. The systems thy have in place surrounding Moscow make our Patriot
3's look like fucking nerf guns.
Mathematics is NOT there for the United States for a real combined operations war of
scale with Iran. Unless US political class really wants to see people with pitch-forks.
see more
"Mathematics is not there..." . Neither is the industrial base, including supply lines. Not the mines, mills, factories to
produce any significant levels of warfighting materiel such as we're talking about here.
Not the workforce, either. Meanwhile, where are the basic designs for these weps? The years
of lab work, bench tests, pilot specimens & prototypes, the development pipeline? The
contractors to build them? the Tier 2, 3, 4 suppliers? Where are the universities that
train such people as are needed? Where is the political will? Where is the government
coordination? Where is the money? Indeed, every Democrat and probably half the Republicans
who run for office campaign on controlling military spending; not that USA gets all that
much benefit from the current $800 billion per year. see more
You see, here is the difference--I can calculate approximate required force
for that but I don't want to. It is Friday. You can get some basic intro into operational
theory (and even into Salvo Equations) in my latest book. Granted, my publisher fought me
tooth and nail to remove as much match as possible. But I'll give you a hint--appearance of
S-500 on any theater of operations effectively closes it off effectively for any missile or
aircraft operations when deployed in echeloned (multi-layer) AD. see more
"... Economic growth is more about financialising goods and services that were previously free or are/were social goods. There is no real growth; just taxing the living. ..."
"... So, in my view, the only restraint on destroying Iran is capability, is the cost and the risk of retaliation (not just from Iran) - not the destruction of Iran's capital - better for Iran's capital to be destroyed than for Iran to be independent or a competitor. ..."
My comment @342 should have read: "The petrodollar is the way in which the US gets the
rest of the world to fund its wars,"
---------
Your comment about capitalist accumulation doesn't hold (as a motivator for the US) when
we have a capitalist monopolist situation. Rate of profit is not about growth (of real
goods); it is about reducing competition and scarcity. When you are the monopolist you can
charge what you like but profit becomes meaningless - the monopolist power comes from the
control of resources - the monopolistic capitalist becomes a ruler/monarch. You no longer
need ever-increasing customers so you can dispense with them if you so chose (by reducing the
population). One bottle of water is far more valuable and a lot less trouble to produce that
100 millions bottles of water. There is no point in AI to provide for the needs of "the
many"; AI becomes a means to dispense with "the many" altogether.
Economic growth is more about financialising goods and services that were previously free
or are/were social goods. There is no real growth; just taxing the living.
So, in my view, the only restraint on destroying Iran is capability, is the cost and the risk of
retaliation (not just from Iran) - not the destruction of Iran's capital - better for Iran's
capital to be destroyed than for Iran to be independent or a competitor.
The future of the U.S.'s involvement in the Middle East is in Iraq. The exchange of
hostilities between the U.S. and Iran occurred wholly on Iraqi soil and it has become the site
on which that war will continue.
Israel continues to up the ante on Iran, following President Trump's lead by bombing Shia
militias stationed near the Al Bukumai border crossing between Syria and Iraq.
The U.S. and Israel are determined this border crossing remains closed and have demonstrated
just how far they are willing to go to prevent the free flow of goods and people across this
border.
The regional allies of Iran are to be kept weak, divided and constantly under
harassment.
Iraq is the battleground because the U.S. lost in Syria. Despite the presence of U.S. troops
squatting on Syrian oil fields in Deir Ezzor province or the troops sitting in the desert
protecting the Syrian border with Jordan, the Russians, Hezbollah and the Iranian Quds forces
continue to reclaim territory previously lost to the Syrian government.
Now with Turkey redeploying its pet Salafist head-choppers from Idlib to Libya to fight
General Haftar's forces there to legitimize its claim to eastern Mediterannean gas deposits,
the restoration of Syria's territorial integrity west of the Euphrates River is nearly
complete.
The defenders of Syria can soon transition into the rebuilders thereof, if allowed. And they
didn't do this alone, they had a silent partner in China the entire time.
And, if I look at this situation honestly, it was China stepping out from behind the shadows
into the light that is your inciting incident for this chapter in Iraq's story.
China moving in to sign a $10.1 billion deal with the Iraqi government to begin the
reconstruction of its ruined oil and gas industry in exchange for oil is of vital
importance.
It doubles China's investment in Iraq while denying the U.S. that money and influence.
This happened after a massive $53 billion deal between Exxon-Mobil and Petrochina was put on
hold after the incident involving Iran shooting down a U.S. Global Hawk drone in June.
With the U.S balking over the Exxon/Petrochina big deal, Iraqi Prime Minster Adel Abdul
Mahdi signed the new one with China in October. Mahdi brought up the circumstances surrounding
that in Iraqi parliaments during the session in which it passed the resolution recommending
removal of all foreign forces from Iraq.
Did Trump openly threaten Mahdi over this deal as I covered in my
podcast on this? Did the U.S. gin up protests in Baghdad, amplifying unrest over growing
Iranian influence in the country?
And, if not, were these threats simply implied or carried by a minion (Pompeo, Esper, a
diplomat)? Because the U.S.'s history of regime change operations is well documented. Well
understood color revolution
tactics used successfully in
places like Ukraine , where snipers were deployed to shoot protesters and police alike to
foment violence between them at the opportune time were on display in Baghdad.
Mahdi openly accused Trump of threatening him, but that sounds more like Mahdi using the
current impeachment script to invoke the sinister side of Trump and sell his case.
It's not that I don't think Trump capable of that kind of threat, I just don't think he's
stupid enough to voice it on an open call. Donald Trump is capable of many impulsive things,
openly threatening to remove an elected Prime Minister on a recorded line is not one of
them.
Mahdi has been under the U.S.'s fire since he came to power in late 2018. He was the man who
refused Trump during
Trump's impromptu Christmas visit to Iraq in 2018 , refusing to be summoned to a
clandestine meeting at the U.S. embassy rather than Trump visit him as a head of state, an
equal.
He was the man who declared the Iraqi air space closed after Israeli air attacks on Popular
Mobilization Force (PMF) positions in September.
And he's the person, at the same time, being asked by Trump to act as a mediator between
Saudi Arabia and Iran in peace talks for Yemen.
So, the more we look at this situation the more it is clear that Abdul Madhi, the first
Iraqi prime minister since the 2003 U.S. invasion push for more Iraqi sovereignty, is emerging
as the pivotal figure in what led up to the attack on General Soleimani and what comes after
Iran's subsequent retaliation.
It's clear that Trump doesn't want to fight a war with Iran in Iran. He wants them to
acquiesce to his unreasonable demands and begin negotiating a new nuclear deal which
definitively stops the possibility of Iran developing a nuclear weapon, and as P
atrick Henningsen at 21st Century Wire thinks ,
Trump now wants a new deal which features a prohibition on Iran's medium range missiles ,
and after events this week, it's obvious why. Wednesday's missile strike by Iran demonstrates
that the US can no longer operate in the region so long as Iran has the ability to extend its
own deterrence envelope westwards to Syria, Israel, and southwards to the Arabian Peninsula,
and that includes all US military installations located within that radius.
Iraq doesn't want to be that battlefield. And Iran sent the message with those two missile
strikes that the U.S. presence in Iraq is unsustainable and that any thought of retreating to
the autonomous Kurdish region around the air base at Erbil is also a non-starter.
The big question, after this attack, is whether U.S. air defenses around the Ain al Assad
airbase west of Ramadi were active or not. If they were then Trump's standing down after the
air strikes signals what Patrick suggests, a new Middle East in the making.
If they were not turned on then the next question is why? To allow Iran to save face after
Trump screwed up murdering Soleimani?
I'm not capable of believing such Q-tard drivel at this point. It's far more likely that the
spectre of Russian electronics warfare and radar evasion is lurking in the subtext of this
story and the U.S. truly now finds itself after a second example of Iranian missile technology
in a nascent 360 degree war in the region.
It means that Iran's threats against the cities of Haifa and Dubai were real.
In short, it means the future of the U.S. presence in Iraq now measures in months not
years.
Because both China and Russia stand to gain ground with a newly-united Shi'ite Iraqi
population. Mahdi is now courting Russia to sell him S-300 missile defense systems to allow him
to enforce his demands about Iraqi airspace.
Moqtada al-Sadr is mobilizing his Madhi Army to oust the U.S. from Iraq. Iraq is key to the
U.S. presence in the region. Without Iraq the U.S. position in Syria is unsustainable.
If the U.S. tries to retreat to Kurdish territory and push again for Masoud Barzani and his
Peshmerga forces to declare independence Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan will go
ballistic.
And you can expect him to make good on his threat to close the Incerlik airbase, another
critical logistical juncture for U.S. force projection in the region.
But it all starts with Mahdi's and Iraq's moves in the coming weeks. But, with Trump rightly
backing down from escalating things further and not following through on his outlandish threats
against Iran, it may be we're nearing the end of this intractable standoff.
Back in June I told you
that Iran had the ability to fight asymmetrically against the U.S., not through direct
military confrontation but through the after-effects of a brief, yet violent period of war in
which all U.S., Israeli and Arab assets in the Middle East come under fire from all
directions.
It sent this same message then that by attacking oil tankers it could make the transport of
oil untenable and not insurable. We got a taste of it back then and Trump, then, backed
down.
And the resultant upheaval in the financial markets creating an abyss of losses, cross-asset
defaults, bank failures and government collapses.
Trump has no real option now but to negotiate while Iraq puts domestic pressure on him to
leave and Russia/China come in to provide critical economic and military support to assist
Mahdi rally his country back towards some semblance of sovereignty
How about "what is the goal?" There is none of course. The assholes in the Washington/MIC
just need war to keep them relevant. What if the US were to closed down all those wars and
foreign bases? THEN the taxpayer could demand some accounting for the trillions that are
wasted on complete CRAP. There are too many old leftovers from the cold war who seem to think
there is benefit to fighting wars in shithole places just because those wars are the only
ones going on right now. The stupidity of the ****** in the US military/MIC/Washington is
beyond belief. JUST LEAVE you ******* idiots.
Sometimes, in treading thru the opaque, sandstorm o ******** swept wastes of the '
desert of the really real '...
one must rely upon a marking... some kind of guidepost, however tenuous, to show you to be
still... on the trail, not lost in the vast haunted reaches of post-reality. And you know,
Tommy is that sort of guide; the sort of guy who you take to the fairgrounds, set him up with
the 'THROW THE BALL THRU THE HOOP... GUARANTEED PRIZE TO SCOOP' kiosk...
and he misses every time. Just by watching Tom run through his paces here... zeroing in on
the exact WRONG interpretation of events ... every dawg gone time... one resets their compass
to tru course and relaxes into the flow agin! Thanks Tom! Let's break down ... the Schlitzy
shopping list of sloppy errors:
Despite the presence of U.S. troops squatting on Syrian oil fields in Deir Ezzor
province or the troops sitting in the desert protecting the Syrian border with Jordan, the
Russians, Hezbollah and the Iranian Quds forces continue to reclaim territory previously
lost to the Syrian government. / umm Tom... the Russkies just ONCE AGIN... at Ankaras
request .. imposed a stop on the IDLIB CAMPAIGN. Which by the way... is being conducted
chiefly by the SAA. Or was that's to say. To the east... the Russkies have likewise become
the guarantors of .... STATIS... that is a term implying no changes on the map. Remember
that word Tom... "map" ... I recommend you to find one... and learn how to use it!
Now with Turkey redeploying its pet Salafist head-choppers from Idlib to Libya to fight
General Haftar's forces there to legitimize its claim to eastern Mediterannean gas
deposits, the restoration of Syria's territorial integrity west of the Euphrates River is
nearly complete. See above... with gravy Tom. Two hundred jihadists moving to Libya has not
changed the status quo... except in dreamland.
Israel continues to up the ante on Iran, f ollowing President Trump's lead by bombing
Shia militias stationed near the Al Bukumai border crossing between Syria and Iraq.
Urusalem.. and its pathetically obedient dogsbody USSA ... are busy setting up RIMFISTAN
Tom.. you really need to start expanding your reading list; On both sides of that border
you mention .. they will be running - and guarding - pipeline running to the mothership.
Shia miitias and that project just don't mix. Nobody gives a frying fluck bout your
imaginary 'land bridge to the Med'... except you and the gomers. And you and they aren't
ANYWHERES near to here.
Abdul Madhi, the first Iraqi prime minister since the 2003 U.S. invasion push for
more Iraqi sovereignty, is emerging as the pivotal figure in what led up to the attack on
General Soleimani and what comes after Iran's subsequent retaliation.
Ok... this is getting completely embarrassing. The man is a 'caretaker' Tom...
that's similar to a 'janitor' - he's on the way out. If you really think thats' being
pivotal... I'm gonna suggest that you've 'pivoted' on one of your goats too many
times.
Look, Tom... I did sincerely undertake to hold your arm, and guide you through this to a
happier place. But you... are underwater my man. And that's quite an accomplishment, since we
be traveling through the deserts of the really real. You've enumerated a list of things which
has helped me to understand just how completely distorted is the picture of the situation
here in mudded east.. is... in the minds of the myriad victims of your alt-media madness. And
I thank you for that. But its time we part company.
These whirring klaidescope glasses I put on, in order to help me see how you see things,
have given me a bit of a headache. Time to return to seeing the world... as it really
works!
The whole *target and destroy* Iran (and Iraq) clusterfuck has always been about creating
new profit scenarios, profit theaters, for the MIC.
If the US govt was suddenly forced to stop making and selling **** designed to kill
people... if the govt were forced to stopping selling **** to other people so
they can kill people... if the govt were forced to stop stockpiling **** designed to
kill people just so other people would stop building and stockpiling **** designed to kill
people... first the US then the world would collapse... everyone would finally see... the US
is a nation of people that allows itself to be propped up by the worst sort of people... an
infinitesimally small group of gangsters who legally make insane amounts of money... by
creating in perpetuity... forever new scenarios that allow them to kill other people.
Jesus ******* Christ ZeroHedge software ******* sucks.
Why has Trump no real option? What do you believe are the limits of Trump's options that
assure he must negotiate? Perhaps all out war is not yet possible politically in the US, but
public sentiment has been manipulated before. Why not now?
One must not yet reject the idea that the road to Moscow and Beijing does not run through
Iran. Throwing the US out of the Middle East would be a grievous failure for the deep state
which has demonstrated itself to be absolutely ruthless. It is hard to believe the US will
leave without a much more serious war forcing the issue.
So far Trump has appeared artless and that may continue but that artlessness may well
bring a day when Trump will not back down.
The motivation behind Trump pulling out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action wasn't
because, after careful analytical study of the plan, he decided it was a bad deal. It was
because Israel demanded it as it didn't fit into their best interests and, as with the
refreezing of relationships with Cuba, it was a easier way to undo Obama policy rather than
tackling Obamacare. Hardly sound judgement.
The war will continue in Iraq as the Shia majority mobilize against an occupying force
that has been asked to leave, but refuse. What will quickly become apparent is that this war
is about to become far more multifaceted with Iraqi and Iranian proxies targeting American
interests across numerous fronts.
Trump is the head of a business empire; Downsizing is not a strategy that he's ever
employed; His business history is a case study in go big or go bust.
trump's zionist overlords have demanded he destroy iran.
as a simple lackey, he agreed, but he does need political cover to do so.
thus the equating of any attack or threat of attack by any group of any political
persuasion as originating from iran.
any resistance by the shia in iraq will be considered as being directed from iran, thus an
attack on iran is warranted.
any resistance by the currect governement of iraq will be considered as being directed
from iran, thus an attack on iran is warranted.
any resistance by the sunni in iraq will be considered subversion by iran, or a false flag
by iran, thus an attack on iran is warranted.
trump's refusal to follow the SOFA agreement, and heed the call of the democratic
government we claim to have gone in to install, is specifically designed to lead to more
violence, which in turn can be blamed on iran's "malign" influence, which gives the entity
lackeys cover to spread more democracy.
I'm more positive that Iraq can resolve its issues without starting a Global War.
The information
shared by the Iraqi Prime Minister goes part way to awakening the population as to what
is happening and why.
Once more information starts to leak out (and it will from those individuals who want to
avoid extinction) the broad mass of the global population can take action to protect
themselves from the psychopaths.
China moving in to sign a $10.1 billion deal with the Iraqi government to begin the
reconstruction of its ruined oil and gas industry in exchange for oil is of vital
importance.
Come on Tom, you should know better than that: the U.S will destroy any agreements between
China and the people of Iraq.
The oil will continue to be stolen and sent to Occupied Palestine to administer and the
people of Iraq will be in constant revolt, protest mode and subjugation- but they will never
know they are being manipulated by the thieving zionists in D.C and Tel aviv.
Agreed. It will take nothing short of a miracle to stop this. Time isnt on their side
though so they better get on it. They will do something big to get it going.
This isn't "humanity." Few people are psychopathic killers. It is being run by a small
cliche of Satanists who are well on their way to enslaving humanity in a dystopia even George
Orwell could not imagine. They control most of the levers of power and influence and have
done so for centuries.
Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to
risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one
piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor
for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the
country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along,
whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the
leaders. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the
peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in
any country.
- Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring's testimony before the Nuremberg tribunal on crimes
against humanity
"... The Las Vegas billionaire gave Republicans $82m for the 2016 elections and his views, notably staunch support for Netanyahu's Israel, are now the official US line ..."
"... Adelson's considerable support for Republicans is in no small part motivated by what he regards as their more reliable support for the policies of Benjamin Netanyahu , which appear intent on preventing the creation of an independent Palestinian state. ..."
"... Adelson gave $82m toward Trump's and other Republican campaigns during the 2016 election cycle – more than three times the next largest individual donor, according to Open Secrets . ..."
"... That commitment bought him an attentive hearing from the new administration as he pushed for the appointment of Bolton as national security adviser knowing that he would be an important ally in getting the White House to kill the Iran nuclear deal. The New York Times reported that Adelson is a member of a " shadow National Security Council " advising Bolton. ..."
"... The day after Trump announced that the US was pulling out of the Iran agreement, Adelson was reported to have held a private meeting at the White House with the president, Bolton and Vice-President Mike Pence. ..."
"... Adelson was so enthusiastic about the move that he offered to pay for some of the costs and provided a jet to fly Guatemala's official delegation to Israel for the ceremony. (The Central American country has also announced plans to follow Trump and move its own embassy .) ..."
"... "Adelson is a linchpin in bringing together the radical extremists on the Israeli right and this group of hardliners on Israel and neoconservatives," said Levy, who is now president of the US-based Middle East Project. ..."
"... He paid for a new headquarters for the most powerful pro-Israel lobby group in Washington (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), spent $100m to fund "birthright" trips for young Jewish Americans to Israel, and funds a group opposing criticism of the Jewish state at US universities. ..."
"... In 2015 he secretly bought the Las Vegas newspaper, the Review-Journal , which had led the way in critical coverage of the billionaire's business dealings. Several reporters subsequently left the paper complaining of editorial interference and curbs on reporting of the gambling industry. ..."
"... Right now, Adelson is concentrated on ensuring the Republicans remain in control of Congress, and is pouring $30m into funding the GOP's midterm elections campaign. ..."
"... Adelson is no less active in Israel where he owns the country's largest newspaper, a publication so closely linked with Netanyahu's administration it has been dubbed the "Bibipaper" after the prime minister's nickname. ..."
"... In 2014, he told a conference during a discussion about the implications for democracy of perpetual occupation or annexation of parts of the West Bank without giving Palestinians the right to vote in Israeli elections: "Israel isn't going to be a democratic state. So what?" ..."
The Las Vegas
billionaire gave Republicans $82m for the 2016 elections and his views, notably staunch support
for Netanyahu's Israel, are now the official US line
Sheldon Adelson
has spent millions on backing Israel and attacking supporters of Palestinian rights in the US.
Photograph: Kin Cheung/AP In 2015, the billionaire casino owner and Republican party funder
Sheldon
Adelson spent days in a Las Vegas courtroom watching his reputation torn apart and
wondering if his gambling empire was facing ruin.
An official from Nevada's gaming control board sat at the back of the court listening to
mounting evidence that
Adelson bribed Chinese officials and worked with organised crime at his casinos in Macau
– allegations that could have seen the magnate's Las Vegas casinos stripped of their
licenses.
The case, a civil suit by a former manager of the Macau gaming operations who said he was
fired for curbing corrupt practices, was another blow in a bad run for Adelson.
He had thrown $150m into a futile effort to unseat the "socialist" and "anti-Israel" Barack
Obama in the 2012 election. His credibility as a political player was not enhanced by his
backing of Newt Gingrich for president.
But three years on from the court case, Adelson's influence has never been greater.
"Adelson's established himself as an influential figure in American politics with the amount
of money that he has contributed," said Logan Bayroff of the liberal pro-Israel group, J
Street. "There's no doubt that he has very strong, very far-right dangerous positions and that
– at very least – those positions are really being heard and thought about at the
highest levels of government."
As the 2015 court hearing unfolded, the billionaire swallowed his considerable pride and
paid millions of dollars to settle the lawsuit, heading off the danger of the graft allegations
being tested at a full trial.
The casinos stayed in business and continued to contribute to a vast wealth that made
Adelson the 14th
richest person in America last year with a net worth of $35bn, according to Forbes.
Adelson has put some of that money toward pushing an array of political interests ranging
from protecting his business from online gambling to opposition to marijuana legalisation.
But nothing aligns more closely with his world view than the intertwining of the Republican
party and Israel .
Adelson's considerable support for Republicans is in no small part motivated by what he
regards as their more reliable support for the policies of Benjamin Netanyahu , which appear
intent on preventing the creation of an independent Palestinian state.
Adelson gave $82m toward Trump's and other Republican campaigns during the 2016 election
cycle – more than three times the next largest individual donor, according
to Open Secrets .
That commitment bought him an attentive hearing from the new administration as he pushed for
the appointment of Bolton as national security adviser knowing that he would be an important
ally in getting the White House to kill the Iran nuclear deal. The New York Times reported that
Adelson is a member of a " shadow
National Security Council " advising Bolton.
The day after Trump announced that the US was pulling out of the Iran agreement, Adelson was
reported to have held a
private meeting at the White House with the president, Bolton and Vice-President Mike
Pence.
Facebook
Twitter Pinterest Sheldon Adelson attends the opening ceremony of the new US embassy in
Jerusalem in May. Photograph: Sebastian Scheiner/AP
The casino magnate also pushed hard to see the US embassy moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem
– an action previous presidents had shied away from because of the diplomatic
ramifications.
Adelson was so enthusiastic about the move that he offered to pay for some of the costs and
provided a jet to fly Guatemala's official delegation to Israel for the ceremony. (The Central
American country has also announced plans to
follow Trump and move its own embassy .)
Daniel Levy, a former member of Israeli negotiating teams with the Palestinians and policy
adviser to the then Israeli prime minister, Ehud Barak, said that Adelson's money had helped
resurface neoconservative policies which had been discredited after the US invasion of
Iraq.
"Adelson is a linchpin in bringing together the radical extremists on the Israeli right and
this group of hardliners on Israel and neoconservatives," said Levy, who is now president of
the US-based Middle East Project.
The billionaire is also deeply committed to protecting Israel within the US.
An example
of an anti-BDS poster funded by Sheldon Adelson. Photograph: Courtesy of Robert Gardner
He paid for a new headquarters for the most powerful pro-Israel lobby group in Washington
(the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), spent $100m to fund "birthright" trips for
young Jewish Americans to Israel, and funds a group opposing criticism of the Jewish state at
US universities.
The Israeli newspaper
Haaretz recently revealed that Adelson funded an investigation by an Israeli firm with ties
to the country's police and military into the American activist Linda Sarsour, a co-chair of
the Women's March movement who campaigns for Palestinian rights and supports a boycott of the
Jewish state.
Adelson also funds Rabbi Shmuley Boteach and his World Values Network which published a
full-page personal attack in the New York Times on the actor Natalie Portman for refusing an
award from Israel because of its government's policies.
For his part, the casino magnate does not take criticism well.
In 2015
he secretly bought the Las Vegas newspaper, the Review-Journal , which had led the way in
critical coverage of the billionaire's business dealings. Several reporters subsequently left
the paper complaining of editorial interference and curbs on reporting of the gambling
industry.
Right now, Adelson is concentrated on ensuring the Republicans remain in control of
Congress, and is pouring $30m into funding the GOP's midterm elections campaign.
Adelson is no less active in Israel where he owns the country's largest newspaper, a
publication so closely linked with Netanyahu's administration it has been dubbed the
"Bibipaper" after the prime minister's nickname.
Personal relations with Netanyahu have soured but Adelson remains committed to the prime
minister's broader "Greater Israel" political agenda and to strengthening ties between the
Republicans' evangelical base and Israel.
It's not always a welcome involvement by a man who is not an Israeli citizen – not
least because Adelson's vision for the Jewish state does not represent how many of its people
see their country.
In 2014, he told a conference during a discussion about the implications for democracy of
perpetual occupation or annexation of parts of the West Bank without giving Palestinians the
right to vote in Israeli elections: "Israel isn't going to be a democratic state. So what?"
'Brought to Jesus': the evangelical grip on the Trump administration The influence of
evangelical Christianity is likely to become an important question as Trump finds himself
dependent on them for political survival
Fri 11 Jan 2019 02.00 EST Last modified on Fri 18 Jan 2019 16.51 EST
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email Donald Trump at
the Republican national convention in Cleveland, Ohio, on 18 July 2016. Photograph: Mike
Segar/Reuters I n setting out the Trump administration's Middle East policy, one of the first
things Mike Pompeo made clear to his audience in Cairo is that he had come to the region as "as
an evangelical Christian".
In his speech at the American University in Cairo, Pompeo said that in his state department
office: "I keep a Bible open on my desk to remind me of God and his word, and the truth."
The secretary of state's primary message in Cairo was that the US was ready once more to
embrace conservative Middle Eastern regimes, no matter how repressive, if they made common
cause against Iran.
His second message was religious. In his visit to Egypt, he came across as much as a
preacher as a diplomat. He talked about "America's innate goodness" and marveled at a newly
built cathedral as "a stunning testament to the Lord's hand".
ss="rich-link"> 'Toxic Christianity': the evangelicals creating champions for
Trump Read more
The desire to erase Barack Obama's legacy, Donald Trump's instinctive embrace of autocrats,
and the private interests of the Trump Organisation have all been analysed as driving forces
behind the administration's foreign policy.
The gravitational pull of white evangelicals has been less visible. But it could have
far-reaching policy consequences. Vice President Mike Pence and Pompeo both cite evangelical
theology as a powerful motivating force.
Just as he did in Cairo, Pompeo called on the congregation of a Kansan megachurch three
years ago to join a fight of good against evil.
"We will continue to fight these battles," the then congressman said at the Summit church in Wichita. "It
is a never-ending struggle until the rapture. Be part of it. Be in the fight."
For Pompeo's audience, the rapture invoked an apocalyptical Christian vision of the future,
a final battle between good and evil, and the second coming of Jesus Christ, when the faithful
will ascend to heaven and the rest will go to hell.
For many US evangelical Christians, one of the key preconditions for such a moment is the
gathering of the world's Jews in a greater Israel between the Mediterranean and the Jordan
River. It is a belief, known as premillenial dispensationalism or Christian Zionism – and
it has very real potential consequences for US foreign policy .
It directly colours views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and indirectly, attitudes
towards Iran, broader Middle East geopolitics and the primacy of protecting Christian
minorities. In his Cairo visit, Pompeo heaped praise on Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, for building the
new cathedral, but made no reference to the 60,000
political prisoners the regime is thought to be holding, or its routine use of torture.
Pompeo is an evangelical Presbyterian, who says he was "brought to Jesus" by other cadets at
the West Point military academy in the 1980s.
"He knows best how his faith interacts with his political beliefs and the duties he
undertakes as secretary of state," said Stan van den Berg, senior pastor of Pompeo's church in
Wichita in an email. "Suffice to say, he is a faithful man, he has integrity, he has a
compassionate heart, a humble disposition and a mind for wisdom."
As Donald
Trump finds himself ever more dependent on them for his political survival, the influence
of Pence, Pompeo and the ultra-conservative white Evangelicals who stand behind them is likely
to grow.
"Many of them relish the second coming because for them it means eternal life in heaven,"
Andrew Chesnut, professor of religious studies at Virginia Commonwealth University said. "There
is a palpable danger that people in high position who subscribe to these beliefs will be
readier to take us into a conflict that brings on Armageddon."
Chesnut argues that Christian Zionism has become the "majority theology" among white US
Evangelicals, who represent about a quarter of the
adult population . In a 2015
poll , 73% of evangelical Christians said events in Israel are prophesied in the Book of
Revelation. Respondents were not asked specifically whether their believed developments in
Israel would actually bring forth the apocalypse.
The relationship between evangelicals and the president himself is complicated.
Trump himself embodies the very opposite of a pious Christian ideal. Trump is not
churchgoer. He is profane, twice divorced, who has boasted of sexually assaulting women. But
white evangelicals have embraced him.
Eighty per cent of white evangelicals voted for him in 2016, and his popularity among them
is remains in the 70s. While other white voters have flaked away in the first two years of his
presidency, white evangelicals have become his last solid bastion.
Some leading evangelicals see Trump as a latterday King Cyrus, the sixth-century BC Persian
emperor who liberated the Jews from Babylonian captivity.
The comparison is made explicitly in
The Trump Prophecy , a religious film screened in 1,200 cinemas around the country in
October, depicting a retired firefighter who claims to have heard God's voice, saying: "I've
chosen this man, Donald Trump, for such a time as this."
Lance Wallnau , a self-proclaimed
prophet who features in the film, has called Trump "God's Chaos Candidate" and a "modern
Cyrus".
"Cyrus is the model for a nonbeliever appointed by God as a vessel for the purposes of the
faithful," said Katherine
Stewart , who writes extensively about the Christian right.
She added that they welcome his readiness to break democratic norms to combat perceived
threats to their values and way of life.
"The Christian nationalist movement is characterized by feelings of persecution and, to some
degree, paranoia – a clear example is the idea that there is somehow a 'war on
Christmas'," Stewart said. "People in those positions will often go for authoritarian leaders
who will do whatever is necessary to fight for their cause."
Trump was raised as a Presbyterian, but leaned increasingly towards evangelical preachers as
he began contemplating a run for the presidency.
Trump's choice of Pence as a running mate was a gesture of his commitment, and four of the
six preachers at his inauguration were evangelicals, including White and Franklin Graham, the
eldest son of the preacher Billy Graham, who defended Trump through his many sex scandals,
pointing out: "We are all sinners."
Having lost control of the House of Representatives in November, and under ever closer
scrutiny for his campaign's links to the Kremlin, Trump's instinct has been to cleave ever
closer to his most loyal supporters.
Almost alone among major demographic groups, white evangelicals are overwhelmingly in favour
of Trump's border wall, which some preachers equate with fortifications in the Bible.
Evangelical links have also helped shape US alliances in the Trump presidency. As secretary
of state, Pompeo has been instrumental in forging link with other evangelical leaders in the
hemisphere, including
Guatemala's Jimmy Morales and the new Brazilian president, Jair Bolsonaro . Both have undertaken to
follow the US lead in
moving their embassies in Israel to Jerusalem .
Trump's order to move
the US embassy from Tel Aviv – over the objections of his foreign policy and national
security team – is a striking example of evangelical clout.
ss="rich-link"> Sheldon Adelson: the casino mogul driving Trump's Middle East
policy Read more
The move was also pushed by Las Vegas billionaire and Republican mega-donor, Sheldon
Adelson, but the orchestration of the
embassy opening ceremony last May, reflected the audience Trump was trying hardest to
appease.
For many evangelicals, the move cemented Trump's status as the new Cyrus, who oversaw the
Jews return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple.
The tightening of the evangelical grip on the administration has also been reflected in a
growing hostility to the UN, often portrayed as a sinister and godless organisation.
Since the US ambassador, Nikki Haley, announced her departure in October and Pompeo took
more direct control, the US mission has become increasingly combative, blocking references to
gender and
reproductive health in UN documents.
Some theologians also see an increasingly evangelical tinge to the administration's broader
Middle East policies, in particular its fierce embrace of Binyamin Netanyahu's government, the
lack of balancing sympathy for the Palestinians – and the insistent demonisation of the
Iranian government.
ss="rich-link"> US will expel every last Iranian boot from Syria, says Mike Pompeo
Read more
Evangelicals, Chesnut said, "now see the United States locked into a holy war against the
forces of evil who they see as embodied by Iran".
This zeal for a defining struggle has thus far found common cause with more secular hawks
such as the national security adviser, John Bolton, and Trump's own drive to eliminate the
legacy of Barack Obama, whose signature foreign policy achievement was the 2015 nuclear deal
with Tehran, which Trump abrogated last May.
In conversations with European leaders such as Emmanuel Macron and Theresa May, Trump has
reportedly insisted he has no intention of going to war with Iran. His desire to extricate US
troops from Syria marks a break with hawks, religious and secular, who want to contain Iranian
influence there.
But the logic of his policy of ever-increasing pressure, coupled with unstinting support for
Israel and Saudi Arabia, makes confrontation with Iran ever more likely.
One of the most momentous foreign policy questions of 2019 is whether Trump can veer away
from the collision course he has helped set in motion – perhaps conjuring up a last
minute deal, as he did with North Korea – or instead welcome conflict as a distraction
from his domestic woes, and sell it to the faithful as a crusade.
Probably in the medium term the situation for the US in ME will be worse, but in the short term (in an electoral year) the people
I talked, with some knowledge of the recent history of the ME, and me, we think:
a) Trump dares to do what at least 3 former administration did not dare to do: kill the first "terrorist" on the list (as ex-admiral
William J. Fallon has said, Suleimani was the Nº 1 in his list for 12 years), so for the American people is the more resolute
and brave POTUS of at least 10 administration (somebody says from Lincoln times). Obama was a coward.
b) The fact that Suleimani was a national hero for a nation of 82 million people and also for 150 million of shia around the
world, mourned by millions in the streets, make a bigger Trump "victory" over the Iranian "regime", and it is a powerful advice
to the others leaders and commanders in the world that try to fight or oppose to USA.
c) People say that after killing Al-Bagdadi, Suleimani, Muhandis, the next in the list is Nasralah (pure wishful thinking but
right now, why not thinking that?)
d) The USA did no use their AA system to shut-down the incoming missiles to not give a clue to the Iranians of their real effectiveness
in combat situation and because the Russians have many SIGINT platforms following the events to capture the signals, methods,
tactics and technology of the US anti-ballistic missiles systems. So now the Iranians are blind of the real effectiveness of their
missiles in a real combat situation and the Russians do not have a clue also. For sure USA can take down at least some modified
SCUD C missiles, simply it was not worth to do.
e) The fact that Trump did not retaliate is not a symptom of weakness, simply no American was hurt after killing Suleimani
(an act of war), only some holes in the sand.
f) In the speech of today Trump is defiant with the killing of Suleimani and with more economic sanctions to Iran, that will
be more crippling than now. He does not want to escalate (more). There will be a deal in the future, but much less good for the
Iranians than the Obama's JCPOA (it was an electoral promise).
g) The retaliation of the PMU, they say, "will be similar than that of Iran", translating it : "lob some katyusha rockets in
the backyard of few US bases giving advice to the Americans do not go out". No risks at all, the se-escalation is complete.
h) Trump is defiant about not leaving Iraq, I think at the end they will go but after they have a very good deal. Of course
it is all about the Iraqi oil, in exchange for the American blood and money wasted in Iraq. Iraq has the biggest oil reserves
in the world and USA want a good chunk of them, they never ever leave "giving" all of them to the Chinese or Iranians or anybody
else. Trump does not want US soldiers in Iraq, but he wants the oil above anything else (it is condition "sine qua non" to maintain
the Empire)
i) Trump has now the full enthusiastic support of the AIPAC and all the others powerful Israeli lobby he will have more money
than required for the election. He has demonstrated he is the best possible POTUS for Israel
j) In the short term USA will leave Syria and in the medium term Iraq, OK, but they never ever leave "all the region", they
need to be there to maintain the "American Way of Live" (US $ as reserve currency)
If nothing dramatically change, I expect a crushing victory of Trump in the coming US election, he has all the cards now in
his hand, and he will not waste them.
The 5 lightweight hangars at the Ain al-Asad airbase that were destroyed in the Iranian bullseye hit
housed US drones. Possibly the very one
used to assassinate General Qassem Soleimani.
See this tweet by Babak Taghvaee
from yesterday with photos:
#BREAKING: It is now confirmed that the #IRGC backed Kataib Hezbollah (45th Brigade of #PMU) launched 40 unguided rockets at
Ain Al Asad Air Base where the #USArmy's MQ-1Cs are based. At-least one of them participated in the operation for elimination
of #Soleimani in #Baghdad!
"... Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been revealed to be the puppet master behind POTUS Trump's motion to liquidate a top Iranian commander, CNN reported citing sources inside and around the White House, with the revelation indicating Pompeo's influential status in the Trump administration. ..."
"... The sources suggested that the Iranian general was Pompeo's fixation, so that he even sought to get a visa to Iran in 2016 when he represented Kansas in Congress, before assuming the role of CIA director and then his current one. ..."
"... Despite winning the moniker of "Trump whisperer" over the ties he has developed with POTUS, Pompeo's ability to sell an aggressive Iran strategy to Trump, who has commonly opposed any military confrontation, has caused a certain sway, the sources implied. ..."
"... "He's the one leading the way", according to the source in Pompeo's inner circle, discussing the showdown with Iran. "It's the president's policy, but Pompeo has been the leading voice in helping the president craft this policy. There is no doubt Mike is the one leading it in the Cabinet". ..."
"... While bragging about Washington's "big and accurate" missiles as well as US achievements during his tenure, he separately praised the "new powerful economic sanctions" aimed at Iran, promising that they would be in place until Tehran "changes its behaviour". Also, he invited NATO to get more deeply involved in what is going on in the Middle East, with the Transatlantic bloc reacting favorably to the suggestion. ..."
Mike Pompeo has reportedly long cherished plans to take the Iranian general off the Middle
East battlefield, as he is said to have for quite a while seen late Commander Soleimani as the
one behind the spiralling tensions with Tehran. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been
revealed to be the puppet master behind POTUS Trump's motion to liquidate a top Iranian
commander, CNN
reported citing sources inside and around the White House, with the revelation indicating
Pompeo's influential status in the Trump administration.
According to several sources, taking Iranian General Qasem Soleimani – the leader of
the elite Quds Force, a powerful military group with vast leverage in the region - "off the
battlefield" has been Pompeo's goal for a decade.
Pompeo "was the one who made the case to take out Soleimani, it was him absolutely", a source
said, adding he apparently floated the idea when debating the US Embassy raid over New Year
with Trump.
According to a number of sources close to Pompeo, the secretary of state has at all times
believed that Iran is the root cause of the woes in the Middle East, and Soleimani in
particular - the mastermind of terrorism raging across the region. This point of view is
notably in tune with how Pompeo commented on the commander's assassination:
"We took a bad guy off the battlefield", Pompeo told CNN on 5 January. "We made the right
decision". The same day, Pompeo told ABC that killing Soleimani was important "because this
was a fella who was the glue, who was conducting active plotting against the United States of
America, putting American lives at risk".
The sources suggested that the Iranian general was Pompeo's fixation, so that he even sought
to get a visa to Iran in 2016 when he represented Kansas in Congress, before assuming the role
of CIA director and then his current one.
Despite winning the moniker of "Trump whisperer" over the ties he has developed with POTUS,
Pompeo's ability to sell an aggressive Iran strategy to Trump, who has commonly opposed any
military confrontation, has caused a certain sway, the sources implied.
"He's the one leading the way", according to the source in Pompeo's inner circle, discussing
the showdown with Iran. "It's the president's policy, but Pompeo has been the leading voice in
helping the president craft this policy. There is no doubt Mike is the one leading it in the
Cabinet".
Regardless of who inspired the drone attack that killed Soleimani, the two countries are
indeed going through a stint of severe tensions, but no direct military confrontation. After
Tehran's retaliatory attack, Trump announced a slew of more stringent economic limitations to
be slapped on Iran.
While bragging
about Washington's "big and accurate" missiles as well as US achievements during his
tenure, he separately praised the "new powerful economic sanctions" aimed at Iran, promising
that they would be in place until Tehran "changes its behaviour". Also, he invited NATO to get
more deeply involved in what is going on in the Middle East, with the Transatlantic bloc
reacting favorably to the suggestion.
1. Being Santa Claus to Netanyahu, the far right and the very rich (Generous donors)
2. Doing the impossible, making Hillary look like the better of 2 terrible choices
3. Proving 42% of the American public aren't too swift.
"... Now, he told "Democracy Now!", it will be hard for the Iraqi public to see the bases as anything but "a force that is driving them into a war between Iran and the United States." ..."
"... "Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. I mean, remember, Qassem Soleimani arrived in Baghdad airport, where half of it is an American base. Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. He took selfies. People took his pictures. That didn't happen in secret. Qassem Soleimani was not Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi hiding in a cave or moving stealthily through the country. He stayed in the Green Zone. So, all this happened because there was an understanding between the Americans and the Iranians. So, if the Americans wanted to keep their bases in Iraq, the Iranians would have the freedom to move. And with the killing of Soleimani, the rules of the game have totally changed," he said. ..."
"The Guardian" journalist Ghaith Abdul-Ahad says that before the attack on Qassem
Soleimani in Baghdad last week "there was an understanding between the Americans and the
Iranians" that allowed officials from Iran and the U.S. to move freely within Iraq and
maintained relative goodwill toward American bases.
"The killing of Qassem Soleimani ended an era in which both Iran and the United States
coexisted in Iraq," he said.
Now, he told "Democracy Now!", it will be hard for the Iraqi public to see the bases as
anything but "a force that is driving them into a war between Iran and the United States."
"Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. I mean, remember, Qassem Soleimani arrived in
Baghdad airport, where half of it is an American base. Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in
Iraq. He took selfies. People took his pictures. That didn't happen in secret. Qassem Soleimani
was not Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi hiding in a cave or moving stealthily through the country. He
stayed in the Green Zone. So, all this happened because there was an understanding between the
Americans and the Iranians. So, if the Americans wanted to keep their bases in Iraq, the
Iranians would have the freedom to move. And with the killing of Soleimani, the rules of the
game have totally changed," he said.
AMY GOODMAN: Ghaith, can you comment on this new information that's come to light about the
timing of Soleimani's assassination Friday morning? Iraq's caretaker Prime Minister Adel
Abdul-Mahdi has revealed he had plans to meet with Soleimani on the day he was killed to
discuss a Saudi proposal to defuse tension in the region. Mahdi said, quote, "He came to
deliver me a message from Iran responding to the message we delivered from Saudi Arabia to
Iran" -- Saudi Arabia, obviously, a well-known enemy of Iran. Was he set up? Talk about the
significance of this.
GHAITH ABDUL-AHAD: Well, it is very significant if it's actually General Qassem Soleimani
came to Iraq to deliver this message, if it was actually there was a process of negotiations in
the region. We know that Abdul-Mahdi and the Iraqi government, in general, over the last year
had been trying to position Iraq as this middle power, as this power where both -- you know, as
a country that has a relationship with both Iran and the United States. In that awkward place
Iraq found itself in, Iraq has tried to maximize on this. So they started back in summer and
fall, when there was an escalation between Iran and the United States, when Iran shot down an
American drone. We've seen Adel Abdul-Mahdi fly to Iran, try to mediate. We've seen Adel
Abdul-Mahdi open channels of communications with the Gulf, with Saudi Arabia.
So, if it actually, the killing of General Soleimani, ended that peace initiative, it will
be kind of disastrous in the region, because, as Narges was saying earlier, it is -- you know,
Pompeo is speaking about Iran being this ultimate evil in the region, as this crescent of
Shias, as if they just arrived in the past 10 years in the region. The fact if we see Iran's
reactions, it's always a reaction to an American provocation. You've seen the occupation of
Iraq in 2003. You've seen Iran declared as an "axis of evil." So, if you see it from an Iranian
perspective, it's always this existential threat coming from the United States. And I don't
think there is a more existential threat than in past year. So, yes, I know -- I mean, I think
Adel Abdul-Mahdi and the Iraqi government were trying to find this middle ground, which I think
is totally lost, because even Adel Abdul-Mahdi, the person who was trying to find this middle
ground, was the person who proposed this law yesterday in the Parliament to expel all American
troops from the country.
And I would like to add like another thing. The killing of Qassem Soleimani ended an era in
which both Iran and the United States coexisted in Iraq. So, from 2013, '14, we, as
journalists, we've seen on the frontlines how the proxies of each power have been helping each
other. So we've seen Iranian advisers helping the American-trained Iraqi Army unit or
counterterrorism unit in the fight against ISIS. In the same sense, we've seen American
airstrikes on threats to these -- kind of to ISIS when it was threatening these militias. That
coexistence, it didn't only come from both having a -- sharing an enemy, which is ISIS, or
Daesh, but also these were the rules of the game. These were the rules in which Qassem
Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. I mean, remember, Qassem Soleimani arrived in Baghdad
airport, where half of it is an American base. Qassem Soleimani could travel openly in Iraq. He
took selfies. People took his pictures. That didn't happen in secret. Qassem Soleimani was not
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi hiding in a cave or moving stealthily through the country. He stayed in
the Green Zone. So, all this happened because there was an understanding between the Americans
and the Iranians. So, if the Americans wanted to keep their bases in Iraq, the Iranians would
have the freedom to move. And with the killing of Soleimani, I think the rules of the game have
totally changed.
So now I think the first victim of the assassination will be the American bases in Iraq. I
don't see any way where the Americans can keep their presence as they did before the
assassination of Soleimani. And even the people in the streets, even the people who opposes
Iran, who opposes the presence of Iranian militias in power and politics, the corruption of
these pro-Iranian parties, even those people would look at these American bases now as not as a
force that came to help them in the fight against ISIS, but a force that's dragging them into a
war between Iran and the United States.
Two helicopters and several fixed wing aircraft destroyed in Kenia, several buildings
demolished by Iran rockets. For what? For the the guy who was instumental in driving ISIS out of
Syria and Iraq?
Democratic 2020 candidate Cory Booker just tweeted about the
Capitol Hill briefing on the US-Iran crisis.
Cory Booker (@CoryBooker)
Just stepped out of a 75-minute briefing regarding President Trump's military actions in
Iraq -- we were provided no evidence of an imminent threat. I remain deeply skeptical that he
had justification for this attack.
On Iran and the Middle East, the Trump administration is following
Israel's playbook.
US President Donald Trump and Israel's PM
Benjamin Netanyahu hold up a proclamation recognising Israel's sovereignty over the
Golan Heights on March 25, 2019 [File: Reuters/Leah Millis]
Supporters of
Donald Trump
think of the US president as an exceptional one-of-a-kind force
of nature - a sui generis leader. His detractors like to compare him to Russian
President
Vladimir Putin
or describe him as a Putin stooge, and since he ordered the
"vengeful" or "reckless" assassination of Iranian General Qassim Solemani, some
have
likened
him
to a Middle Eastern despot. But a more pertinent comparison lies elsewhere.
Since taking office in January 2017, Trump's dramatic positions and
pronouncements on the Middle East and beyond have shocked and dismayed much of
the US foreign policy establishment, especially on three main challenges facing
the US in the region: security, diplomacy and democracy and human rights.
Trump has not only undone much of his predecessor's legacy, both domestically
and internationally, he also trashed Barack Obama's doctrine and policies in
favour of Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu
's. For the past three years, he has been re-coupling US
and Israeli strategies, especially towards
Iran
and the
global "war on terror" which Obama spent eight years decoupling.
This is not to say, Obama was not a staunch supporter of Israel and defender
of its "security" or was not trigger happy with the US drone assassination
programme. He certainly was. He just did not like Netanyahu and did
not appreciate his deceit.
Obama tried to pursue an independent US policy free from Israel's narrow
constraints and considerations, after eight years of the Bush administration's
wars and blunders in the region.
By contrast, Trump embraced all things Netanyahu as soon as he stepped into
the White House.
It helped that the two men have far more in common than meets the eye.
Eerie similarities
Both men are thrice married with a history of adultery, are facing charges for
misusing their office for personal gain, and have a problematic relationship with
the truth.
And yet, both Netanyahu and Trump remain all too popular with their right-wing
base.
Even religious fanatics, both in Israel and the US, consider these two
secular, undevout, and morally challenged leaders as God's vessels on earth.
Both are able
showmen
,
who have pursued, and mastered, populist, theatrical and divisive policies that
have rallied their rightist constituencies around their populist personas.
But most importantly in this context, Trump has pursued the same
ultra-nationalist securitarian, some say racist, agendas that Netanyahu has long
championed in
Israel
and the Middle East.
This is especially important today, as both commanders-in-chief are exploiting
foreign policy to deflect attention from their domestic troubles with the law.
Embracing Netanyahu's positions
Trump's knowledge of the Middle East was dismal prior to taking office. He was
an empty page ready to be filled, but only with the ideas which helped guide and
propel his presidential campaign towards victory, such as infringements on rights
of immigrants and minorities, a ban on Muslims travelling to the US, and all
things anti-Obama.
A number of Middle Eastern despots like those of Egypt and the UAE did try to
fill in some of the blanks. But no one had the ability, style, record, and
diligence of Netanyahu, who also enjoyed unfiltered access to the president-elect
through his three ultra-Zionist lieutenants, Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt and
David Friedman.
First among these ideas, was the radical departure from a quarter of a century
of US policy towards Israel and
Palestine
,
namely moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, accepting the legitimacy
of the illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian lands, abandoning
the two-state solution, and recognising Israel's sovereignty over the occupied
Syrian Golan Heights.
It is Netanyahu's dream come true.
Trump also embraced Netanyahu's view on the Arab world in support of friendly
despots and dictators and against democracy and human rights. He aligned US
policy toward the Gulf and Arab affairs with the interests of Saudi Arabia, the
UAE and Egypt and embraced Saudi Crown Prince
Mohammed bin Salman
despite his reckless policies domestically and regionally
- all in the hope of paving the way for Arab normalisation of relations with
"colonial" Israel.
Another Netanyahu dream come true.
Attacking Iran
Nowhere was Netanyahu's influence on Trump more pronounced than on Iran.
The Trump administration abandoned the Iran nuclear deal against the advice
and urging of its
NATO
allies, Russia and China.
It then pursued a punitive policy of containment through tough economic
sanctions, an option unavailable to Israel, in order to strong-arm Iran into a
humiliating new deal that not only bans all its nuclear activity, but also
curtails its military and regional outreach.
When maximum pressure did not produce the desired results, as Iran continued
its bellicose regional policies, Trump adopted both Netanyahu's means and
endgame, starting with the assassination of Soleimani, widely seen as a
"declaration of war" with untold consequences for the region.
Israel has been carrying out targeted killings and preemptive strikes against
Iranian targets in Syria; in 2013, it was accused of being behind the killing of
another Revolutionary Guard general,
Hassan
Shateri
.
To be clear, Trump did not order the assassination to avenge the killings of
countless Syrians and Iraqis; he did so to deter Iran from escalating its attacks
on US interests and allies.
Although Netanyahu tried to distance himself from the targeted assassination
of the Iranian general in Iraq, make no mistake, this is a third Netanyahu dream
come true, in a span of three years. He is said to have been the only world
leader with prior knowledge of the planned assassination.
Regional crisis
Nothing is more satisfying for an Israeli leader than having the US embrace
Israel's strategy and fight Israel's wars in the region. And nothing is more
dangerous for the rest of the world - we all know how the last conflict Tel Aviv
incited ended in disaster in Iraq.
The last thing any Israeli leader wants is for the US to withdraw from the
region, leaving Israel to fend for itself in a hostile environment. Same goes for
Saudi Arabia
.
That is why it is important to underline that while the Trump administration
may seek to reposition its forces out of the hotspots of the Middle
East, including Iraq (just as Israel redeployed out of Lebanon and Gaza) the US
will still maintain formidable projection of forces throughout the region.
The question is, will this strategy enable future US diplomacy, which also
served Israel's interests during the so-called "peace process", or lead to
the further escalation of violence and war?
Alas, the ongoing bluster about imminent attacks, counter-attacks, and
disproportionate responses and bombings of cultural sites do not bode well for
diplomacy.
With naval fleets,
military
bases
and some 60,000 troops deployed around Iran and throughout the Middle
East, the Trump administration could pursue an Israel-like air-land-sea strategy
of drones, fighter jets, guided missiles, cyber and Special Forces attacks and
targeted assassinations that exhaust its enemies and destabilises the region as a
whole.
That would be another Netanyahu dream and another Middle East nightmare come
true.
As the Trump Administration continues to
barrel toward a war with Iran, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gave a press
conference in which he once again claimed that every dubious accusation made by the
administration was true, and the internally inconsistent comments among top officials are all
somehow in agreement.
Pompeo's comments, even the ones that made no sense or were obviously untrue, were echoed
across US media outlets as absolute facts following the briefing. Everyone was clearly more
comfortable just reporting " Pompeo says "
than analyzing it.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
was very critical of some of the worst claims Pompeo made , saying one would have to be
brain-dead to believe them. He noted it made no sense to attack Iran to "preempt" attacks when
the attack just made attacks even more likely.
Pompeo was largely dismissive of questions about the US attack, and rejected claims that
Gen. Qassem Soleimani was working on Saudi diplomacy, saying
nobody believed Soleimani was engaged in diplomacy and that Iranian FM was lying about
that. In reality, Iraq's PM Adel Abdul Mahdi was the one who broke the story of why Soleimani
was in Iraq. Instead of evidence to the contrary, Pompeo just denied.
On the question of the US barring Zarif from the UN in violation of the headquarters
agreement, Pompeo said the US doesn't comment on why they deny people entrance, and insisted
that the US always complies with the headquarters agreement, despite it flat out saying you
can't block officials from speaking at the UN, and the US doing exactly that.
The closest anyone at the briefing came to calling Pompeo on his contradictions was on the
matter of the US attacking cultural sites. President Trump threatened to attack Iranian
cultural sites on Saturday, Pompeo said Trump never said that on Sunday, and Trump said it
again on Sunday evening. Pompeo was asked to address this.
Pompeo said that what he said, that Trump never said there would be attacks on cultural
sites, was "completely consistent with what the President has said," which repeatedly was that
he intends to attack cultural sites. This was a bit too glaring, and one of the press said "No,
but the President has -" before being interrupted by Pompeo.
At this point, Pompeo went off on a tangent claiming that the ayatollah is the "real threat"
to Iranian culture. When asked if that meant US attacks on cultural sites are "ruled out,"
despite Trump's comments, Pompeo promptly ended the briefing and left.
Secretary of Defense Mark Esper also claimed on Tuesday that Soleimani was planning to
attack Americans "within days" if the US hadn't killed him. As with Pompeo, his claim did not
include any evidence, and ask with Pompeo's claims, the press is echoing it.
The neocon cabal of Pompeo, Ester and O'bian needs to be fired immediately and investigated
by FBI.
Notable quotes:
"... As for the war powers resolution justification provided by the administration, that legislation was not designed to alter the fundamental constitutional balance, but to restore it, Healy says. Critically, it does not give presidents a free pass to carry out military action for 60 days without congressional approval, as some have suggested. ..."
"... The war powers resolution itself was introduced after Congress discovered Nixon's secret war in Cambodia in 1973. It was designed to allow Congress to terminate any unauthorized actions taken by the executive branch and to require transparency. If the president responds to any "imminent threat" not covered by an existing statute or law authorizing use of force, then the president must within 48 hours report to Congress what actions have been taken. ..."
"... "With the Soleimani strike, the administration is saying they're responding to an imminent threat, but they have not publicly stated what that threat is," said Kate Kizer, policy director at Win Without War, in an interview with TAC. "From reporting, there's not a lot of evidence of an imminent attack. So they should have come to Congress first and said what they were going to do." ..."
"... The Constitution clearly gives the power to declare war to Congress. Article II states that the president can act without Congress only when it is necessary to do so against imminent threats to U.S. territories, possessions, or citizens. ..."
claims
the strike was "authorized" in part by the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF),
which provided the legal basis for the war in Iraq.
"Unless Trump is using his presidential sharpie, it's not at all clear how this 17-year-old
statute authorizes what seems to be a major escalation that could start a whole new war," said
Gene Healy, vice president of the Cato Institute, in an interview with The AmericanConservative.
As for the war powers resolution justification provided by the administration, that
legislation was not designed to alter the fundamental constitutional balance, but to restore
it, Healy says. Critically, it does not give presidents a free pass to carry out military
action for 60 days without congressional approval, as some have suggested.
The war powers resolution itself was introduced after Congress discovered Nixon's secret
war in Cambodia in 1973. It was designed to allow Congress to terminate any unauthorized
actions taken by the executive branch and to require transparency. If the president responds to
any "imminent threat" not covered by an existing statute or law authorizing use of force, then
the president must within 48 hours report to Congress what actions have been taken.
In the case of Soleimani, "the Pentagon statement doesn't mention any imminent attacks,"
notes Healy . Secretary of State Mike "Pompeo says Soleimani was planning
an attack that could have killed hundreds of lives, but he's provided no evidence for that. I
think it's hardly cynical to verify, instead of blindly trusting, given the track record of
this administration and recent past administrations."
"With the Soleimani strike, the administration is saying they're responding to an
imminent threat, but they have not publicly stated what that threat is," said Kate Kizer,
policy director at Win Without War, in an interview with TAC. "From reporting, there's not a
lot of evidence of an imminent attack. So they should have come to Congress first and said what
they were going to do."
That's because there's simply "
no viable argument " that the 2002 AUMF authorizes force against Iran , according to
Brian Egan, a former legal adviser to both the State Department and the NSC,
and Tess Bridgeman, a senior fellow at NYU School of Law and former a ssociate
c ounsel to the p resident.
The 2002 AUMF allows the president to "defend the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq " and "enforce all relevant United Nations
Security Council resolutions against Iraq " ( emphasis added
).
"Those are plainly not relevant to the situation" today, Egan and Bridgeman
write.
The Trump administration also said
it does not " need congressional sign off from a legal standpoint" for the
Soleimani strike because of the president's authority as
commander-in-chief under Article II of the Constitution , CNN reported.
The Constitution clearly gives the power to declare war to Congress. Article II states
that the president can act without Congress only when it is necessary to do so against
imminent threats to U.S. territories, possessions, or citizens.
That's why Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Pentagon chief Mark Esper, and Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley were so emphatic Monday that the U.S. was responding
to an "imminent threat." But so far, no evidence of that has been provided.
While a 2018 Office of Legal Council (OLC) opinion offers a very liberal
definition of executive authority and provides
" very little constraint on modern presidential uses of force," it appears to classify the
Soleimani strike as an act of war, since Iran is a nation state that will likely escalate its
military retaliation in response to the killing of their uniformed military member.
Indeed, the U.S. has already
said it will send 3,500 additional troops to the Middle East "after Iran vowed to exact
'severe revenge.'" The U.S. has warned its citizens to leave Iraq, and Iran has
already begun firing at housing for American forces in Iraq: all signs that point to
escalation.
Moreover, targeted political assassinations, like the kind used against Soleimani, have been
banned by executive order since the Ford administration. Ronald Reagan signed Executive Order
12333, which reads: "No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government
shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination."
Soleimani was "not a rogue outlaw, but a military official of a sovereign government we were
not at war with, making his killing an assassination,"
writes Ben Friedman, policy director at Defense Priorities. "His actions, however evil,
served Iranian policy."
"The idea that the president can, without going to Congress, take out a top level official
of a country we're not in an authorized war with, is crossing a Rubicon," said Healy.
So what happens now?
Congress has several choices to make in the days ahead. It can pass empty, non-binding
resolutions, that require the president's sign-off, like the kind suggested by Kaine and
Pelosi. Or it can repeal the decades-old
AUMFs that have been used to justify continuing U.S. escalations in the Middle East.
Congress could also pass bills like those by Representative Khanna and Senator Sanders to
strip funding for offensive military action against Iran from the NDAA.
It remains to be seen if Congress will choose substantive actions, like defunding
unauthorized wars, over window dressing.
I'm suspended from Twitter for saying that Americans are sick of dying in wars for
Israel.
Soleimani was hated because he longed for the freedom of the Palestinian people from the
clutches of fascist, apartheid Israhell.
This conversation had with Al Mahdi, is not only plausible but entirely believable as this
has been played out in other regime change such as Ukrainian Maidan and Syria.
God bless General Soleimani. The hero of the resistance. He will accomplish more in Martyrdom
than when he was alive. He would be so happy. Maybe this is why he so sought his Martyrdom...
Mike Pompeo was on the TeeVee today scoffing at those who do not agree with him and the
Ziocon inspired "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran. It must be a terrible thing for
intelligence analysts of integrity and actual Middle East knowledge and experience to have to
try to brief him and Trump, people who KNOW, KNOW from some superior source of knowledge that
Iran is the worst threat to the world since Nazi Germany, or was it Saddam's Iraq that was the
worst threat since "beautiful Adolf?"
The "maximum pressure" campaign is born of Zionist terrors, terrors deeply felt. It is the
same kind of campaign that has been waged by the Israelis against the Palestinians and all
other enemies great and small. This approach does not seem to have done much for Israel. The
terrors are still there.
Someone sent me the news tape linked below from Aleppo in NW Syria. I have watched it a
number of times. You need some ability in Arabic to understand it. The tape was filmed in
several Christian churches in Aleppo where these two men (Soleimani and al-Muhandis) are
described from the pulpit and in the street as "heroic martyr victims of criminal American
state terrorism." Pompeo likes to describe Soleimani as the instigator of "massacre" and
"genocide" in Syria. Strangely (irony) the Syriac, Armenian Uniate and Presbyterian ministers
of the Gospel in this tape do not see him and al-Muhandis that way. They see them as men who
helped to defend Aleppo and its minority populations from the wrath of Sunni jihadi Salafists
like ISIS and the AQ affiliates in Syria. They see them and Lebanese Hizbullah as having helped
save these Christians by fighting alongside the Syrian Army, Russia and other allies like the
Druze and Christian militias.
It should be remembered that the US was intent on and may still be intent on replacing the
multi-confessional government of Syria with the forces of medieval tyranny. Everyone who really
knows anything about the Syrian Civil War knows that the essential character of the New Syrian
Army, so beloved by McCain, Graham and the other Ziocons was always jihadi and it was always
fully supported by Wahhabi Saudi Arabia as a project in establishing Sunni triumphalism. They
and the self proclaimed jihadis of HTS (AQ) are still supported in Idlib and western Aleppo
provinces both by the Saudis and the present Islamist and neo-Ottoman government of Turkey.
Well pilgrims, there are Christmas trees in the newly re-built Christian churches of Aleppo
and these, my brothers and sisters in Christ remember who stood by them in "the last
ditch."
"Currently there are at least 600 churches and 500,000–1,000,000 Christians in Iran."
wiki below. Are they dhimmis? Yes, but they are there. There are no churches in Saudi
Arabia, not a single one and Christianity is a banned religion. These are our allies?
Mr. Jefferson wrote that "he feared for his country when he remembered that God is just." He
meant Virginia but I fear in the same way for the United States. pl
"U.S.
Economic Warfare and Likely Foreign Defenses" provides numerous methods besides simply
the cessation of dollar use for international commercial transactions. Along with watching
the "Debt Wish 2020" vid linked above, I also suggest reading/watching this program . And lastly, I
suggest reading this analysis
here , although it only tangentially deals with your question.
US President Donald Trump and Israel's PM
Benjamin Netanyahu hold up a proclamation recognising Israel's sovereignty over the
Golan Heights on March 25, 2019 [File: Reuters/Leah Millis]
Supporters of
Donald Trump
think of the US president as an exceptional one-of-a-kind force
of nature - a sui generis leader. His detractors like to compare him to Russian
President
Vladimir Putin
or describe him as a Putin stooge, and since he ordered the
"vengeful" or "reckless" assassination of Iranian General Qassim Solemani, some
have
likened
him
to a Middle Eastern despot. But a more pertinent comparison lies elsewhere.
Since taking office in January 2017, Trump's dramatic positions and
pronouncements on the Middle East and beyond have shocked and dismayed much of
the US foreign policy establishment, especially on three main challenges facing
the US in the region: security, diplomacy and democracy and human rights.
Trump has not only undone much of his predecessor's legacy, both domestically
and internationally, he also trashed Barack Obama's doctrine and policies in
favour of Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu
's. For the past three years, he has been re-coupling US
and Israeli strategies, especially towards
Iran
and the
global "war on terror" which Obama spent eight years decoupling.
This is not to say, Obama was not a staunch supporter of Israel and defender
of its "security" or was not trigger happy with the US drone assassination
programme. He certainly was. He just did not like Netanyahu and did
not appreciate his deceit.
Obama tried to pursue an independent US policy free from Israel's narrow
constraints and considerations, after eight years of the Bush administration's
wars and blunders in the region.
By contrast, Trump embraced all things Netanyahu as soon as he stepped into
the White House.
It helped that the two men have far more in common than meets the eye.
Eerie similarities
Both men are thrice married with a history of adultery, are facing charges for
misusing their office for personal gain, and have a problematic relationship with
the truth.
And yet, both Netanyahu and Trump remain all too popular with their right-wing
base.
Even religious fanatics, both in Israel and the US, consider these two
secular, undevout, and morally challenged leaders as God's vessels on earth.
Both are able
showmen
,
who have pursued, and mastered, populist, theatrical and divisive policies that
have rallied their rightist constituencies around their populist personas.
But most importantly in this context, Trump has pursued the same
ultra-nationalist securitarian, some say racist, agendas that Netanyahu has long
championed in
Israel
and the Middle East.
This is especially important today, as both commanders-in-chief are exploiting
foreign policy to deflect attention from their domestic troubles with the law.
Embracing Netanyahu's positions
Trump's knowledge of the Middle East was dismal prior to taking office. He was
an empty page ready to be filled, but only with the ideas which helped guide and
propel his presidential campaign towards victory, such as infringements on rights
of immigrants and minorities, a ban on Muslims travelling to the US, and all
things anti-Obama.
A number of Middle Eastern despots like those of Egypt and the UAE did try to
fill in some of the blanks. But no one had the ability, style, record, and
diligence of Netanyahu, who also enjoyed unfiltered access to the president-elect
through his three ultra-Zionist lieutenants, Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt and
David Friedman.
First among these ideas, was the radical departure from a quarter of a century
of US policy towards Israel and
Palestine
,
namely moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, accepting the legitimacy
of the illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian lands, abandoning
the two-state solution, and recognising Israel's sovereignty over the occupied
Syrian Golan Heights.
It is Netanyahu's dream come true.
Trump also embraced Netanyahu's view on the Arab world in support of friendly
despots and dictators and against democracy and human rights. He aligned US
policy toward the Gulf and Arab affairs with the interests of Saudi Arabia, the
UAE and Egypt and embraced Saudi Crown Prince
Mohammed bin Salman
despite his reckless policies domestically and regionally
- all in the hope of paving the way for Arab normalisation of relations with
"colonial" Israel.
Another Netanyahu dream come true.
Attacking Iran
Nowhere was Netanyahu's influence on Trump more pronounced than on Iran.
The Trump administration abandoned the Iran nuclear deal against the advice
and urging of its
NATO
allies, Russia and China.
It then pursued a punitive policy of containment through tough economic
sanctions, an option unavailable to Israel, in order to strong-arm Iran into a
humiliating new deal that not only bans all its nuclear activity, but also
curtails its military and regional outreach.
When maximum pressure did not produce the desired results, as Iran continued
its bellicose regional policies, Trump adopted both Netanyahu's means and
endgame, starting with the assassination of Soleimani, widely seen as a
"declaration of war" with untold consequences for the region.
Israel has been carrying out targeted killings and preemptive strikes against
Iranian targets in Syria; in 2013, it was accused of being behind the killing of
another Revolutionary Guard general,
Hassan
Shateri
.
To be clear, Trump did not order the assassination to avenge the killings of
countless Syrians and Iraqis; he did so to deter Iran from escalating its attacks
on US interests and allies.
Although Netanyahu tried to distance himself from the targeted assassination
of the Iranian general in Iraq, make no mistake, this is a third Netanyahu dream
come true, in a span of three years. He is said to have been the only world
leader with prior knowledge of the planned assassination.
Regional crisis
Nothing is more satisfying for an Israeli leader than having the US embrace
Israel's strategy and fight Israel's wars in the region. And nothing is more
dangerous for the rest of the world - we all know how the last conflict Tel Aviv
incited ended in disaster in Iraq.
The last thing any Israeli leader wants is for the US to withdraw from the
region, leaving Israel to fend for itself in a hostile environment. Same goes for
Saudi Arabia
.
That is why it is important to underline that while the Trump administration
may seek to reposition its forces out of the hotspots of the Middle
East, including Iraq (just as Israel redeployed out of Lebanon and Gaza) the US
will still maintain formidable projection of forces throughout the region.
The question is, will this strategy enable future US diplomacy, which also
served Israel's interests during the so-called "peace process", or lead to
the further escalation of violence and war?
Alas, the ongoing bluster about imminent attacks, counter-attacks, and
disproportionate responses and bombings of cultural sites do not bode well for
diplomacy.
With naval fleets,
military
bases
and some 60,000 troops deployed around Iran and throughout the Middle
East, the Trump administration could pursue an Israel-like air-land-sea strategy
of drones, fighter jets, guided missiles, cyber and Special Forces attacks and
targeted assassinations that exhaust its enemies and destabilises the region as a
whole.
That would be another Netanyahu dream and another Middle East nightmare come
true.
"... Naturally, we learned soon after from the Iraqi PM himself that Soleimani was in Iraq as part of a diplomatic effort to de-escalate tensions. In other words, he was apparently lured to Baghdad under false pretenses so he'd be a sitting duck for a U.S. strike. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story. ..."
"... As you'd expect, some of the most ridiculous propaganda came from Mike Pompeo, a man who genuinely loves deception and considers it his craft.. For example: ..."
"... Moving on to the really big question: what does this assassination mean for the future role of the U.S. in the Middle East and American global hegemony generally? A few important things have already occurred. For starters, the Iraqi parliament passed a resolution calling for U.S. troops to leave. Even more important are the comments and actions of Muqtada al-Sadr. ..."
"... Unmentioned in the above tweet, but extremely significant, is the fact al-Sadr has been a vocal critic of both the American and Iranian presence in Iraq. He doesn't want either country meddling in the affairs of Iraqis, but the Soleimani assassination clearly pushed him to focus on the U.S. presence. This is a very big deal and ensures Iraq will be far more dangerous for U.S. troops than it already was. ..."
Before discussing what happens next and the big picture implications, it's worth pointing
out the incredible number of blatant lies and overall clownishness that emerged from U.S.
officials in the assassination's aftermath. It started with
claims from Trump that Soleimani was plotting imminent attacks on Americans and was caught
in the act. Mass media did its job and uncritically parroted this line, which was quickly
exposed as a complete falsehood.
CNN anchor uncritically repeating government lies.
This is what mass media does to get wars going. https://t.co/QK1JET7TIj
It's incredibly telling that CNN would swallow this fact-free claim with total credulity
within weeks of discovering the extent of the lies told about
Syrian chemical attacks and
the Afghanistan war . Meanwhile, when a reporter asked a state department official for some
clarification on what sorts of attacks were imminent, this is what transpired.
When asked by a reporter for details about what kinds of imminent attacks Soleimani was
planning, the State Dept. responds with:
"Jesus, do we have to explain why we do these things?"
Naturally, we learned soon after from the Iraqi PM himself that Soleimani was in Iraq as
part of a diplomatic effort to de-escalate tensions. In other words, he was apparently lured to
Baghdad under false pretenses so he'd be a sitting duck for a U.S. strike. Never let the truth
get in the way of a good story.
Iraqi Prime Minister AbdulMahdi accuses Trump of deceiving him in order to assassinate
Suleimani. Trump, according to P.M. lied about wanting a diplomatic solution in order to get
Suleimani on a plane to Baghdad in the open, where he was summarily executed. https://t.co/HKjyQqXNqP
As you'd expect, some of the most ridiculous propaganda came from Mike Pompeo, a man who
genuinely loves deception and considers it his craft.. For example:
Pompeo on CNN says US has "every expectation" that people "in Iran will view the American
action last night as giving them freedom."
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Qassem Soleimani's daughter Zeinab were
among the hundreds of thousands mourning Soleimani in Tehran today. Iranian state TV put the
crowd size at 'millions,' though that number could not be verified. https://t.co/R6EbKh6Gow
Moving on to the really big question: what does this assassination mean for the future
role of the U.S. in the Middle East and American global hegemony generally? A few important
things have already occurred. For starters, the Iraqi parliament passed a
resolution calling for U.S. troops to leave. Even more important are the comments and
actions of Muqtada al-Sadr.
WOW,
Iraqi Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr orders the return of "Mahdi Army" in response the
American strike that killed Suleimani.
Mahdi Army fought against the US troops during the invasion in 2003. Sadr disbanded the
group in 2008.
Unmentioned in the above tweet, but extremely significant, is the fact al-Sadr has been
a vocal critic of both the American and Iranian presence in Iraq. He doesn't want either
country meddling in the affairs of Iraqis, but the Soleimani assassination clearly pushed him
to focus on the U.S. presence. This is a very big deal and ensures Iraq will be far more
dangerous for U.S. troops than it already was.
Going forward, Iran's response will be influenced to a great degree by what's already
transpired. There are three things worth noting. First, although many Trump supporters are
cheering the assassination, Americans are certainly
nowhere near united on this , with many including myself viewing it as a gigantic strategic
blunder. Second, it ratcheted up anti-American sentiment in Iraq to a huge degree without Iran
having to do anything, as highlighted above. Third, hardliners within Iran have been given an
enormous gift. With one drone strike, the situation went from grumblings and protests on the
ground to a scene where any sort of dissent in the air has been extinguished for the time
being.
Exactly right, which is why Iran will go more hardline if anything and more united.
If China admitted to taking out Trump even Maddow wouldn't cheer. https://t.co/zqaEDIoWH1
Iranian leadership will see these developments as important victories in their own right and
will likely craft a response taking stock of this much improved position. This means a total
focus on making the experience of American troops in the region untenable, which will be far
easier to achieve now.
If that's right, you can expect less shock and awe in the near-term, and more consolidation
of the various parties that were on the fence but have since shifted to a more anti-American
stance following Soleimani's death. Iran will start with the easy pickings, which consists of
consolidating its stronger position in Iraq and making dissidents feel shameful at home. That
said, Iran will have to publicly respond with some sort of a counterattack, but that event will
be carefully considered with Iran's primary objective in mind -- getting U.S. troops out of the
region.
This means no attacks on U.S. or European soil, and no attacks targeting civilians either.
Such a move would be as strategically counterproductive as Assad gassing Syrian cities after he
was winning the war (which is why many of us doubted the narrative) since it would merely
inflame American public opinion and give an excuse to attack Iran in Iran. There is no way
Iranian leadership is that stupid, so any such attack must be treated with the utmost
skepticism.
President Trump and his Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told us the US had to assassinate
Maj. Gen. Qassim Soleimani last week because he was planning "Imminent attacks" on US citizens.
I don't believe them.
Why not? Because Trump and the neocons – like Pompeo – have been lying about
Iran for the past three years in an effort to whip up enough support for a US attack. From the
phony justification to get out of the Iran nuclear deal, to blaming Yemen on Iran, to blaming
Iran for an attack on Saudi oil facilities, the US Administration has fed us a steady stream of
lies for three years because they are obsessed with Iran.
And before Trump's obsession with attacking Iran, the past four US Administrations lied
ceaselessly to bring about wars on Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Serbia, Somalia, and the
list goes on.
At some point, when we've been lied to constantly and consistently for decades about a
"threat" that we must "take out" with a military attack, there comes a time where we must
assume they are lying until they provide rock solid, irrefutable proof. Thus far they have
provided nothing. So I don't believe them.
President Trump has warned that his administration has already targeted 52 sites important
to Iran and Iranian culture and the US will attack them if Iran retaliates for the
assassination of Gen. Soleimani. Because Iran has no capacity to attack the United States,
Iran's retaliation if it comes will likely come against US troops or US government officials
stationed or visiting the Middle East. I have a very easy solution for President Trump that
will save the lives of American servicemembers and other US officials: just come home. There is
absolutely no reason for US troops to be stationed throughout the Middle East to face increased
risk of death for nothing.
In our Ron Paul Liberty Report program last week we observed that the US attack on a senior
Iranian military officer on Iraqi soil – over the objection of the Iraq government
– would serve to finally unite the Iraqi factions against the United States. And so it
has: on Sunday the Iraqi parliament voted to expel US troops from Iraqi soil. It may have been
a non-binding resolution, but there is no mistaking the sentiment. US troops are not wanted and
they are increasingly in danger. So why not listen to the Iraqi parliament?
Bring our troops home, close the US Embassy in Baghdad – a symbol of our aggression
– and let the people of the Middle East solve their own problems. Maintain a strong
defense to protect the United States, but end this neocon pipe-dream of ruling the world from
the barrel of a gun. It does not work. It makes us poorer and more vulnerable to attack. It
makes the elites of Washington rich while leaving working and middle class America with the
bill. It engenders hatred and a desire for revenge among those who have fallen victim to US
interventionist foreign policy. And it results in millions of innocents being killed
overseas.
There is no benefit to the United States to trying to run the world. Such a foreign policy
brings only bankruptcy – moral and financial. Tell Congress and the Administration that
for America's sake we demand the return of US troops from the Middle East! (Republished from
The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
I'm suspended from Twitter for saying that Americans are sick of dying in wars for
Israel.
Soleimani was hated because he longed for the freedom of the Palestinian people from the
clutches of fascist, apartheid Israhell.
This conversation had with Al Mahdi, is not only plausible but entirely believable as this
has been played out in other regime change such as Ukrainian Maidan and Syria.
God bless General Soleimani. The hero of the resistance. He will accomplish more in Martyrdom
than when he was alive. He would be so happy. Maybe this is why he so sought his Martyrdom...
Not only Mossad but probably many others would like to see a suicide bomber blow himself
up somewhere in the US killing alot of people. That makes it difficult to figure out who
did it and maybe impossible to figure it out. It would be a mess.
But they could always find an un-scorched Iranian passport in mint condition among the
debris of the explosion.
Whether he is eating ice cream or not, Trump appears to be on a rampage to recreate the
end of The Godfather.
Less than 24 hours after a US drone shockingly killed the top Iranian military leader,
Qasem Soleimani, resulting in equity markets groaning around the globe in fear over Iranian
reprisals (and potentially, World War III), the US has gone for round two with Reuters and
various other social media sources reporting that US air strikes targeting Iraq's Popular
Mobilization Units umbrella grouping of Iran-backed Shi'ite militias near camp Taji north
of Baghdad, have killed six people and critically wounded three, an Iraqi army source said
late on Friday.
Now would be the perfect time for the Mossad to do its false flag shtick. They wouldn't even
have to try very hard to pin it on Iran. I'll bet that when the news came out that the
Iranian guy had been killed, every neocon on the planet popped a boner that will last for
days. Michael Ledeen is probably mazel tov-ing his ass off.
I don't care about the dead Muslim who got killed, since that's the only kind of "good
Muslim" you're ever going to find, but I would still prefer for the U.S. to get out of the
Middle East altogether. Let those two warring anti-Christ peoples kill each other to their
hearts' content.
"I think there should be open hearings on this subject," Schiff told the
Washington Post in an interview published Monday. "The president has put us on a path where we may be at war with Iran. That
requires the Congress to fully engage."
Asked for his thoughts on President Trump warning Iran that the U.S. will hit 52 sites, including cultural sites, if Tehran retaliates
the California Democrat said: "None of that could come out of the Pentagon. Absolutely no way."
... ... ...
Schiff 's comments to the Post come after he suggested Secretary of State Mike Pompeo misrepresented intelligence indicating
that killing Soleimani saved American lives.
"It was a reckless decision that increased the risk to America all around the world, not decreased it. When Secretary Pompeo says
that this decision to take out Qasem Soleimani saved American lives, saved European lives, he is expressing a personal opinion, not
an intelligence conclusion," he
told CNN State of the Union host Jake Tapper. "I think it will increase the risk to Americans around the world. I have
not seen the intelligence that taking out Soleimani was going to either stop the plotting that is going on or decrease other risks
to the United States."
On Sunday's broadcast of CNN's "State of the Union," 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) questioned
if President Donald Trump's reasons for the Qasem Soleimani assassination was to distract from impeachment.
Warren said, "I think that the question that we ought to focus on is why now? Why not a month ago, and why not a month from now?
And the answer from the administration seems to be that they can't keep their story straight on this. They pointed in all different
directions. And you know, the last time that we watched them do this was the summer over Ukraine. As soon as people started asking
about the conversations between Donald Trump and the president of Ukraine and why aid had been held up to Ukraine, the administration
did the same thing. They pointed in all directions of what was going on. And of course, what emerged then is that this is Donald
Trump just trying to advance Donald Trump's own political agenda. Not the agenda of the United States of America. So what happens
right now? Next week, the president of the United States could be facing an impeachment trial in the Senate. We know that he is deeply
upset about that. I think that people are reasonably asking why this moment? Why does he pick now to take this highly inflammatory,
highly dangerous action that moves us closer to war? We have been at war for 20 years in the Middle East, and we need to stop the
war this the Middle East and not expand it."
Tapper asked, "Are you suggesting that President Trump pulled the trigger and had Qasem Soleimani killed as a distraction from
impeachment?"
Warren said, "Look, I think that people are reasonably asking about the timing and why it is that the administration seems to
have all kinds of different answers. In the first 48 hours after this attack, what did we hear? Well, we heard it was for an imminent
attack, and then we heard, no, no, it is to prevent any future attack, and then we heard that it is from the vice president himself
and no, it is related to 9/11, and then we heard from president reports of people in the intelligence community saying that the whole,
that the threat was overblown. You know, when the administration doesn't seem to have a coherent answer for taking a step like this.
They have taken a step that moves us closer to war, a step that puts everyone at risk, and step that puts the military at risk and
puts the diplomats in the region at risk. And we have already paid a huge price for this war. Thousands of American lives lost, and
a cost that we have paid domestically and around the world. At the same time, look at what it has done in the Middle East, millions
of people who have been killed, who have been injured, who have been displaced. So this is not a moment when the president should
be escalating tensions and moving us to war. The job of the president is to keep us safe, and that means move back from the edge."
Tapper pressed, "Do you believe that President Trump pulled the trigger on this operation as a way to distract from impeachment?
Is that what you think?"
Warren said, "I think it is a reasonable question to ask, particularly when the administration immediately after having taken
this decision offers a bunch of contradictory explanations for what is going on."
She continued, "I think it is the right question to ask. We will get more information as we go forward but look at the timing
on this. Look at what Donald Trump has said afterward and his administration. They have pointed in multiple directions. There is
a reason that he chose this moment, not a month ago and not a month from now, not a less aggressive and less dangerous response.
He had a whole range of responses that were presented to him. He didn't pick one of the other ones. He picked the most aggressive
and the one that moves us closer to war. So what does everybody talk about today? Are we going to war? Are we going to have another
five years, tens, ten years of war in the Middle East, and dragged in once again. Are we bringing another generation of young people
into war? That is every bit of the conversation right now. Donald Trump has taken an extraordinarily reckless step, and we have seen
it before, he is using foreign policy and uses whatever he can to advance the interests of Donald Trump."
he Iraqi parliament approved a measure that called for an end to the U.S. military presence
in Iraq. The prime minister spoke in favor of a departure of U.S. forces, and it seems very
likely that U.S. forces will be required to leave the country in the near future. The
president's response to this was in keeping with his cartoon imperialist attitudes about other
countries:
Trump threatens Iraq with sanctions if they expel US troops: "If they do ask us to leave,
if we don't do it in a very friendly basis. We will charge them sanctions like they've never
seen before ever. It'll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame."
Trump doesn't see other countries as genuinely sovereign, and he doesn't respect their
decisions when they run counter to what he wants, so his first instinct when they choose
something he dislikes is to punish them. Economic war has been his preferred method of
punishment, and he has applied this in the form of tariffs or sanctions depending on the
target. Iraq's government is sick of repeated U.S. violations of Iraqi sovereignty, and the
U.S. strikes over the last week have strengthened the existing movement to remove U.S. forces
from the country. One might think that Trump would jump at the chance to pull U.S. troops out
of Iraq and Syria that the Iraqi parliament's action gives him. It would have been better to
leave of our own accord before destroying the relationship with Baghdad, but it might be the
only good thing to come out of this disaster. It is telling that Trump's reaction to this news
is not to seize the opportunity but to threaten Iraq instead. Needless to say, there is
absolutely no legitimate basis for imposing sanctions on Iraq, and if Trump did this it would
be one more example of how the U.S. is flagrantly abusing its power to bully and attack smaller
states.
In another instance of the president's crude cartoon imperialism, he
repeated his threat to target Iran's cultural heritage sites:
President Trump on Sunday evening doubled down on his claim that he would target Iranian
cultural sites if Iran retaliated for the targeted killing of one of its top generals,
breaking with his secretary of state over the issue.
Aboard Air Force One on his way back from his holiday trip to Florida, Mr. Trump
reiterated to reporters traveling with him the spirit of a Twitter post on Saturday, when he
said that the United States government had identified 52 sites for retaliation against Iran
if there were a response to Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani's death. Some, he tweeted, were of
"cultural" significance.
Such a move could be considered a war crime under international laws, but Mr. Trump
said Sunday that he was undeterred.
When o when will this man leave the stage? Who oh who will stand up against him and save
the world from this man? God have mercy on us all and deliver us from this anti-christ.
Trump really really enjoyed telling his "Black Jack Pershing's bullets dipped in pig's
blood" fairy tales during the campaign, and so did the rallygoers. He loves reveling in the
amoral gutter, and his base loves him unconditionally. Ailes, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity,
and now Trump: their aggresive, barbaric, venal leaders and spokesmen. Whaddayagonnado?
They can't help it. They follow the guy who calls the opposition within his own party
"human scum." Takes one to know one, right? That's right. Trump is a visceral hedonist, so
yes, he likes aggression.
As reactions are emerging around the world, it seems pretty clear that the US will be
almost completely isolated in this situation. Europe may finally be growing a spine.
Most interesting is the reaction from the UK. Dominic Raab initially made some
"balanced" remarks pointing out that Soleimani was a bad actor but counseling restraint.
The next day, presumably under directions from Boris Johnson, he retracted that and said
that the UK is on the same page as the US. This is a portent of things to come. I think
that most people who voted for Brexit did so because they wanted to take back their
sovereignty from Brussels. But this weekend is probably the first step in the UK's march
towards becoming, in practical terms, a US colony. The UK's economy and other influence are
simply not large enough to stand alone against those of the US, the EU, and China. They
will be in something of a beggars can't be choosers position when negotiating trade deals
with these larger entities. They can expect the EU to do them no favors given their chaotic
dealings with them. China will probably take a pragmatic approach to them. Their best hope
for favorable treatment is with the United States, and Johnson has fawned over Trump enough
to have reason to believe it might happen. But it also entails that the UK will not be free
to dissent from US foreign policy in the slightest way. In fact, if we end up in a
conventional war with Iran, I suspect that the UK will be the only nation in the world that
sends troops there with us. (The UAE, Israel and the Saudis will, of course, cheer us on,
even goad us, but will not risk any of their own blood.) I wonder how Brexit supporters
will feel about that. At least Brussels never dragged them into any stupid wars.
Remember this date. It marks the date the UK began its journey from the frying pan into
the fire.
At this point the question is, can Trump have even a vaguely normal conversation about
anything? Certainly not foreign policy. Just how much of this manure can he spew before the
Republican Party responds? My guess is they've gone so far past the point of normal that
there's no coming back This is both sad and frightening.
One common response to Trump's threat to attack Iranian cultural sites is that the
military would not carry out such obviously illegal orders
I wouldn't put any hope in the US military disobeying such orders. It's not what they
are really trained for. They may pay lip service to having respect for laws of war but they
won't actually pay any attention to them. Respect for culture? Remember Dresden? The crude
barbarism of Sherman and Sheridan is the spirit of the US military.
As a conservative (not a Republican, but certainly not a Democrat) who cannot abide
thinking of any of the democratic candidates as President, I would love to see impeachment.
Mike Pence would be infinitely preferable as President to this little psychopathic bully.
Seriously, the last few days should principled non-interventionists know that Trump is
empjatically not one of us. He'd gladly sabotage the future of the United States on the
alter of his own ego.
"He sees war only in the crudest terms of plunder and atrocity."
It's a blunt but true observation. We spend most of our time justifying wars as noble
and moral, using euphemism to disguise the reality to ourselves and others. Two cheers for
being truthful.
I also note that destroying cultural monuments is claimed to be a war crime, while
inevitable civilian deaths are just acceptable collateral damage.
Let's not pretend that the long history of the imperial coveting of either Iraq's or
Iran's resources has ever been much more than plunder, often making use of atrocity. What
doesn't qualify as that, is great game imperialist jockeying for geostrategic advantage
against commercial rivals.
Of course "things" would be sacrosanct, while human lives are not, in the wholly
materialist calculus of warmongering.o
Attacking cultural-heritage sites, Pres. Trump? Like what the Taliban did to the Buddhas of
Bamyan? Or what ISIS did to ancient art, architecture, and artifacts in Mosul, Palmyra,
Raqqa, and more? What a barbarian!
Will Congress dare to eliminate funds for the occupation of Iraq and for attacking Iran?
Will all those that would vote for continuation of funding will be removed from office
through elections, in the very gerrymandered locales, in a FPTP system, with no ability to
leave work early to go to vote, with so many disenfranchised? The system is fully rigged to
be a dictatorship all but in name...
Another thing: Trump's decrying of the Iraqi war was merely a way he could rail at the
other Republican candidates. If the establishment was for it, he was against it. That's how
he works.
Maybe he fools himself into thinking he's got principles. Maybe he even thinks he has a
coherent foreign policy (or policy of any kind). But no, he's just narcissism and id all
the way down.
There's still no border wall. Still troops in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Planned
Parenthood is still funded.
Oh, but he waves the flag, doesn't he? That makes up for everything...right?
The Trump administration has assassinated Iran's top military leader, Qassim Suleimani, and with the possibility of a serious escalation
in violent conflict, it's a good time to think about how propaganda works and train ourselves to avoid accidentally swallowing it.
The Iraq War, the bloodiest and costliest U.S. foreign policy calamity of the 21 st century, happened in part because
the population of the United States was insufficiently cynical about its government and got caught up in a wave of nationalistic
fervor. The same thing happened with World War I and the Vietnam War. Since a U.S./Iran war would be a disaster, it is vital that
everyone make sure they do not accidentally end up repeating the kinds of talking points that make war more likely.
Let us bear in mind, then, some of the basic lessons about war propaganda.
Things are not true because a government official says them.
I do not mean to treat you as stupid by making such a basic point, but plenty of journalists and opposition party politicians
do not understand this point's implications, so it needs to be said over and over. What happens in the leadup to war is that government
officials make claims about the enemy, and then those claims appear in newspapers ("U.S. officials say Saddam poses an imminent threat")
and then in the public consciousness, the "U.S. officials say" part disappears, so that the claim is taken for reality without ever
really being scrutinized. This happens because newspapers are incredibly irresponsible and believe that so long as you attach "Experts
say" or "President says" to a claim, you are off the hook when people end up believing it, because all you did was relay the fact
that a person said a thing, you didn't say it was true. This is the approach the New York Times took to Bush administration allegations
in the leadup to the Iraq War, and it meant that false claims could become headline news just because a high-ranking U.S. official
said them. [UPDATE: here's an example
from Vox, today, of a questionable government claim being magically transformed into a certain fact.]
In the context of Iran, let us consider some things Mike Pence tweeted about Qassim Suleimani:
"[Suleimani] assisted in the clandestine travel to Afghanistan of 10 of the 12 terrorists who carried out the September
11 terrorist attacks in the United States Soleimani was plotting imminent attacks on American diplomats and military personnel.
The world is a safer place today because Soleimani is gone."
It is possible, given these tweets, to publish the headline: "Suleimani plotting imminent attacks on American diplomats, says
Pence." That headline is technically true. But you should not publish that headline unless Pence provides some supporting evidence,
because what will happen in the discourse is that people will link to your news story to prove that Suleimani was plotting imminent
attacks.
To see how unsubstantiated claims get spread, let's think about the Afghanistan hijackers bit. David Harsanyi of the National
Review defends
Pence's claim about Suleimani helping the hijackers. Harsanyi cites the 9/11 Commission report, saying that the 9/11 commission
report concluded Iran aided the hijackers. The report
does indeed say that Iran allowed free
travel to some of the men who went on to carry out the 9/11 attacks. (The sentence cut off at the bottom of Harsanyi's screenshot,
however, rather crucially
says : "We have no evidence that Iran or Hezbollah was aware of the planning for what later became the 9/11 attack.") Harsanyi
admits that the report says absolutely nothing about Suleimani. But he argues that Pence was "mostly right," pointing out that Pence
did not say Iran knew these men would be the hijackers, merely that it allowed them passage.
Let's think about what is going on here. Pence is trying to convince us that Suleimani deserved to die, that it was necessary
for the U.S. to kill him, which will also mean that if Iran retaliates violently, that violence will be because Iran is an aggressive
power rather than because the U.S. just committed an unprovoked atrocity against one of its leaders, dropping a bomb on a popular
Iranian leader. So Pence wants to link Suleimani in your mind with 9/11, in order to get you blood boiling the same way you might
have felt in 2001 as you watched the Twin Towers fall.
There is no evidence that either Iran or Suleimani tried to help these men do 9/11. Harsanyi says that Pence does not technically
allege this. But he doesn't have to! What impression are people going to get from helped the hijackers? Pence hopes you'll
conflate Suleimani and Iran as one entity, then assume that if Iran ever aided these men in any way, it basically did 9/11 even if
it didn't have any clue that was what they were going to do.
This brings us to #2:
Do not be bullied into accepting simple-minded sloganeering
Let's say that, long before Ted Kaczynski began sending bombs through the mail, you once rented him an apartment. This was pure
coincidence. Back then he was just a Berkeley professor, you did not know he would turn out to be the Unabomber. It is, however,
possible, for me to say, and claim I am not technically lying, that you "housed and materially aided the Unabomber." (A friend of
mine once sold his house to the guy who turned out to be the Green River Killer, so this kind of situation does happen.)
Of course, it is incredibly dishonest of me to characterize what you did that way. You rented an apartment to a stranger, yet
I'm implying that you intentionally helped the Unabomber knowing he was the Unabomber. In sane times, people would see me as the
duplicitous one. But the leadup to war is often not a sane time, and these distinctions can get lost. In the Pence claim about Afghanistan,
for it to have any relevance to Suleimani, it would be critical to know (assuming the 9/11 commission report is accurate) whether
Iran actually could have known what the men it allowed to pass would ultimately do, and whether Suleimani was involved. But that
would involve thinking, and War Fever thrives on emotion rather than thought.
There are all kinds of ways in which you can bully people into accepting idiocy. Consider, for example, the statement "Nathan
Robinson thinks it's good to help terrorists who murder civilians." There is a way in which this is actually sort of true: I think
lawyers who aid those accused of terrible crimes do important work. If we are simple-minded and manipulative, we can call that "thinking
it's good to help terrorists," and during periods of War Fever, that's exactly what it will be called. There is a kind of cheap sophistry
that becomes ubiquitous:
I don't think Osama bin Laden should have been killed without an attempt to apprehend him. -- > So you think it's good
that Osama bin Laden was alive?
I think Iraqis were justified in resisting the U.S. invasion with force. -- > So you're saying it's good when U.S. soldiers
die?
I do not believe killing other countries' generals during peacetime is acceptable. -- > So you believe terrorists should
be allowed to operate with impunity.
I remember all this bullshit from my high school years. Opposing the invasion of Iraq meant loving Saddam Hussein and hating America.
Thinking 9/11 was the predictable consequence of U.S. actions meant believing 9/11 was justified. Of course, rational discussion
can expose these as completely unfair mischaracterizations, but every time war fever whips up, rational discussion becomes almost
impossible. In World War I, if you opposed the draft you were undermining your country in a time of war. During Vietnam, if you believed
the North Vietnamese had the more just case, you were a Communist traitor who endorsed every atrocity committed in the name of Ho
Chi Minh, and if you thought John McCain shouldn't have been bombing civilians in the first place then clearly you believed he should
have been tortured and you hated America.
"If you oppose assassinating Suleimani you must love terrorists" will be repeated on Fox News (and probably even on MSNBC).
Nationalism advocate Yoram Hazony
says there is something wrong with those who
do not "feel shame when our country is shamed" -- presumably those who do not feel wounded pride when America is emasculated by our
enemies are weak and pitiful. We should refuse to put up with these kind of cheap slurs, or even to let those who deploy them place
the burden of proof on us to refute them. (In 2004, Democrats worried that they did appear unpatriotic, and so they ran a
decorated war veteran, John Kerry, for president. That didn't work.)
Scrutinize the arguments
Here's Mike Pence again:
"[Suleimani] provided advanced deadly explosively formed projectiles, advanced weaponry, training, and guidance to Iraqi
insurgents used to conduct attacks on U.S. and coalition forces; directly responsible for the death of 603 U.S. service members,
along with thousands of wounded."
I am going to say something that is going to sound controversial if you buy into the kind of simple-minded logic we just
discussed: Saying that someone was "responsible for the deaths of U.S. service members" does not, in and of itself, tell us anything
about whether what they did was right or wrong. In order to believe it did, we would have to believe that the United States is
automatically right, and that countries opposing the United States are automatically wrong. That is indeed the logic that many
nationalists in this country follow; remember that when the U.S. shot down an Iranian civilian airliner, causing hundreds of deaths,
George H.W. Bush said
that he would never apologize for America, no matter what the facts were. What if America did something wrong? That was
irrelevant, or rather impossible, because to Bush, a thing was right because America did it, even if that thing was the mass murder
of Iranian civilians.
One of the major justifications for murdering Suleimani is that he "caused the deaths of U.S. soldiers." He was thus an aggressor,
and could/should have been killed. That is where people like Pence want you to end your inquiry. But let us remember where those
soldiers were. Were they in Miami? No. They were in Iraq. Why were they in Iraq? Because we illegally invaded and seized a country.
Now, we can debate whether (1) there is actually sufficient evidence of Suleimani's direct involvement and (2) whether these
acts of violence can be justified, but to say that Suleimani has "American blood on his hands" is to say nothing at all without
an examination of whether the United States was in the right.
We have to think clearly in examining the arguments that are being made.
Here 's the Atlantic 's
George Packer on the execution:
"There was a case for killing Major General Qassem Soleimani. For two decades, as the commander of the Revolutionary Guards'
Quds Force, he executed Iran's long game of strategic depth in the Middle East -- arming and guiding proxy militias in Lebanon
and Iraq that became stronger than either state, giving Bashar al-Assad essential support to win the Syrian civil war at the cost
of half a million lives, waging a proxy war in Yemen against the hated Saudis, and repeatedly testing America and its allies with
military actions around the region for which Iran never seemed to pay a military price."
The article goes on to discuss whether this case is outweighed by the pragmatic case against killing him. But wait. Let's dwell
on this. Does this constitute a case for killing him? He assisted Bashar al-Assad. Okay, but presumably then killing Assad
would have been justified too? Is the rule here that our government is allowed unilaterally to execute the officials of other governments
who are responsible for many deaths? Are we the only ones who can do this? Can any government claim the right?
He assisted Yemen in its fight against "the hated Saudis." But is Saudi Arabia being hated for good reason? It is not enough to
say that someone committed violence without analyzing the underlying justice of the parties' relative claims.
Moreover, assumptions are made that if you can prove somebody committed a heinous act, what Trump did is justified. But that doesn't
follow: Unless we throw all law out the window, and extrajudicial punishment is suddenly acceptable, showing that Suleimani was a
war criminal doesn't prove that you can unilaterally kill him with a drone. Henry Kissinger is a war criminal. So is George W. Bush.
But they should be captured and tried in a court, not bombed from the sky. The argument that Suleimani was planning imminent
attacks is relevant to whether you can stop him with violence (and requires persuasive proof), but mere allegations of murderous
past acts do not show that extrajudicial killings are legitimate.
It's very easy to come up with superficially persuasive arguments that can justify just about anything. The job of an intelligent
populace is to see whether those arguments can actually withstand scrutiny.
Keep the focus on what matters
"The main question about the strike isn't moral or even legal -- it's strategic." --
The Atlantic
"The real question to ask about the American drone attack that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani was not whether it was justified,
but whether it was wise" -- The New York Times
"I think that the question that we ought to focus on is why now? Why not a month ago and why not a month from now?" --
Elizabeth Warren
They're going to try to define the debate for you. Leaving aside the moral questions, is this good strategy? And then you
find yourself arguing on those terms: No, it was bad strategy, it will put "our personnel" in harms way, without noticing that you
are implicitly accepting the sociopathic logic that says "America's interests" are the only ones in the world that matters. This
is how debates about Vietnam went: They were rarely about whether our actions were good for Vietnamese people, but about whether
they were good or bad for us , whether we were squandering U.S. resources and troops in a "fruitless" "mistake." The people
of this country still do not understand the kind of carnage we inflicted on Vietnam because our debates tend to be about whether
things we do are "strategically prudent" rather than whether they are just. The Atlantic calls the strike a "blunder," shifting
the discussion to be about the wisdom of the killing rather than whether it is a choice our country is even permitted to make. "Blunder"
essentially assumes that we are allowed to do these things and the only question is whether it's good for us.
There will be plenty of attempts to distract you with irrelevant issues. We will spent more time talking about whether Trump followed
the right process for war, whether he handled the rollout correctly, and less about whether the underlying action itself is
correct. People like Ben Shapiro will say things
like :
"Barack Obama routinely droned terrorists abroad -- including American citizens -- who presented far less of a threat to
Americans and American interests than Soleimani. So spare me the hysterics about 'assassination."
In order for this to have any bearing on anything, you have to be someone who defends what Obama did. If you are, on the other
hand, someone who belives that Obama, too, assassinated people without due process (which he did), then Shapiro has proved exactly
nothing about whether Trump's actions were legitimate. (Note, too, the presumption that threatening "America's interests" can get
you killed, a standard we would not want any other country using but are happy to use ourselves.)
Emphasis matters
Consider three statements:
"The top priority of a Commander-in-Chief must be to protect Americans and our national security interests. There is no
question that Qassim Suleimani was a threat to that safety and security, and that he masterminded threats and attacks on Americans
and our allies, leading to hundreds of deaths. But there are serious questions about how this decision was made and whether we
are prepared for the consequences."
"Suleimani was a murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans. But this reckless
move escalates the situation with Iran and increases the likelihood of more deaths and new Middle East conflict. Our priority
must be to avoid another costly war."
"When I voted against the war in Iraq in 2002, I feared it would lead to greater destabilization of the country and the
region. Today, 17 years later, that fear has unfortunately turned out to be true. The United States has lost approximately 4,500
brave troops, tens of thousands have been wounded, and we've spent trillions on this war. Trump's dangerous escalation brings
us closer to another disastrous war in the Middle East that could cost countless lives and trillions more dollars. Trump promised
to end endless wars, but this action puts us on the path to another one."
These are statements made by Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders, respectively. Note that each of them is
consistent with believing Trump's decision was the wrong one, but their emphasis is different. Buttigieg says Suleimani was a
"threat" but that there are "questions," Warren says Suleimani was a "murderer" but that this was "reckless," and Sanders says this
was a "dangerous escalation." It could be that none of these three would have done the same thing themselves, but the emphasis is
vastly different. Buttigieg and Warren lead with condemnation of the dead man, in ways that imply that there was nothing that
unjust about what happened. Sanders does not dwell on Suleimani but instead talks about the dangers of new wars.
We have to be clear and emphatic in our messaging, because so much effort is made to make what should be clear issues appear murky.
If, for example, you gave a speech in 2002 opposing the Iraq War, but the first half was simply a discussion of what a bad and threatening
person Saddam Hussein was, people might actually get the opposite of the impression you want them to get. Buttigieg and Warren,
while they appear to question the president, have the effect of making his action seem reasonable. After all, they admit that he
got rid of a threatening murderer! Sanders admits nothing of the kind: The only thing he says is that Trump has made the world worse.
He puts the emphasis where it matters.
I do not fully like Sanders' statement, because it still talks a bit more about what war means for our people ,
but it does mention destabilization and the total number of lives that can be lost. It is a far more morally clear and powerful antiwar
statement. Buttigieg's is exactly what you'd expect of a Consultant President and it should give us absolutely no confidence that
he would be a powerful voice against a war, should one happen. Warren confirms that she is not an effective advocate for peace. In
a time when there will be pressure for a violent conflict, we need to make sure that our statements are not watery and do not make
needless concessions to the hawks' propaganda.
Imagine how everything would sound if the other side said it.
If you're going to understand the world clearly, you have to kill your nationalistic emotions. An excellent way to do this is
to try to imagine if all the facts were reversed. If Iraq had invaded the United States, and U.S. militias violently resisted, would
it constitute "aggression" for those militias to kill Iraqi soldiers? If Britain funded those U.S. militias, and Iraq killed the
head of the British military with a drone strike, would this constitute "stopping a terrorist"? Of course, in that situation, the
Iraqi government would certainly spin it that way, because governments call everyone who opposes them terrorists. But rationality
requires us not just to examine whether violence has been committed (e.g., whether Suleimani ordered attacks) but what the
full historical context of that violence is, and who truly deserves the "terrorist" label.
Is there anything Suleimani did that hasn't also been done by the CIA? Remember that we actually engineered the overthrow of the
Iranian government, within living people's lifetimes . Would an Iranian have been justified in assassinating the head of the
CIA? I doubt there are many Americans who think they would. I think most Americans would consider this terrorism. But this is because
terrorism is a word that, by definition, cannot apply to things we do, and only applies to the things others do. When you start to
actually reverse the situations in your mind, and see how things look from the other side, you start to fully grasp just how crude
and irrational so much propaganda is.
"It was not an assassination." -- Noah Rothman, conservative commentator
"That's an outrageous thing to say. Nobody that I know of would think that we did something wrong in getting the general."
-- Michael Bloomberg, on Bernie Sanders' claim that this was an "assassination"
Our access to much of the world is through language alone. We only see our tiny sliver of the world with our own eyes, much of
the rest of it has to be described in words or shown to us through images. That means it's very easy to manipulate our perceptions.
If you control the flow of information, you can completely alter someone's understanding of the things that they can't see firsthand.
Euphemistic language is always used to cover atrocities. Even the Nazis did not say they were "mass murdering innocent civilians."
They said they were defending themselves from subversive elements, guaranteeing sufficient living space for their people, purifying
their culture, etc. When the United States commits murder, it does not say it is committing murder. It says it is engaging in a stabilization
program and restoring democratic rule. We saw during the recent
Bolivian coup how easy it is
to portray the seizure of power as "democracy" and democracy as tyranny. Euphemistic language has been one of the key tools of murderous
regimes. In fact, many of them probably believe their own language; their specialized vocabulary allows them to inhabit a world of
their own invention where they are good people punishing evil.
Assassination sounds bad. It sounds like something illegitimate, something that would call into question the goodness of the United
States, even if the person being assassinated can be argued to have "deserved it." Thus Rothman and Bloomberg will not even admit
that what the U.S. did here was an assassination, even though we literally targeted a high official from a sovereign country and
dropped a bomb on him. Instead, this is " neutralization
." (Read this fascinatingly feeble attempt
by the Associated Press to explain why it isn't calling an obvious assassination an assassination, just as the media declined to
call torture torture when Bush did it.)
Those of us who want to resist marches to war need to insist on calling things exactly what they are and refuse to allow the country
to slide into the use of language that conceals the reality of our actions.
Remember what people were saying five minutes ago
Five minutes ago, hardly anybody was talking about Suleimani. Now they all speak as if he was Public Enemy #1. Remember how much
you hated that guy? Remember how much damage he did? No, I do not remember, because people like Ben Shapiro only just discovered
their hatred for Suleimani once they had to justify his murder.
During the buildup to a war there is a constant effort to make you forget what things were like a few minutes ago. Before World
War I, Americans lived relatively harmoniously with Germans in their midst. The same thing with Japanese people before World War
II. Then, immediately, they began to hate and fear people who had recently been their neighbors.
Let us say Iran responds to this extrajudicial murder with a colossal act of violent reprisal, after the killing
unifies the country around a demand for vengeance. They kill a high-ranking American official, or wage an attack that kills our
civilians. Perhaps it will attack some of the soldiers that are now being moved into the Middle East. The Trump administration will
then want you to forget that it promised this assassination was to "
stop a war ." It will then
want you to focus solely on Iran's most recent act, to see that as the initial aggression. If the attack is particularly bad,
with family members of victims crying on TV and begging for vengeance, you will be told to look into the face of Iranian evil, and
those of us who are anti-war will be branded as not caring about the victims. Nobody wants you to remember the history of U.S./Iran
relations, the civilians we killed of theirs or the time we destabilized their whole country and got rid of its democracy. They want
you to have a two-second memory, to become a blind and unthinking patriot whose sole thought is the avenging of American blood. Resisting
propaganda requires having a memory, looking back on how things were before and not accepting war as the "new normal."
Listen to the Chomsky on your shoulder.
"It is perfectly insane to suggest the U.S. was the aggressor here." -- Ben Shapiro
They are going to try to convince you that you are insane for asking questions, or for not accepting what the government tells
you. They will put you in topsy-turvy land, where thinking that assassinating foreign officials is "aggression" is not just wrong,
but sheer madness. You will have to try your best to remember what things are, because it is not easy, when everyone says
the emperor has clothes, or that Line A is longer than Line B, or that shocking people to death is fine, to have confidence in your
independent judgment.
This is why I keep a little imaginary Noam
Chomsky sitting on my shoulder at all times. Chomsky helps keep me sane, by cutting through lies and euphemisms and showing things
as they really are. I recommend reading his books, especially during times of war. He never swallowed Johnson's nonsense about Vietnam
or Bush's nonsense about Iraq. And of course they called him insane, anti-American, terrorist-loving, anti-Semitic, blah blah blah.
What I really mean here though is: Listen to the dissidents. They will not appear on television. They will be smeared and treated
as lunatics. But you need them if you are going to be able to resist the absolute barrage of misinformation, or to hear yourself
think over the pounding war drums. Times of War Fever can be wearying, because there is just so much aggression against dissent that
your resistance wears down. This is why a community is so necessary. You may watch people who previously seemed reasonable develop
a pathological bloodlust (mild-mannered moderate types like Thomas Friedman and Brian Williams going suck on our missiles
). Find the people who see clearly and stick close to them.
Sasha @ 149:
"Fact is that Trump is following the plan of the Foundation of the Defense of Democracy (FDD)
which was originally founded as EMET (Hebrew for "truth"), "to provide education to enhance
Israel's image in North America." Undercover video from Al Jazeerah caught the Israeli
ex-intel official Sima Vakhnin-Gil in 2017 saying "We have FDD" when she was asked how Israel
lobbies for its interests.
Dan Cohen @dancohen3000 - 5:23 UTC · Jan 4, 2020
FDD is an Israeli government front group. Trump mega donor Bernard "Iran is the devil" Marcus
pays 1/3 of its budget. FDD advisor Richard Goldberg was appointed to National Security
Council to push for attacking Iran. FDD continued to pay his salary.
FDD was tasked by Israel to instigate a U.S. war on Iran. Following FDD's plans Trump and his
advisors are trying to provoke Iran to retaliate in a way that allows them to launch such a
war."
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/01/the-revenge-for-the-assassination-of-qassem-soleimani.html
What I am suggesting is that given nobody in the history of the US military has ever handed
over a draft letter with a general's signature block to a third party unless the person
handing it over is 100% certain that general wants it handed over. They just do not cowboy at
that level in the military. So as far as that general was concerned, this was the direction
in which they were heading, perhaps barring certain details (and of course those details can
include stalling in entirety for eternity). It hit the news. A couple hours elapsed and there
were serious rituals invoked for the walking back of the letter, to the point of saying it
was real but a draft and should not have been sent and apart from that what we are actually
doing is 180 degrees inapposite of what the letter says. That's not the result of
miscommunication or oversight. Somebody put the kibosh on the entire concept of pulling out
(and yes, information from the ground tends to indicate they're still busy getting out before
mortars begin to go off). Who would have been both (A) out of the loop regarding the
intention to communicate what was in the letter AND (B) had the stroke to say "not so fast"
AND (C) does not want US troops pulling out of Iraq? Mitch McConnell?
The oil producing states in the USA -- such as Alaska, Texas, North Dakota, New Mexico and
others -- will be happy to see hostilities between the American Empire and Iran, and the
Russians and Mexicans and Brazilians and Canadians and other oil producing nations will be
similarly pleased to see the price of oil jump way over a hundred dollars a barrel.
The Saudi Arabians are most likely trying to bribe the Iranians so that the Iranians don't
bomb the living Hell out of Saudi Arabian oil installations but maybe the bribe won't be big
enough or the Iranian strategists want to pop the price of oil before they do anything else.
The Iranians might be enticed by Saudi Arabian offers of dollars or other hard currencies in
large quantities and the Iranians might hold off on pulverizing the Hell out of any and all
oil facility targets in Saudi Arabia. The bribery negotiations might be highly civilized with
the Iranians and Saudi Arabians sitting around eating figs and caviar and mulling over
bribery figures.
Meanwhile, the greedy oil interests in the USA and globally are licking their frigging
chops at the thought of oil jumping to 150 dollars a barrel and staying there. The human
factor must be considered without considerations of whether or not the niceties of proper
behaviour are in play. The oil money grubber people want more loot and they don't give a damn
how they get it.
The Iranians might split the difference and take half the bribe money from the Saudi
Arabians and then bomb the Hell out of half the targets they originally planned to hit. The
Saudi Arabians could helpfully point out some aging oil installations that were due for
refurbishment anyhow and tell the Iranians they could hit them. I guess the oil business is
murderous up to a point, and then the negotiations kick in.
If the Iranians don't partially pop the Saudi Arabian oil installations, then maybe the
Iranians and Saudi Arabians have a sneaky prior deal on that.
The Iranians have to play the public relations game and the best way to do that would be
to jump up the price of oil while telling the Iranian people that they will get their revenge
but not just yet, and the Iranians will tell their people that the long game is the way to
go.
Don't tell me that the oil people money grubbers ain't licking their chops like ravenous
wolves at the thought of the Iranians pounding all kinds of Hell out of Saudi Arabian oil
installations!
So Trump instead of draining the swamp brought swamp creatures like Pompeo into his Administration; now he can pay the price.
Notable quotes:
"... The greenlighting of the airstrike near Baghdad airport represents a bureaucratic victory for Pompeo ..."
"... "We took a bad guy off the battlefield. We made the right decision," Pompeo told CNN. "I'm proud of the effort that President Trump undertook." ..."
"... On Dec. 29, Pompeo, Esper and Milley traveled to the president's private club in Florida, where the two defense officials presented possible responses to Iranian aggression, including the option of killing Soleimani, senior U.S. officials said. ..."
"... One significant factor was the "lockstep" coordination for the operation between Pompeo and Esper, both graduates in the same class at the U.S. Military Academy, who deliberated ahead of the briefing with Trump, senior U.S. officials said. Pence also endorsed the decision, but he did not attend the meeting in Florida. ..."
"... Some defense officials said Pompeo's claims of an imminent and direct threat were overstated, and they would prefer that he make the case based on the killing of the American contractor and previous Iranian provocations. ..."
"... On Sunday, Iran announced that it was suspending all limits of the nuclear deal, including on uranium enrichment, research and development, and enlarging its stockpile of nuclear fuel. Britain, France and Germany, as well as Russia and China, were original signatories of that deal with the United States and Iran, and all opposed Trump's decision to withdraw from the pact. ..."
"... "No one trusts what Trump will do next, so it's hard to get behind this," said the European diplomat. ..."
"... Since his time as CIA director, Pompeo has forged a friendship with Yossi Cohen, the director of the Israeli intelligence service Mossad, said a person familiar with their meetings. The men have spoken about the threat posed by Iran to both Israel and the United States. In a prescient interview in October, Cohen said Soleimani "knows perfectly well that his elimination is not impossible." ..."
"... At every step of his government career, Pompeo has tried to stake out a maximalist position on Iran that has made him popular among two critical pro-Israel constituencies in Republican politics: conservative Jewish donors and Christian evangelicals. ..."
"... After Trump tapped Pompeo to lead the CIA, Pompeo quickly set up an Iran Mission Center at the agency to focus intelligence-gathering efforts and operations, elevating Iran's importance as an intelligence target. ..."
The secretary also spoke to President Trump multiple times every day last week, culminating in Trump's decision to approve the
killing of Iran's top military commander, Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, at the urging of Pompeo and Vice President Pence, the officials
said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
Pompeo had lost a similar high-stakes deliberation last summer when Trump declined to retaliate militarily against Iran after
it downed a U.S. surveillance drone, an outcome that left Pompeo "morose," according to one U.S. official. But recent changes to
Trump's national security team and the whims of a president anxious about being viewed as hesitant in the face of Iranian aggression
created an opening for Pompeo to press for the kind of action he had been advocating.
The greenlighting of the airstrike near Baghdad airport represents a bureaucratic victory for Pompeo, but it also carries
multiple serious risks: another protracted regional war in the Middle East; retaliatory assassinations of U.S. personnel stationed
around the world; an
interruption in the battle against the Islamic State; the
closure of diplomatic pathways to containing
Iran's nuclear program; and a major backlash in Iraq, whose parliament
voted on Sunday to expel all U.S. troops from the country.
For Pompeo, whose political ambitions are a source of
constant speculation , the death of U.S. diplomats would be particularly damaging given his unyielding criticisms of former secretary
of state Hillary Clinton following the killing of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and other American personnel in Benghazi in 2012.
But none of those considerations stopped Pompeo from pushing for the targeted strike, U.S. officials said, underscoring a fixation
on Iran that spans 10 years of government service from Congress to the CIA to the State Department.
"We took a bad guy off the battlefield. We made the right decision," Pompeo told CNN. "I'm proud of the effort that President
Trump undertook."
Pompeo first spoke with Trump about killing Soleimani months ago, said a senior U.S. official, but neither the president nor Pentagon
officials were willing to countenance such an operation.
For more than a year, defense officials warned that the administration's campaign of economic sanctions against Iran had increased
tensions with Tehran, requiring a bigger and bigger share of military resources in the Middle East when many at the Pentagon wanted
to redeploy their firepower to East Asia.
How the siege of the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad unfolded On
Jan. 1, the siege on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad appeared to come to an end after supporters of the Iranian-backed Kataib Hezbollah
militia retreated. (Liz Sly, Joyce Lee, Mustafa Salim/The Washington Post)
Trump, too, sought to draw down from the Middle East as he promised from the opening days of his presidential campaign. But that
mind-set shifted on Dec. 27 when 30 rockets hit a joint U.S.-Iraqi base outside Kirkuk, killing an American civilian contractor and
injuring service members.
On Dec. 29, Pompeo, Esper and Milley traveled to the president's private club in Florida, where the two defense officials
presented possible responses to Iranian aggression, including the option of killing Soleimani, senior U.S. officials said.
Trump's decision to target Soleimani came as a surprise and a shock to some officials briefed on his decision, given the Pentagon's
long-standing concerns about escalation and the president's aversion to using military force against Iran.
One significant factor was the "lockstep" coordination for the operation between Pompeo and Esper, both graduates in the same
class at the U.S. Military Academy, who deliberated ahead of the briefing with Trump, senior U.S. officials said. Pence also endorsed
the decision, but he did not attend the meeting in Florida.
"Taking out Soleimani would not have happened under [former secretary of defense Jim] Mattis," said a senior administration official
who argued that the Mattis Pentagon was risk-averse. "Mattis was opposed to all of this. It's not a hit on Mattis, it's just his
predisposition. Milley and Esper are different. Now you've got a cohesive national security team and you've got a secretary of state
and defense secretary who've known each other their whole adult lives."
Mattis declined to comment.
In the days since the strike, Pompeo has become the voice of the administration on the matter, speaking to allies and making the
public case for the operation. Trump chose Pompeo to appear on all of the Sunday news shows because he "sticks to the line" and "never
gives an inch," an administration official said.
But critics inside and outside the administration have questioned Pompeo's justification for the strike based on his claims that
"dozens if not hundreds" of American lives were at risk.
Lawmakers left classified briefings with U.S. intelligence officials on Friday saying they heard nothing to suggest that the threat
posed by the proxy forces guided by Soleimani had changed substantially in recent months.
When repeatedly pressed on Sunday about the imminent nature of the threats, whether it was days or weeks away, or whether they
had been foiled by the U.S. airstrike, Pompeo dismissed the questions.
"If you're an American in the region, days and weeks -- this is not something that's relevant," Pompeo told CNN.
Some defense officials said Pompeo's claims of an imminent and direct threat were overstated, and they would prefer that he
make the case based on the killing of the American contractor and previous Iranian provocations.
Critics have also questioned how an imminent attack would be foiled by killing Soleimani, who would not have carried out the strike
himself.
"If the attack was going to take place when Soleimani was alive, it is difficult to comprehend why it wouldn't take place now
that he is dead," said Robert Malley, the president of the International Crisis Group and a former Obama administration official.
Following the strike, Pompeo has held back-to-back phone calls with his counterparts around the globe but has received a chilly
reception from European allies, many of whom fear that the attack puts their embassies in Iran and Iraq in jeopardy and has now eliminated
the chance to keep a lid on Iran's nuclear program.
"We have woken up to a more dangerous world," said France's Europe minister, Amelie de Montchalin.
Two European diplomats familiar with the calls said Pompeo expected European leaders to champion the U.S. strike publicly even
though they were never consulted on the decision.
"The U.S. has not helped the Iran situation, and now they want everyone to cheerlead this," one diplomat said.
"Our position over the past few years has been about defending the JCPOA," said the diplomat, referring to the 2015 Iran nuclear
deal.
On Sunday, Iran announced that it was suspending all limits of the nuclear deal, including on uranium enrichment, research
and development, and enlarging its stockpile of nuclear fuel. Britain, France and Germany, as well as Russia and China, were original
signatories of that deal with the United States and Iran, and all opposed Trump's decision to withdraw from the pact.
"No one trusts what Trump will do next, so it's hard to get behind this," said the European diplomat.
Pompeo has slapped back at U.S. allies, saying "the Brits, the French, the Germans all need to understand that what we did --
what the Americans did -- saved lives in Europe as well," he told Fox News.
Israel has stood out in emphatically cheering the Soleimani operation, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praising
Trump for "acting swiftly, forcefully and decisively."
"Israel stands with the United States in its just struggle for peace, security and self-defense," he said.
Since his time as CIA director, Pompeo has forged a friendship with Yossi Cohen, the director of the Israeli intelligence
service Mossad, said a person familiar with their meetings. The men have spoken about the threat posed by Iran to both Israel and
the United States. In a prescient interview in October, Cohen said Soleimani "knows perfectly well that his elimination is not impossible."
Though Democrats have greeted the strike with skepticism, Republican leaders, who have long viewed Pompeo as a reassuring voice
in the administration, uniformly praised the decision as the eradication of a terrorist who directed the killing of U.S. soldiers
in Iraq after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.
"Soleimani made it his life's work to take the Iranian revolutionary call for death to America and death to Israel and turn them
into action," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said.
A critical moment for Pompeo is nearing as he faces growing questions about a potential Senate run, though some GOP insiders say
that decision seems to have stalled. Pompeo has kept in touch with Ward Baker, a political consultant who would probably lead the
operation, and others in McConnell's orbit, about a bid. But Pompeo hasn't committed one way or the other, people familiar with the
conversations said.
Some people close to the secretary say he has mixed feelings about becoming a relatively junior senator from Kansas after leading
the State Department and CIA, but there is little doubt in Pompeo's home state that he could win.
At every step of his government career, Pompeo has tried to stake out a maximalist position on Iran that has made him popular
among two critical pro-Israel constituencies in Republican politics: conservative Jewish donors and Christian evangelicals.
After Trump tapped Pompeo to lead the CIA, Pompeo quickly set up an Iran Mission Center at the agency to focus intelligence-gathering
efforts and operations, elevating Iran's importance as an intelligence target.
At the State Department, he is a voracious consumer of diplomatic notes and reporting on Iran, and he places the country far above
other geopolitical and economic hot spots in the world. "If it's about Iran, he will read it," said one diplomat, referring to the massive flow of paper that crosses Pompeo's desk. "If
it's not, good luck."
Most probably Pompeo was cheating and deceived Trump to get the approval of this asssasination. now with his head on the block he
is trying to avoid the responsibility.
Notable quotes:
"... Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said public assurances from the Trump administration that such a threat was "imminent" were simply not enough. ..."
"... Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said on CNN's "State of the Union" that until the administration provides answers on "how this decision was reached ... then this move is questionable , to say the least." ..."
"... "I still worry about whether this president really understands that this is not a show, this is not a game," he said. "Lives are at stake right now." ..."
"... the administration has yet to make public its evidence that Soleimani was acting out of step in comparison with his years of similar planning as a leader in Iran's proxy wars and other covert operations, which have led to U.S. deaths . ..."
Democrats on Sunday demanded answers about the
killing of top Iranian
Gen.
Qassem Soleimani as tensions mounted with Iran and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo insisted that the United States had faced an
imminent threat.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said on ABC's "This Week" that he worried that President Donald Trump's decision
"will get us into what he calls
another
endless war in the Middle East ." He called for Congress to "assert" its authority and prevent Trump from "either bumbling or
impulsively getting us into a major war."
Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said public assurances from the Trump administration that such
a threat was "imminent" were simply not enough.
"I think we learned the hard way ... in the Iraq War that administrations sometimes
manipulate
and cherry-pick intelligence to further their political goals," he said.
"That's what got us into the Iraq War. There was no WMD," or weapons of mass destruction, he said. "I'm saying that they have
an obligation to present the evidence."
Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said on CNN's "State of the Union" that until the administration provides
answers on "how this decision was reached ... then
this move is questionable
, to say the least."
"I still worry about whether this president really understands that this is not a show, this is not a game," he said. "Lives
are at stake right now."
The fraught relationship with Iran has significantly deteriorated in the days since Soleimani's death, which came days after rioters
sought to storm the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad and a U.S. contractor was killed in a rocket attack on an Iraqi military base
in Kirkuk.
The Defense Department said Soleimani, the high-profile commander of Iran's secretive Quds Force, who was accused of controlling
Iranian-linked proxy militias across the Middle East, orchestrated the attacks on bases in Iraq of the U.S.-led coalition fighting
the Islamic State militant group, including the strike that killed the U.S. contractor. In addition, the Defense Department said
Soleimani approved attacks on the embassy compound in Baghdad.
"
We
took action last night to stop a war ," Trump said Friday in a televised address, referring to the airstrike that killed Soleimani.
"We did not take action to start a war."
But the administration has yet to make public its evidence that Soleimani was acting out of step in comparison with his years
of similar planning as a leader in Iran's proxy wars and other covert operations,
which have led to U.S. deaths .
Iran and its allies vowed to retaliate for the general's death, and Trump has since escalated his language in response.
Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics
@ChuckOrloski
At the time I thought that it might be justified, if Al Qaida actually did 9/11. Now I know
that Al Qaida was and is a CIA operation and have my doubts regarding its involvement in
9/11.
Even if it was, that was on direct orders of its American handlers.
What's more, now I
know for sure that the US government spreads shameless lies, so you can't believe anything it
says. In fact, you can safely assume that everything it says is a lie and be right 99.9% of
the time.
So, I did not see it as a war crime back then, but I do now.
"... work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason ..."
"... Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said the parliamentary resolution to end foreign troop presence in the country did not go far enough, calling on local and foreign militia groups to unite . I also have confirmation that the Mehdi Army is being re-mobilized . ..."
"... The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way…and without hesitation! ..."
First, let’s begin by a quick summary of what has taken place (note: this info is still coming in, so there might be corrections
once the official sources make their official statements).
Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdl Mahdi has now officially revealed that the US had asked him to mediate between the US and Iran
and that General Qassem Soleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer to his mediation efforts. Thus, Soleimani was
on an OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC MISSION as part of a diplomatic initiative INITIATED BY THE USA .
The Iraqi Parliament has now voted on a resolution requiring the government to press Washington and its allies to withdraw
their troops from Iraq.
Iraq’s caretaker PM Adil Abdul Mahdi said the American side notified the Iraqi military about the planned airstrike minutes
before it was carried out. He stressed that his government denied Washington permission to continue with the operation.
The Iraqi Parliament has also demanded that the Iraqi government must “ work to end the presence of any foreign troops
on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason “
The Iraqi Foreign Ministry said that Baghdad had turned to the UN Security Council with complaints about US violations of
its sovereignty .
Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said the parliamentary resolution to end foreign troop presence in the country did not go
far enough, calling on local and foreign militia groups to unite . I also have confirmation that the Mehdi Army is being re-mobilized
.
The Pentagon brass is now laying the responsibility for this monumental disaster on Trump (see
here ). The are now slowly waking up to this immense clusterbleep and don’t want to be held responsible for what is coming
next.
For the first time in the history of Iran, a Red Flag was hoisted over the Holy Dome Of Jamkaran Mosque , Iran. This indicates
that the blood of martyrs has been spilled and that a major battle will now happen . The text in the flag say s “ Oh Hussein we
ask for your help ” (u nofficial translation 1) or “ Rise up and avenge al-Husayn ” (unofficial translation 2)
The US has announced the deployment of 3’000 soldiers from the 82nd Airborne to Kuwait .
Finally, the Idiot-in-Chief tweeted the following message , probably to try to reassure his freaked out supporters: “
The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World!
If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way…and
without hesitation! “. Apparently, he still thinks that criminally overspending for 2nd rate military hardware is going to
yield victory…
Analysis
Well, my first though when reading these bullet points is that General Qasem Soleimani has already struck out at Uncle Shmuel
from beyond his grave . What we see here is an immense political disaster unfolding like a slow motion train wreck. Make no mistake,
this is not just a tactical "oopsie", but a major STRATEGIC disaster . Why?
For one thing, the US will now become an official and totally illegal military presence in Iraq. This means that whatever SOFA
(Status Of Forces Agreement) the US and Iraq had until now is void.
Second, the US now has two options:
Fight and sink deep into a catastrophic quagmire or Withdraw from Iraq and lose any possibility to keep forces in Syria
Both of these are very bad because whatever option Uncle Shmuel chooses, he will lost whatever tiny level of credibility he has
left, even amongst his putative "allies" (like the KSA which will now be left nose to nose with a much more powerful Iran than ever
before).
The main problem with the current (and very provisional) outcome is that both the Israel Lobby and the Oil Lobby will now be absolutely
outraged and will demand that the US try to use military power to regime change both Iraq and Iran.
Needless to say, that ain't happening (only ignorant and incurable flag-wavers believe the silly claptrap about the US armed forces
being "THE BEST").
Furthermore, it is clear that by it's latest terrorist action the USA has now declared war on BOTH Iraq and Iran.
This is so important that I need to repeat it again:
The USA is now at war, de-facto and de-jure , with BOTH Iraq and Iran.
I hasten to add that the US is also at war with most of the Muslim world (and most definitely all Shias, including Hezbollah and
the Yemeni Houthis).
Next, I want to mention the increase in US troop numbers in the Middle-East. An additional 3'000 soldiers from the 82nd AB is
what would be needed to support evacuations and to provide a reserve force for the Marines already sent in. This is NOWHERE NEAR
the kind of troop numbers the US would need to fight a war with either Iraq or Iran.
Finally, there are some who think that the US will try to invade Iran. Well, with a commander in chief as narcissistically delusional
as Trump, I would never say "never" but, frankly, I don't think that anybody at the Pentagon would be willing to obey such an order.
So no, a ground invasion is not in the cards and, if it ever becomes an realistic option we would first see a massive increase in
the US troop levels, we are talking several tens of thousands, if not more (depending on the actual plan).
No, what the US will do if/when they attack Iran is what Israel did to Lebanon in 2006, but at a much larger scale. They will
begin by a huge number of airstrikes (missiles and aircraft) to hit:
Iranian air defenses Iranian command posts and Iranian civilian and military leaders Symbolic targets (like nuclear installations
and high visibility units like the IRGC) Iranian navy and coastal defenses Crucial civilian infrastructure (power plants, bridges,
hospitals, radio/TV stations, food storage, pharmaceutical installations, schools, historical monuments and, let's not forget that
one, foreign embassies of countries who support Iran). The way this will be justified will be the same as what was done to Serbia:
a "destruction of critical regime infrastructure" (what else is new?!)
Then, within about 24-48 hours the US President will go on air an announce to the world that it is "mission accomplished" and
that "THE BEST" military forces in the galaxy have taught a lesson to the "Mollahs". There will be dances in the streets of Tel Aviv
and Jerusalem (right until the moment the Iranian missiles will start dropping from the sky. At which point the dances will be replaced
by screams about a "2nd Hitler" and the "Holocaust").
Then all hell will break loose (I have discussed that so often in the past that I won't go into details here).
In conclusion, I want to mention something more personal about the people of the US.
Roughly speaking, there are two main groups which I observed during my many years of life in the USA.
Group one : is the TV-watching imbeciles who think that the talking heads on the idiot box actually share real knowledge and expertise.
As a result, their thinking goes along the following lines: " yeah, yeah, say what you want, but if the mollahs make a wrong move,
we will simply nuke them; a few neutron bombs will take care of these sand niggers ". And if asked about the ethics of this stance,
the usual answer is a " f**k them! they messed with the wrong guys, now they will get their asses kicked ".
Group two : is a much quieter group. It includes both people who see themselves as liberals and conservatives. They are totally
horrified and they feel a silent rage against the US political elites. Friends, there are A LOT of US Americans out there who are
truly horrified by what is done in their name and who feel absolutely powerless to do anything about it. I don't know about the young
soldiers who are now being sent to the Middle-East, but I know a lot of former servicemen who know the truth about war and about
THE BEST military in the history of the galaxy and they are also absolutely horrified.
I can't say which group is bigger, but my gut feeling is that Group Two is much bigger than Group One. I might be wrong.
I am now signing off but I will try to update you here as soon as any important info comes in.
The Saker
UPDATE1 : according to the Russian website Colonel
Cassad , Moqtada al-Sadr has officially made the following demands to the Iraqi government:
Immediately break the cooperation agreement with the United States. Close the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. Close all U.S. military bases
in Iraq. Criminalize any cooperation with the United States. To ensure the protection of Iraqi embassies. Officially boycott American
products.
Cassad (aka Boris Rozhin) also posted this excellent caricature:
UPDATE3 : al-Manar reports that two rockets have landed near the US embassy in Baghdad.
UPDATE4 :
Zerohedge
is reporting that Iranian state TV broadcasted an appeal made during the funeral procession in which a speaker said that each
Iranian ought to send one dollar per person (total 80'000'000 dollars) as a bounty for the killing of Donald Trump. I am trying to
get a confirmation from Iran about this.
UPDATE5 : Russian sources claim that all Iranian rocket forces have been put on combat alert.
UPDATE6 : the Russian heavy rocket cruiser "Marshal Ustinov" has cross the Bosphorus and has entered the Mediterranean.
The Essential Saker III: Chronicling The Tragedy, Farce And Collapse of the Empire in the Era of Mr MAGA
Order Now The Essential Saker II: Civilizational
Choices and Geopolitics / The Russian challenge to the hegemony of the AngloZionist Empire
(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear
who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation
policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please
be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.
(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.
(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
<b>bold text</b> results in bold text
<i>italic text</i> results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
<em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
<strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
<q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
<cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:
a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
<blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:
a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant
to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more
quickly.
and last but not least:
<a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in
Name of your link
(4)No need to use this special character in between paragraphs: You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated. The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will
look like before you send it.
(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.
Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdl Mahdi has now officially revealed that the US had asked him to mediate between the US and Iran
and that General Qassem Soleimani to come and talk to him and give him the answer to his mediation efforts. Thus, Soleimani was
on an OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC MISSION as part of a diplomatic initiative INITIATED BY THE USA.
If this is true, it makes America's murder of General Soleimani even more outrageous. This would be like the USA sending an
American regime official to some other country for a negotiation only to have him/her drone striked in the process!
America reveals its malign character as even more sick that even its opponents have thought possible.
Perhaps, Iran should request that Mike Pompeo come to Baghdad for a negotiation about General Soleimani 's murder and then
"bug splat" Pompeo's fat ass from a drone!
"For one thing, the US will now become an official and totally illegal military presence in Iraq. This means that whatever SOFA
(Status Of Forces Agreement) the US and Iraq had until now is void."
-I actually read somewhere that the Iraqi government is just a caretaker government and even thought it voted to remove foreign
forces, it is not actually legally binding.
I'm no lawyer. I don't see why that would matter. If a caretaker government is presented with a crisis, why would it not have
the authority to act?
That said, It could be the line the US government chooses to use to insist its presence is still legal. If course the MSM will
repeat and repeat and make it seem real.
Couldn't agree more. When I read that my jaw dropped and I'm sure my eyes went huge. I just couldn't believe they could be that
stupid, or that immoral, that sunk in utter utter depravity. They truly are those who have not one shred of decency, and thus
have no way of recognising or understanding what decency is. Pure psychopath – an inability to grasp the emotions, values, and
world view of those who are normal. This truly is beyond the pale, and this above everything else will ensure the revenge the
heartbroken people of Iran are seeking. May God bless them.
The US Armed Forces do not need to be 'THE BEST". All they need is mountains of second rate ordinance to re-bury Iraq bury Iran
under rubble. They can then keep their forces in tightly fortified compounds and bomb the c**p out of any one who wants to 'steal
their oil', or any one who wants to 'steal the land promised by God to the Chosen People'. The U.S. has always previously been
limited in their avarice for destruction by their desire to be viewed as the 'good guy'. This limitation has now been stripped
away. There is now nothing to stop the AngloZionist entity except naked force in return.
"realistic option we would first see a massive increase in the US troop levels, we are talking several tens of thousands, if not
more (depending on the actual plan)."
Yes, but these are not part of a single force, many of these are more a target than a threat. Besides, they need to be concentrated
into a a few single forces to actually participate in an invasion.
The Saker
To understand troop size and relevance think along these lines. For every US front line soldier there will be 5 others in support
roles, logistics etc. So for every front line fighting Marine there will be 5 others who got him there and who support him in
his work. 10,000 front line fighting troops means 50,000 troops shipping out to the borders of Iran. I think perhaps you would
need 100,000 US front line troops for an invasion AND occupation (because we all know if they go in they aren't going to leave
quickly) We're talking about half a million US troops, this simply isn't going to happen for multiple reasons, not least they
need to amass at some form of base (probably Iraq – yeah right) maybe Kuwait? They'd just be a constant sitting target. Saker
is correct in that if this goes down it's going to be an air campaign (will the Iranians use the S300s they have?) and possibly
Navy supported. the Israelis will help out but in turn make themselves targets at home for rocket attacks. Again I can't see it
happening, it would take too long to arrange plus from the moment it kicks off every US base, individual is just a target to the
majority of anti US forces spread across the whole middle east. I expect back door diplomacy, probably to little effect, and a
ham fisted token blitz of cruise missiles and drone bombs at Iranian infrastructure, sadly this will not work for the Americans,
we will have a long running campaign on ME ground but also mass terrorist activity across the US and some of its allies. Its a
best guess scenario but if that plays out whatever happens to Iran this war will be another long running death by a 1000 cuts
for the US and will guarantee Trump does not get re-elected.
Whoever sold this to Trump (Bolton via Pompeo? Bibi?) has really lit the touch paper of ruin. Yes it stinks of Netanyahoo but
it also reaks of full strength neocon, Bolton style. Trump is dumb enough to fall for it and obviously did.
1. To read the Colonel Cassad website in English or any other language, just go to
https://translate.yandex.com/ and then paste in the Cassad URL, which
is given above but again, it's https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/
The really nice thing is that when you click on links, Yandex Translate automatically translates those links. Two problems, though.
1. For some unknown reason, Yandex always first translates Cassad as English-to-Russian, and then you have to click on a little
window near the top left, to again request Russian-to-English and then it translates everything fine. I do not experience this
problem when using Yandex on any other website. 2. Unlike what Benders-Lee intended when he invented the web browser, the "back
button" almost doesn't work on Yandex Translate. So always right-click to open links in a new tab.
2. The US could probably carry out a large number of air attacks, but the Iranian response would be to destroy all the Gulf
oil facilities AND everything worth bombing in Israel. This potential for offense is Iran's best defense, and, I think, the main
reason why there hasn't been a war. Iran's air defense missiles are probably more effective than the lying MSM will admit, and
might shoot down a large percentage of the humans and aluminum the US would throw at Iran, but it's a matter of attrition, and
Iran would suffer grave damage. We can't rule out that that might be the plan since the Empire is run by psychopaths. A US Army
elite training manual, from 2012 in Kansas, implied that by 2020, Europe would not be a major power. Perhaps they were thinking
that Europe would go out of business from a lack of Persian Gulf oil.
3. As for a ground war against Iran, I don't think the US or even the US with the former NATO coalition, would have any hope
and they know it. A real invasion force would require at least 250,000 troops, probably 500,000, maybe more. 80 million very determined
and united Iranians, many of whom who don't fear martyrdom, would make the Vietnam War look like a bad picnic with fire ants
. Yes, Vietnam had jungle for guerillas to hide behind, but South Vietnamese society was divided and many supported the Americans.
Iran has no such division. Even the Arab province of Khuzestan would stand united, knowing how the Shiite Arabs are mistreated
in the Eastern Province and in Kuwait.
Count me in as part of group two. As a former U.S. Army service member I can assure anyone reading this that this action is an
historic strategic mistake. What the Saker has outlined above is very likely. There is most probably no way to walk back now.
Who in the ME would negotiate with the U.S. Government? Their perfidy is well known. Many citizen in this country feel like they
are held hostage by a government that doesn't represent their interests or feelings. I hope the people in the ME know this.
Since the folks in the ME know that the US is a "pretend democracy" they also realize that the people of the USA are just as oppressed
by the AngloZionist regime as the people abroad. Frankly, I have traveled on a lot of countries and I have never come across anything
like real hostility towards the US American people. The very same people who hate Uncle Shmuel very much enjoy US music, literature,
movies, novel ideas, etc. I believe that the Empire is truly hated across the globe, but not the people of the USA.
Kind regards
The Saker
As long as people of the USA tolerate their government criminal activities around the world, and this is happening for last 70
years, I don't agree with your comment. These crimes are commited in the name of people of the USA, who are doing nothing to prevent
them. As for movies coming from US, most of them are propaganda about 'exceptional nation'. No thanks.
The United States of America is not a democracy, it is a constitutional republic. That being said, the fall elections are going
to be of significant interest.
Couldn't agree with you less Saker. They share the spoils of war, generation after generation. From the killing of indigenous
population to neocolonial resource extraction today, they get their cut. You cannot have it both ways, enjoying the spoils of
war and hiding behind invalid rationalizations, pretending you have no-thingz to do with that.
Russian TV says that there were anti-war demonstrations in 80 (!) US cities.
I don't have the time to check whether this is true, but it sure sounds credible to me.
The Saker
This information is true. I personally took part in the march in Denver, Colorado. I would estimate we had about 500 people,
which is a lot more than most anti-war protests have ever gotten in recent memory.
Do not count out the possibility of a sudden large and massive anti-war movement suddenly springing out of nowhere.
Unfortunately, I do not see how "peaceful" protests will accomplish anything on their own. Rioting may be necessary. The system
needs to be shut down and commerce slow to a crawl so that nobody may ignore this.
I agree that there will first be a period of violent confusion, followed by -- well, what sane person even wants to think about
what possible horrors lie ahead?
The threat of one or more spectacular false flag attacks to further fan the flames would also appear to be a possibility.
Real evil has been unleashed, that is clear. The empire has decided to fight, and to fight very dirty.
Wasn't the Saker working in the employ of the US or NATO when they attacked Srbija without cause? Because that was my understanding.
Actually, no. I was working at the UN Institute for Disarmament Research.
But thanks for showing everybody how ugly, petty and clueless ad hominem using trolls can be!
The Saker
"I can't say which group is bigger, but my gut feeling is that Group Two is much bigger than Group One. I might be wrong."
My personal observation is unfortunately the opposite. I think the population that is over 40 is probably leans 80% toward
the TV-watching imbecile category with zero critical thinking abilities and exposure to four plus decades of propaganda. The population
under 40 is largely too apathetic to have an opinion and unwilling to engage in research.
History will most likely play out in disaster resulting from a corrupt ruling class, systemic institutional rot, and brain-washed
public not realizing what's happened.
I will hazard a guess and say there are far more men than women in Group 1, and many more draft-age young adults of both sexes
in Group 2.
But by and large a disturbing number of people in America regard world events as being akin to a football game, with Team A
and Team B and a score to be kept. If things don't appear to be going well for their "team," they speak and behave irrationally,
with crass statements like "nuke the whole place and turn it into a glass parking lot." Impressive, isn't it? Grown adults, comporting
themselves like overindulged little children, always accustomed to getting their way – and displaying a terrifying willingness
to set the whole house on fire when they don't.
It is a spiritual illness which pollutes the USA. Terrible things will have to happen before the society can become well, again
Even if only 20% of the population join us, that will be enough. Because guess what? The TV-watching imbeciles are fat, lazy,
and they won't do anything to support the government either, and they definitely aren't brave enough to get in the way of an angry
mob
It's interesting to me, this comment of Sakers'. I have been thinking, with these revelations of the utter depravity and total
lack of what was once called "honour " and treating the enemy with respect, of a few instances which seemed to show me that not
all of America was like this.
There is a scene in the much loved but short lived** TV series "Firefly" in which the rebel "outsider" spaceship Captain offers
a doctor on the run a berth with them. The Doctor says "but you dont like me. You could kill me in my sleep" to which the Captain
replies "Son, you dont know me yet, So let me tell you know, If i ever try to kill you, you will be awake, you will be facing
me, and you will be armed"
Exactly I thought. There is a Code of Honour by which battles used to be fought. This latest by US has shown how low it's Ruling
Regime is, that is doesn't not see that. But from examples like the above, I gathered that there are people in America who still
hold to it closely – and that's good to know.
** Short lived because it showed as it's heroes a group of people who lived outside the Ruling Tyrannical Regime, who had fought
for Independence and lost, and now lived "by their wits" and not always according to law. Not surprising that the rulers of US
weren't going to allow that to go to air!!
Unfortunately I believe the largest group in the USA is the "nuke 'em group". All of my friends watch Fox and none have an understanding
of the empire.
Sake thank you as always for your excellent work. What do you think Iran will attack first?
Thanks Saker for this discussion/information space you provide when nothing is very trustworthy and on what is a holiday week
end for you.
Two points:
Never underestimate the perfidy of the Kurds. They held back on the censure/withdrawal vote in the Iraqi\
parliament and are probably offering withdrawal airport space for US military.
And Agreed, about most Americans being absolutely horrified and ashamed.Even Alex Jones had to put Syrian Girl on and to post
her on video.banned. One of his callers demanded that Alex apologize to his listening audience on "bended knee" for his support
of Trump's attack on Iran. When Alex tried to schmooze
the irate caller -- The man started yelling -- "Who cares, Alex, who cares about Iran my neighbors have no jobs
and are dying from drug overdoses. who cares about Israel? Let them take care of themselves."
Trump has sealed his own fate on many levels and ours her in looneylandia. It is said that a nation gets the leadership it
deserves. We are about to become a nation of the yard-sale.
Whew, this is something to chew on and try to digest. That first point jumped right off the page. General Soleimani was on an
official diplomatic mission, requested by the U.S.! They set him up and were waiting for him to get in his car at the airport
and go onto the road.
The entire world will know there is no way to justify this. It is just as ugly as the public murder of JFK. They have zero credibility
in all they say and do. It will be interesting to see who supports what is coming and who have gotten the message from this murder
and have decided they cannot support this beast.
How many missiles does the us have in the middle east?
How many air defense missiles does have iran?
Does iran have the ability to destroy us airbases to prevent aircraft from attacking iranian territory? That would be my first
move: destroying the ennemy s fighter jets while they are still on the ground.
How many missiles does iran can launch ? How far can they hit?
I think these are important questions if we want to make a good assessment of the situation
Thank you for the continuing courageous, fact-based reporting.
All as-yet-unenslaved-minds of the oppressed people living under the auspices of the empire share the horror of what has happened,
made worse so, for I personally, learning the evil duplicity of the 'fake' diplomacy of the masters of the U.S.A. administration.
If there had been any credibility whatsoever, left for the U.S.A. diplomatic integrity, it is now completely murdered.
I should like to point out, yet again, the perverse obviousness of the utter subordination of the utterly testiclesless
america n ' leadership ' by the affiliates, dually loyal extra-nationals, aligned to the quasi-nation of
pychopathic hatred against humanity.
In spite of, and now increasingly because of, the absurd perception management/propaganda agencies, completely controlled by
this aforementioned affiliation, and their ongoing absurd efforts, people are becoming aware of the ultimate source of the hatred
and agenda we re witnessing in the ME, and indeed, in ever country under the auspices of the empire.
It is becoming impossible to cover, even for the most timid followers of the citizens of empire-controlled nation states.
The war continues against the non-subliminated citizens, and will certainly escalate as the traction of the perception-management
techniques have been pushed way over their best-before date.
Even not wanting to know this, people are becoming aware of it.
I urge all those self-identifying with this affiliation of secretive hatred against humanity to disavow either publicly, or
privately, this collective of hatred.
The recusement of the fifth-column will undermine these machinations.
It is now the time to realize that no promise of superior upward mobility, in exchange for activities supporting the affiliation,
is worth the stark prospect of complete destruction of the biosphere.
Saker: what makes you think it will just be a couple of days of bombing? I would have thought they would set up a no fly zone
then fly over that country permanently blowing the shit out of any military thing on the ground until the gov collapses.
Iran doesn't have the ability to prevent this & running a country under these conditions is impossible.
Set up a no-fly zone over Iran? Iran is well aware of American air-power. They have a multi-layer air defense. And I wouldn't
be surprised that the Iranian's are capable of taking out U.S. satellites.
Iran knows their enemy. They have been preparing for conflict with the U.S. for 40 years. This is a sophisticated, and highly
advanced nation, with brilliant leadership. They understand what their weaknesses are, and what their strengths are.
The wild cards are threefold: Russia. China. North Korea. If one wants to think about the possible asymmetrical capabilities
of those three, let alone the pure power their militaries, it boggles the mind.
Prediction: The U.S. stands down on orders of their own military. People like John Bolton quietly pass away in their sleep.
The only no fly zone to be implemented will be on all american warplanes over Iran and Iraq. Do you remember the multimillion
drone that went down? Multipliy it by hundreds of manned planes. God, how delusional can you be?!!!
You have a fighting force that is a disgrace composed by little girls that start screeming once they get bullets flying over their
heads. You have aircraft battle groups that are sitting ducks waitng to go to the bottom of the sea. Wake up and get your pills,
man!
Paul23, from where will the aircraft take off to implement your "no-fly zone"? Any air base within 2,000 km would be destroyed
by a shower of cruise missiles and possibly drones.
It is Group 1 -- loud, reactionary, extremely vulgar, militant parasites -- which defines the US national character. Exceptional
and indispensable simply mean "entitled to other peoples' natural resources and labour output". Trying to reason with these lowlives
is a waste of time. Putin understands this; hence the new Russian weapons. The latter will be needed very soon.
Americans are a good people but America is one of the most heavily propagandized nations in the world. The media is corrupt.
The educational systems teach a sanitized version of history. But that is only a part of it.
Pro-Military propaganda is everywhere. Even before the Superbowl, jet bombers fly over the stadium – as if Militarism constituted
a basic American value. At Airports, "Military Personnel" are given preferential boarding. At retail stores customers are asked
to make donations to "military families." College football games are dedicated to "Military Appreciation Day." High Schools work
in unison with Military Recruiters to steer students into the Military. Even playground facilities for children that have video
displays display pro military messages. And that is just the tip of the iceberg.
Most of this propaganda is paid for out of the obscene military budget. The average citizen doesn't have a chance.
Americans are a good people, if they really knew what was being done in their name, they would put a stop to it.
Militant parasites do live in a world of total lies, deception, and delusion but never at the expense of their survival
instincts. US imperial coercion, mayhem, and murder globally are absolutely crucial to the American way of life, and the 99% know
it. Their living standards would drop enormously without the imperial loot. Thus, they dearly yearn for all the repression, war,
and chauvinism they vote for and more.
One thing is telling, at least for me. Who the f in the right state of mind kills other state's official and then admits of doing
it?!? The common sense sense tells me that you do something and to avoid bigger consequences you stay quet and deny everything.
Just like CIA is doing. Trump just put US military personnel in grave danger. We know how they accused Manning for showing the
to the world US war crimes. They put him in the jail for what Trump just did. But, I cannot believe that they are that much stupid.
If US does not want war, as Trump is saying, they could have done this and then blame someone else because now it has been shown
that they wanted to "talk" to Iran, as Iraqis PM said. At least, US brought new meaning to the word "talk"
The most damaging, no most devestating, assymetrical attack on the US would be a 'non violent' attack.
Let me quickly explain.
It has been well known since the exposure of the man behind the curtain during the great financial crisis of 2007-08 that all
Human operations – all Human life in fact – is financialised in some way.
Some ways being so sophisticated or 'subtle' that barely 1 person in 1000 is even aware, much less capable of understanding
them, much less the financial control grid (and state / deepstate power base) which empoverishs them and enslaves them to an endless
cycle of aquiring and spending 'money'.
Look deeply and the wise will see how 'Human resources' (as opposed to Human Beings) are herded like cattle to be worked on
the farm, 'fleeced', or slaughtered as appropriate to the money masters.
We have been programmed, trained, and conditioned to call 'currency units' (dollar/euro/pound/yuan, etc) 'money', when they
are actually nothing of the sort, they are state or bank issued money substitutes.
In the middle east and north africa some leaders recognised this determined how to escape slavery and subjegation. They attempted
to field this knowledge like an economic-nuke, but without the massive protection required, and they were destroyed by the empire
– Sadam Hussain with his oil for Gold (and oil for Euros) program, and Col. Gadaffi of Libya with his North African 'Gold Dinar'
and 'Silver Durham' Islamic money program.
To cut a very long story short – the evil empire depends upon all nations and peoples excepting thier pieces of paper currency
units as 'real' money – which the empire print / create in unlimited quantities to fund thier war machine and global progrram
of domination.
All financial markets are either denominated or settled in US Dollars (or are at least convertable).
All Nations Central Banks (except Irans I believe) are linked via various US Dollar exchange / liquidity mechanisms, and all
'settle' in US Dollars.
Currently all nations use US controlled electronic banking communications / exchange / tranfer systems (swift being the most
well known).
Would it therefore not make sence to go for the very beating heart of the Beast – the US financial system?
The most powerful attack against the empire would therefore be against this power base – the global reserve currency – the
US dollar – and the US ability to print any quantity of it (or create digits on a screen and call them 'Dollar Units').
It would be pointless trying to fight an emnemy capable of printing for free enough currency to buy every resource (including
peoples lives) – unless that super ability was destroyed or disrupted.
Example of a massive nuclear equivilent attack on the beast would be an internal and major disrruption of interbank electronic
communications (at all levels from cash machine operation and card payment readers up to interbank transfers and federal banking
operations).
Shut down the US banking system and you shut down the US war machine.
Not only that you shut down the US ability to buy resources and bribe powerful leaders – which means they wont be able to recover
from such a blow quickly.
Shutting down banking and electronic payments of all kinds would cause the US people – particularly those currently enjoying
bread and circus distraction and pacification – to tear appart thier own communities, and each other, as the spoiled and gready
fight for the remaining resources, including food and fuel.
The 'grid' has been studied in great depth by both Russia and China (and Israel as part of thier neo-sampson option) and we
can therefore deduce that Iran has some knowledge of how it works and where the weak links are (and not just the undersea optical
cables and wireless nodes).
I, and a thousand other people have always said, the best, perhaps only way to defeat the US and end its reign of terror on
this Earth is to take away its ability to create out of thin air the Worlds global reserve currency – the US Dollar.
Reducing the US to an empoverished 3rd world state by taking its check book away would be a worthy and lasting revenge and
humiliation.
" I, and a thousand other people have always said, the best, perhaps only way to defeat the US and end its reign of terror on
this Earth is to take away its ability to create out of thin air the Worlds global reserve currency – the US Dollar. "
No, the best way would be for each nation to ditch the intertwined, privately ( Rothschild ) controlled central banks, and
to return to printing their own money. Anything, short of that will just perpetuate the same system from a different home base
( nation ), most likely China next. This virus can jump hosts and it will given a chance.
Who knows what will happen, but an actual boots on the ground invasion of Iran will not happen. Iran is not Irak and things have
changed since that war.
US does not have 6 to 12 months to gather it's forces and logistics for an invasion (remember, the election is coming), plus
US no longer has the heavy lift assets to do this. Toss in the fact that Iran is now on a war footing and has allies in the general
AO, hired RoRo's and other logistics and supply assets will be targets before they get anywhere near the ports or beaches to off
load. Plus, you can kiss oil goodbye, Iran will close the straights a nanosecond after the first bomb is in the air.
An air assault such as Serbia will be very expensive, Iran will fight back from the first bomb if not before, and Iran has
a pretty viable air defense system and the missiles to make life miserable for any cluster of troops and logistics within roughly
300 kilometers of the borders if not longer. Look at a map. There is a long border between Iran and Irak, but as such and considering
the terrain, any viable ground attack has to come from Irak territory. With millions of Iraki's seething at what Uncle Sugar just
did and millions of Iranians seething at what Uncle Sugar just did, any invading troops will not be greeted with showers spring
blossoms. To paraphrase a quote, 'You will be safe nowhere, our land will be your grave.'
Toss in the fact that an invasion of Irak, if even half successful, will put American troops on a war footing perilously close
to Russian territory and possibly directly on the Russian Lake, aka Caspian Sea, and sovereign territory of Russia. Won't happen,
VVP will not allow it.
Ergo, in spite of all the bluster and chest beating, at best all Foggy Bottom can do is bomb, bomb some more and bomb again.
The cost in airframes and captured pilots will be a disaster and if RoRo's and other logistic heavy lift assets or bases are hit,
the body bags coming back to Dover will be of numbers that can not be hidden as they are today with explanations that the dead
are victims of training accidents or air accidents.
Foggy Bottom, and Five Points with Langley, have painted themselves in to a corner and unfortunately for them, (and it's within
the realm of possibility that Five Points egged Trump on for this deal regardless of their protestations of innocence and surprise)
they are now in a case of put up or shut up. As a point of honor they will continue down the spiral path of open warfare and war
is like a cow voiding it's watery bowels, it splatters far beyond the intended target.
As my friend said a few years ago, damn you, damn your eyes, damn your souls, damn you back to Satan whose spawn you are. Go
back to your fetid master and leave us in peace.
Never The Last One, paper back edition. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1521849056
A deep look in to Russia, her culture and her Armed Forces, in essence a look at the emergence of Russian Federation.
"UPDATE2: RT is reporting that "One US service member, two contractors killed in Al-Shabaab attack in Kenya, two DoD personnel
injured". Which just goes to prove my point that spontaneous attacks are what we will be seeing first and that the retaliation
promised by Iran will only come later."
Saker, Some of us might be curious to know what your experience with the UN Institute for Disarmament Research informs you about
the imminent Virginia gun bans and confiscations planned for this year and next. Can Empire afford to fight an actual shooting
war on two fronts, one externally against Iraq/Iran and the second internally against its own people, some of whom will paradoxically
be called away to fight on the first front? Perhaps the two conflicts could become conjoined as Uncle Shmuel mislabels every peaceful
gun owner who just wants to be left alone as a foreign enemy-sympathizer and combatant by default, thereby turning brother against
brother in a bloody prolonged hell in the regions immediately around Washington DC? Could the Empire *truly* be that suicidal?
'Mr. Trump, the Gambler! Know that we are near you, in places that don't come to your mind. We are near you in places that you
can't even imagine. We are a nation of martyrdom. We are the nation of Imam Hussein You are well aware of our power and capabilities
in the region. You know how powerful we are in asymmetrical warfare You know that a war would mean the loss of all your capabilities.
You may start the war, but we will be the ones to determine its end '
Gen. Soleimani (2018)
Hello Saker,
I would like to ask you a question.
According to the Russian nuclear doctrine "The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the
use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction against itself or its allies and also in response to large-scale aggression
involving conventional weapons in situations that are critical for the national security of the Russian Federation and its allies."
In your opinion does Russia consider Iran such an ally? Will Russia shield Iran against USAn / Israeli nuclear strikes? In case
of an imminent nuclear strike on Iran is Russia (and possibly others) going to issue a nuclear ultimatum to the would-be aggressor?
And in case an actual nuclear attack on Iran happens is Russia going to retaliate / deter further attacks with its own nukes?
What is your opinion?
One thing: please do not start explaining why the above scenario is completely unthinkable, unrealistic and why it would never
ever happen. I need your opinion on the possible events if such an attack does take place or it is about to happen. I do not need
reasons why it would not happen; I need your opinion what might take place if it does happen. If you cannot answer my question,
have no opinion or simply do not want to answer it please let me know it.
In case there is a formal commitment by Russia – one I know not of – when, where was it made?
Thanks in advance.
I think USA still has nuclear option.
They will not hesitate to use it on Iran if Israel is in danger.
So, I think Iran shall be defeated anyway, as USA is much stronger.
Wrong. If the US uses nukes, then this will secure the total victory of Iran.
The Saker
How does this secure a total victory, dear Saker? Please help my to understand this: Nukes on every major city, industrial site,
infrastructure with pos. millions dead – how is this a victory?
I think that if Iran were to launch some devastating missiles into Israel, either a US ship/submarine or Israel will launch a
nuclear bomb into Iran. The US knows there is nothing to be gained by a ground invasion. If we [the US] were to start launching
missiles into Iran, Iran would rightfully be launching sophisticated arms back toward US ships and Israel and the US can't stand
for that. We are good at dishing it out, but lousy at receiving it.
I can only believe we assassinated Solieman [apologies] because it is the writhing of a dying petrodollar. The US is desperate.
But I don't understand how going to war is supposed to help?
"Beijing's ties with Tehran are crucial to its energy and geopolitical strategies, and with Moscow also in the mix, a broader
conflagration is a real possibility"
Last but not least, Happy Nativity to all Orthodox Christians (thanks for the beautifully illustrated Orthodox calendar, The
Saker.)
Let us all pray for peace.
Trump is the King of the South. Killing under a flag of parley is a rare thing these days and is the reason why Trump will end
up going to war with no allies by his side just like the path mapped oit for him in Daniel.
It's not a blunder.
Trump's goals pre-assassination:
1) withdraw US troops from the ME ("Fortress America") and
2) placate Israel
This is how it is done. Not a direct "hey guys, we have to bring the boys home." Trump tried that and got smashed by the Deep
State and Israel. Instead, he is going to force the Islamic world to do the talking for him by refusing to host our pariah army
(that's all they have to do, not destroy a major US base or two). Then even the Deep State will admit it's a lost cause. He can
say he did all he could while achieving his goals.
As The Saker pointed out, the troops being sent now are to evacuate, not to conquer Tehran. Next time this year the US will have
its troops home and Trump will be reelected
"... It is time b and the others admit that they made a mistake. b has been supportive of keeping Trump in power and his reelection. This is a mistake. karlo1 also expressed some support for Trump, which is naive, and inexcusable, for such an intelligent person. ..."
"... Let's make a bet that all of those who somehow supported Trump here will eat their words this year. ..."
"... It is time for people to think very carefully and deeply about things. Do not be naive. Think very carefully. Get your brains working, please. ..."
So what happened to the naive people who were putting their peace hopes in Trump? He just
said he will strike important sites in Iran, including cultural sites.
It is time b and the others admit that they made a mistake. b has been supportive of
keeping Trump in power and his reelection. This is a mistake. karlo1 also expressed some
support for Trump, which is naive, and inexcusable, for such an intelligent person.
Let's make a bet that all of those who somehow supported Trump here will eat their words
this year.
It is time for people to think very carefully and deeply about things. Do not be naive.
Think very carefully. Get your brains working, please.
If I were China at this point, watching the schoolyard bully beating up on a fellow
citizen, I might just want to take the Bully's focus off the fellow citizen and, with
Russia's backing, tell the bully to pick on someone their own size.
Given the brazenness of the threats and provoking going on to start some military
conflict, maybe China needs to play the "I won't sign the trade deal and I want to cash in my
US Treasuries." cards to redirect the narrative and focus.
I like the silence of nations watching the bully trying to goad the world into military
war. It speaks volumes that Trump is being the biggest bully he can to incite military
warfare which they would lose if they don't go nuclear.
I find it saddening that so many commenters here don't seem to grasp that asymmetrical
warfare that is needed now is not the eye for eye type. Military warfare is the problem, not
the solution.
"Trump: "We targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran
many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture,
and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no
more threats!"
Threats! I.e., Trump to Iran: If you don't let us off the hook for what we did to you, you
will be sorry!! Wouldn't this also be a war crime per . . . Geneva? Nuernberg? Destruction of
cultural sites?
The man is really a terrifying nutter who thinks nothing of destroying ancient cultures
while sitting in his gauge, glitzy digs in the Trump Tower or Mar-a Lago.
Thanks to Really @ 124 - Yes, I do know that Iran is not Arabic - the interview I was
remembering was in Qatar in October after a meeting that Zahir had addressed concerning his
HOPE initiative, and that interview had been posted on twitter - I could not find it in my
search just now, but my confusion was due to, I believe, his mentioning Arabic countries at
one point. Apologies for the misstatement. You are correct that the initiative is aimed more
widely than that.
Lozion@62 - Re: Your Magnier quote, "The US did not plan to kill the vice commander of the
Iraqi Hashd al-Shaabi brigade Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes when it assassinated Iranian Brigadier
General Qassem Soleiman"
The light bulb above my chimpanzee brain just flickered (briefly). Somewhere on SST (maybe
Lang?): something to the effect of 'Never underestimate US gov/mil incompetence'. Maybe it
was the opposite of what Magnier thought really took place.
Treasonous, dual-citizen chickenhawks of the US possibly targeted Hashd al-Shaabi
vice-commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes . They were trying to kill him because they found
out from some snitch that he just showed up at the airport for some reason. The all-seeing US
didn't realize Soleimani was even there . I guess because the sneaky Soleimani flew
commercial into Baghdad and probably carried his bags to the waiting SUVs. Who would have
expected that ? How devious!
This seems entirely plausible to me. Soleimani was too expensive a target - end of the
State of Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE and all. But whacking a vice-commander of Hashd
al-Shaabi with a quarter-million dollar JAGM? Hell YEAH! We live for this kind
of preventative assassination heroism in the US. Especially if accompanied by colorful
graphics.
The awkward and delayed response of the usual US mil/gov mouthpieces makes this ridiculous
scenario even more believable. I have thoroughly convinced myself that this was a US screw-up
of EPIC proportions. In case the US government is reading MoA, this was all Lozion's doing.
I'm an innocent conspiracy primate.
I don't trust Magnier's reporting about an offer made by USA to Iran and his
speculation that Trump "offering the life of a 4-star general" is as nonsensical as it is
irresponsible.
In the past I've found Magnier to be unreliable - like when he has lauded Israel and
hinted that Iran was behind the tanker attacks. It sometimes seems to me that Magnier
relishes the possibility of a war with Iran.
Magnier's reporting is inconsistent with Trump Administration actions now and in the past.
Trump was "locked and loaded" for war with Iran in September! So why would Trump offer to
lift sanctions and strike a nuclear deal now EXCEPT AS A RUSE.
We should also be mindful that the Iranians have refused to negotiate while sanctions are
in place. This has been Iran's position for quite some time. Reporting about an rebuffed
offer without noting this is irresponsible and a disservice to readers.
PS Why does Magnier's site track users via graph.facebook?
<> <> <> <> <> <>
I find it highly doubtful that Iran brought down PanAm 103 .
Such speculation only plays into USA's depiction of Iran as a terrorist state.
I know we are not to feed the trolls, but this is a meme worth commenting on:
"...So what happened to the naive people who were putting their peace hopes in
Trump?..."
Many here are emphasizing this doubtful implication (even Circe, whom I praised for a
stellar observation on the subject of Iran - and it even crept into my own cut and paste of
Suilimani's attributes.
We do not know (and I'm grateful to Pepe for entering this into his recent article) how
much of this is being orchestrated by Trump of his own unadulterated initiative. We agree
it's a mafia operating. Is he the boss of it? That's speculation. What is important is that
those (and we've seen how they operate) in 'power' are calling the shots.
So I'm viewing with suspicion any post (including mine) that accidentally or not inserts
this meme.
Bin Laden, Al Baghdadi, etc were not beloved state officials or state actors of any kind.
Qaddafi, like Saddam, was toppled in actions that were designed to look like regime change
from below -- but I agree to some extent that his death comes close, but was Qaddafi singled
out by a precision hit in the precise fashion we are seeing here. But my point is that a
bridge has been crossed here in terms of scale, brazenness, and the extent to which no
attempt was made to conceal that it was a hit ordered directly by POTUS. It is an
unprecedented shift in international relations where a host of other covert tactics were
fully available and would have achieved the same outcome.
I guess I'm the only human round here who finds the child like refusal by so many to believe
that Iran played a payback card with Lockerbie, a very small stunt that didn't require much
at all in the way of participants, while they lap up lurid (& frequently white
supremacist at heart) nonsense conspiracies such as that 911 was a deliberate strategy (one
that would have required a cast of hundreds if not thousands, all staying schtum for
evermore) - f++king ludicrous.
The Iranians had to teach amerika that shooting down a passenger jet had major consequences.
They did that while benefiting from real world politics where amerika needed to have Iran
& Syria (who had assisted) onside for gulf war 1. Libya got stitched up because they were
convenient mugs who lacked friends in the ME because the colonel had no time for pretty much
every other ME leader - his interest had always been Africa.
This is pretty typical of people who have a need to see everything in black or white. Don't
say anything bad about Iran or Syria because they are enemies of fukasi eh. What use are
nations such as Iran or Syria if they are not prepared to get their hands dirty once in a
while? No use.
The fact that Iran got just the right payback in a just way then stopped is something people
should be proud of Iran for, rather than squealing "No No they wouldn't they couldn't do
that."
I can remember celebrating down the workers' club on the day news of the Lockerbie bombing
came out. What had occurred was obvious, sure a few innocents died, that happens in war, the
war amerika had kicked off and if that plane hadn't gone down most of the passengers would
have been sitting in a coffee shop today with half a chubbie in their pants at the thought
amerika had showed that 'Sullymanny' who was the boss.
b is correct to bring up that action because it encapsulates exactly how Iran is, truth
and justice are at the heart of everything Iran's leadership believes & does. It wasn't
Iran who fitted up Libya - amerika & england did that. Iran had merely insisted that the
entire plane saga be buried if amerika wanted any assistance with Saddam Hussein, who let's
face as far as Iran was concerned deserved everything he got. George H Bush showed himself to
be at least as silly as his son - neither had any comprehension of what would happen should
Ba'ath be removed from power in Iraq, that Iran would be the major beneficiary.
That I reckon is a major part of why amerikan leaders & their zionist proxies get so hot
on Iran. Iran played them like a bitch and now they know it.
If Lockerbie incident substantiated with Rober Fisk stories or world powers intelligence
evidences, Iran definitely would be sanctioned and would pay very high price, would be tried
in international criminal court.
Why they did not brought Gadhafy to the court? Because they did not have clear evidence.
Look other works of Robert Fisk, how is Independent now? What color is it now?
My view about Trump is based on my psychological portrait of Trump. He is a US
supremacist, plus a military (see their presence around him and the large increase in mil
budgets) and a zionist (see his family) puppet.
I see him as an aggressive animal. He will start a war if he can get away with it. He also
likes to grandstand, so he hates the US decline in the world. He wants to brag how great he
(and by proxy the US) is. It is also known that he does not like muslims. No way for him to
have good relations with Iran.
He is a gambler. He will push and push, as long as he could get away with it. In
international relations though, especially in the relations with some countries, who have
strong grievances against the US, this could lead to war.
Trump said that he could nuke Afghanistan is necessary. Sorry, but i do not see in this
talk his advisors behind him, but only his own animalistic nature.
Truth is, i was supportive of Trump in the past, but with time i changed my opinion. After
careful observation. And i'm glad i did. It shows that my mind is still flexible, and will
accept even the unpleasant truth, as long as it is the truth.
If i'm calling now a person that i was relatively supportive in the past "an animal" you
can imagine my disappointment.
Addendum to @143
Unless of course the lack of concealment was a deliberate provocation to incite a real war.
In which case Iran must choose asymmetry. Hit KSA and close the Gulf. The world will sideline
the US in a panicked scramble to quieten everything down. But I don't see evidence that the
markets believe this will happen. Oil not really moving up that much. A good analysis of the
financial markets' view on this would shed some light.
Also, does anybody have an accurate summary of the current structure of the Iraqi
parliament, someone who can crunch the numbers? The US would surely have been preparing well
in advance to prevent a spill to evict them, but is it in the bag or is it fluid? I wonder
what the bookies are offering...
Too much noise from the US, as usual, threats blah blah, there are simply not enough fire
power in the Gulf to go to war against Iran, just recall what took from many countries to
invade Iraq, so no WWIII, no major confrontation is expected. The Orange Man is clearly
agitated, his few TV appearances, are showing a very disturbed person, not the usual Trumpest
we know about.
The backstage is intense, Iran has to retaliate, the US gets that, but it is trying to reduce
the impact, this is definitively what is being dealt in the Swiss, Oman and Qatar meetings in
the past 24 hrs. There will be more contacts until this whole mess is done.
Iranians and Iraqis are not afraid, they want confrontation, it will be hard for their
leaders to hold them at bay, but I believe the payback is coming slowly, in pieces, not once,
but in several blows, a masterpiece could be against American allies in the region, since the
US will have hard time re retaliate, and the damage to the US will be done as it was with the
tankers, agains KSA etc... We should also expect IEDs to kill many soldiers and US
mercenaries, the later will be focused for sure, and that means in Iraq and Syria.
Would like to share with the SyrPers visiting MoA, that until the site is not back on
line, we are trying to gather at Platosgun.com, at Taxi's place, so far we managed to some
Syrpers there and get out comment section back to live in a different address, at least for
while. See you there SyrPers.
Have we missed an obvious explanation for shocking behavior?
That control of Iran is needed to enable the Crown to do Brexit and flourish? That
middle-east oil/gas and the politics of global availability are crucial to the Crown's
survival as elitist Royalty.
The US.gov has acted as the Crown's proxy for a very long time, knowingly or
unknowingly.
Look at a global map of Planet Earth. Look at England [if you can find it]. And don't
confuse it with Japan, which also knows something about needing/wanting proxies...knowingly
or not.
Now, go do Brexit without guaranteed [under control] sources of energy and other
plunder.
People have lost their fear of Nuclear weapons. If the U.S. use Nukes against Iran, the
radioactive cloud will be blown across the Atlantic Ocean and land where?
Quite apart from the fact that if the U.S. use Nukes without a serious retaliation, nowhere
is safe. Putin has been quoted that any form of nuclear weapon used on any of it's allies
will be considered as a nuclear attack on Russia itself and will be responded to by a full
scale retaliatory strike.
As the U.S. has no defense against the latest Russian weaponry, they will realize that
indeed, the living will envy the dead.
I have no idea as to what the attack strategy of Russia will be but I doubt it will be to
kill millions of people. Far more effective Is to wipe out major infrastructure, transport,
water and energy systems and then see what 340 million people do to survive.
Well put. We in Australia have a mini-Trump for PM (an embarrassing fawning dog licking
Trump's balls on his recent visit to the US) who is currently mismanaging our bushfire
catastrophe due to a total lack of empathy. A former marketing manager, Scott Morrison is a
sociopath who makes bullies look like Mother Teresa. The combination of self-righteous
evangelism with fanatical neoliberal ideology, when wedded to a lust for power at all costs
and the crushing of any dissent (usually through awful marketing-school cynicism), makes for
extreme social and political toxicity. He adores Trump and actually took notes at an Ohio
rally (I kid you not). As the east coast burns like never before (a region the size of Texas
gone, 1500 homes, 20+ lives lost) he went on holiday to Hawaii (staying in a Trump hotel).
When he returned he was greeted by visceral hostility (enormously satisfying to watch
here ). His instinct was to make an ad explaining how great his leadership is(n't). His
position is owed to his commitment to Australia's only three sources of wealth: selling coal
and iron ore to China, real estate (ponzi scheme), banking (even bigger ponzi scheme). I
would drone strike him and Trump in a New York minute
"A new California law fines you $1,000 if you shower and do 1 load of laundry in the
same day. And if the Gov declares a drought, the fine goes up to *$10,000*."
@139 PWIV. My take here from before Magnier's post:
Posted by: Lozion | Jan 4 2020 2:25 utc | 363
"Killing Mohandes was not part of the plan imo. Note how he is never mentioned in Western
press? The US will now have to contend with an extraordinary parliament session this Sunday
and likely a vote for US troop ousting will be made. Surely that's not what the US wanted
though it had to be anticipated if Mohandes got hit. Either they ignored he was present or
decided it was worth the risk. Now its blowback time. Lets see what Sadr's block will vote.
He will finally reveal is true colors by making or breaking the vote (53 MP's).."
You may be right though and it is the opposite but I think IL leaked the info on Soleimani
going to Baghdad for the funeral of the martyred PMU soldiers and the hit was
greenlighted..
And this way we already can test who inspired the US/Israel sponsored terrorists in Syria
and Iraq to destory all the cultural heritage there...sicne The Donals just confess this was
in their strategic manuals....The Syrian government should keep a capture of that Twitt for
further claims on compensations at ICC...
Obviously, nobody swallowed that was an ingenious occurence of those brutes to the
eyebrows of Captagon...Someon wanted those treasure destroyed and payed to smugle those able
to be so..
Iran has already been under attack: And much lied about:
From Oct. 2019 Iran claims two explosions on board the Iranian Sabiti oil tanker were
caused by a missile attack in the Red Sea
Sept 2018 At least 29 people, including children, have been killed in a terrorist attack
on a military parade in south-west Iran, responsibility claimed by Islamic State and a
separatist group.
Aug 2015 "Israel's defense minister hinted on Friday that the Jewish state's intelligence
services were behind the rash of killings of Iranian nuclear scientists."
And then there are the false accusations: June 2019 Hours after the U.S. released video
footage that 'showed' an Iranian boat removing an unexploded mine from the side of an oil
tanker, the Japanese owner of that vessel said that the ship was likely damaged by a "flying
object" and dismissed claims of a mine attack as "false."
The news was distorted and interpreted, hand-to-hand differently.
Swiss Ambassador in Tehran was summoned for Solaimani assassination, he went to Iran foreign
ministry, yesterday morning ( Swiss is represent and protect USA affairs in Iran). At the
same visit he delivered a letter from USA to Iran. What is the content of the letter is not
known to public. The Sepah commander in his speech hinted that American ( through a country)
has requested to set a limit ( or ceiling) for retaliation and Iran has reject the request. (
who was the third country? Nobody knows, many countries are trying to mediate every
hour).
In an interview Zarif explained that Swiss ambassador was summoned, he came in the morning,
in the same session he delivered an indecent letter from USA. He was summoned in the
afternoon, came and received our sturdy an tough written response.
A 4 star general or like that are logical interpenetration. Why you do not look Chris
Morphy's speeches?
He ( Morphy) said equivalent to Solaimani is American secretary of defense. Would you satisfy
with Morphy interpretation?
>>Also, does anybody have an accurate summary of the current structure of the Iraqi
parliament, someone who can crunch the numbers? The US would surely have been preparing well
in advance to prevent a spill to evict them, but is it in the bag or is it fluid? I wonder
what the bookies are offering...
In the iraqi parliament, sunnis and kurds are against expelling the US. They are a
minority though. There are also two small shia factions who are against that.
But the expellers will have the majority if Muqtada al Sadr supports them. So by the
coming vote, it will become clear who is a US agent in Iraq, and who is not.
My bet is a 70 % probability for a vote to expell the US from Iraq.
@Moon
Fitst, as others have pointed out, it is unclear who was responsible for the downing of
Pan AM 103 . Many took credit for it and ultimately it may have been the CIA itself.
Second, Iran has always been of strategic interest to great powers even before
Israel existed or oil was discovered there. To suggest that the US would have no strategic
interest in controlling Iran if it were not for Israel is ridiculous. The US deep state
has been trying to reclaim Iran since Carter lost it. Also, note that Israel supplied
weapons to the Islamic Republic of Iran during the the Iran-Iraq war.
If want to look to past history of what Iran will do, you only need to look back to the
Iran-Iraq war. After the US wiped out all Iranian oil platforms and the Iranian navy in
operation Praying Mantis, a ceasefire and peace was negotiated soon afterwords. Trump and
Lindsey Graham have warned Iran that they will lose all their oil refineries if they attempt
retaliation. Iran no longer has any doubts that Trump will make good on that threat. To
suggest that Iran will act irrationally and retaliate regardless of US consequences is the
height of racism.
Also to think that China or Russia will somehow defend Iran against US attacks is wishful
thinking,
Trump is the perfect man, in the perfect position, at the perfect time, to finally get their
wish and attempt to smash up Iran. He is no more than a front man. Every president is backed
by some interests and competing interests back various candidates.
If he (they) think he (they) can play the "rocket man" game against the Persian he (they)
are sadly mistaken. Obviously Obama took a much different tack with Iran while smashing up
some of the old Arab secular countries at the same time. I would not know how to begin to
think through this madness of Empire regime planning.
Below is a Reuters article, so you know it is low balling the numbers but, admitting that not
ALL Americans are on board with the Iran/Iraq attack
"
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Groups of protesters took to the streets in Washington and other U.S.
cities on Saturday to condemn the air strike in Iraq ordered by President Donald Trump that
killed Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani and Trump's decision to send about 3,000
more troops to the Middle East.
"No justice, no peace. U.S. out of the Middle East," hundreds of demonstrators chanted
outside the White House before marching to the Trump International Hotel a few blocks
away.
Similar protests were held in New York, Chicago and other cities. Organizers at Code Pink,
a women-led anti-war group, said protests were scheduled on Saturday in numerous U.S. cities
and towns.
Protesters in Washington held signs that read "No war or sanctions on Iran!" and "U.S.
troops out of Iraq!"
Speakers at the Washington event included actress and activist Jane Fonda, who last year
was arrested at a climate change protest on the steps of the U.S. Capitol.
"The younger people here should know that all of the wars fought since you were born have
been fought over oil," Fonda, 82, told the crowd, adding that "we can't anymore lose lives
and kill people and ruin an environment because of oil."
"Going to a march doesn't do a lot, but at least I can come out and say something: that
I'm opposed to this stuff," said protestor Steve Lane of Bethesda, Maryland. "And maybe if
enough people do the same thing, he (Trump) will listen."
Soleimani, regarded as the second most powerful figure in Iran, was killed in the U.S.
strike on his convoy at Baghdad airport on Friday in a dramatic escalation of hostilities in
the Middle East between Iran and the United States and its allies.
Public opinion polls show Americans in general have been opposed to U.S. military
interventions overseas. A survey last year by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found 27%
of Americans believe military interventions make the United States safer, and nearly half
said they make the country less safe.
"
One point: Since Iran now knows that it will be blamed for *anything* that happens in the
Middle East - witness the Houthis attack on the Saudi oil fields, it does not have much
incentive to keep its retaliation "plausibly deniable." So I suspect Iran will make it clear
that it is responsible for whatever retaliation it conducts. It will only keep such
retaliation at a level below a direct strike against senior US officials such as Pence,
Pompeo, or the Joint Chiefs.
My guess would be a strike against a division level or regional US military officer in the
region - possibly via car bomb in the UAE or even Europe. Or an equivalent strike against an
Israeli officer or diplomat via Hezbollah - although that might difficult due to limited
access. That will make it obvious that is was Iran, but Iran may still use a cut-out such as
Hezbollah or Shia elsewhere so no Quds Force operative can be identified as being
involved.
"Military security" is an oxymoron, as SEAL Richard Marcinko demonstrated with his Red
Cell team decades ago. Every US military member in the world is now at increased risk for
assassination and every US base in the world is at risk for a serious attack similar to the
Marine Barracks bombing.
I'd hate to be any US official flying into any airport in the Middle East - given that an
equivalent drone strike can be done by almost every militant group in the Middle East, now
that the Houthis have demonstrated how.
Below is another Reuters article, this one about the lying, boot licking and obfuscating UK
"
LONDON (Reuters) - Britain urged all parties to show restraint on Saturday after the United
States killed Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani in an air strike, but said its
closest ally was entitled to defend itself against an imminent threat.
Defence minister Ben Wallace said in a statement that he had spoken to his U.S.
counterpart Mark Esper, adding: "We urge all parties to engage to de-escalate the
situation.
"Under international law the United States is entitled to defend itself against those
posing an imminent threat to their citizens," he added.
"
LYSSANDER the only suspect for the bombing of Capt William Roger's wife's van was a former
family friend involved in some sort of personal dispute over a divorce.
> Grudge, not terrorism, seen in Rogers bombing
> Joe Hughes
> Tribune Staff Writer
>
> 10/02/1989
> The San Diego Union-Tribune
>
> TRIBUNE; 1,2,3,4,5
> A-1:1,2,3,4; B-1:5
> (Copyright 1989)
>
>
>
> Federal investigators have turned away from
> terrorism as a motive for the
> pipe-bombing of a van driven by the wife of Navy
> Capt. Will C. Rogers III
> and are looking at an American believed to have a
> grudge against Rogers,
>
Thanks for the succinct summary. That seems to accord with the balance across the country.
It's hard to tell in Iraq whether religion (Sunni v Shi'a) means more than ethnicity (Arab v
Persian). Like all these artificial nations created after the collapse of the Ottoman empire
the ethno-tribal, religious and class breakdown is impenetrable and mercurial. It always
reminds me of Frank Herbert's masterpiece Dune. 70% eh? I like those odds.
In passing, it reached 49 degrees celsius where I live in western Sydney yesterday (a
Sydney record) and the smoke haze is now so bad from multiple fire fronts on the edges of the
city that driving is dangerous and motorways are closing. With heavy water restrictions in
place my garden is dead. All my capsicums burnt on the stem yesterday as the road bitumen
melted outside. This is the case from Queensland to South Australia, a coastline 2000km long.
Plus Australia currently has the worst air quality in the world. And this is only one month
into a 3 month fire season. Very depressing.
T he drone assassination in Iraq of Iranian Quds Force commander General Qassem Soleimani
evokes memory of the assassination of Austrian Archduke Ferdinand in June 1914, which led to
World War I. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was quick to warn of "severe
revenge." That Iran will retaliate at a time and place of its choosing is a near certainty. And
escalation into World War III is no longer just a remote possibility, particularly given the
multitude of vulnerable targets offered by our large military footprint in the region and in
nearby waters.
What your advisers may have avoided telling you is that Iran has not been isolated.
Quite the contrary. One short week ago, for example, Iran launched its first joint naval
exercises with Russia and China in the Gulf of Oman, in an unprecedented challenge to the U.S.
in the region.
Cui Bono?
It is time to call a spade a spade. The country expecting to benefit most from hostilities
between Iran and the U.S. is Israel (with Saudi Arabia in second place). As you no doubt are
aware, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is fighting for his political life. He continues to
await from you the kind of gift that keeps giving. Likewise, it appears that you, your
son-in-law, and other myopic pro-Israel advisers are as susceptible to the influence of Israeli
prime ministers as was former President George W. Bush. Some commentators are citing your
taking personal responsibility for providing Iran with a casus belli as unfathomable.
Looking back just a decade or so, we see a readily distinguishable pattern.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon payed a huge role in getting George W. Bush to
destroy Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Usually taciturn, Gen. Brent Scowcroft, national security
adviser to Presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush, warned in August 2002 that "U.S. action
against Iraq could turn the whole region into a cauldron." Bush paid no heed, prompting
Scowcroft to explain in Oct. 2004 to The Financial Times that former Israeli Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon had George W. Bush "mesmerized"; that Sharon has him "wrapped around his
little finger." (Scowcroft was promptly relieved of his duties as chair of the prestigious
President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board.)
In Sept. 2002, well before the attack on Iraq, Philip Zelikow, who was Executive Secretary
of the 9/11 Commission, stated publicly in a moment of unusual candor, "The 'real threat' from
Iraq was not a threat to the United States. The unstated threat was the threat against Israel."
Zelikow did not explain how Iraq (or Iran), with zero nuclear weapons, would not be deterred
from attacking Israel, which had a couple of hundred such weapons.
Zombie Generals
When a docile, Peter-principle, "we-are-still-winning-in-Afghanistan" U.S. military
leadership sends more troops (mostly from a poverty draft) to be wounded and killed in
hostilities with Iran, Americans are likely, this time, to look beneath the equally docile
media for answers as to why. Was it for Netanyahu and the oppressive regime in Israel? Many
Americans will wake up, and serious backlash is likely.
Events might bring a rise in the kind of anti-Semitism already responsible for domestic
terrorist attacks. And when bodybags arrive from abroad, there may be for families and for
thinking Americans, a limit to how much longer the pro-Israel mainstream media will be able to
pull the wool over their eyes.
Those who may prefer to think that Gen. Scowcroft got up on the wrong side of the bed on
Oct. 13, 2004, the day he gave the interview to The Financial Times may profit from
words straight from Netanyahu's mouth. On Aug. 3, 2010, in a formal VIPS Memorandum for your
predecessor, we provided some "Netanyahu in his own words."
We include an excerpt here for historical context:
"Netanyahu's Calculations
Netanyahu believes he holds the high cards, largely because of the strong support he
enjoys in our Congress and our strongly pro-Israel media. He reads your [Obama's] reluctance
even to mention controversial bilateral issues publicly during his recent visit as
affirmation that he is in the catbird seat in the relationship.
During election years in the U.S. (including mid-terms), Israeli leaders are particularly
confident of the power they and the Likud Lobby enjoy on the American political scene.
Netanyahu's attitude comes through in a video taped nine years ago and shown on Israeli
TV, in which he bragged about how he deceived President Clinton into believing he (Netanyahu)
was helping implement the Oslo accords when he was actually destroying them.
The tape displays a contemptuous attitude toward -- and wonderment at -- an America so
easily influenced by Israel. Netanyahu says:
" America is something that can be easily moved. Moved in the right direction. They won't
get in our way Eighty percent of the Americans support us. It's absurd."
Israeli columnist Gideon Levy wrote that the video shows Netanyahu to be "a con artist who
thinks that Washington is in his pocket and that he can pull the wool over its eyes," adding
that such behavior "does not change over the years."
Recommendation
We ended VIPS' first Memorandum For the President (George W. Bush) with this critique of
Secretary of State Colin Powell's address at the UN earlier that day:
"No one has a corner on the truth; nor do we harbor illusions that our analysis is
"irrefutable or undeniable" [as Powell claimed his was]. But after watching Secretary Powell
today, we are convinced that you would be well served if you widened the discussion beyond
the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and
from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic."
We are all in a limina l moment. We write with a sense of urgency suggesting you avoid
doubling down on catastrophe.
For the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity:
William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military
Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
Marshall Carter-Tripp, Foreign Service Officer and Division Director, State
Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research (ret.)
Graham Fuller, former Chairman, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)
Mike Gravel, former Adjutant, top secret control officer, Communications Intelligence
Service; special agent of the Counter Intelligence Corps and former United States Senator
Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC Iraq; Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate
VIPS)
Michael S. Kearns, Captain, USAF (ret.); ex-Master SERE Instructor for Strategic
Reconnaissance Operations (NSA/DIA) and Special Mission Units (JSOC)
John Kiriakou, former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator,
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Karen Kwiatkowski, Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense
watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003
Edward Loomis, NSA Cryptologic Computer Scientist and Technical Director (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA presidential
briefer (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for the Near East &
CIA political analyst (ret.)
Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.)
Scott Ritter, former MAJ., USMC, former UN Weapon Inspector, Iraq
Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel
(ret.)
Sarah Wilton, Commander, U.S. Naval Reserve (ret.) and Defense Intelligence Agency
(ret.)
Robert Wing, former U.S. Department of State Foreign Service Officer (Associate
VIPS)
"... Somehow the Ziocons around Trump have forgotten that the present state of Iraq refused to yield to Obama's demands for a SOFA and in effect expelled the US from the country. ..."
"... The Iraqi parliament is going to vote in emergency session over the issue of the death of al-Muhandis. Will they vote to expel the US from their country? ..."
"... What a lot of commentators seem to overlook is that America has basically declared war on Iraq, while our soldiers are hosted on joint bases with Iraqi soldiers. ..."
"... "We need to get out of Iraq and Syria now. That is the only way that we're going to prevent ourselves from being dragged into this quagmire, deeper and deeper into a war with Iran." Tulsi Gabbard. ..."
"... Assassination of generals, one from an allied country, one from a country with which we have no declared war, and both assassinations performed on the territory of an allied, sovereign country without permission? This is piracy. Why should anyone trust the word of a country which does not honor the most basic of international law? ..."
"... Will we go if they vote that way? I'll go with no. The Neocons desperately want us in Iraq to protect Israel and stick it to Iran as much as possible. They have a laundry list of prepared arguments and we have the dumbest, most compliant, state media in recorded history. We also have a President who believes that intnl law is for weaklings and loves saying 'take the oil'. ..."
"... Take a look at this interview to David Petraeus by FP on yesterday´s summary executions...What you make of this? https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/03 He sounds as if he were the brain behind this operation on summary executions..along some other think tankers.. ..."
"... Whoever is President we will have war. The President is just a feckless puppet controlled by the Zionist. I'll never vote again. It's a waste of time and a farce. Hillary or Donald no different just a matter of timing. Obama destroyed Libya and Syria. Bush II the simpleton and his fairy tale WMD lie. I've lost all respect for whatever "the republic" is suppose to be. On top of that the masses are too stupid for democracy to work. ..."
Qasem Soleimani was an Iranian soldier. He lived by the sword and died by the sword. He met
a soldier's destiny. It is being said that he was a BAD MAN. Absurd! To say that he was a BAD
MAN because he fought us as well as the Sunni jihadis is simply infantile. Were all those who
fought the US BAD MEN? How about Gentleman Johhny Burgoyne? Was he a BAD MAN? How about Sitting
Bull? Was he a BAD MAN? How about Aguinaldo? Another BAD MAN? Let us not be juvenile.
The Iraqi PMU commander who died with Soleimani was Abu Mahdi al Muhandis. He was a member
of a Shia militia that had been integrated into the Iraqi armed forces. IOW, we killed an Iraqi
general. We killed him without the authorization of the supposedly sovereign state of Iraq.
We created the present government of Iraq through the farcical "purple thumb" elections.
That government holds a seat in the UN General Assembly and is a sovereign entity in
international law in spite of Trump's tweet today that said among other things that we have
"paid" Iraq billions of US dollars. To the Arabs, this statement that brands them as hirelings
of the US is close to the ultimate in insult.
Somehow the Ziocons around Trump have forgotten that the present state of Iraq refused to
yield to Obama's demands for a SOFA and in effect expelled the US from the country.
The Iraqi parliament is going to vote in emergency session over the issue of the death of
al-Muhandis. Will they vote to expel the US from their country?
Will we go if they vote that way? We should. If we do not, then we will be exposed as
imperialist hypocrites.
Trump should welcome such a vote. He wants to get out of the ME? What greater opportunity
could we have to do so?
Let us leave if invited to go. Let the oh, so clever locals deal with their own hatreds and
rivalries. pl
What a lot of commentators seem to overlook is that America has basically declared war on
Iraq, while our soldiers are hosted on joint bases with Iraqi soldiers.
But...Elora guesses you are being rhetorical here...because... if he would have died by
the sword...would not have he had the opportunity to defend himself against his
enemy/opponent?
Instead...he was caught on surprise...unarmed...and hit by an overwhelming force...he was
going to some funerals...
"We need to get out of Iraq and Syria now. That is the only way that we're going to prevent
ourselves from being dragged into this quagmire, deeper and deeper into a war with Iran."
Tulsi Gabbard.
Some impressive images worth thousands words...just to remember everybody that this man was
an appreciated human being...doing his duty....for his motherland...and his God....
To better understand the pain of that elderly yazidi woman in the video, some testimony by
Rania Khalek on the role of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis ( the other militia commander killed who is
being as well slandered as terrorist along Soleimani ...) in stopping yazidi genocide in Iraq
when nobody else was giving a damn, less any help, for this people...
Assassination of generals, one from an allied country, one from a country with which we have
no declared war, and both assassinations performed on the territory of an allied, sovereign
country without permission? This is piracy. Why should anyone trust the word of a country
which does not honor the most basic of international law?
And am I alone to be disgusted to see the senior members of our government lie blatantly
and constantly, when they're not fellating the nearest likudnik....
We go where we are wanted and appreciated. We have no skin in Iraq. Build the Wall and
protect our own borders. Concentrate our resources on cyber-security.
Tulsi makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately that disqualifies her for the presidency, not
because she couldn't execute the functions of the presidency, but because neither the party
apparatchiks nor the voters would give her the chance. These days either nationalistic
claptrap or promises of more freebies are what carry the day. Quelle domage, eh?
As for the Iraqi parliament voting to expel U.S. forces? That's an interesting question. If
they did, they'd better vote to expel the "den of spies" at the embassy and insist on our
having a normal sized legation (as all countries would be well advised to do). But if they
do, would we leave? I personally doubt it even though it would be best if we did and let the
Iraqis do what they will, which would probably be reverting back to some sort of strongman
govt, of a type more suited to their cultural traditions and inclinations. It's high time we
afforded the rest of the world the type of cultural and political autonomy we claim to revere
so much.
So, we leave? A good thing for us and for them and the world at large.
Or, we don't? Then we expose the truth the rest of the world already knows, but we at least
expose the truth to our own people who have been fed a steady diet of mendacious BS about
what we've been doing over there all these years.
That attack on the "airport limo" vehicles leaving Baghdad airport sure took some nerve on
our part to think that we could sell something like that...
And, did Trump actually order it, or did someone else in the MIC order it first and Trump
laid claim to it afterwards? Uncle Joe, if he had ordered it, would have afterwards announced
the execution of a fall guy and denied any complicity! If Trump didn't order it, he should
throw whoever did under the bus instead of crowing and wrapping himself in the flag. I wonder
about what actually happened in planning this hit job on prominent military people on their
way to a funeral for 31 people who may or may not have had anything whatsoever to do with the
death of a single American mercenary in Iraq in an attack by persons unknown on a small
outpost.
It's times like this I wish I was a fly on the wall, listening to what the Russian General
Staff conversations regarding this assassination are at this moment.
Trump IMHO would do well to seek Putin's counsel on how to exit the corner that Trump has
backed US into. While this spells problems for our US, it also creates additional problems
for Russia in the ways that could cause them MAJOR problem as well as in a full blown Mideast
War with many players in the mix. Not a good mix either.
Israel can't handle a full blown Mideast War, no matter how much their narcissistic
national psyche thinks they can. Israel is a mere postage stamp in a sea of rage, which
tsunami waves could very easily consume them. Sheldon Adelson and his Likud/NEOCON blowhards
have no concept of what is on the short horizon, that can go one way or the other.
I'm glad I'm retired in this instance. My glass of bourbon is more palatable than the
grains of Mideast sand that fixing to get stirred up.
God help us all.
Pat, why does the US military always get left with the shit-storms to clean up after?
Why?
Will we go if they vote that way? I'll go with no. The Neocons desperately want us in Iraq to protect Israel and stick it to
Iran as much as possible. They have a laundry list of prepared arguments and we have the
dumbest, most compliant, state media in recorded history. We also have a President who
believes that intnl law is for weaklings and loves saying 'take the oil'.
I can hear the talking points already ...
1. 'Obama made the same mistake and it created ISIS.'
2. 'Iran has taken over Iraq, it's not a legitimate request' (look at how we selectively
recognize govts in South America and no one blinks).
3. 'Iran will use Iraq as a base to attack us' (yeah, its about 100 miles closer).
I can't stand what we have become, the jackals have taken over and the MSM attacks the
very few who are not jackals.
OK. Who do you think would have had the power to order the strike? Not the CIA, the
military would not accept such an order. Not the chairman of the JCS, he is not in the chain
of command. That leaves Esper, SECDEF. Really? He looks like a putschist to you? You are
ignorant of the American government.
Take a look at this interview to David Petraeus by FP on yesterday´s summary
executions...What you make of this?
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/03 He sounds as if he were the brain behind this operation on summary executions..along some
other think tankers..
Whoever is President we will have war. The President is just a feckless puppet controlled by
the Zionist. I'll never vote again. It's a waste of time and a farce. Hillary or Donald no
different just a matter of timing. Obama destroyed Libya and Syria. Bush II the simpleton and
his fairy tale WMD lie. I've lost all respect for whatever "the republic" is suppose to be.
On top of that the masses are too stupid for democracy to work.
"... Trump's closeness to Benjamin Netanyahu also plays into this scenario. I won't fall-off my bar stool in shock and surprise should such a joint operation prove to be true. ..."
"... "America is something that can be easily moved. Moved in the right direction. They won't get in our way Eighty percent of the Americans support us. It's absurd." Benjamin Netanyahu ..."
"... CNN is desperately pushing the trope that 'Trump and his military commanders hastily assembled a situation room at Mar-a-Lago.' No evidence, no eye witnesses, no communique with WADC, no confirmation from Trump himself. Check, and mate. ..."
"... The Neocons did it. They really did it! Any cogent political world analysis is drawn into a cauldron and destroyed. Everything devolves to 'Trump, Russia and Iran' now. Deep State wins! ..."
"... Maybe the Israelis/neocons fear that Trump might lose in November and want to start the war while Bibi's favorite lapdog is still P0TUS. Not, that the Democrats are peacelovers (except for Sanders and Gabbard). But they might be more afraid of a negative reaction by the electorate. Murdering Suleimani NOW was not some hasty decision without a plan. I am afraid, it was done to get THE ultimate war in the middle east going, no matter if and how much restraint Iran will show. ..."
When President Trump announced the assassination of General Qassim Soleimani, he said that
there was "unambiguous" information that Soleimani was planning attacks on US forces in Iraq
and Syria. My first thought was what were the sources of that "unambiguous" information?
I'll
bet dollars to donuts that it was Israel's Mossad. The sheer precision and timing of that
"hit" had all the smell and feel of a Mossad operation. While the US did the actual killing,
the Israelis did the 'fingering.'
Trump's closeness to Benjamin Netanyahu also plays into
this scenario. I won't fall-off my bar stool in shock and surprise should such a joint
operation prove to be true.
"America is something that can be easily moved. Moved in the right direction. They won't get
in our way Eighty percent of the Americans support us. It's absurd." Benjamin Netanyahu
This bold statement of Israeli/Jewish hubris remains as true today as it was when he said
it, over 20 years ago. This fact is only understood by examining 'who' controls the
media.
Israel requested this hit. And the Americans were stupid enough to oblige.
Joerg , Jan 4 2020 18:49 utc |
31Paul Leibowitz , Jan 4 2020 18:51 utc |
32
CNN is desperately pushing the trope that 'Trump and his military commanders hastily
assembled a situation room at Mar-a-Lago.' No evidence, no eye witnesses, no communique with
WADC, no confirmation from Trump himself. Check, and mate.
Having 'beheaded' Trump and launched what will be enormous death and destruction, the PNAC
pesharim and their Neocon noodniks are desperate to deflect responsibility onto Trump,
essentially they are 'necklacing' Trump and the Republican administration using the compliant
poodled MSM.
This allows the DNC WarHogs to pretend to be the 'People's Populist Party of Peace' at
their Convention in July, and bring about the final Bolshevik takeover that Brexit and Hong
Kong and a 1,000,000 man Deplorable march on Milwaukee had threatened to defeat.
The high crimes of the Biden's, Kerry's and Pelosi's in Ukraine, and the genocidal crimes
against humanity of Maidan itself, are now ink-blotted out of history.
The Neocons did it. They really did it! Any cogent political world analysis is drawn into
a cauldron and destroyed. Everything devolves to 'Trump, Russia and Iran' now. Deep State
wins!
The Iranians know who the real enemy is. The US(Trump) is just the dumb executioner -
they'll get their response in due time. In the mean time, the 1st response will be felt in
Tel Aviv.
Since coming to office, pompous Pompeo's been tripping back-n-forth between Tel Aviv and
DC, taking his mad orders from Bibi.
One thing for sure, US presence in the ME is on borrowed time.
The Iranians know who the real enemy is. The US(Trump) is just the dumb executioner - they'll
get their response in due time. In the mean time, the 1st response will be felt in Tel Aviv.
Since coming to office, pompous Pompeo's been tripping back-n-forth between Tel Aviv and
DC, taking his mad orders from Bibi.
One thing for sure, US presence in the ME is on borrowed time.
Israel wanted USA to go to war with Iran even well before the Syria debacle. Consequential
considerations of such an event caused the US to hesitate, especially after UK parliament
voted against being a partner to such a shenanigan. Now a US-Iran War may well be at hand.
Whether this would conflagrate the whole ME, and later the whole world, remain to be seen.
US soldiers ready to die for Israeli interests under Israeli command:
"The United States and Israel enjoy a strong and enduring military-to-military partnership
built on a trust that has been developed over decades of cooperation," said USAF Third Air
Force commander Lt.-Gen. Richard Clark, who also serves as the commander for the deploying
Joint Task Force – Israel.
...
According to Clark, the US and Israeli troops will work side-by-side under each other's
relevant chain of command.
"As far as decision-making, it is a partnership," he continued, stressing nonetheless that
"at the end of the day it is about the protection of Israel – and if there is a
question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to Zvika
[Haimovitch]."
Washington and Israel have signed an agreement which would see the US come to assist
Israel with missile defense in times of war and, according to Haimovitch, "I am sure once the
order comes we will find here US troops on the ground to be part of our deployment and team
to defend the State of Israel."
And those US troops who would be deployed to Israel, are prepared to die for the Jewish
state, Clark said.
"We are ready to commit to the defense of Israel and anytime we get involved in a kinetic
fight there is always the risk that there will be casualties. But we accept that – as
every conflict we train for and enter, there is always that possibility," he said.
George V 24
Same here. A drone/missile strike to take out a leader, claim he's responsible for many
deaths ("millions" DJT), and then claim innocence at any response is a classic Israeli
tactic. They did this to test Iron Dome. There had been a ceasefire with Hamas, Israel killed
a Hamas leader they claimed responsible for an attack 6 months earlier, and then pointed out
Hamas when the usual rockets were launched.
arata , Jan 4 2020 20:42 utc |
71Circe , Jan 4 2020 20:46 utc |
72
First I want to express admiration of Iranian courage in resisting the corrupting influence
of Zionist expansionism and condolences for the immense loss of a brave hero and unparalleled
military leader, Soleimani, who was not a general's general, but a soldier's general admired
by many.
Iran is a bastion of resistance against Zionism and therefore the number one target and
enemy of Zionists. Despite, the invasion of Iraq, Israeli assault on Lebanon, proxy invasions
of Syria and Yemen, and the severest of sanctions, the Iran domino remains standing. For this
reason, Zionist Trump came into power guns blazing against Iran, intent on its destruction.
There was no doubt on that, and his assassination of Iran's most revered general removes all
doubt on his intent. The murder of Soleimani represents a cowardly act typical of a coward
like Trump not to have to face a foreign opponent and military leader like Soleimani leading
the Iranian offensive against Zionism and the looming war on Iran. But mark my words,
Soleimani's spirit will be there on the battlefield of any war initiated by Trump and
his cabal.
Trump, the jackass liar that he is, justifies his barbaric act as a response to an
imminent threat against U.S. forces and personnel. THIS IS A BALD-FACED LIE. If the
threat were imminent then the logical urgent step would have been to sabotage the ACTUAL
threat mounted as Soleimani did not arrive in Iraq to carry out any attack himself. This
proves Trump is lying when he bragged this lie to the crowd at yesterday's rally. The truth
is really that Trump wanted a shrewd Iranian general and formidable opponent out of the way
to facilitate the Zionist goal to take on Iran. Trump resorted, as usual, to his con way of
fooling everyone with this fabrication. Also, Soleimani had the stature to become the next
President of Iran, and this was a sobering thought feared by the Zionist Trump cabal. Imagine
a man of strength and intelligence, feared by many but loved by more, ruling Iran. Gutless,
crass Trump killed that potential. As I wrote previously, Trump killed the albatross and
misery will follow him for it. All said, Iran did have every right to avenge the killing of
numerous militia by the U.S.; the funeral of which Soleimani was to attend in Iraq, making
the act perpetrated on him from a drone all the more repulsive and dishonorable. It was as if
yellow-belly Trump shot Soleimani in the back robbing him of the dignity of death in battle
he deserved as a warrior of his calibre, albeit not of the glory that will never be
Trump's.
IMHO, Iran should first and most importantly, ferret out TRAITORS not loyal to the cause
of resistance who delivered Soleimani to the enemy. Iran needs to tighten its security and
scrutinize, clean up and enhance its intelligence network especially in view of escalating
momentum towards war. It must use this time of mourning to rally public sentiment both in
Iran and Iraq and strengthen its alliances great and small to the cause of resistance to
imperial domination and, regionally, OCCUPATION--Zionist U.S. OCCUPATION in the Middle East.
Unifying, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, even Palestine to the cause of ending ZIONIST U.S.
OCCUPATION and ousting America from the Middle East and derailing corrupt Zionist expansion
and influence should be PRIORITY NUMBER ONE. This means decrying high and low the monumental
destruction, corruption and evil that this occupation has wrought on the entire Middle East
and the hardship of massive displacement suffered and being suffered by millions.
That is the fundamental goal, however, ending the occupation in Iraq by U.S. forces
first is Iran's domino to victory . As far as retaliation, in my view, the multi-pronged
strategy (death by a thousand cuts) I hear and read Iran might be contemplating would be more
effective than one spectacular event, because it would make clear the ubiquitous nature of
Iran's reach, and make the Zionist American opponent think twice about attacking Iran with
deadly tentacles that will activate and mobilize anywhere to the detriment of its enemy.
My first thought with all of this has been, why now? After reading I have a possible
answer.
Background:1. The Russians have been building up in Syria for a major assault on remaining
ISIS on the Syrian/Iraq border, the Iraqi/Iran forces announced that the planned assault
would begin hours before the five Iraq/Iran military bases were hit. 2. Israel just suffered
a defeat when they launched six missiles at Syria and five were taken out by Syria using
Russian supplied weaponry. The sixth missile fell in the desert, was recovered by Syria and
given to Russia.
These two events are key; the US/Israeli ISIS teams in Syria and on the Iraqi border were
about to be wiped out and control of the border by Syria leaving the US northern Syria
installations without a supply line. The Israeli failed attacked showed that the Syrian
defense systems were now fulling integrated with Russia and that the upcoming attack on ISIS
would probably end them as well as Israel's ability to destroy Syrian/Iranian sites in
Syria.
I think the US military and Pompeo panicked, they came up with a quick casus belli by having
one of their proxies lob missiles at a US encampment with the intent of killing a US citizen.
They then hit the Iraqi/Iran teams that were part of the planned Russian assault shutting
down the planned Russian attack. Pompeo and the Generals immediately flew to Fla to tell
Trump what they had done. Silence from Trump,why? Because he knew that this decision was a
trap to damage his reelection, he saw the plot which is why he stayed in Florida.
Then things really went sideways IMO. Israel seeing it's chance in the confusion, used it's
pawn Pompeo to order a hit on the airport killing the General, you will note that Israel says
it was told before the hit, my guess is no, they told Pompeo to take the hit and he did.
Israel immediately said it had nothing to do with the decision, Pompeo immediately said Trump
ordered it. Trump was forced to say it was his decision and defend it IMO.
Yes it is possible that Trump was told of an opportunity to take out the General but the
MIC/Pompeo know Trump historically pulls back from attacks, remember the Bolton fiasco with
the tankers, with the drone, they couldn't get Trump to attack then, why would he now attack
a Iraqi airbase when the attack on the Iraq/Iran bases was such a disaster for US Iraqi
relations? Why would they bother to ask him now after having put him in a box with the first
strikes?
Now there is talk that Trump has sent a Qatar rep to Iran to cut a deal. THAT is his
initiative, none of the prior events are his initiatives. Could be wrong, and for all that is
not to like about Trump he is not stupid, his goal is to win a Pulitzer prize as the peace
president.
Yes he rants about Iran, the guys who finance his campaign demand that, but push come to
shove, who the hell wants to be remembered as the guy who started a nuclear war...and lost??
Told you all it's Nutandyahoo who is in charge of jUSA. The Tronald is only his stooge:
Patriot Ali
@LogicalAnalys1s
Viral video shows official from SaudiArabia congratulating Israel pm Netanyahu over the
death of #Qasem_Suleimani . Video is spreading like wildfire in pro #Iran accounts
😡
World OSINT
/>
1:04
8:44 AM - 4 Jan 2020 https://twitter.com/LogicalAnalys1s/status/1213501484790407171
@ Posted by: psychohistorian | Jan 4 2020 22:18 utc | 84
Thank you. Someone making sense.
Most are talking about this like it's halftime in a sporting match - completely juvenile.
Iran needs to pull back and focus on making themselves stronger in economy and technology and
for strong ties with other responsible players. They have opportunities with many countries
which are increasingly disenchanted with the west. And the west is headed for an economic
beating - which explains the desperate behavior.
Even if Iran is very careful in their behavior Irael is going to continue to press for war -
the psychotic fears most those that he has attacked.
But maybe with careful behavior and planning and efforts to repair and maintain ties the
Iraninans could be ready for that eventuality.
In all of this, and the many comments, I must praise Circe for this final one @ 72. It
strikes a definitive chord:
"...That is the fundamental goal, however, ending the occupation in Iraq by U.S. forces
first is Iran's domino to victory. As far as retaliation, in my view, the multi-pronged
strategy (death by a thousand cuts) I hear and read Iran might be contemplating would be more
effective than one spectacular event, because it would make clear the ubiquitous nature of
Iran's reach, and make the Zionist American opponent think twice about attacking Iran with
deadly tentacles that will activate and mobilize anywhere to the detriment of its enemy."
It is clear that Qasseem Soleimani was of a stature for Iran that his legacy will be part
of the determination for what follows in the eyes of his dedicated compatriots. I agree with
Circe here - what will immediately follow is important. It might even include the extraction
from Syria of American influence, which would require the cooperation of Assad. I am
remembering that Iraq's foreign minister recently gave a speech concerning the unification of
Arabic countries toward a peaceful end. That now must include the departure of US troops and
is the antithesis to war, something that would make a commendable legacy for both generals
who have now had their funeral at an important spiritual center.
War is not on. The fall of the black domino is. But this is not retribution; that will
come. Bravo Circe; good post.
" I cannot recall an act of this kind in the last 50 years especially in the extent to which
it seems to take for granted an underlying legitimacy and thus an naive openness, almost
childlike in its self-belief..."
patroklos @77
Doesn't Osama bin Laden count? Obama ordered and took open credit for the assassination of
dozens of individuals, many of them later shown to have been totally innocent of any
involvement in politics, many children etc.
And then, of course there was one Colonel Ghadaffi publicly assassinated, after his
surrender, with extreme brutality.
The only new thing about this is that the victim was a person of power and eminence.
Pepe Escobar: "According to my best Southwest Asia intel sources, "Israel gave the US the
coordinates for the assassination of Qasem Soleimani as they wanted to avoid the
repercussions of taking the assassination upon themselves." https://thesaker.is/us-starts-the-raging-twenties-declaring-war-on-iran/
Espen and Trump have made it clear that they will hold Iran responsible for whatever may
happen in the region and that they will strike in response or preemptively. Essentially, that
makes the real Iranian reaction largely irrelevant. And Israel could create a false flag
incident #a la USS Liberty. Or some rogue groups that Iran cannot control might attack US
troops or installations. Whether by design or accident, there will be a pretext to base
another military strike against Iran on. And then another, until a full blown US-Iran war
erupts which Bibi, Lieberman & co so desperately want.
Years of relentless demonization of Iran in the US and the UK have brainwashed large swaths
of the population. They will accept a war against Iran, albeit reluctantly, as long as not
too many Americans get killed in its wake.
I don't believe for a second that the US would "accept" a limited retaliation. They will
jump at any opportunity. Lindsey Graham stands between Trump and impeachment and that
warmonger is on record for seeking to bomb Iran's oil refineries. Incidentally, he was the
only senator who Trump consulted prior to the murder. Could well be that Graham is right now
the real P0TUS , at least until the senate has voted on impeachment. Conveniently, pelosi has
put the impeachment on hold, thereby prolonging that situation. Coincidence? I don't think
so.
Maybe the Israelis/neocons fear that Trump might lose in November and want to start
the war while Bibi's favorite lapdog is still P0TUS. Not, that the Democrats are peacelovers
(except for Sanders and Gabbard). But they might be more afraid of a negative reaction by the
electorate.
Murdering Suleimani NOW was not some hasty decision without a plan. I am afraid, it was done
to get THE ultimate war in the middle east going, no matter if and how much restraint Iran
will show.
I do think, btw that Trump blew his reelection by killing Suleimani. Another warmonger
will assuredly take his place.
"CNN is desperately pushing the trope that 'Trump and his military commanders hastily
assembled a situation room at Mar-a-Lago.' "
Leibowitz # 32
Why would they do this *after* the strike?
That sounds kind of silly. And "hastily" sounds as though they were taken unawares . . . They
were surprised to hear that Solameini had been taken out?????
Lozion@62 - Re: Your Magnier quote, "The US did not plan to kill the vice commander of the
Iraqi Hashd al-Shaabi brigade Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes when it assassinated Iranian Brigadier
General Qassem Soleiman"
The light bulb above my chimpanzee brain just flickered (briefly). Somewhere on SST (maybe
Lang?): something to the effect of 'Never underestimate US gov/mil incompetence'. Maybe it
was the opposite of what Magnier thought really took place.
Treasonous, dual-citizen chickenhawks of the US possibly targeted Hashd al-Shaabi
vice-commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes . They were trying to kill him because they found
out from some snitch that he just showed up at the airport for some reason. The all-seeing US
didn't realize Soleimani was even there . I guess because the sneaky Soleimani flew
commercial into Baghdad and probably carried his bags to the waiting SUVs. Who would have
expected that ? How devious!
This seems entirely plausible to me. Soleimani was too expensive a target - end of the
State of Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE and all. But whacking a vice-commander of Hashd
al-Shaabi with a quarter-million dollar JAGM? Hell YEAH! We live for this kind
of preventative assassination heroism in the US. Especially if accompanied by colorful
graphics.
The awkward and delayed response of the usual US mil/gov mouthpieces makes this ridiculous
scenario even more believable. I have thoroughly convinced myself that this was a US screw-up
of EPIC proportions. In case the US government is reading MoA, this was all Lozion's doing.
I'm an innocent conspiracy primate.
Bombing a civilian airport in another country in order to assassinate Iranian and Iraq
leaders is a very bad diplomacy ;-)
It might well be that today this idiot blow up his chances fro reelection because revenge is
dish that should be served cold and Iran can postpone it for 11 months or so.
What is interesting is that neoliberal MSM are glad and still talking about Zelensky and
impeachment. What a country ! It looks like the decade of the twenties can be the decade of
another World War. "In every war the first casualty is truth."
Bombing a civilian airport in another country in order to assassinate Iranian and Iraq
leaders is a very bad diplomacy ;-)
It might well be that today this idiot blow up his chances fro reelection because revenge is
dish that should be served cold and Iran can postpone it for 11 months or so.
What is interesting is that neoliberal MSM are glad and still talking about Zelensky and
impeachment. What a country ! It looks like the decade of the twenties can be the decade of
another World War. "In every war the first casualty is truth."
Talleyrand remarked that Napoleon's assassination of the Duke of Enghien was worse than a
crime. It was a mistake. Donald Trump's decision to target Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, the head
of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, for destruction brings to mind the French diplomat's
lapidary verdict. Iran is likely to unleash its fearsome Shia proxy militias, wherever and
whenever it can. Nor is support from Europe, which is on the frontlines of Iranian blowback,
likely to be forthcoming. Quite the contrary.
Billionaire
Paul Singer
's New York-based hedge fund said in a
statement
Friday it had submitted the dispute for arbitration and urged the government to pay the damages
in order to preserve its reputation with international investors. Elliott said, to date, the parties have been
unable to resolve the matter on their own.
"Like all prominent economies, Korea obviously has no interest in
being viewed as hostile to foreign investors, particularly when other economies in the Asia-Pacific region are
fast becoming potentially attractive alternatives," Elliott said in the statement.
The South Korean government
acknowledged
they received the notice in a separate statement.
Elliott lost a proxy fight to oppose the combination of the Samsung
units, solidifying the founding family's grip over the group. Samsung narrowly won the vote, clinching support
from the government-run
National Pension Service
. Elliott claims the government unfairly meddled in the deal, which led to a
massive corruption scandal in the country.
NPS sided with Samsung after pressure from the presidential office,
landing the minister, who was then in charge of the pension fund, in jail. Elliott, which owned about 7 percent
of Samsung C&T at the time, says it incurred significant damages as a result of the former administration's
hand in allowing the merger to go through.
Samsung Vice Chairman Jay Y. Lee, who's been leading the group
after his father slipped into a coma, walked free from prison earlier this year after his sentence for bribery
in connection to the deal was suspended. Park Geun-hye, South Korea's first female president, was
sentenced
to 24 years in prison after being found guilty on charges including bribery and abuse of power.
"It is regrettable that the former administration took a hostile
approach to foreign investment rather than embracing it with a view to promoting domestic innovation and
maintaining economic growth," Elliott said Friday.
Another Samsung investor, Mason Capital Management, has also
served
a notice of intent to the government, saying it incurred
$175 million
in damages related to the actions of the former administration.
Elliott encouraged the South Korean government to uphold its
obligations toward foreign investors, including paying the damages, working to prevent future breaches, and
taking steps to no longer shield the ruling families at the expense of investors.
"Maintaining credibility internationally among investors is
critical to attracting foreign investment and propelling Korea to even greater prosperity," Elliott said.
Earlier this year, Elliott waged another fight in South Korea
against Hyundai Motor Group. In May, the automotive giant bowed to pressure from the activist and
shelved
its
$8.8 billion
restructuring plan, marking an unprecedented victory for shareholder activism in the
country.
"... in the short term at least, it will provide Trump and his creatures with exactly the jingoistic deflection they need to draw attention away from his and his Administration's criminality and incompetence. ..."
"... will probably not be too long into tomorrow's news cycle before the full fury of the RW Machine is turned on their REAL targets: not Iran, but any Americans who might question Glorious Leader's "tough" actions.... ..."
"... That is now guaranteed to happen and pass. The US will be ordered to leave and will refuse. At that point all Americans and coalition partners in Iraq will be free targets with out the protection of the local forces. ..."
"... Think Iraq 2005. Iraqis owe their country to Iran and Soleimani as do the Syrians. Like the US fled with it's tail between it's legs from Turkey the same will now happen in Iraq and Syria. ..."
Good article by Daniel Larison in TAC. Sample quote -
"Iran hawks have been agitating for open conflict with Iran for years. Tonight, the
Trump administration obliged them by assassinating the top IRGC-Quds Force commander Qassem
Soleimani and the head of Kata'ib Hezbollah in a drone strike in Baghdad"
Assassinating foreign military leaders is a provocation. The US govt openly provokes
another war. They think it will be another cake walk, like in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The American Conservative (TAC) was founded in 2002, to oppose the prospective invasion
of Iraq. TAC has been vindicated.
Real conservatives are anti-war and anti-empire. Fake conservatives seek perpetual war
in the Middle East, to destabilize not only Iran, but the USA also. The USA is now the Evil
Empire, replacing the former USSR.
Today in 2020, TAC is again right to oppose another war of choice, this time against
Iran.
I find it unfathomable how we in the U.S. consider bombing a civilian airport in another
country in order to assassinate both leaders in that and another country. CNN barely blinks
and is still talking about Zelensky and FOX is grinning ear to ear because they think that
Iran has been given a lesson and will accept their long overdue punishment.
This is not normal. This is an act of war. Iran will respond in a way we do not
expect.
Never mind Iran, however will Iraq respond to this?
She has already gotten upset at America for bringing armed troops into her territory,
from Syria. Could this be the straw that causes her to break off diplomatic relations with
us and expel our diplomats out of the country?
Well it looks like the decade of the twenties will be another World War. "In every war the
first casualty is truth." Don't look for the truth on FOX News except for Tucker Carlson's
show.
We will see. This guy engineered hundreds of killings of Americans in Iraq. As a move in
geopolitical terms, Iran cannot win a war with us. They know that.
I guess somebody had to make the 1914-vintage Hapsburgs look relatively competent, I
just didn't expect it to be America. Even against the backdrop of the serial self-inflicted
disasters of the last 20 years, the casino swindler manages to amaze. The loss column on
this mindless stunt will probably top any Trump has "achieved" yet -- which makes it "the
biggest, the greatest ever", right? Many are saying so....
I'm morbidly curious about how the Trump cult explains this one away.
This is what I thought was voting against when I voted for Trump against Hillary Clinton in
2016. He promised to end the wars and get us out of the Mideast. Why in the name of
everything holy did he let the Israelis and Saudis goad him into another stupid, needless,
wasteful conflict, this time with Iran? Why? I don't care anymore who the Democrats
nominate. I just want Trump and his gang of crooks and foreign agents out of my government.
Maybe: but in the short term at least, it will provide Trump and his creatures with exactly
the jingoistic deflection they need to draw attention away from his and his
Administration's criminality and incompetence.
Even at this early date we're seeing an orgy
of bellicose gloating from all the usual suspects: and it will probably not be too long
into tomorrow's news cycle before the full fury of the RW Machine is turned on their REAL
targets: not Iran, but any Americans who might question Glorious Leader's "tough"
actions....
Yes, this could lead to war. But I am wondering exactly what that would look like. Iran's
conventional military forces are far too weak to directly attack the US. So would this mean
an escalation of terrorist attacks, or what?
"we moved the demo away fromembassy, in exchange for a promise from MPs to vote on
expelling all US
occupation forces next week. We will take all necessary actions if that doesn't
happen."
That is now guaranteed to happen and pass. The US will be ordered to leave
and will refuse. At that point all Americans and coalition partners in
Iraq will be free targets with out the protection of the local forces.
Think Iraq 2005. Iraqis owe their country to Iran and Soleimani as do
the Syrians. Like the US fled with it's tail between it's legs from
Turkey the same will now happen in Iraq and Syria.
"... Soleimani is a senior Iranian military commander, and he also happens to be one of the more popular public figures inside Iran. Killing him isn't just a major escalation that guarantees reprisals and further destabilizes the region, but it also strengthens hard-liners in Iran enormously. Trump claimed not to want war with Iran, but his actions have proven that he does. No one who wants to avoid war with Iran would order the assassination of a high-ranking Iranian officer. Trump has signaled his willingness to plunge the U.S. into a new war that will be disastrous for our country, Iran, and the entire region. American soldiers, diplomats, and citizens throughout the region are all in much greater danger tonight than they were this morning, and the president is responsible for that. ..."
ran hawks have been agitating for open conflict with Iran for years. Tonight, the Trump
administration obliged them by assassinating the top IRGC-Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani
and the head of Kata'ib Hezbollah in a drone strike in Baghdad:
Hard to understate how big this is
• Qassem Suleimani is Iran's most powerful mil figure in Region
• He runs Iran's proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq
• Both men designated by US as Terrorist
• Muhandis was at US embassy attack protest, calls himself "Suleimani soldier"
Reuters reports
that a spokesman for the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq also confirmed the deaths:
Iranian Major-General Qassem Soleimani, head of the elite Quds Force, and Iraqi militia
commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis were killed late on Thursday in an air strike on their convoy
in Baghdad airport, an Iraqi militia spokesman told Reuters.
Soleimani is a senior Iranian military commander, and he also happens to be one of the
more popular public figures inside Iran. Killing him isn't just a major escalation that
guarantees reprisals and further destabilizes the region, but it also strengthens hard-liners
in Iran enormously. Trump claimed not to want war with Iran, but his actions have proven that
he does. No one who wants to avoid war with Iran would order the assassination of a
high-ranking Iranian officer. Trump has signaled his willingness to plunge the U.S. into a new
war that will be disastrous for our country, Iran, and the entire region. American soldiers,
diplomats, and citizens throughout the region are all in much greater danger tonight than they
were this morning, and the president is responsible for that.
It is hard to convey how irrational and destructive this latest action is. The U.S. and Iran
have been dangerously close to war for months, but the Trump administration has made no effort
to deescalate tensions. All that it would take to push the two governments over the brink into
open conflict is a reckless attack that the other side cannot ignore. Now the U.S. has launched
just such an attack and dared Iran to respond. The response may not come immediately, but we
have to assume that it is coming. Killing Soleimani means that the IRGC will presumably
consider it open season on U.S. forces all across the region. The Iran obsession has led the
U.S. into a senseless new war that it could have easily avoided, and Trump and the Iran hawks
own the results.
Trump supporters have often tried to defend the president's poor foreign policy record by
saying that he hadn't started any new wars. Well, now he has, and he will be responsible for
the consequences to follow.
When US politicians comment about the country's adversaries, a an official narrative
harangue of disinformation and Big Lies follows so often these figures likely no longer can
distinguish between truth and fiction.
Washington's hostility toward Iran has gone on with nary a letup since its 1979 revolution
ended a generation of US-installed tyranny, the country regaining its sovereignty, free from
vassal state status.
On Monday, White House envoy for regime change in Iran Brian Hook stuck to the fabricated
official narrative in discussing Iran at the State Department.
He falsely called Sunday's Pentagon terror-bombing strikes on Iraqi and Syrian sites
"defensive."
They had nothing to do with "protect(ing) American forces and American citizens in Iraq" or
Syria, nothing to do with "deterr(ing) Iranian aggression" that doesn't exist and never did
throughout Islamic State history -- how the US and its imperial allies operate, not Iran, the
region's leading proponent of peace and stability.
Hook lied saying Iraqi Kata'ib Hezbollah paramilitaries (connected to the country's Popular
Mobilization Forces) don't serve "the interests of the Iraqi people."
That's precisely what they do, including their earlier involvement in combatting
US-supported ISIS.
Hook turned truth on its head, accusing Iran of "run(ning) an expansionist foreign policy"
-- what US aggression is all about, not how Tehran operates.
Like other Trump regime officials, he threatened Iran, a nation able to hit back hard
against the US and its regional imperial partners if attacked -- why cool-headed Pentagon
commanders want no part of war with the country.
Kata'ib Hezbollah, other Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces, and the vast majority of Iraqi
civilians want US occupation of their country ended.
For decades, US direct and proxy aggression, including sanctions war, ravaged the country,
killing millions of its people, causing appalling human suffering.
Hook: "(T)he last thing the (US) is looking for is (war) in the Middle East "
Fact: It's raging in multiple theaters, notably Syria and Yemen, once again in Iraq after
last Sunday's US aggression, more of the same virtually certain ahead.
State Department official David Schenker participated in Monday's anti-Iran propaganda
exercise with Hook.
Claiming the US wants regional de-escalation, not escalation, is polar opposite reality on
the ground in all its war theaters and in other countries where it conducts subversion against
their governments and people.
The best way the US could protect its citizens worldwide is by ending aggressive wars,
bringing home its troops, closing its empire of bases used as platforms for hostilities against
other nations, and declaring a new era of peace and cooperative relations with other
countries.
Based on its belligerent history throughout the 19th and 20th centuries to the present day,
this change of policy, if adopted, would be un-American.
Hook: "Iran has been threatening the region for the last 40 years" -- what's true about US
aggression, not how Tehran operates anywhere.
Hook: Iran "is facing its worst financial crisis and its worst political crisis in its
40-year history."
Fact: US war on the country by other means, economic terrorism, bears full responsibility
for its economic hardships, intended to harm its people, including Trump regime efforts to
block exports of food, drugs and medical equipment to Iran.
Fact: Hostile US actions toward Iran and countless other nations are flagrant international
law breaches -- the world community doing nothing to counter its hot wars and by other
means.
Fact: The Iranian "model" prioritizes peace and stability. Endless war on humanity is how
the US operates globally -- at home and abroad.
Fact: Iran isn't an "outlaw regime," the description applying to the US, its key NATO
allies, Israel, the Saudis, and their rogue partners in high crimes.
Hostile US actions are all about offense, unrelated to defense at a time when Washington's
only enemies are invented as a pretext for endless wars of aggression.
The US under both right wings of its war party poses an unparalleled threat to everyone
everywhere.
As long as its aggression goes unchallenged, the threat of humanity-destroying nuclear war
exists.
It could start anywhere -- in the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific, or against Russia by
accident or design.
On New Year's day 2020, I'd love to be optimistic about what lies ahead.
As long as Republican and Dem hardliners pursue dominance over other nations by brute force
and other hostile means, hugely dangerous tinderbox conditions could ignite an uncontrollable
firestorm anywhere.
Stephen Lendman was born in 1934 in Boston, MA. In 1956, he received a BA from Harvard
University. Two years of US Army service followed, then an MBA from the Wharton School at the
University of Pennsylvania in 1960. After working seven years as a marketing research
analyst, he joined the Lendman Group family business in 1967. He remained there until
retiring at year end 1999. Writing on major world and national issues began in summer 2005.
In early 2007, radio hosting followed. Lendman now hosts the Progressive Radio News Hour on
the Progressive Radio Network three times weekly. Distinguished guests are featured. Listen
live or archived. Major world and national issues are discussed. Lendman is a 2008 Project
Censored winner and 2011 Mexican Journalists Club international journalism award recipient.
Iran's foreign minister, Javad Zarif, called the killing of General Suleimani an act of
"international terrorism" and warned it was "extremely dangerous & a foolish
escalation."
"The US bears responsibility for all consequences of its rogue adventurism," Mr. Zarif
tweeted.
... ... ...
"From Iran's perspective, it is hard to imagine a more deliberately provocative act," said
Robert Malley, the president and chief executive of the International Crisis Group. "And it is
hard to imagine that Iran will not retaliate in a highly aggressive manner."
"Whether President Trump intended it or not, it is, for all practical purposes, a
declaration of war," added Mr. Malley, who served as White House coordinator for the Middle
East, North Africa and the gulf region in the Obama administration.
Some United States officials and Trump administration advisers offered a less dire scenario,
arguing that the show of force might convince Iran that its acts of aggression against American
interests and allies have grown too dangerous, and that a president the Iranians may have come
to see as risk-averse is in fact willing to escalate.
One senior administration official said the president's senior advisers had come to worry
that Mr. Trump had sent too many signals -- including when he called off a planned
missile strike in late June -- that he did not want a war with Iran.
Tracking Mr. Suleimani's location at any given time had long been a priority for the
American and Israeli spy services and militaries. Current and former American commanders and
intelligence officials said that Thursday night's attack, specifically, drew upon a combination
of highly classified information from informants, electronic intercepts, reconnaissance
aircraft and other surveillance.
The strike killed five people, including the pro-Iranian chief of an umbrella group for
Iraqi militias, Iraqi television reported and militia officials confirmed. The militia chief,
Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, was a strongly pro-Iranian figure.
The public relations chief for the umbrella group, the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq,
Mohammed Ridha Jabri, was also killed.
American officials said that multiple missiles hit the convoy in a strike carried out by the
Joint Special Operations Command.
American military officials said they were aware of a potentially violent response from Iran
and its proxies, and were taking steps they declined to specify to protect American personnel
in the Middle East and elsewhere around the world.
Two other people were killed in the strike, according to a general at the Baghdad joint
command, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the
news media.
... ... ...
The United States and Iran have long been involved in a shadow war in battlegrounds across
the Middle East -- including in Iraq, Yemen and Syria. The tactics have generally involved
using proxies to carry out the fighting, providing a buffer from a direct confrontation between
Washington and Tehran that could draw America into yet other ground conflict with no
discernible endgame.
The potential for a regional conflagration was a basis of the Obama administration's push
for a 2015 agreement that froze Iran's nuclear program in return for sanctions relief.
Mr. Trump withdrew from the deal in 2018, saying that Mr. Obama's agreement had emboldened
Iran, giving it economic breathing room to plow hundreds of millions of dollars into a campaign
of violence around the region. Mr. Trump responded with a campaign of "maximum pressure" that
began with punishing new economic sanctions, which began a new era of brinkmanship and
uncertainly, with neither side knowing just how far the other was willing to escalate violence
and risk a wider war. In recent days, it has spilled into the military arena.
General Suleimani once described himself to a senior Iraqi intelligence official as the
"sole authority for Iranian actions in Iraq," the official later told American officials in
Baghdad.
In a speech denouncing Mr. Trump, General Suleimani was even less discreet -- and openly
mocking.
"We are near you, where you can't even imagine," he said. "We are ready. We are the man of
this arena."
Multiple
news sources are reporting the assassination, near Baghdad Airport, of Suliemani, the leader of
Irans Quds force. Some commentators are saying that this is "bigger than killing Bin Laden".
According to the Pentagon, the assassination was at the direct command of President Trump. I am
afraid this event, allegedly taken to forestall further attacks on US forces in Iraq, may have
unintended consequences.
To me, the logic of Trump in doing this is unfathomable. Did he intend to provoke Iran and
the Russians? What did he expect to achieve? Clearly the stress on the Iraqi Government is
going to be extreme. How has this assassination improved the security of U.S. forces in the
region? What does the Committee think?
I agree the stress on the Iraqi government will be intense. Will they force the US out?
Did Trump order this expecting that to happen? Or did he order this at the behest of Bibi,
MbS and the neocon contingent (Pompeo, Haspel, Esper, Kushner) he has surrounded himself
with, not really thinking through the implications.
The one scenario that I speculate that took place is the low-level "warfare" between US
forces and the various Iraqi/Iranian/Syrian militias got escalated. And Trump was being
"briefed" that it was all Iranian "influenced". That would have fit his generally anti-Iran
mindset and then he was presented with this "target of opportunity" and given seconds to
decide and he went with the flow to pull the trigger.
My sense is that while Iran will heat up the rhetoric, they won't retaliate militarily in
a direct and open manner. Instead they'll pile the pressure on the Iraqi government to expel
US forces.
The Mahdi Army is reportedly being reactivated, presumably they have some more combat
experience now thanks to the ISIS war. We have some 5,000 troops in the country and God knows
how many citizens there along with whatever we have in Syria. The Iranians are pissed and
want their revenge. The Iraqis are pissed too as is Hezbollah I'd imagine. I fear that this
is going to be bad.
Who is driving US policy in the region now, who is Trump listening to?
Once again the neocons have pulled off the seemingly impossible, imagine have the power
and cunning to have a country use their own servicemen as bait and cannon fodder to serve the
interests of a foreign country. Another nail in the American coffin, unfortunately.
I guess all Col. Lang's effort for the past 2 decades have been undermined. There is no way
that the assassination of a member of an Iranian equivalent of JCS will be tolerated. The
Iranian government will consider a lack of response to be interpreted as an invitation for
more adventurism by Trump admin. The whole talk about covert action is ignorant as the
Iranian foreign minister has already stated that there will be consequences.
The dice has been cast and at this point it really doesn't matter which faction within
Trump's entourage managed to start a conflict: the king-of-gamblers, Sheldon Adelson &
the rest of NeoConLibs, got their wish.
Not happy about it but nothing to do to reverse course.
I could it see it playing out in two general ways. Clearly, this could make things much
worse, across the entire Middle East. That's a given. On the other hand.....
It MIGHT be so that there are a lot of people in Iraq, Iran (yes, Iran) silently (for now,
if they know what is good for them in the short run) celebrating this hit. A lot of Iraqis
and Iranians have been killed by this guy's forces in the last few months. Alone. Who do we
think the people in Iraq and Iran have been protesting against? Al Quds. And there might even
be a few people in the Iranian govt who think now is the time to reduce, dramatically, the
influence of Al Quds. These facts should not be dismissed out of hand. But again, on the
other hand....
it may be deemed unholy and unpatriotic to celebrate taking out this SOB...as the lament
might go, 'he's an SOB but he;s our SOB!'.
I know this...I would be tempted to evacuate our embassy. Now. Like starting
yesterday.
We'll see. But I shed no tears for this guy. Nor do I celebrate it. Because either
way...it is grim. Now, if there was someone like the Col exploiting the vacuum and shock
waves certain to come in the wake of this...I would see opportunities. I repeat, a lot of
people in the Middle East did not like this guy or his organization...even if they don't like
the US too. But that kind of thing requires a mind that plays chess. And can kill, too. And I
don't see too many minds, and souls, like that in DC anymore.
"... Since May 2019 the U.S. deployed at least 14,800 additional soldiers to the Middle East. Over the last three days airborne elements and special forces followed . The U.S. has clearly planned for an escalation. ..."
Earlier today a U.S. drone or helicopter
killed Major General Qassim Soleimani, the famous commander of
the Iranian Quds ('Jerusalem') force, while he left the airport of Baghdad where he had just
arrived.
The Quds force is the external arm of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.
Soleiman was responsible for all relations between Iran and political and militant movements
outside of Iran. Hajji Qassim advised the Lebanese Hisbullah during the 2006 war against
Israel. His support for Iraqi groups enabled them to kick the U.S. invaders out of Iraq. He was
the man responsible for, and successful in, defeating the Islamic State in iraq and Syria. In
2015 Soleimani traveled to Moscow and convinced Russia to intervene in Syria. His support for
the Houthi in Yemen enabled them to withstand the Saudi attackers.
Soleimani had arrived in Baghdad on a normal flight from Lebanon. He did not travel in
secret. He was picked up at the airport by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes, the deputy commander of the
al-Hashd al-Shaabi, an official Iraqi security force under the command of the Iraqi Prime
Minister. The two cars they traveled in were destroyed in the U.S. attack. Both men and their
drivers and guards died.
The U.S. created two martyrs who will now become the models and idols for tens of millions
of youth in the Middle East.
The Houthi in Yemen, Hizbullah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Palestine, the paramilitary
forces in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere have all benefited from Soleimani's advice and support.
They will all take actions to revenge him.
Moqtada al-Sadr, the unruly Shia cleric who commands millions of followers in Iraq,
has
given orders to reactivate his military branch 'Jaish al-Imam al-Mahdi'. Between 2004 and
2008 the Mahdi forces fought the U.S. occupation of Iraq. They will do so again.
The outright assassination of a commander of Soleimani's weight demands an Iranian reaction
of at least a similar size. All U.S. generals or high politicians traveling in the Middle East
or elsewhere will now have to watch their back. There will be no safety for them anywhere.
No Iraqi politician will be able to argue for keeping U.S. forces in the country. The Iraqi
Prime Minister Abdel Mahdi has called for a parliament
emergency meeting to ask for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops:
"The targeted assassination of an Iraqi commander is a violation of the agreement. It can
trigger a war in Iraq and the region. It is a clear violation of the conditions of the U.S.
presence in Iraq. I call on the parliament to take the necessary steps."
The National Security Council of Iran is
meeting with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to "study the options of response". There are many
such options. The U.S. has forces stationed in many countries around Iran. From now on none of
them will be safe.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a statement calling for three days of public mourning and then
retaliation.
"His departure to God does not end his path or his mission," the statement said, "but a
forceful revenge awaits the criminals who have his blood and the blood of the other martyrs
last night on their hands."
Iran will tie its response to the political calender. U.S. President Donald Trump will go
into his reelection campaign with U.S. troops under threat everywhere. We can expect incidents
like the
Beirut barracks bombing to repeat themselves when he is most vulnerable.
Trump will learn that killing the enemy is the easy part of a war. The difficulties come
after that happened.
In 2018 Soleimani publicly responded
to a tweet in which Trump had threatened Iran:
"Mr. Trump, the gambler! [ ] You are well aware of our power and capabilities in the region.
You know how powerful we are in asymmetrical warfare. Come, we are waiting for you. We are
the real men on the scene, as far as you are concerned. You know that a war would mean the
loss of all your capabilities. You may start the war, but we will be the ones to determine
its end. "
Since May 2019 the U.S. deployed at least 14,800 additional soldiers to the Middle East.
Over the last three days airborne elements and special forces
followed . The U.S. has clearly planned for an escalation.
Soleimani will be replaced by an officer of equal stature and capability. Iran's policies
and support for foreign groups will intensify. The U.S. has won nothing with its attack but
will feel the consequences for decades to come. From now on its position in the Middle East
will be severely constrained. Others will move in to take its place.
Posted by b on January 3, 2020 at 9:05 UTC |
Permalink
If Iran is smart they would ask Tulsi Gabbard to come to Tehran and try to make peace with
Trump. Israel and the neocons in the Trump orbit want an excuse to attack Iran. Don't give
them one. Take the high road.
Oh, it was certainly a grave miscalculation by the US. The NeoCons must have been pushing for
it for years, and it wasn't the first assassination attempt. But I don't think the reprisal
will be immediate. Retaliation needs to be carefully thought out, in order to avoid an
exchange mounting in tension leading to outright war (certainly part of the US plan).
I was wondering, seeing as Netanyahu has suddenly dropped his Greek visit, and run back home,
whether the retaliation won't be against Israel. Netanyahu certainly fears it.
Do not retaliate immediately to suit your enemies .
Let the world see how a civilised Iran responds to utter provocation by an uncivilised
bully.
They used to call it Buck Braking.
The world (except the usual arselickers) will understand that retaliation is justified and
the cost of defending every USA and Israel target will be huge.
When a threat is carried out it is weakened.
Go to World opinion.
Hope al-Sadr has got sore balls from sitting on the fence. Small minded prick trying to use
US for his small minded shenanigans. But whatever, if he mobilize his forces against the US,
we might be able to cheer a few US bodybags on there way home. With no defences, Iraqi's will
pay a high price, but bodybags have a major influence on US public.
Soleimani will be replaced by an officer of equal stature.
I'm not sure I'd agree with that. Sulaimani was a figure of exceptional stature,
and skill. But, as you say, he may yet be worth more dead than alive, as a martyr.
There have been all kinds of threats of retaliation for so long. Nothing materializes. Israel
has been bombing targets in Syria with impunity. They've even bombed in Iraq.
There's all kinds of strong words and rhetoric. Let's see what if anything Khamanei does?
Let's see if the Iraqi parliament does anything? How are they going to force the US military
to exit?
The world will remember Qassim Soleimani as a pivotal figure in the struggle against US
domination in the Middle East. Rest in peace Major General.
This surely must be the single most stupid thing Trump could do entering the election
year.
How ironic that the warmongering Democrats will use the consequences of the targeted
killing of an Iranian official as ammunition to kill this presidency.
Iran is not looking for an all out war, the response will be asymmetric and
appropriate.
Straining US-Israeli relations and poisoning the political well in the US to accelerate
the decline of the American Empire would be the ultimate revenge.
Trump repaid Sheldon Adelson, but more people will pay the ultimate price.
Though I fully believe Trump is capable of ordering a hit one of the highest ranking generals
in the Iranian military, I'm not necessarily convinced that is the case. My first thoughts on
hearing news of the assassination were as follows: when the Pentagon and its corporate
bullhorns make such a special point of telling us that Trump gave the order to kill such a
high ranking military figure why do I harbor suspicions that might not have been the case? I
don't need telling in capital letters that Trump did it, as I would assume the order would
have to have come from the president without having to be told. Normally, Trump does the
bragging bit himself. If it is to be done at all. That Trump ordering the hit gets such a
special mention suggests that the Pentagon more often than not carries out similar operations
irrespective of what the president might want. Well, my might musings may amount to what some
what label a conspiracy theory but might a military coup just taken place in the US? After
all, would the president have enough courage to tell the American people he had not given the
order if that were the case? When we can't trust our leaders and we can't trust the media,
who can we trust? And who is to be believed? Apart from that, the way the news is being
released has a few unsubtle hints of dumping blame on Trump. A lot of people in the Pentagon,
might either regret the operation, or were never given an inkling of what was about to
happen.
"The U.S. has won nothing with its attack but will feel the consequences for decades to come.
Others will move in to take its place."
Wait for awhile on that one. Iraq will have to take some major hits if it tries moving to
the Russia China sphere. And it will have to deal with the fith column which are strong. Iraq
will have to go through the fire - like Donbass, Syria ect until it is distilled to a solid
core and then they will get support that will drive back the yanks.
To summarize b: The US doesn't gain anything, and potentially loses everything they sought
out to do in Iraq (and by extension; Syria), from the killing of Soleimani.
So why do it? Was Soleimani really the target? Who benifits by drawing the US and Iran
closer war?
I wouldn't be surprised if an article about 'bad intel received from a 3rd party' pops up
in the NYT in a few months time.
Iranians have to do nothing, every rocket, bullett or treeleave which falls in the vicinity
of an American will be labeled a counter attack of tthe iranians. And thus striking fear,
they will live their own nightmare.
The tweet of khamenie yesterday provoked trump, ttrump did exactly as aspected when sulieman
made his public trip to iraq. Maybe he is as dead as Epstein or he did underestimatte the
american stupiditty.
There's all kinds of strong words and rhetoric. Let's see what if anything Khamanei does?
You underestimate the gravity of the crisis. It's much more profound than that,
not far off 9/11 level. But there won't be instant retaliation. That would be foolish.
I've been following Elijah M. and several others on twitter, as well as more mainstream
sources for several hours after learning of these assassinations.
the absolute stupidity, maliciousness and wickedness of the US Political and Military
Elites is truly astonishing. They have misjudged every single thing in that part of the world
since 9/11 and the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and then Iraq - and spent/wasted
well over $5 trillion. not to mention the horrific loss of life everywhere from Syria to Iraq
and Yemen. And we are now looking at another even more catastrophic war.
it is unbelievable
The price of crude oil has jumped over $2 USD on the world markets since the news
I expect the US to fully resist being booted out of Iraq (which would also make it's two
major positions in Syria highly untenable). who could now believe that US troops in Iraq and
Syria won't come under sustained attack now, by the many allies Iran has in the area?
Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Sistani considers "the #US attack against the #BaghdadAirport
is a clear violation of #Iraq sovereignty".
That is clear support for the US withdrawal from #Iraq.
AND
S Sistani condemns the "attack against Iraqi (not Iranian-militia) position on the borders
killing our Iraqi sons to the hateful attack on #BaghdadAirport is a violation and
internationally unlawful (US) act against anti-#ISIS hero(s) leading to difficult times for
#Iraq".
Really, the ball is in Iraq's court. This is an attack on Iraqi sovereignty as much as an act
of war on Iran. We will now see what the Iraqi are made of.
Trump was personally responsible for having the organisation Soleimani led declared a
terrorist organisation. Time to quit the "Trump is a dumbfuck led by others" Trump is around
70 and has been his own boss all his life. He is now commander in chief of the US military.
He gives the orders, nobody else. He doesn't give a shit about the cold war and Europe, hence
people thinking he is a peacenik. What he does care about is enemies of Israel and control of
energy.
I am left wondering to what extent the events were pre-planned.
Seems very possible that Trump will never actually be impeached. As a war President, his
legacy will be guarded. Was impeachment ever anything but a distraction prior to a false-flag
and escalation?
IMO Trump's Presidential contract with the Deep State likely includes NO IMPEACHMENT and
NO RELEASE OF HIS TAXES. Both to guard his "good name" because Trump see the the "Trump"
brand as his biggest asset.
The best revenge the Iraninans could have would be the expulsion of US troops from Iraq and
Syria, which by the way was also the overarching goal of Soleimani...
If the Iraqi politician had anything resembling balls, they would have kicked the US out
the moment Trump proclaimed he had 'secured' the Syrian oil. Will have to do some research on
whether Iraqi politicians can produce kids.
You (far more elaborately) illustrated my take.
I personally think he gets 'strongly advised' on which course to take, and even if he
disagrees goes along anyways. Maybe it's just plain selfish expediency, or one of many other
reasons.
Makes one wonder if the raids on Epstein's residences landed the deep-state some very
incriminating footage.
Perhaps they 'own' him outright now.
I'll be surprised if the next election doesn't bring major civil unrest to the USA.
Then 'they' will have something to really worry about, directly in their own laps, for a
change.
Trump doesn't give a shit about soft power. He believes in hard power. Iraq has no defence
against the US, and Trump intends to attack Iran. He needs a 9 11 to take the American
population with him.
Calls upon Member States that have the capacity to do so to take all necessary measures,
in compliance with international law, in particular with the United Nations Charter, as
well as international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law, on the territory under
the control of ISIL also known as Da'esh, in Syria and Iraq, to redouble and coordinate
their efforts to prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by ISIL also
known as Da'esh as well as ANF, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and
entities associated with Al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups, as designated by the United
Nations Security Council, and as may further be agreed by the International Syria Support
Group (ISSG) and endorsed by the UN Security Council, pursuant to the Statement of the
International Syria Support Group (ISSG) of 14 November, and to eradicate the safe haven
they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria;
USA have made it very clear that they are not leaving Syria and the same thinking/excuses
likely applies to Iraq.
Some will argue that using UN2249 as justification for over-staying and virtual
occupation is wrong-headed. Nevertheless, USA claims to remain to ensure against a resurgence
of ISIS. Clearly they intend to stay until their goals are met or they are forced out
militarily.
I suspect I'm not the only MoA barfly who thinks the assassination of Hossein Soleymani could
have been planned with Mossad or other organisations and individuals in Israeli society.
The Iraqis are certainly capable of making life for the US very uncomfortable in Iraq and
Syria, even if not force withdrawal. The present US structure and numbers depend on Iraqi
acquiescence, and that's about shot, even before the assassination. If the position is to be
maintained without Iraqi acquiescence, then thousands more troops would be required, and that
wouldn't go down well back home in the States. That's one of the reasons why the act was a
grave miscalculation.
Prayers for *Qassim Soleimani* and the 'engineer' *Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes*.
RIP.
Amen.
WE who respect Life & Freedom have, a huge debt, to Qassim Soleimani.
It was Qassim Soleimani who was in Moscow many times, BEFORE the Russian Federation went
'all-in' in Syria September 2015. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Syria+Russia+2015&t=ffcm&ia=web
He was a brilliant military strategist, who after these meetings had convinced V.Putin &
Russian Military of a....very very effective 'game plan' to free the Syrian People of the
wahhabbi-terrorists & jizzreali-mercenaries.
Yes. Brilliant Man.
Besides this characteristic, Qassim Soleimani was a man of faith.
Unafraid to travel openly, knowing Our God would be with him both in Life & Death.
People like Soleimani and Zahreddine had their religion, but they were also secular in their
world veiw - not religious nutcases. Not good when the yanks kill them. But then there's all
- to us - the unknowns the US has killed. Perhaps unknown to us, like the SAA soldiers on the
hills out of Dier Ezzor killed in the US Australian and other assorted rabble strike. 100 or
so SAA, unknown to us but known to family and friends. Sooner the yank frankenstein made up
of assorted so called dissidents and genuine zionists is wiped off the earth the better.
I figure Iran will have to retaliate and thus this will likely escalate. The Saker initially
thinks war is 80% certain, I think it's probably a bit higher than that.
This was not Trump`s decision. Trump had to take responsibilty to show he is in command. He
will soon realize that he was played by the CIA and the Israelis. By then it is too late.
The US and its vassals are speeding up confrontation with the Axis because they know that the
showdown is inevitable. However, It will not happen according to the US timetable.
Keep a good supply of popcorn on hand. The pandora box has plenty of surprises. The question
remains,
I figure Iran will have to retaliate and thus this will likely escalate. The Saker initially
thinks war is 80% certain, I think it's probably a bit higher than that.
Posted by: TEP | Jan 3 2020 10:49 utc | 36
The Iranians would be foolish to allow themselves to be goaded like that.
Putin has warned Trump against attacking Iran. Trump needs an excuse. I may be wrong but I
doubt an Iranian response to the US killing will cut it. This will be interesting to see.
Trump may have to wear the Iranian response or bear the same consequence as if he had
attacked Russia.
Iran has a choice. It can suffer hit like this one left right and center, at least until
the end of the Trump regime, or it can strike back and initiate ware. Unless Iran strikes
back, which will intimate war, Trump will up the the game to where he is hitting Iran at will
and Iran is taking major losses. Like Putin says, 'when a fight is inevitable, hit first'.
Iran is better off kicking things off now rather than after they have taken big losses.
"This was not Trump`s decision. Trump had to take responsibilty to show he is in
command. He will soon realize that he was played by the CIA and the Israelis."
I too look to twitter. I see claims that Iran has dispersed fighter aircraft to fields near
the borders. I see that "out bound heavies" are flying out of the US...calls for people to
pack and bugout...signs here and there of this conflict becoming very destructive and
impossible to control. The Iranian 3 day pause makes sense, but no one should assume that the
aggressor will wait 3 days..is not looking like simple attack, but like a campaign. If so,
then it's a red hot fight. S. Mohamad Marandi and Mark Sleboda often have interesting tweets.
If this is a campaign, yes of course there was/is a plan. However no plan survives first
contact with the enemy. Persia has been there a long time, Yankee fatboy...something the fine
gentlemen perhaps may not have known, since they're barking insane and know zero history. The
US history is merely the blink of history's eye, so far. Education by war is a harsh process,
and expensive.
If state a is attacked, then internal mechanism of state a tends to force leadership of a
to "reply". similarly if state b attacks state a, it's because of the internal calculus of
state b that this occurs. all war may be seen as domestic in origin.
Maybe I ought to fill the car with gas... That's my internal calculus.
Does anyone here follow Trump's Twitter posts (I don't)? If so, please link his tweet in
which he claims responsibility. The vile narcissist that we are led to believe him to be
would want to brag loud and first if he ordered the assassination, regardless of the time it
happened.
No Twitter post? Then I doubt Trump was in the loop.
The neocons are "making history" again and Trump will have to choose to go along
with it rather than fight it, but it is clear to me now that he is not even being briefed on
these operations until after the fact.
In fact, Trump being holed up in his Florida compound and not even in Washington as this
war is launched suggests to me that he may have been threatened with being Kennedy-ed.
"Shut up and go along or an Iranian will snuff you... and we know it will be an Iranian
because we already have his passport ready to be found at the scene of the crime."
Insanity? Yes, America has collectively gone insane, as has its population individually.
It could be that Trump tried to fight it, but fighting mass insanity is like trying to hold
back a hurricane. Even a President cannot do that.
I'd expect the Iranians to be more subtle than that. I don't think there's any advantage
for the Iranians to directly attack the US position in the ME.
, This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
Your
comment could not be posted. Error type: Your comment has been posted. Post another comment
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the
image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
< B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
< U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
< A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)
@silviosilver
ecade, including tracking the course of a Argentine navy ship, Libertad. When it arrived in
Ghana, he persuaded one of the country's judges to detain the vessel in port until he was
paid the millions owed to him. Argentina won that round, successfully arguing in the
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea that the ship should be released. But he won a
later court battle resulting in the South American country defaulting on its debts.
The former president of Argentina, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, memorably
described Singer as "the Vulture Lord", a "bloodsucker" and a "financial terrorist".
Singer was the first one who did it. He and his co-workers at Elliot Associates co. are
all Jewish. Paul Singer created Vulture Capitalism with his use of NYC courts to sue
Panama! This has never been done before, suing a foreign nations from a court in another
nation
Simply appalling behavior! How I miss the good old days, when they'd just park a warship off your
coast and make you an offer you couldn't refuse.
@silviosilver
the case to a New York district court, Elliott broke with long-standing international law
and custom, according to which sovereign governments are not sued in regular courts meant
to deal with questions internal to a nation state. Further, the presiding judge accepted
the case – another break with custom. It set the stage for two decades of similar
parasitism on struggling countries by Elliott Associates, a practice that has reaped
billions for Jewish financiers.
Non- Jews may have copied this technique later but it was Paul Singer's invention and he
was Jewish. Therefore, it is fair to call it a Jewish invention.
@Mr.
Anon a, the struggling nation finally agreed in 2000 to pay him $58 million. That meant
he got better than a 400 percent return.
Argentina was the biggest fish of all to be fried by Singer's Elliot Associates.
In 2001, Elliott Associates purchased an Argentinian default for $48 million; the face
value of that debt today is $630 million. The fund wants repayment for the full value of
the debt to all of Argentina's creditors, as it did in 1995 with Panama. This amounts to
$1.5 billion, which could rise to $3 billion including, again, that all-important interest
and fees.
Sue
Chang
Markets reporter
Bloomberg via Getty Images
Paul Singer's Elliott Management, which lost its high-profile proxy battle against Samsung Group last year, may
be facing an investigation by prosecutors for failing to follow disclosure rules, according to a Korean media
report.
South Korea's Securities & Futures Commission said it has decided to refer Elliott to the prosecution following
an internal review and has submitted pertinent materials, according to Yonhap News.
The commission claims that although Elliott followed regulations when it boosted its ownership in Samsung by
2.17% from 4.95% in June, the actual disclosure should have been submitted in May when its stake had already
passed 5% via total return swaps, according to Yonhap.
However, a person familiar with the matter said there were no agreements at any time with the parties in
question to give Elliott the right to the underlying Samsung shares. He also pointed out the commission had not
issued any official findings from its own probe other than to refer the matter to the prosecution.
Hedge funds often use total return swaps, a complex derivative swap, to take long position in assets without
having to own them outright.
In a similar controversy in the U.S. involving CSX Corp.
CSX,
+0.03%
, the Children's Investment Fund of Britain and 3G
Capital Partners, a judge for the Federal District Court of Manhattan ruled that the hedge funds had violated
securities laws by not fully disclosing their stakes in a timely manner, including positions held via total return
swaps. But in so ruling, Judge Lewis Kaplan also said there was nothing he could do to
penalize the
funds
.
In Elliott's case, "the financial regulators believe that if an investor utilizes total return swaps to
increase its ownership in a company with the specific intent to launch a hostile attack on the management, then it
is in direct conflict with the principles behind public disclosures," the news agency said.
The decision by the commission to involve the prosecution in Elliott's case marks the first time Korean
authorities have taken action against investors exploiting total return swaps to bolster their positions,
according to Yonhap.
Elliott Management declined to comment on the report.
the point, he gave speech in front of AIPAC. His AIPAC speech reinforced my belief that
trump is nothing but a wolf in a sheep's clothing. It was at that moment trump showed who
is in charge and who owns him.
Trump doesn't believe in endless war? Why did he give jared to chalk up middle east peace
plan? Why are trumps children either married to or engaged to jews? Every one of them! His
pride daughter ivanka converted to judaism and he kept saying during in AIPAC speech "My
daughter ivanka has three little wonderful jewish babies".
Has any point in time a US president ever said "My daughter has wonderful Christian
babies" ??
Trump is now essentially funded by three Jews -- Singer, Bernard Marcus, and Sheldon
Adelson, together accounting for over $250 million in pro-Trump political money. In return,
they want war with Iran.
Hmm -- The day after Trump in inaugurated for his second term -- will Iran be in his
crosshairs? We need to think very seriously about that!
Trump and the Republican Party puppets are nothing more than nasty politician whores for
billionaire Jews such as Seth Klarman and Paul Singer and Shelly Adelson and Les Wexner and
Bernie Marcus and many other money-grubber Jew donors.
The Republican Party Jew donors want to continue to flood the USA with mass legal
immigration and mass illegal immigration and the Jew donors want to continue to use the US
military as muscle to fight unnecessary wars and endless wars on behalf of Israel.
The Republican Party Jew donors also want to have all their shady money-grubber scams
protected by the Republican Party politician whores.
I wrote this in October of 2017 about Seth Klarman and Puerto Rican government debt:
Puerto Rico must be allowed to go belly up. The bond owners who own Puerto Rican debt must
go tits up. The US government must not bail out the investors who purchased Puerto Rican
government debt, or any debt whatsoever connected to Puerto Rico. Seth Klarman has been
revealed as a person who has bought Puerto Rican bonds in hopes of cashing out big.
SETH KLARMAN must be given a salt shaker to sprinkle salt on his worthless Puerto Rican
bonds before he eats them. Klarman must lose 100 cents on the dollar for his greedy purchase
of Puerto Rican debt. Klarman has loads of loot, and the Puerto Rican government debt was
purchased for one of his funds. I am sure his investors won't mind getting soaked by Seth for
a bit of money -- it is not even a whole billion dollars, only close to it.
David Dayen says:
Klarman, who has been described as the Oracle of Boston, has a history of buying
unpopular or distressed assets on the cheap in hopes of a payday. Baupost manages over $30
billion in assets. He is known as the top campaign contributor in New England and has been
a major donor in Republican politics in Massachusetts, including largely secret support for
2016's Question 2, an ultimately unsuccessful effort to lift a state cap on charter
schools.
Klarman supported Hillary Clinton in 2016, calling Donald Trump "completely unqualified
for the highest office in the land."
Klarman's involvement in Puerto Rican debt will surely come as a surprise to activists
in Massachusetts and Puerto Rico, who have never mentioned him among the "vultures" who are
causing undue pain for the island's U.S. citizens.
I recently learned that from about 1790 to 1967 the USState department refused to issue US
passports to people who held foreign passports. State also didn't hire any dual citizens for
any job from cafeteria dishwasher to ambassador.
Then in the mid sixties, an Israeli immigrant who became a US citizen applied for a US
passport. State refused to issue the US passport. So the Israeli immigrant practiced lawfare.
In 1967 the Supreme Court issued one of its usual detrimental and dangerous rulings. State
was ordered to start issuing US passports to dual citizens.
Soon there were numerous applications to State depot jobs from Israeli citizens residing
in the US. Knowing lawsuits loomed, State caved.
And that children is how and why State, commerce, DOJ CIA treasury, top security civilian
departments in the Pentagon and other federal agencies became flooded with dual American
Israeli citizens who divert money to Israel. Plus they work for Israel instead of the US.
Mysterious how the only Whites who manage to make it past affirmative action barriers are
Jews.
Maybe there's a special affirmative action quota for Israelis residing in America.
The Last but not LeastTechnology is dominated by
two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt.
Ph.D
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors
of this site
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be
tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without
Javascript.
Jim's Editor's Notes are solely crowdfunded via PayPal
Every one of the 50 organizations calls itself Zionist and supports the Zionist State of Israel. That, of course, is the same Zionist State that ethnically cleansed the Palestinian people. Every one of them continues to support Israel even though it continues to ethnically cleanse, attack, bomb and torture the Palestinian people.
?
Gezzah Potts
(@DrJillStein) January 5, 2020
January 20, 2020 © Photo: Flickr / DonkeyHotey On the 17 September 1656, Oliver Cromwell, a Protestant Puritan, who had won a civil war, and had the English king beheaded in public, railed against England's enemies. There was, he told Parliament that day, an axis of evil abroad in the world. And this axis – led by Catholic Spain – was, at root, the problem of a people that had placed themselves at the service of 'evil'. This 'evil', and the servitude that it beget, was the evil of a religion – Catholicism – that refused the English peoples' desire for simple liberties: " [an evil] that put men under restraint under which there was no freedom and under which, there could be 'no liberty of individual consciousness'".
Marwan Bishara
![US President Donald Trump and Israel's PM Benjamin Netanyahu hold up a proclamation recognising Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights on March 25, 2019 [File: Reuters/Leah Millis]](https://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2020/1/7/f9ebbd55fd674620b4ea73a418358957_18.jpg "Trump: The American Netanyahu")
Your comment could not be posted. Error type: Your comment has been posted. Post another comment
Bloomberg via Getty Images
